« | Home | »

Growth, biomass and carbon accumulation among rubber (Hevea brasiliensis), teak

By lakmali | February 2, 2010

N. Appuhamy, L. Samarappuli and S. Karunaratne

The study was conducted to compare the biomass accumulation and carbon stocks among rubber, teak and mahogany. Above Ground Biomass of each species were calculated using the allometric models. Mean total tree height of rubber, teak and mahogany were ranging from 0.87 m to 20.32 m, 3.41 m to 11.05 m and 1.65 m to 7.53 m, respectively, between 1 to 10 years of age. For height and age, regression logistic standard curves were fitted to teak, rubber and mahogany with the R2 of 0.845, 0.916 and 0.921 respectively. The mean dbh of rubber, teak and mahogany were varying from 2.19 cm to 19.63 cm, 1.97 cm to 12.84 cm and 1.75 cm to 8.14 cm, respectively, within the selected age series. Exponential curves for rubber (R2=0.976) and teak (R2=0.915) and logistic curve for mahogany (R2=0.913) were fitted for dbh vs. age. Mean total tree biomass and carbon stock in rubber were significantly higher from other two species in all selected age series, except first year; biomass and carbon stock varying 0.89 kg/tree to 262.61 kg/tree and 0.45 kg/tree to 131.30 kg/tree, respectively. For other two species, it was ranged from 0.74 kg/tree to 88.87 kg/tree and 0.37 kg/tree to 44.35 kg/tree for teak and 0.49 kg/tree to 23.83 kg/tree and 0.24 kg/tree to 11.91 kg/tree for mahogany. For Biomass and age regression logistic, critical exponential and exponential standard curves were fitted to rubber (R2=0.965), mahogany (R2=0.862) and teak (R2=0.874). The relationship of Height vs. dbh showed a high degree of association for rubber (R2=0.918), teak (R2=0.859) and mahogany (R2=0.976). Moreover, the relationship of biomass vs. height recorded a high degree of association for rubber (R2=0.911), teak (R2=0.862) and mahogany (R2=0.962).Keywords: Biomass accumilation, dbh, treeheight, teak, Mahogany, Rubber

N. Appuhamy1, L. Samarappuli2 and S. Karunaratne1

1Department of Plantation Management, Faculty of Agriculture and Plantation Management,

University of Wayamba, Sri Lanka

2Department of Soils and Plant Nutrition, Rubber Research Institute of Sri Lanka.

Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »

Comments