Department of Geography and Environment, Boston University, 675 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA.
Ecol Appl. 2012 Apr;22(3):1015-35. doi: 10.1890/11-1250.1.
There is conflicting evidence about the importance of urban soils and vegetation in regional C budgets that is caused, in part, by inconsistent definitions of "urban" land use. We quantified urban ecosystem contributions to C stocks in the Boston (Massachusetts, USA) Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) using several alternative urban definitions. Development altered aboveground and belowground C and N stocks, and the sign and magnitude of these changes varied by land use and development intensity. Aboveground biomass (live trees, dbh > or = 5 cm) for the MSA was 7.2 +/- 0.4 kg C/m2 (mean +/- SE), reflecting a high proportion of forest cover. Vegetation C was highest in forest (11.6 +/- 0.5 kg C/m2), followed by residential (4.6 +/- 0.5 kg C/m2), and then other developed (2.0 +/- 0.4 kg C/m2) land uses. Soil C (0-10 cm depth) followed the same pattern of decreasing C concentration from forest, to residential, to other developed land uses (4.1 +/- 0.1, 4.0 +/- 0.2, and 3.3 +/- 0.2 kg C/m2, respectively). Within a land use type, urban areas (which we defined as > 25% impervious surface area [ISA] within a 1-km(2) moving window) generally contained less vegetation C, but slightly more soil C, than nonurban areas. Soil N concentrations were higher in urban areas than nonurban areas of the same land use type, except for residential areas, which had similarly high soil N concentrations. When we compared our definition of urban to other commonly used urban extents (U.S. Census Bureau, Global Rural-Urban Mapping Project [GRUMP], and the MSA itself), we found that urban soil (1 m depth) and vegetation C stocks spanned a wide range, from 14.4 +/- 0.8 to 54.5 +/- 3.4 Tg C and from 4.2 +/- 0.4 to 27.3 +/- 3.2 Tg C, respectively. Conclusions about the importance of urban soils and vegetation to regional C and N stocks are very sensitive to the definition of urban used by the investigators. Urban areas, regardless of definition, are rapidly expanding in their extent; a systematic understanding of how our development patterns influence ecosystems is necessary to inform future development choices.
关于城市土壤和植被对区域 C 预算的重要性存在相互矛盾的证据,部分原因是“城市”土地利用的定义不一致。我们使用几种替代的城市定义来量化波士顿(美国马萨诸塞州)都会统计区(MSA)中城市生态系统对 C 储量的贡献。发展改变了地上和地下 C 和 N 储量,这些变化的符号和大小因土地利用和开发强度而异。MSA 的地上生物量(直径大于或等于 5 厘米的活树)为 7.2 +/- 0.4 kg C/m2(平均值 +/- SE),反映了森林覆盖的高比例。植被 C 在森林中最高(11.6 +/- 0.5 kg C/m2),其次是住宅(4.6 +/- 0.5 kg C/m2),然后是其他开发用地(2.0 +/- 0.4 kg C/m2)。土壤 C(0-10 厘米深度)也呈现出从森林到住宅到其他开发用地的 C 浓度递减的模式(分别为 4.1 +/- 0.1、4.0 +/- 0.2 和 3.3 +/- 0.2 kg C/m2)。在同一土地利用类型内,城市地区(我们将其定义为 1 公里 2 移动窗口内超过 25%的不透水面面积[ISA])通常含有较少的植被 C,但土壤 C 略多。与同一土地利用类型的非城市地区相比,城市地区的土壤 N 浓度更高,但住宅地区的土壤 N 浓度同样较高。当我们将我们的城市定义与其他常用的城市范围(美国人口普查局、全球农村-城市测绘项目[GRUMP]和 MSA 本身)进行比较时,我们发现城市土壤(1 米深)和植被 C 储量范围很广,分别为 14.4 +/- 0.8 至 54.5 +/- 3.4 Tg C 和 4.2 +/- 0.4 至 27.3 +/- 3.2 Tg C。关于城市土壤和植被对区域 C 和 N 储量的重要性的结论非常敏感于研究人员使用的城市定义。城市地区,无论其定义如何,其范围都在迅速扩大;系统地了解我们的发展模式如何影响生态系统,对于告知未来的发展选择是必要的。