Can Restoration of Freshwater Mineral Soil Wetlands Deliver Nature-Based Climate Solutions to Agricultural Landscapes?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This study advances scientific understanding of the magnitude of carbon sequestration that could be achieved through conservation (securing existing carbon stocks) and restoration (creating new carbon stocks) of freshwater mineral soil wetlands on agricultural landscapes. Within an agricultural landscape in southern Ontario (Canada), 65,261 wetlands comprising 63,135 ha were lost. Of these, 6,899 wetlands comprising 5,198 ha were “easy-to-restore” wetlands, defined as wetlands that were small (<0.5 ha), with no hydrological inflow or outflow, and that were drained by a drainage ditch and could be restored by plugging the drainage ditch. Within these easy-to-restore wetlands, a chronosequence of wetlands that covered a range of restoration ages [i.e., drained (0 years), 15 years, 25 years, 40 years, and intact marshes] was established to capture potential changes in rates of sedimentation and organic carbon (OC) sequestration with restoration age. Three sediment cores were collected at the center of the open-water portion of the wetland and segmented in the field. In the lab, each individual segment from each core was dried, sieved through a 2-mm mesh, weighed and analyzed for 137 Cs and 210 Pb radioisotopes and OC. OC stocks (35.60 Mg ha –1 ) and OC sequestration rates (0.89 Mg C ha –2 yr –1 ) in wetlands restored for 40 years were comparable to if not marginally larger than intact wetlands, suggesting that restoration promotes OC sequestration but that an initial recovery phase of up to 25 years or more is needed before returning to a pre-drainage equilibrium. An economic analysis to compare the costs and benefits of wetland conservation and restoration was then conducted. The benefit-cost analysis revealed that the financial benefits of carbon sequestration are greater than the financial costs over a 30-year time horizon for retaining wetlands but not for restoring wetlands. The breakeven costs such that wetland restoration is economically feasible based on current carbon price projections is estimated to be $17,173 CAD ha –1 over the 30-year time horizon; any wetland restoration project that costs this amount or less could be justified on economic grounds based solely on the carbon benefits. This study’s findings indicate that wetlands are important nature-based climate solutions, but that incentivizing their use through a carbon market will require either scientific innovations to reduce restoration costs or increase carbon sequestration rates, or stacking carbon benefits with other ecosystem service benefits into a comprehensive market for nature-based climate solutions.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».