See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/347751507

Carbon Storage and Emission Factor of Savanna Ecosystems in Soudano-

Sahelian Zone of Cameroon

Article · January 2020

CITATIONS READS

10 582

3 authors:

V. Awe Djongmo Valery Noiha Noumi

University of Ngaoundere University of Bertoua, Higher Teacher Training College
37 PUBLICATIONS 133 CITATIONS 48 PUBLICATIONS 355 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Louis Zapfack
University of Yaounde I
156 PUBLICATIONS 1,795 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Diversité génétique de Vernonia spp. View project

Plant diversity and sequestration potential in Agro-ecosystems in Africa View project

All content following this page was uploaded by V. Awe Djongmo on 23 December 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

ew

Vol 2 | Issue 1 | Pages 60-70

Journal of Botany Research

ISSN: 2643-6027

Research Article DOI: 10.36959/771/562

Carbon Storage and Emission Factor of Savanna

Ecosystems in Soudano-Sahelian Zone of Cameroon
Awé Djongmo Victor1*, Noiha Noumi Valery1,2 and Zapfack Louis3
1
Department of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Ngaoundere, Cameroon
2
Higher Teacher Training College (ENS) of Bertoua, Cameroon
3
Department of Biology and Plant Physiology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Yaounde I, Cameroon

Abstract
Savana ecosystems can play an important role in climate change regulation. In this study, the carbon storage and emission
factor of Savanna ecosystems in soudano-sahelian zone of Cameroon was assessed from measurement of the major pools
including the aboveground biomass, belowground biomass, dead tree biomass, plant litter and soil organic carbon. The
total carbon storage capacity of Savanna ecosystems ranged from 39.85 ± 14.65 tC/ha for degraded area to 152.18 ± 43.76
tC/ha for the swampy area. The carbon stock in aboveground biomass is higher in reforested areas (54.26 ± 6.54 tC/ha)
and lower in degraded areas (10.04 ± 0.97 tC/ha). Carbon stocks in belowground biomass were lower in the degraded
area (2.66 ± 1.02 tC/ha) and higher in reforested areas (11.82 ± 2.54 tC/ha). Carbon stock in litter are higher in swampy
areas (0.81 ± 0.06 tC/ha) and lower in inselbergs (0.59 ± 0.05 tC/ha). The average carbon stocks in dead wood obtained
in this study differed between habitats and tended to increase from degraded areas (1.35 ± 0.53 tC/ha) to plantation
and reforested areas with respectively 2.75 ± 1.03 tC/ha each. Soil carbon was lower in degraded areas (25.10 ± 2.09 tC/
ha) and higher in swampy areas (100.60 ± 9.65 tC/ha). The average total emission factor obtained in this study differed
between habitats and tended to increase from degraded areas (103.09 ± 29.54 teqCO2/ha) to plantations (427.17 ± 45.06
teqCO2/ha). These results therefore confirm the contributing role of savannah ecosystems studied in the fight against the
mitigation of climate change in Sudano-Sahelian zone of Cameroon.

Keyword
Cameroon, Climate change, Carbon, Deforestation, Emission of CO2eq, Savanna ecosystems

Introduction 14.8 tCO2/ha/year) according to the type of growth and den-

sity of trees [3]. They can be largely offset by substituting the
The storage of carbon in plants and soils contributes both ecosystem pruning’s to fossil fuels for heating. For over half a
to climate change mitigation and adaptation of territories [1]. century, sub-Saharan Africa faces an accelerated degradation
Soils and plants capture greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in of its plant biodiversity due to human activities and natural
the atmosphere and store them in their biomass, thus con- events [4]. Climate change and its many consequences on the
stituting carbon sinks [1]. This process is called carbon se- lives of men are a major challenge for developing countries.
questration [2] and is related to photosynthesis in plants and Living populations in these countries depend heavily on nat-
the decomposition of organic matter in the soils. This is an ural plant resources and often have a relatively limited adap-
argument for both the preservation of natural, agricultural tive capacity [5]. Therefore, these countries are often among
and forestry and the development of nature. The soils are the most seriously affected by climate change. In Cameroon,
carbon sinks, natural reservoirs that absorb carbon from the as in many other sub-Saharan countries, the effects of climate
atmosphere and thus contribute to reducing the concentra-
tion of atmospheric CO2. Photosynthesis is the main driver of
CO2 sequestration, which allows the extraction of terrestrial *Corresponding author: AWE DJONGMO Victor, Department of
Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Ngaounde-
carbon storage and carbon sinks [1]. In addition, sustainable
re, P.O.BOX: 454, Ngaoundere, Cameroon
management of these areas is conducive to the development
of renewable resources, contributing among other things to Accepted: February 13, 2020
the need to adapt to climate change [1]. For these reasons, Published online: February 15, 2020
carbon sequestration is a major focus in project implementa- Citation: Victor AD, Valery NN, Louis Z (2020) Carbon Storage
tion to achieve the goal of carbon neutrality by 2050 [1]. The and Emission Factor of Savanna Ecosystems in Soudano-
Agroforestry systems are favorable for carbon storage with a Sahelian Zone of Cameroon. J Bot Res 2(1):60-67
potential between 1.5 and 4 tC per hectare per year (5.5 to

Copyright: © 2019 Victor AD, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms
of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and S CHOLARS. D IRECT
Scholarly Pages
reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Open Access | Page 60 |

Citation: Victor AD, Valery NN, Louis Z (2020) Carbon Storage and Emission Factor of Savanna Ecosystems in Soudano-Sahelian Zone of
Cameroon. J Bot Res 2(1):60-67

Figure 1: Geographic location of the study area in the North Region of Cameroon.

change are ever more noticeable, especially in the northern Data collection
part of Cameroon [6]. In the coming decades, experts predict
Data were collected in quadrats 50 × 50 square meters
that climate change will affect the livelihoods and plant bio-
(north-south) 2500 m² non-variable surface were installed
diversity significantly [1]. Objective of the study is the evalu-
in the savanna ecosystems in the end make a comparison.
ation of carbon storage and ecological inputs in different car-
Geographic coordinates were taken using the GPS for ev-
bon pools of savannah ecosystems. Hence the interest of the
ery tree that is part of the sample to determine its loca-
present study is to present savanna ecosystems as measures
tion on the ground. Within 4 quadrats sub-set with the son
to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions due to deforesta-
and compass, all woody plants with a DBH ≥ 10 cm were
tion. This study was conducted in Northern Cameroon during
consistently measured and counted using a tape to 1.30 m
the dry season of 2018. This study shows the positive impact
above ground for large trees and 50 cm of soil for shrubs
of savannah ecosystems in climate change mitigation due to
and bushes. To assess the biomass, present in several com-
deforestation.
ponents (overhead and underground), in addition to con-
Materials and Methods sider the soil organic matter. The living aboveground bio-
mass: All trees having a diameter to height of upper chest
Study area or equal to 10 cm were measured in the main plot of 2500
The study was conducted during the dry season of 2018 m2. Biomass dead wood: Two perpendicular lines 50 m in-
in four departments (Benoue, Faro, Mayo-Loutii and Mayo- tersecting at the center of the plot are drawn and snuff
Rey) of the North Region in Cameroon, located between lati- variables considered were the case, the circumference, to-
tude 9°18 'North and longitude 13° 23' East [7]. The landscape tal height, and the status of the tree. Sampling dead wood
is characterized by a wide pediplain between the Mandara was done in two categories:- For the dead timber, DBH was
Mountains (1442 m) in the north and the tray of the Adama- measured by making use of methods for living trees and
wa to the south. The climate is Sudano-Sahelian with two the height was measured using the measuring tape. The
seasons: A dry season (November-May) and a rainy season diameters of trunks or branches fell to the ground and in-
(June-October), both with a duration of six months [8]. Mean tercepting this line is measured using a caliper. Only diam-
monthly temperatures range from 26 °C in August to 40 °C in eters greater than 5 cm will then be considered in the anal-
March. The soil is ferruginous, characterized by high acidity ysis. The biomass of the litter is collected in a metal square
(pH 5.5 to 6), and a low cation exchange capacity [8,9]. The frame of 1 m x 1m and 0.5 x 0.5 m². Floor biomass: Soil
vegetation is predominately Sudanian shrub savannahs with samples were taken at 0-30 cm deep in quadrats 0.25 m
areas of cleared degraded savannahs around the villages [10]. × 0.25 m is delimited in the quadrats plot of 2500 m². The
Agriculture is the main activity of the population in the North total carbon is obtained by the sum of the aboveground
Region, mainly practiced as subsistence farming (corn, pea- carbon, belowground carbon, litter, dead wood and soil
nut and millet) [11] (Figure 1). (Figure 2).

Victor et al. J Bot Res 2019, 2(1):60-67 Open Access | Page 61 |

Citation: Victor AD, Valery NN, Louis Z (2020) Carbon Storage and Emission Factor of Savanna Ecosystems in Soudano-Sahelian Zone of
Cameroon. J Bot Res 2(1):60-67

Quadrat of 1m2 for little decomposed

littersampling

Quadrat 0.5 × 0.5m2 for highly pling

decomposed litter sam

Quadrat of 0.25 × 0.25m2 for

soil sampling

Quadrat of 50 m × 50 m for the inventory of ligneous trees according to the direction of the
sampling in the strips of 12.5 m × 50 m
= Picket

Figure 2: Diagram of the device illustrating a sampling unit.

Estimate Carbon in Biomass of Different follows: V = Π² (Σdi²)/8L with V: volume of wood density (m3/
Compartments of Savanna Ecosystems ha); Di: diameter of each wood debris sampled (m); L: Length
of the quadrant (m) = 50 m in the case of our study. Trans-
Aboveground biomass lating the results obtained from the bulk volume was made
by setting the value of wood density to 0.47 KgMS.m-3 [19].
The allometric equation developed by Brown, et al. [12]
The portion of the dry mass of carbon stock was made by the
for dry tropical climates was used to calculate the biomass of
following equation: Carbon stock in dead wood = Quantity
each individual and to deduce carbon in wood of the system
of dry matter (QDM) × 0.5 [20,21]. Litter Biomass: The litter
studied.
plant samples were dried in an oven at 65 °C for 72 hours and
AGB = expo (-1.996 + 2.32* ln (DBH)) with AGB then ground and the organic carbon was determined using
Aboveground biomass in kilogram (kg), DBH: Diameter dry ashing method. Equation (4): DM = (PSE/PHE)*100 where
Breast Height (cm). From this biomass, the amount of carbon DM = percentage of dry matter (%); PSE = dry weight of the
(tC/ha) was obtained by multiplying this biomass by 0.475 sample after three days in the oven at 65 °C (g); PHE = wet
conversion factor [10,13]; then it was converted to tons of weight of the sample measured in the field (g). Equation (5):
carbon per ha. B = (PHT*DM)/100; where: B = biomass (g); PHT = total wet
weight in measured in the field (g); DM = percentage of dry
Belowground biomass (BGB) matter (%) [22,23].
Belowground biomass was estimated according to the al- Soil organic carbon
lometric equation developed by [14,15], BGB = Expo (-1.0587
+ 0.8836* ln AGB). The soil organic carbon was determined by the method
of Walkley and Black [24], which consists in oxidizing soil
Dead wood biomass organic matter with potassium bicarbonate (K2Cr2O7) in a
sulfuric acid medium (H2SO4) in a solution/K2Cr2O7 ratio of
The calculation of the volume of dead timber was done us-
0.25/10. The analysis was done by calorimetry. The organic
ing the formula by Mund [16] as follows: 𝑉 = π*ℎ*𝑓*(DBH/2)2
content was determined by multiplying the organic carbon
where V: Volume of death timber (m3); DBH: Diameter Breast
content with the Sprengel [25] factor, which is 1.724 for
Height (m); h: height of death timber (m); f = form factor
cultivated soils and 2 for non-crop land. Soil carbon (SCOS)
(0.627). The lying on the dead wood biomass was measured
(tC/ ha) = Da. (% COS). S. P [26] with Da: bulk density in
using the line intersect method presented by Harmon and
tones /m3; %COS: organic carbon content of the soil; S:
Sexton [17]. Calculating the volume of the coated dead wood
area in m2; p: depth m.
was done using the formula used by Waren and Olsen [18] as

Victor et al. J Bot Res 2019, 2(1):60-67 Open Access | Page 62 |

Citation: Victor AD, Valery NN, Louis Z (2020) Carbon Storage and Emission Factor of Savanna Ecosystems in Soudano-Sahelian Zone of
Cameroon. J Bot Res 2(1):60-67

Total carbon 11.82 ± 2.54 tC/ha, with an average of 6.83 ± 3.20 tC/ha.
On average, belowground biomass was lower in degraded
CT = AGB + BGB + CL + CBM + SCOS with AGB: Carbon in
areas (2.66 ± 1.02 tC/ha) and higher in reforested areas
aboveground biomass; BGB: Carbon in belowground biomass;
(11.82 ± 2.54 tC/ha). Statistical analysis a significant dif-
CL: Litter carbon; CBM: carbon dead wood; SCOS: Soil carbon.
ference between habitats (Kruskal-Wallis test, df = 6; F =
Calculation of emission factors CO2 equivalent in 84.74; p-Value ˂ 0.001). The carbon stock in litter obtained
in this research ranged from 0.59 ± 0.05 tC/ha to 0.81 ±
biomass of different compartments of Savanna 0.06 tC/ha, with an overall average of 0.72 ± 0.09 tC/ha.
Ecosystems The carbon stock in litter was higher in swampy area (0.81
The emission factors relate five (05) carbon pools: Abo- ± 0.06 tC/ha) and lower on inselberg (0.59 ± 0.05 tC/ha),
veground biomass, belowground biomass, litter, dead wood yet statistical analysis showed no significant difference
and soil. between habitats (Kruskal-Wallis test, df = 6; F = 0.44;
p-Value < 0.001). The average carbon stocks in dead wood
Aboveground biomass emission factor obtained in this study differed between habitats and tend-
ed to increase in degraded areas (1.35 ± 0.53 tC/ha) for
FEAGB = AGB × FCFCMSBV × FCC with FEAGB
planting and reforestation respectively 2.75 ± 1.03 tC/ha
FEAGB: Aboveground biomass emission factor; AGB: Abo- each, but statistical analysis did not reveal any significant
veground biomass; FCFCMSBV: Conversion factor of the car- differences between habitats (Kruskal-Wallis test, df = 6;
bon fraction of dry matter in the living biomass, 0.47; FCC: F = 0.73; p-Value < 0.001). The soil carbon (0-30 cm) var-
Carbon Conversion factor CO2 equivalent = 44/12 [2,3,27]. ied between habitats. The average soil carbon (0-30 cm)
obtained in all habitats was 65.18 ± 27.53 tC/ha. On aver-
Belowground biomass emission factor age, soil carbon was lower in the degraded areas (25.10
FEBGB = FEAGB × TBS with FEBGB: Belowground biomass ± 2.09 tC/ha) and higher in swampy areas (100.60 ± 9.65
emission factor; TBS: Belowground biomass ratio relative to tC/ha). Statistical analysis by the Kruskal-Wallis test at the
aboveground biomass [2,3,27]. 1% evidenced a significant variation between habitats (df
= 6; F = 80.59; p-Value ˂ 0.001). Total carbon stock has an
Litter emission factor average of 104.3 ± 43.55 tC/ha in all studied habitats. The
FEL = CL × FCC with FEL: litter emission factor; average total carbon stocks obtained in this study differ
between habitats and tend to increase the degraded area
CL: Carbon litter; FCC: Carbon Conversion factor CO2 (39.85 ± 14.65 tC/ha) to the plantation (152.18 ± 43.76 tC/
equivalent = 44/12 [2,3,27]. ha). Statistical analysis by the Kruskal-Wallis test at the 1 %
evidenced a significant variation between habitats (df = 6;
Dead wood emission factors F = 86.05; p-Value ˂ 0.001), (Table 1).
FEBM = BBM × FC FCMSBM × FCC with FEBM: Dead wood
emission factors; BBM: Dead wood biomass; FCFCMSBM: Emission factors in the different compartments
Conversion factor of the carbon fraction of solids in the dead of Savanna Ecosystems
wood, 0.49 [2,3,27].
The aboveground biomass emission factors obtained in
Total Carbon emission factors this research ranges from 17.31 ± 1.97 to 93.59 ± 10.4 te-
qCO2/ha, representing an overall average of 51.02 ± 15.44
FES = CT × FCC with CT: Total Carbon; FCC: Carbon Conver- teqCO2/ha. The aboveground biomass emissions factors
sion factor CO2 equivalent = 44/12 [2]. are higher in reforestation (93.59 ± 10.4 teqCO2/ha) and
lower in degraded areas (17.31 ± 1.97 teqCO2/ha). Sta-
Data analysis
tistical analysis by the Kruskal-Wallis test at the 1% evi-
The data was encoded in EXCEL sheets and analyzed using denced a significant variation between habitats (df = 6; F
the software Statgraphics plus 5.0. ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis = 95.68; p-Value ˂ 0.001). The belowground biomass emis-
tests (with an level of significance of 1%) were performed by sion factors of the study area varies 2.59 ± 1.02 to 14.13
this software in order to test for correlations and significant ± 1.05 teqCO2/ha, with an average of 7.40 ± 3.20 teqCO2/
differences. ha; have an average lower in the degraded area (2.59 ±
1.02 teqCO2/ha) and higher plantation (14.13 ± 1.05 teq-
Results and Discussion CO2/ha). Statistical analysis by the Kruskal-Wallis test at
Carbon stock in the different compartments of the 1% evidenced a significant variation between habitats
(df = 6; F = 88.85; p-Value ˂ 0.001). The litter emission
Savanna Ecosystems factors obtained in this research ranges from 2.16 ± 0.65
The carbon stock in aboveground biomass is higher in to 2.97 ± 1.76 teqCO2/ha, represents an overall average
reforestation (54.26 ± 6.54 tC/ha) and lower in degraded of 2.64 ± 1.08 teqCO2/ha. The litter emission factors are
area (10.04 ± 0.97 tC/ha). Statistical analysis showed a higher in swampy area (2.97 ± 1.76 teqCO2/ha) and low-
significant difference between habitats (df = 6; F = 85.84; er in Inselberg (2.16 ± 0.65 teqCO2/ha). Statistical analysis
p-Value ˂ 0.001). The carbon stocks in belowground bio- by the Kruskal-Wallis test at the 1% threshold is no evi-
mass of the study area varied between 2.66 ± 1.02 and dence no significant variation between habitats (df = 6; F =

Victor et al. J Bot Res 2019, 2(1):60-67 Open Access | Page 63 |

Citation: Victor AD, Valery NN, Louis Z (2020) Carbon Storage and Emission Factor of Savanna Ecosystems in Soudano-Sahelian Zone of
Cameroon. J Bot Res 2(1):60-67

Table 1: Carbon stock (ton/ha) in the different compartments of Savanna Ecosystems.

Carbon stock
Habitats AGB BGB Litter Dead wood Soil (0-30 cm) Total Carbon
Plantation 37.24 ± 3.76c 8.47 ± 1.05d 0.60 ± 0.05a 2.75 ± 1.03a 93.10 ± 8.65f 142.16 ± 31.06d
Reforestation 54.26 ± 6.54e 11.82 ± 2.54e 0.79 ± 0.04a 2.75 ± 1.03a 67.82 ± 4.08c 137.44 ± 31.29d
Agroforestry 25.56 ± 1.54b 6.08 ± 0.76c 0.78 ± 0.01a 2.00 ± 1.32a 70.29 ± 5.65d 104.71 ± 29.98c
Degraded area 10.04 ± 0.97a 2.66 ± 1.02b 0.70 ± 0.34a 1.35 ± 0.53a 25.10 ± 2.09a 39.85 ± 14.65b
Woody savannah 25.5 ± 2.54b 6.06 ± 1.65c 0.78 ± 0.01a 1.99 ± 0.65a 63.75 ± 3.78c 98.08 ± 29.54c
Swampy area 40.24 ± 4.20d 9.08 ± 2.41d 0.81 ± 0.06a 1.45 ± 0.42a 100.60 ± 9.65e 152.18 ± 43.76de
Inselberg 14.26 ± 0.54a 3.63 ± 0.85a 0.59 ± 0.05a 1.55 ± 0.76a 35.65 ± 3.80b 55.68 ± 13.87a
M ± STDV 29.58 ± 15.44 6.83 ± 3.20 0.72 ± 0.09 1.97 ± 0.58 65.18 ± 27.53 104.3 ± 43.55

M ± STDV: Mean ± standard deviation. The values ​​assigned the same letter are not statistically different a probability level of 1%.

Table 2: Emission factors in the different compartments of Savanna Ecosystems.

teqCO2 emissions factors

Habitats FEAGB FEBGB FEL FEBM FES FETC
Plantation 64.23 ± 5.76c 14.13 ± 1.05d 2.20 ± 0.65c 4.94 ± 2.03d 341.67 ± 38.65f 427.17 ± 45.06d
Reforestation 93.59 ± 10.4e 11.23 ± 2.54 2.89 ± 0.54d 4.94 ± 2.03d 248.89 ± 44.8c 361.54 ± 41.29d
Agroforestry 44.08 ± 3.54b 5.73 ± 0.76c 2.86 ± 0.21b 3.59 ± 1.32c 257.96 ± 25.5d 314.22 ± 39.98c
Degraded area 17.31 ± 1.97a 2.59 ± 1.02b 2.57 ± 0.34a 3.59 ± 1.32c 92.11 ± 32.9a 118.17 ± 24.65b
Woody savannah 43.98 ± 4.54b 5.71 ± 1.65c 2.86 ± 0.21b 2.42 ± 2.05a 233.96 ± 43.8c 103.09 ± 29.54c
Swampy area 69.40 ± 6.20d 9.02 ± 2.41d 2.97 ± 1.76c 3.57 ± 3.12d 100.60 ± 9.36e 162.19 ± 23.76de
Inselberg 24.59 ± 1.54a 3.44 ± 0.85a 2.16 ± 0.65a 2.78 ± 0.76a 130.83 ± 10.80b 288.93 ± 33.87a
M ± STDV 51.02 ± 15.44 7.40 ± 3.20 2.64 ± 1.08 3.69 ± 3.62 200.86 ± 27.53 371.87 ± 47.46

M ± STDV: Mean ± standard deviation. The values ​​assigned the same letter are not statistically different at probability level of 1%.

0.23; p-Value < 0.001). The averages dead wood emission ly 10.04-54.26 tC/ha; 2.66-11.82 tC/ha; 0.59-0.81 tC/ha;
factors obtained in this study differ between habitats and 1.35-2.75 tC/ha, 25.10-100.60 tC/ha and 39.85-152.18 tC/
tend to increase the degraded area (2.42 ± 2.05 teqCO2/ha) ha with coefficients of variation of respectively 52.19%;
for plantation and reforestation respectively 4.94 ± 2.03 46.85%; 12.50%; 29.44%; 42.23% and 41.75%. From all
teqCO2/ha each. Statistical analysis by the Kruskal-Wallis the calculated variables, the coefficient of variation SCL
at the 1% threshold is no evidence no significant variation (12.50%) is the lowest compared to the other four vari-
between habitats (df = 6; F = 0.13; p-Value < 0.001). The ables. A very strong and highly significant correlation was
average of the soil emission factors obtained in all habitats observed between SCAGB with FEAGB (R² = 0.98; p ≤ 0.001);
is 200.86 ± 27.53 teqCO2/ha. They have an average lower FEL (R² = 0.94; p ≤ 0.001); FEBM (R² = 0.96; p ≤ 0.001);
in degraded area (92.11 ± 32.9 teqCO2/ha) and higher in FETC (R² = 0.94; p ≤ 0.001). As against a weaker and not
swampy area (341.67 ± 38.65 teqCO2/ha). Statistical analy- significant correlation was observed between the SCAGB
sis by the Kruskal-Wallis test at the 1% evidenced a signifi- and FEBGB (R² = 0.49; p > 0.05) but a fairly strong and sig-
cant variation between habitats (df = 6; F = 84.40; p-Value nificant correlation was observed between the SCAGB and
˂ 0.001). The total Carbon emission factor has an average FES (R² = 0.59; p < 0.05). Correlations between SCBS with
of 371.87 ± 47.46 teqCO2/ha in all studied habitats. Aver- FEAGB (R² = 0.81; p ≤ 0.001); FEBGB (R² = 0.98; p ≤ 0.001);
age total carbon emission factor obtained in this study dif- FETC (R² = 0.96; p ≤ 0.001) are very strong and highly sig-
fer between habitats and tend to increase the degraded nificant. By cons between SCBGB with FEL (R² = 0.56; p <
area (103.09 ± 29.54 teqCO2/ha) to the plantation (427.17 0.05); FEBM (R² = 0.51; p < 0.05); FES (R² = 0.68; p < 0.05), a
± 45.06 teqCO2/ha). Statistical analysis by the Kruskal-Wal- fairly strong and significant correlation was observed.
lis test at the 1% evidenced a significant variation between
Correlations between SCL with FEAGB (R² = 0.88; p ≤
habitats (df = 6; F = 86.05; p-Value ˂ 0.001) (Table 2).
0,001); FEBGB (R² = 0.80; p ≤ 0.001); FEL (R² = 0.98; p ≤
Relationship between carbon storage and emis- 0.001); FES (R² = 0.90; p ≤ 0.001) and FETC (R² = 0.89; p ≤
0.001) are very strong and highly significant but between
sion factors of Savanna Ecosystems
SCL with FEBM a less strong correlation and no significant
The minimum and maximum values SCAGB, SCBGB, SCL, differences were observed (R² = 0.48; p > 0.05). A very
SCBM, SCOS (0-30 cm) and total Carbon are respective- strong and significant correlation was observed between

Victor et al. J Bot Res 2019, 2(1):60-67 Open Access | Page 64 |

Citation: Victor AD, Valery NN, Louis Z (2020) Carbon Storage and Emission Factor of Savanna Ecosystems in Soudano-Sahelian Zone of
Cameroon. J Bot Res 2(1):60-67

Table 3: Pearson correlation matrix to the Carbon Storage and Emission Factor of Savanna Ecosystems.

Pearson Correlation
Variables FEAGB FEBGB FEL FEBM FES FETC Min Max Mean (CV)
SCAGB 0.98 ***
0.49ns 0.94 ***
0.96***
0.59 *
0.94***
10.04 54.26 29.58 (52.19%)
SCBGB 0.81 ***
0.98 ***
0.56 *
0.51*
0.68 *
0.96***
2.66 11.82 6.83 (46.85%)
SCL 0.88 ***
0.80 *
0.98 ***
0.48ns 0.90 ****
0.89***
0.59 0.81 0.72 (12.50%)
SCBM 0.51* 0.59* 0.24ns 0.99*** 0.59* 0.94*** 1.35 2.75 1.97 (29.44%)
SCOS (0-30 cm) 0.88 ***
0.87 ***
0.56 *
0.81****
0.88 ***
0.96***
25.10 100.60 65.18 (42.23%)
Total Carbon 0.88 ***
0.90 ****
0.89 ***
0.98***
0.90 ****
0.98***
39.85 152.18 104.3 (41.75%)

Min: Minimum; Max: Maximum; CV = Coefficient of variation. The coefficients p < 0.05 Were Significantly correlated; *: P ≤ 0.05; **p ≤ 0.01;
***
p < 0.001 (Pearson test); ns = not significant (p > 0.05).

the SCMB with FEBM (R² = 0.99; p ≤ 0.001) and FETC (R² litters were plantations comes in addition to crops, timber
= 0.94; p ≤ 0.001) but weaker and not significant with FEL left standing, the swampy area adjacent to the latter and
(R² = 0.24; p > 0.05) yet strong enough and with significant the resulting wasteland unprotected above its established.
FEAGB (R² = 0.51; p < 0.05); FEBGB (R² = 0.59; p < 0.05); FES Moreover, although the lighting rate is higher in the woody
(R² = 0.59; p < 0.05). The results in Table 3 show that there savanna and degraded area, the humidity is lower in insel-
is a significant and positive correlation between SCOS (0- berg; which significantly affects the rate of decomposition of
30 cm) and FEL (R² = 0.56; p < 0.05); and a very strong and organic matter that will be most important in swampy areas
positive correlation between SCOS (0-30 cm); FEAGB (R² = studied in the inselberg. The average carbon stocks in dead
0.88; p≤0.001); FEBGB (R² = 0.87; p ≤ 0.001); FEBM (R² = wood obtained in this study differ between habitats and tend
0.81; p ≤ 0.001); FES (R² = 0.88; p ≤ 0.001) and FETC (R² = to increase the degraded area (1.35 ± 1.53 tC/ha) for planting
0.96; p ≤ 0.001). In the end very strong correlations, very and reforestation respectively 2.75 ± 2.03 tC/ha each. Hence,
positive and highly significant were observed between the the presence of a larger number of fallen trees. The reason
total Carbon with FEAGB (R² = 0.88; p ≤ 0.001); FEBGB (R² = plantations and reforestation store more carbon in this com-
0.90; p ≤ 0.001); FEL (R² = 0.89; p ≤ 0.001); FEBM (R² = 0.98; ponent is certainly due to the fact that farmers have very lit-
p ≤ 0.001); FES (R² = 0.90; p ≤ 0.001) and FETC (R² = 0.98; p tle involvement in this type of system, unlike the degraded
≤ 0.001, (Table 3). area where fallen trees are mostly harvested for purposes of
firewood and charcoal production. The soil carbon (0-30 cm)
The carbon stock in aboveground biomass is higher in re-
varies from one habitat to another.
forestation (54.26 ± 6.54 tC/ha) and lower in degraded areas
(10.04 ± 0.97 tC/ha). Several factors could explain the spatial The average carbon soil (0-30 cm) obtained in all the hab-
variability of carbon stocks recorded in the different habi- itats is 65.18 ± 27.53 tC/ha. It has an average lower in the de-
tats studied. Clark and Clark [28] and Gourlet-Fleury and col- graded area (25.10 ± 2.09 tC/ha) and higher in swampy area
leagues [29], emphasize the influence of the type of soil in the (100.60 ± 9.65 tC/ha). This gap could be explained mainly in
spatial variability of biomass stocks, and thus their carbon in part by the different biochemical textures and compositions
the tropics. In fact, the type of soil controls the specific com- of the soil and also the fact that in degraded areas, anthropo-
position [30] and explains its difference between ecosystems genic factors (bushfires, logging, growing up slash and burn)
by natural selection related to species adaptation [31]. Bocko and biophysical factors (erosion, stripping surface layers, me-
and colleagues [32] also point out that structural variables ex- chanical action and clearing the oxidation of organic matter)
plain more of the spatial variation of biomass in African rain- that destroy and reduce organic refunds from the middle
forests. In fact, air carbon stock tends to increase with the towards the ground. Indeed, the carbon storage dynamics in
increase of certain structural parameters such as basal area agroforestry soil depends on changes in land use (deforesta-
[29,33]. It is then noted that the most significant differences tion, afforestation, etc.), climate and silvicultural practices
between the different biotopes carbon stocks may reside in mineralization increasing the activity of micro-organisms in
the importance of their basal surfaces [31] and their means the soil (plowing, drainage, fertilization). Total carbon stock
DBH. Carbon stocks in belowground biomass of the study has an average of 104.3 ± 43.55 tC/ha in all studied habitats.
area vary 2.66 ± 1.02 to 11.82 ± 2.54 tC/ha, with an average The average total carbon stocks obtained in this study differ
of 6.83 ± 3.20 tC/ha; have an average lower in the degraded between habitats and tend to increase the degraded area
area (2.66 ± 1.02 tC/ha) and higher in reforestation (11.82 ± (39.85 ± 14.65 tC/ha) to the swampy area (152.18 ± 43.76 tC/
2.54 tC/ha). The main change factors agroforestry soil carbon ha). This is due to different geographical areas studied, the
stocks are climate, the dominant species, in connection with dbh, basal area and density of trees selected and studied eco-
the type of humus, and qualitative characteristics (pedoge- systems. Aboveground biomass Emission factors obtained in
netic type) and quantitative soil (clay content and soil depth). this search range from 17.31 ± 1.97 and 93.59 ± 10.4 teqCO2/
The carbon stock in litter is higher in swampy area (0.81 ± ha, representing an average of 51.02 ± 15.44 teqCO2/ha. Abo-
1.76 tC/ha) and lower in inselberg (0.59 ± 0.65 tC/ha). This veground biomass emission Factors are higher in reforesta-
variation could be explained by two main reasons: Because tion (93.59 ± 10.4 teqCO2/ha) and lower in degraded areas

Victor et al. J Bot Res 2019, 2(1):60-67 Open Access | Page 65 |

Citation: Victor AD, Valery NN, Louis Z (2020) Carbon Storage and Emission Factor of Savanna Ecosystems in Soudano-Sahelian Zone of
Cameroon. J Bot Res 2(1):60-67

(17.31 ± 1.97 teqCO2/ha). The reforestation is the major sink mental riparian populations; such ecosystems are considered
of CO2; this explains the absence of anthropogenic emissions for CO2 emission reductions factors therefore contribute to
of greenhouse gas effects. Aboveground biomass emission the mitigation of climate change mitigations. Which should
factors low in degraded areas, this is due to the presence of be as through the different land use activities, land tenure
anthropogenic (bush fires, logging, slash and burn cultiva- security, agriculture "zero deforestation", reforestation, sus-
tion setting). These results are lower than the results cited tainable forest management, REDD + and CDM projects need
by [27,34] for the dense tropical forest (248.16 teqCO2/ha) to focus on the valuation of these savanna ecosystems North
and the tropical moist deciduous forest (151.31 teqCO2/ha) in Cameroon to motivate local communities to develop conser-
the Mé Region. The belowground biomass emission factors in vation strategies for protecting these ecosystems to benefit
this study area range from 2.59 ± 1.02 to 14.13 ± 1.05 teqCO2/ from carbon credits and also while improving their conditions
ha, with an average of 7.40 ± 3.20 teqCO2/ha; have an aver- of life. These results show that these different ecosystems
age lower in the degraded area (2.59 ± 1.02 teqCO2/ha) and studied are large carbon reservoirs and can justify the use of
higher plantations (14.13 ± 1.05 teqCO2/ha). The high value judicious combination agricultural and woody crops to en-
in plantations, perhaps due to the fact that these plantations hance the total carbon stock and therefore the amount of CO2
are undisturbed ecosystems, with important litter inputs, sig- in degraded ecosystems such as degraded areas.
nificant microbial activity and decomposition leading to the
accumulation of more humus in the soil. These results are Acknowledgments
lower than the results cited by FAO and SEP-REDD +. [27,34] Authors thank all the reviewer whose contributions have
for the dense tropical forest (91.82 teqCO2/ha) and the trop- been very significant for the improvement of this study.
ical moist deciduous forest (30.26 teqCO2/ha) in Mé region.
The litter Emission factors are higher in swampy area (2.97 ± Conflict of Interest
1.76 teqCO2/ha) and lower in Inselberg (2.16 ± 0.65 teqCO2/ The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests
ha). These results are lower than the results cited by GIEC, regarding the publication of this manuscript.
2006 in Ouattara, 2017 for the mature evergreen forest (7.7
teqCO2/ha) and the tropical moist deciduous forest (7.7 teq- References
CO2/ha) in the Soul Region. The average dead wood emission
1. IPCC (2002) Changements climatiques et biodiversité. Document
factors obtained in this study differ between habitats and technique, 89.
tend to increase the degraded area (2.42 ± 2.65 teqCO2/ha)
for plantations and reforestation with respectively 4.94 ± 2.03 2. Kathryn Bickel, Gary Richards (2006) Représentation cohérente
teqCO2/ha each. These results are lower than the results cited des terres. Lignes directrices 2006 du Groupe d’experts intergou-
vernemental sur l’évolution du climat (GIEC) pour les inventaires
by FAO and SEP-REDD +,2017 in Ouattara, 2017 for the dense
nationaux de gaz à effet de serre. Volume 4 : Agriculture, fores-
tropical forest (61.81 teqCO2/ha) and the tropical moist de- terie et autres affectations des terres. Geneva, Switzerland, 47.
ciduous forest (74.92 teqCO2/ha) of the Mé Region. The aver-
age of Soil emission factors obtained in all habitats is 200.86 ± 3. SEP-REDD+ (2017) Niveau d’Emission de Référence pour les
27.53 teqCO2/ha. They have an average lower in the degrad- Forêts de la Côte d’Ivoire. Présentation à la convention cadre
des Nations Unies pour le Changement Climatique, 40.
ed region (92.11 ± 32.9 teqCO2/ha) and higher in swampy
area (341.67 ± 38.65 teqCO2/ha). This can be explained by the 4. Ndjidda (2001) Structure et dynamiques des espèces ligneuses
fact the largest density trees results in greater accumulation dans les zones Sud Est du Parc National de Waza. Mémoire du
of litter in the floor of the swampy area, which favors the ac- Diplôme d’Ingénieur des Eaux et Forêts. Université de Dschang, 62.
cumulation of carbon in the soil resulting in a high CO2 sink. 5. IPCC (2007) Groupe de travail I du GIEC. Quatrième Rapport
The total emission factor has an average of 371.87 ± 47.46 d’évaluation, Bilan 2007 des changements climatiques les bases
teqCO2/ha in all studied habitats. The average total emission scientifiques physiques, Résumé à intention des décideurs, 25.
factor obtained in this study differ between habitats and tend 6. Wafo G (2008) Les aires protegées de l’Extreme-Nord Cameroun
to increase the degraded area (103.09 ± 29.54 teqCO2/ha) entre politique de conservation et pratiques locales, Thèses de
to the swampy area (427.17 ± 45.06 teqCO2/ha). These re- doctorat en géographie - Amenagement-Environnement, Uni-
sults are lower than the value ​​found by Zapfack, et al. 2013 in versité d’Orléans, France, 325.
the Primary forest (17,463.01 teqCO2/ha); Secondary forest 7. Abdoulay M (2012) Migrations dynamiques agricoles et prob-
(1182.829 teqCO2/ha); Wetland (540.84 teqCO2/ha); Planting lèmes fonciers en Afrique subsaharienne Le périmètre irrigué de
(3394.64 teqCO2/ha); Young fallow (5084.62 teqCO2/ha); Old Lagdo (Nord-Cameroun). Cybergeo European Journal of Geog-
fallow (4244.67 teqCO2/ha) of Cameroon. But still higher than raphy 10.
the results found by Noiha, et al. 2017a in the plantations 8. Nguemhe Fils SC, Etouna J, Hakdaoui M (2014) Apport de l’OT et
of cashew (146.88 teqCO2/ha) and savannah (48.28 teqCO2/ du SIG à la cartographie des zones à risque d’érosion hydrique
ha) in Northern Region Cameroon. From these savanna eco- dans le bassin versant productif de Sanguéré, Nord Cameroun,
systems studied value ​​can offset the CO2 emissions resulting Afrique Centrale. International Journal of Innovation and Ap-
from human activities. plied Studies 9: 449-479.

Conclusion 9. Offossou D’Andous K (2011) Remise en culture des jachères

enrichies à acacia sénégal au nord-cameroun : productions for-
The savanna ecosystems contain remarkable carbon estière et agricole, et perceptions paysannes. Mémoire de Stage.
stocks. View their importance on social, ecological, environ- AgroParisTech, Centre de Montpellier 121.

Victor et al. J Bot Res 2019, 2(1):60-67 Open Access | Page 66 |

Citation: Victor AD, Valery NN, Louis Z (2020) Carbon Storage and Emission Factor of Savanna Ecosystems in Soudano-Sahelian Zone of
Cameroon. J Bot Res 2(1):60-67

10. Noiha Noumi V, Zapfack L, Awé Djongmo V, et al. (2017a) Floris- stock de carbone dans les systèmes agroforestiers à karité (Vi-
tic structure and sequestration potential of cashew agroecosys- tellaria paradoxa C.F. Gaertn.) et à néré (Parkia biglobosa Jacq.
tems in Africa: A case study from Cameroon. Journal of Sustain- G. Don) en zone Soudanienne du Bénin. Bulletin de la Recherche
able Forestry 36: 277-288. Agronomique du Bénin India, 9.
11. Awe Djongmo V, Noiha Noumi V, Zapfack L, et al. (2019) Car- 24. Walkley A, Black I Armstrong (1934) An experimentation of the
bon sequestration potential and economic value in agroforestry degtjareff method for determinig soil organic matter rand a pro-
parkland to tectona grandis L. f. (Verbenaceae) in Central Africa: posed modification of chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci 37:
A case study to Department of Poli (Northern Region in Camer- 29-38.
oon). Advances in Research 18: 1-16.
25. Awe AD, Valery NN, Louis Z, et al. (2019) Vegetation Structure,
12. Brown S, Gilespie AJR, Lugo AE (1997) Biomass estimation meth- Root Biomass Distribution and Soil Carbon Stock of Savannah
ods for tropical forest with application to forest inventory data. Agrosystems in Sudano-Sahelian Zone of Cameroon. J Bot Res
For Sci 35: 881-902. 2: 71-80.
13. Zapfack L, Noiha Noumi V, Dziedjou Kwouossu PJ, et al. (2013) 26. Mugheni ES (2016) Etude de la dynamique de carbone organique
Deforestation and carbon stocks in the surroundings of lobéké du sol et biomasse aérienne des forêts monodominantes à Gil-
national park (cameroon) in the congo basin. Environment and bertiodendron dewevrei dans la réserve forestière de Yoko ter-
Natural Resources Research 3: 78-86. ritoire d'Ubundu (Province de la Tshopo, RD Congo). Mémoire
pour l'obtention du diplôme de Grade d'Ingénieur, Université de
14. Cairns MA, Brown S, Helmer EH, et al. (1997) Root biomass allo-
Kisangani, 59.
cation in the world’s upland forests. Oecologia 111: 1-11.
27. Ouattara TA (2107) Niveau d’émission de référence pour les
15. Cairns MA, Olmsted I, Granados J, et al. (2003) Composition and
forêts de la Région de la Mé. Etc Terra-Rongead Représentation
aboveground tree biomass of a dry semi-evergreen forest on
en Côte d’Ivoire 25, BP 691 Abidjan, 25 Riviera Golf-Cocody, Ab-
Mexico’s Yucatan Peninsula. Forest ecology and Management
idjan 28.
186: 125-132.
28. Clark DB, Clark DA (2000) Landscape-scale variation in forest
16. Mund M (2004) Carbon Pools of European beech forests (Fa-
structure and biomass in a tropical rain forest. Forest Ecology
gus sylvatica) under different silvicultural management. Der
and Management 137: 185-198.
Georg-August-University Göttingen, 268.
29. Gourlet-Fleury S, Rossi V, Rejou-Mechain M, et al. (2011) Envi-
17. Harmon ME, Sexton J (1996) Guidelines for Measurements of
ronmental filtering of dense wooded species controls above-
Woody Detritus in Forest Ecosystems (US LTER Publication No.
ground biomass stored in African moist forests. Journal of Ecol-
20) US LTER Network Office, University of Washington, Seattle,
ogy 99: 981-990.
WA, USA, 73.
30. Laurance WF, Fearnside PM, Laurance SG, et al. (1999) Relation-
18. Warren W, Olsen P (1964) A line intersects technique for assess-
ship between soils and Amazon forest biomass: a landscape-scale
ing logging waste. Forest Science 10: 267-276.
study. Forest Ecology and Management 118: 127-138.
19. Ifo AS, Koubouana F, Jourdain C, et al. (2015) Stock and flow of
31. Jaffré T, Veillon JM (1990) Etude floristique et structurale de
carbon in plant woody debris in two different types of natural
deux forêts denses humides sur roches ultrabasiques en Nou-
forests in bateke plateau, central africa. Open Journal of Forest-
velle Calédonie. Rapports scientifiques et techniques, sciences
ry 5: 38-47.
de la vie botanique n°3, 45.
20. Woldendorp G, Keenan R J, Barry S, et al. (2004) Analysis of sam-
32. Bocko Yannick E, Ifo Suspense A, Loumeto Jean J (2017) Quan-
pling methods for coarse woody debris. Forest Ecology and Man-
tification des stocks de carbone de trois pools clés de carbone
agement 198: 133-148.
en Afrique Centrale : Cas de la forêt marécageuse de la likouala
21. Awe DV, Valery NN, Louis Z, et al. (2019) Vegetation Structure, (Nord Congo). European Scientific Journal 13: 1857-7881.
Root Biomass Distribution and Soil Carbon Stock of Savannah
33. Rahaingoson F, Rakotoarimanana V, Edmond R (2013) Analyse
Agrosystems in Sudano-Sahelian Zone of Cameroon. J Bot Res
structurale et floristique de la végétation selon les différents
2: 60-70.
types de gestion sur le Plateau Calcaire Mahafaly. Rôle et place
22. Valentini G (2007) Evaluation de la séquestration du carbone des transferts de gestion des ressources naturelles renouvela-
dans des plantations Agro-forestières et des jachères issues bles dans les politiques forestières actuelles à Madagascar 8.
d’une agriculture migratoire dans les territoires autochtones de
34. FAO et SEP-REDD+ (2017) Données forestières de base pour la
Talamanca au Costa Rica. Mémoire de MSc. en Biologie Végétale,
REDD+ en Côte d’Ivoire. Inventaire de la biomasse forestière
Université de Laval Québec, Canada, 128.
pour estimation des facteurs d’émission. Abidjan 49.
23. Saidou A, Dossa AFE, Gnanglè PC, et al. (2012) Evaluation du

DOI: 10.36959/771/562
Copyright: © 2020 Victor AD, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms
of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and S CHOLARS. D IRECT
reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Victor et al. J Bot Res 2019, 2(1):60-67 Open Access | Page 67 |

View publication stats