Increased but not pristine soil organic carbon stocks in restored ecosystems
Abstract Ecosystem restoration can contribute to climate change mitigation, as recovering ecosystems sequester atmospheric CO2 in biomass and soils. It is, however, unclear how much soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks recover across different restored ecosystems. Here, we show SOC recovery in different...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nature Portfolio
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | Nature Communications |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-55980-1 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832594581338718208 |
|---|---|
| author | Irene Ascenzi Jelle P. Hilbers Marieke M. van Katwijk Mark A. J. Huijbregts Steef V. Hanssen |
| author_facet | Irene Ascenzi Jelle P. Hilbers Marieke M. van Katwijk Mark A. J. Huijbregts Steef V. Hanssen |
| author_sort | Irene Ascenzi |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Ecosystem restoration can contribute to climate change mitigation, as recovering ecosystems sequester atmospheric CO2 in biomass and soils. It is, however, unclear how much soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks recover across different restored ecosystems. Here, we show SOC recovery in different contexts globally by consolidating 41 meta-analyses into a second-order meta-analysis. We find that restoration projects have, since their inception, led to significant SOC increases compared to the degraded state in 12 out of 16 ecosystem-previous land-use combinations, with mean SOC increases thus far that range from 25% (grasslands; 10–39%, 95% CI) to 79% (shrublands; 38–120% CI). Yet, we observe a SOC deficit in restored ecosystems compared to pristine sites, ranging from 14% (forests; 12–16% CI) to 50% (wetlands; 14–87% CI). While restoration does increase carbon sequestration in SOC, it should not be viewed as a way to fully offset carbon losses in natural ecosystems, whose conservation has priority. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-db2751dd37304116b35a5d7cccbfa27b |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2041-1723 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-01-01 |
| publisher | Nature Portfolio |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Nature Communications |
| spelling | doaj-art-db2751dd37304116b35a5d7cccbfa27b2025-01-19T12:32:01ZengNature PortfolioNature Communications2041-17232025-01-0116111210.1038/s41467-025-55980-1Increased but not pristine soil organic carbon stocks in restored ecosystemsIrene Ascenzi0Jelle P. Hilbers1Marieke M. van Katwijk2Mark A. J. Huijbregts3Steef V. Hanssen4Department of Environmental Science, Radboud Institute for Biological and Environmental Sciences, Radboud UniversityDepartment of Environmental Science, Radboud Institute for Biological and Environmental Sciences, Radboud UniversityDepartment of Environmental Science, Radboud Institute for Biological and Environmental Sciences, Radboud UniversityDepartment of Environmental Science, Radboud Institute for Biological and Environmental Sciences, Radboud UniversityDepartment of Environmental Science, Radboud Institute for Biological and Environmental Sciences, Radboud UniversityAbstract Ecosystem restoration can contribute to climate change mitigation, as recovering ecosystems sequester atmospheric CO2 in biomass and soils. It is, however, unclear how much soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks recover across different restored ecosystems. Here, we show SOC recovery in different contexts globally by consolidating 41 meta-analyses into a second-order meta-analysis. We find that restoration projects have, since their inception, led to significant SOC increases compared to the degraded state in 12 out of 16 ecosystem-previous land-use combinations, with mean SOC increases thus far that range from 25% (grasslands; 10–39%, 95% CI) to 79% (shrublands; 38–120% CI). Yet, we observe a SOC deficit in restored ecosystems compared to pristine sites, ranging from 14% (forests; 12–16% CI) to 50% (wetlands; 14–87% CI). While restoration does increase carbon sequestration in SOC, it should not be viewed as a way to fully offset carbon losses in natural ecosystems, whose conservation has priority.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-55980-1 |
| spellingShingle | Irene Ascenzi Jelle P. Hilbers Marieke M. van Katwijk Mark A. J. Huijbregts Steef V. Hanssen Increased but not pristine soil organic carbon stocks in restored ecosystems Nature Communications |
| title | Increased but not pristine soil organic carbon stocks in restored ecosystems |
| title_full | Increased but not pristine soil organic carbon stocks in restored ecosystems |
| title_fullStr | Increased but not pristine soil organic carbon stocks in restored ecosystems |
| title_full_unstemmed | Increased but not pristine soil organic carbon stocks in restored ecosystems |
| title_short | Increased but not pristine soil organic carbon stocks in restored ecosystems |
| title_sort | increased but not pristine soil organic carbon stocks in restored ecosystems |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-55980-1 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT ireneascenzi increasedbutnotpristinesoilorganiccarbonstocksinrestoredecosystems AT jellephilbers increasedbutnotpristinesoilorganiccarbonstocksinrestoredecosystems AT mariekemvankatwijk increasedbutnotpristinesoilorganiccarbonstocksinrestoredecosystems AT markajhuijbregts increasedbutnotpristinesoilorganiccarbonstocksinrestoredecosystems AT steefvhanssen increasedbutnotpristinesoilorganiccarbonstocksinrestoredecosystems |