Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology (DICE), School of Anthropology and Conservation, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent CT2 7NR, UK.
Environ Pollut. 2013 Dec;183:133-42. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2013.06.005. Epub 2013 Jul 29.
Although urbanisation is a major cause of land-use change worldwide, towns and cities remain relatively understudied ecosystems. Research into urban ecosystem service provision is still an emerging field, yet evidence is accumulating rapidly to suggest that the biological carbon stores in cities are more substantial than previously assumed. However, as more vegetation carbon densities are derived, substantial variability between these estimates is becoming apparent. Here, we review procedural differences evident in the literature, which may be drivers of variation in carbon storage assessments. Additionally, we quantify the impact that some of these different approaches may have when extrapolating carbon figures derived from surveys up to a city-wide scale. To understand how/why carbon stocks vary within and between cities, researchers need to use more uniform methods to estimate stores and relate this quantitatively to standardised 'urbanisation' metrics, in order to facilitate comparisons.
虽然城市化是全球土地利用变化的主要原因，但城镇和城市仍然是相对研究不足的生态系统。对城市生态系统服务提供的研究仍然是一个新兴领域，但有证据迅速积累表明，城市的生物碳储量比以前认为的要大。然而，随着更多植被碳密度的出现，这些估计之间的显著差异变得明显起来。在这里，我们回顾了文献中明显存在的程序差异，这些差异可能是碳储存评估变化的驱动因素。此外，我们还量化了一些不同方法在将从调查中得出的碳数据外推到全市范围时可能产生的影响。为了了解城市内部和城市之间碳储量的变化方式/原因，研究人员需要使用更统一的方法来估计碳储量，并将其与标准化的“城市化”指标进行定量关联，以便于比较。
