American Journal of Climate Change, 2024, 13, 140-162

https://www.scirp.org/journal/ajcc
ISSN Online: 2167-9509
ISSN Print: 2167-9495

Synergistic Interactions of Soil and Vegetation

in Agroforestry Systems in Mitigating Climate
Change in Upper East Region, Ghana

Joshua A. Adombire1*, Abdul-Wahab M. Imoro2, Eunice Essel3, Nang B. Douti1

1
Department of Environmental Science, C. K. Tedam University of Technology and Applied Sciences, Navrongo, Ghana
2
Department of Forestry and Forest Resources Management, University for Development Studies, Tamale, Ghana
3
Department of Crop Science and Biotechnology, C. K. Tedam University of Technology and Applied Sciences, Navrongo, Ghana

How to cite this paper: Adombire, J. A., Abstract

Imoro, A.-W. M., Essel, E., & Douti, N. B.
(2024). Synergistic Interactions of Soil and Climate change has been a global pandemic with its adverse impacts affect-
Vegetation in Agroforestry Systems in ing environments and livelihoods. This has been largely attributed to anth-
Mitigating Climate Change in Upper East
ropogenic activities which generate large amounts of Green House Gases
Region, Ghana. American Journal of Cli-
mate Change, 13, 140-162. (GHGs), notably carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide
https://doi.org/10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 (N2O) among others. In the Upper East of Ghana, climate change manifests
in erratic rainfalls, drought, high temperatures, high wind speeds, high inten-
Received: December 24, 2023
sity rainfall, windstorms, flooding, declining vegetation cover, perennial de-
Accepted: May 27, 2024
Published: May 30, 2024 vastating bushfires etc. Practices such as burning farm residues, use of dung
as fuel for cooking, excessive application of nitrogenous fertilizers, and de-
Copyright © 2024 by author(s) and
forestation that are prevalent in the region exacerbate the situation. Although,
Scientific Research Publishing Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative efforts made by governmental and none-governmental organizations to miti-
Commons Attribution International gate climate change through afforestation, agroforestry and promotion of less
License (CC BY 4.0). fuelwood consuming cook stoves, land management practices antagonize
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
these efforts as more CO2 is generated than the carrying capacity of vegeta-
Open Access
tion in the region. Research findings have established the role of trees and soil
in carbon sequestration in mitigating climate. However, there is limited
knowledge on how the vegetation and soil in agroforestry interplay in mitiga-
tion climate change. It is against this background that this review seeks to in-
vestigate how vegetation and soil in an agroforestry interact synergistically to
sequester carbon and contribute to mitigating climate change in Upper East
region of Ghana. In this review, it was discovered soil stored more carbon
than vegetation in an agroforestry system and is much effective in mitigating
climate change. It was found out that in order to make soil and vegetation in
an agroforestry system interact synergistically to effectively mitigate climate
change, Climate Smart Agriculture practice which integrates trees, and pe-

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 May 30, 2024 140 American Journal of Climate Change
 J. A. Adombire et al.

rennials crops effectively mitigates climate. The review concluded that tillage
practices that ensure retention and storage of soil organic carbon (SOC)
could be much effective in carbon sequestration in the Savannah zones and
could be augmented with vegetation to synergistically mitigate climate change
in the Upper East region of Ghana.

Keywords
Climate Change, Carbon Sequestration, Agroforestry, Photosynthesis,
Nutrient Mining, Synergistic

1. Introduction
Climate change is the long-term unfavorable changes in temperature and other
weather patterns. Such changes can be caused by natural factors such as variations
in the sun’s activity or massive volcanic eruptions. Predominantly, human activi-
ties have been the cause of climate change since the 1800s, emanating from the use
of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and gas (Das et al, 2012).
The burning of fossil fuels produces greenhouse gas emissions, behaving as a
blanket wrapped over the Earth, trapping heat from the sun and increasing tem-
peratures. Carbon (IV) oxide and methane (CH4) are the dominant greenhouse
gases causing climate change (Fagodiya et al, 2023). These gases are produced
because of using gasoline as fuel for heating buildings and driving vehicles.
Agriculture, oil and gas enterprises are major methane emitters (Mir et al, 2017).
Lamb et al. (2021) reported that energy, industry, transportation, buildings,
agriculture, and land use are among the major contributors to greenhouse gas
emissions. Anthropogenic activities such as those stated above emit greenhouse
gases such as carbon (IV) oxide (CO2), Methane (CH4), Nitrous oxide (N2O) and
Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC), which are causing an unprecedented warming of
the earth, a phenomenon known as global warming (Warming & Rays, 2011).
The Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reported the global
mean annual temperature at the end of the twentieth century of 0.40˚C - 0.76˚C
higher than at the end of the nineteenth century, with roughly two-thirds of the
increase occurring in just the last three decades. Climate change is resulting in
severe droughts, water scarcity, severe fires, increasing sea levels rise, flooding,
melting polar ice, catastrophic storms, declining biodiversity and soil fertility,
etc. This has threatened livelihoods with many developing countries becoming
more vulnerable to its impacts.
Numerous findings (IPCC, 2007; Albrecht & Kandji, 2003; etc.) have substan-
tiated the fact that agroforestry systems, even if not purposefully designed for
carbon sequestration, have the tendency to increase carbon stocks in the terre-
strial biosphere. Agroforestry systems are estimated to sequester between 12 and
228 mega grams/hectare (Mg∙ha−1) with a median value of 95 Mg∙ha−1 (Saha &
Jha, 2012). Carbon is stored in the soil, tree biomass, crop biomass, and wood

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 141 American Journal of Climate Change

J. A. Adombire et al.

products components of an agroforestry system (Albrecht & Kandji, 2003). It

has also been reported that worldwide, soils store more carbon than the amount
of carbon stored in phytomass and the atmosphere (Saha & Jha, 2012). The effi-
cacy of soil carbon sequestration on lands used for agriculture or forestry is
largely determined by land management strategies or use as referred by the
Kyoto Protocol as, “Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF)”. The
quantity of carbon stored in an agroforestry system is determined by the inter-
play of structure and function of different components within the systems (Al-
brecht & Kandji, 2003). Agricultural activities have been estimated to release 800
tera g C∙yr−1 globally (Sohi et al., 2010).
It is therefore, indicative that the magnitude of carbon sequestered by an
agroforestry system is the combined effect of the above ground (vegetation) and
the below ground (soil) components of the system. This interaction can be either
antagonistic, additive or synergistic depending on how the above ground and the
soil components of the agroforestry system are managed. However, most re-
searchers treat these components of agroforestry systems as mutually exclusive
in carbon storage in mitigating climate change. There is paucity of knowledge on
how the above ground and the below ground component of an agroforestry sys-
tem complement each other to maximize carbon sequestration. It is against this
background that this review seeks to synthesize the synergistic interaction of ve-
getation and soil components of an agroforestry system in sequestering the ter-
restrial carbon in mitigating climate change.
The review also seeks to explicitly demonstrate how soil and residues in an
agroforestry can be managed to maximize carbon sequestration as well as crops
that can be incorporated in an agroforestry to sustainably store soil organic car-
bon and ultimate carbon sequestration and tillage practices to be adopted to en-
hance carbon sequestration capacities of an agroforestry system.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Literature Search
A comprehensive literature review was carried out in this peer review. An initial
scoping research was conducted online in MEDLINE to identify literature relevant
to the topic. A search methodology, identifying keywords, search strings and the
sources of accessible material in Baidu Scholar, SCOPUS, Worldwide Science,
BASE, Microsoft Academic, Google books, CORE, Science Direct, Google Scholar,
and Elsevier BIOBASE, among others to minimize selection bias.
The following approach was used to find scientific research publications: 1)
the keywords including “Carbon”, “sequestration”, “Agroforestry”, “Global
warming, Green House gases”, “methods of carbon capture”, “soil carbon sto-
rage”. Search strings such as land management and carbon sequestration, tillage
and carbon storage’’ synergy of vegetation and soil in carbon sequestration was
conducted. Also, agroforestry and climate change, tillage and carbon storage,
land preparation and global warming, interaction of vegetation and soil in car-

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 142 American Journal of Climate Change

 J. A. Adombire et al.

bon sequestration, trees and carbon capture soil and vegetation in climate
change were considered to be part of the title and abstract; and 2) scientifically
indexed English papers published between 1983 and 2023 were used. A total of
150 papers were retrieved from the literature search.

2.2. Screening and Selection Criteria

The following variables were taken into account: 1) title, keywords, search strings, 2)
abstract, 3) the journals’ credibility, and 4) content analysis. Fifty (50) suitable litera-
ture sources were retained and considered for this review. Figure 1 below shows the
search methodology employed in identifying relevant literature for this review.

Figure 1. Screening process for selecting literature for review (Gentles et al., 2015).

3. Results
3.1. Agroforestry System (AFS)
International Centre for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF) refers to agroforestry
as a name for land-use practices that purposely combines trees and crops with or
without livestock on the same piece of land (Nair et al., 2021). Agroforestry also
refers to the intentional introduction or preservation of trees on farms to in-
crease, diversify, and improve production for enhanced social, economic, and
environmental benefits (Atangana et al., 2014). There are normally both ecolog-
ical and economic interactions between trees and crops parts in agroforestry.

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 143 American Journal of Climate Change

J. A. Adombire et al.

This definition has been helpful in agroforestry’s recognition as a distinct field of

agricultural research (Torquebiau, 2000).
It is approximated 1.6 billion hectares areas of land globally can be turned into
agroforestry (Nair & Garrity, 2012). Agroforestry practices are considered the
best “no regrets” approaches for helping communities adapt and become resi-
lient to the effects of climate change because of their propensity to yield both
economic and environmental benefits (Rao et al, 2007).
Agroforestry is generally practiced with the intention of developing a more
sustainable form of land use that can improve farm productivity and the welfare
of the rural community (Leakey, 1996). The contribution of agriculture to
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions has been estimated to be as low as 20% for
CO2, 50% for CH4 and 70% for N2O when compared to emissions from fossil fu-
els (Bedada & Goshu, 2021). CO2 has been singled out as a highest GHGs being
emitted to atmosphere from agriculture (FAO & ITPS, 2015).
As a means of sequestering carbon, agroforestry has attracted special atten-
tion, according to Kumar and Nair (2011). A major focus of the post-Kyoto
Protocol discussions on climate change is an agenda for reducing the amount of
CO2 in the atmosphere by sequestering carbon in terrestrial plant systems (Ge-
bre, 2016). Agroforestry is an environmentally sound and ecologically sustaina-
ble land use that retains carbon through sequestering it. This is expected to have
a major positive impact on limiting the rise in atmospheric CO2 levels Kumar
and Nair (2011). Managed agroforestry systems store more carbon, but not as
much as pure forest area (Bedada & Goshu, 2021). A significant amount of ab-
oveground carbon stock, ranging from 10.7 to 57.1 mg C∙ha−1 on average, is
stored in agroforestry areas such as parklands, home gardens, and woodlots
(Gebre, 2016).
There is an annual increase of CO2 at a rate of 3.5 Pg (Pg = 1015 g or billion
tons) to the atmosphere resulting largely from the burning fossil fuels and con-
version of tropical forests to agricultural land (Paustian et al., 2000). According
to Albrecht & Kandji (2003), the C sequestration capacity of agroforestry sys-
tems is estimated to range between 12 and 228 Mg∙ha−1, with a median value of
95 Mg∙ha−1 Albrecht & Kandji (2003). With an estimated area of (585 - 1215) ×
106 ha suitable for agroforestry, 1.1 - 2.2 Pg C could be stored in the terrestrial
ecosystems over the next 50 years Albrecht & Kandji (2003). Recent research
conducted in a range of AFSs and ecological settings revealed that tree-based
agriculture systems retained more carbon in deeper soil levels than treeless sys-
tems (Nair et al., 2010). According to Nair et al. (2010), system management and
environmental factors have a major impact on how much carbon is sequestered
in AFSs.
Agroforestry contributes to climate change mitigation and adaptation through:

minimizing the destruction of nearby forests for the expansion of agricul-

tural land, thereby lowering greenhouse gas emissions; providing fuelwood,
which is also utilized as substitute for fossil fuel, and harvesting timber that

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 144 American Journal of Climate Change

 J. A. Adombire et al.

would otherwise be taken from the forest (Unruh et al., 1993) and enhanc-
ing soil C through litter, trimming, and root biomass improving agricultur-
al output Albrecht & Kandji (2003). Mbow et al. (2014) demonstrated that
agroforestry systems improve microclimate by decreasing the intensity of
incident solar radiation while improving water conditions, gaseous exchange,
and efficient water use.

3.2. Classification of Agroforestry

Agroforestry system can be categorized depending on vegetation structure, func-
tion of woody perennials in the system, levels of management input, and envi-
ronmental conditions and ecological suitability of the system (Atangana et al.,
2014).
Thus: agrisilviculture - combining trees/shrubs and crops, silvopastoral - keep-
ing pasture/animals with trees and agrisilvopastoral - integration of crops, pas-
ture/animals and trees. There is also a temporal agroforestry system called
Taungya, which involves the cultivation of forestry tree crops and farmers’ sub-
sistence crops on a forest (Hemida et al., 2023).

3.3. Factors Affecting Carbon Sequestration

in an Agroforestry System
3.3.1. The Type of Agroforestry System
There is ample data to indicate that the kind of agroforestry system has a signif-
icant impact on the trees’ source or sink roles. For instance, agri-silvicultural
systems are net sinks of greenhouse gases (GHGs), whereas agro-silvipastoral
systems may be generators of GHGs (Kandji et al., 2006). The vegetative com-
ponent of agroforestry contribute to carbon capture by using CO2 for photosyn-
thesis and depositing carbon above ground in tree stem, branches and twigs as
well as underground in roots and the soil (Mahajan et al., 2021). Harvesting the
tree for wood results in the permanent sequestration of the carbon for the life of
products such as building materials or furniture created from the tree (Arehart et
al., 2021).
Geography and tree species in an Agroforestry influence its ability to store
carbon (Lasocki, 2001). Ma et al. (2020) reported that in order to improve bio-
mass C sequestration in agroforestry systems, planting a variety of tree species is
a key technic. A basic agroforestry which includes one specific tree species and a
cash crop is capable of storing an average of, while complex agroforestry system
with multiple tree species, shrubs, bushes and crops stores an average of 80.05
Mg C∙ha−1 of carbon stock ranging from 71.99 - 85.45 Mg C∙ha−1 (Toknok, 2013).
Geographical climate also influences the response of soil to agroforestry practic-
es Ma et al. (2020). Additionally, the amount of carbon stored in any agrofore-
stry system is influenced by the structure and function of different parts within
the system (Lorenz & Lal, 2014).
An agroforestry system with diverse tree species is able to sequester much
carbon than a system with a single tree species (Parrotta, 1999). Agroforestry

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 145 American Journal of Climate Change

J. A. Adombire et al.

such as parklands, home gardens, and woodlots stored a substantial above-

ground C stock of 10.7 to 57.1 Mg C∙ha−1 with an average 19.4 Mg C∙ha−1 (Gebre,
2016). Moreover, Ramachandran et al. (2009) have shown that the average ab-
atement rates in tons of CO2∙ha−1∙year−1 are 7.6 for alley farming and 8.7 for im-
proved fallow as indicated in Table 1 below.
Table 2 and Table 3 also indicate the mean above ground carbon sequestra-
tion by agroforestry system types in Africa and the carbon storage potential of
agroforestry systems in different eco-regions of the world, respectively.

3.3.2. Soils
Research has substantiated that soils contain the largest terrestrial carbon (C)
pool that is susceptible to changes in land use and agricultural management
practices (Haddaway et al., 2017). Lal (2011) reported that soils at about 1-m
depth contain approximately 2,500 Gt of C compared to the world biota which
contains 750 Gt of C. Around 12% of soil C is stored in cultivated soils, which
cover around 35% of the planet’s terrestrial surface area (Betts et al., 2007).
Soils have the potential to sequester more carbon but are limited by biocli-
matic factors (United Nations, 2011). These soils are susceptible to different
types of degradation, including wind erosion and other bad management practices
resulting in degradation. Dry lands need to sustainably manage to maintain their
existing SOC levels and foster their SOC sequestration potential (United Nations,
2011). The type of soil is a very important determinant in carbon sequestration

Table 1. The C absorption capacity of different agroforestry models.

No. Agroforestry Model Carbon storage capacity (t∙C∙ha)

1. Agrisilviculture system (11 years) 26.0

2. Block Plantation (6 years) 24.1 - 31.1

3. Silvopasture 31.71

4. Agrisilviculture 13.37

5 Agri-horticulture 12.28

Source: Ramachandran et al. (2009).

Table 2. Mean above ground (vegetation) carbon by agroforestry system types in Africa.

Agroforestry system type Mean Variance Number of Observations

Agrisilvicultural 0.88 0.14 5

Homegarden 0.52 0.07 5

Improved fallows 12.95 20.12 17

Shadow systems 2.27 2.36 18

Silvopastoral 0.15 – 1

Woodlots 3.36 1.85 14

Source: Feliciano et al. (2018).

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 146 American Journal of Climate Change

 J. A. Adombire et al.

Table 3. Carbon storage potential of agroforestry systems in different eco-regions of the

world (Murthy et al., 2013).

Potential (megagram,
Continent Eco-region System References
Mg C/ha−1)

Humid tropical Dixon &

Africa 29 - 53
high Krankina, 1993

South Humid tropical 39 - 102

Agrosilvicultural
America low dry lowlands 39 - 195

Southeast Humid tropical 12 - 228 Krankina &

Asia dry lowlands 68 - 81 Dixon, 1994

Humid tropical
Australia 28 - 51
low

Humid tropical
133 - 154
North high humid Schroeder,
Silvipastoral 104 - 198
America tropical low dry 1994
90 - 17
lowland

Northern Humid tropical Winjum et al.,

15 - 18
Asia low 1992

abilities of soil. Loamy soils, which include a balanced proportion of silt, sand,
and clay, have a significant capacity to store CO2 (Six et al., 2006). This is be-
cause of loam well-structured nature and promotes both adequate aeration and
moisture retention thereby high ability to store organic materials (Rodrigues et
al., 2023). Loamy soil provides conducive environmental conditions for biologi-
cal activities promoting organic matter decomposition and thereby, contributing
to carbon storage (Rodrigues et al., 2023).
Clayey soils due to their fine texture, high mineral content as well as high ca-
tion exchange capacity is able to store large amounts of CO2 (Schimel et al.,
1994). Sandy soils with their large particle size, rapid drainage, lower water
holding capacity and low mineral content have lower carbon sequestration po-
tential than loam and clay (Bai et al., 2019). Choudhury et al. (2014) reported
carbon stock of 18.75, 19.84 and 23.83 Mg∙ha−1 in the surface 0.4 m soil depth
observed under zero tillage of 22.32, 26.73 and 33.07 Mg∙ha−1 in 15 years in
sandy loam, loam and clay loam soil respectively. This increase was highest in
clay loam (38.8%) followed by loam (34.7%) and sandy loam (19.0%) soil. The
carbon sequestration rate was found to be 0.24, 0.46 and 0.62 Mg∙ha−1∙yr−1 in
sandy loam, loam and clay loam soil respectively under zero tillage. It is indica-
tive that, fine textured soils have more potential for storing carbon and zero til-
lage practice enhances carbon sequestration rate in soils by providing better
conditions in terms of moisture and temperature for higher biomass production
and reduced oxidation (González-Sánchez et al., 2012).
According to Lal (2004), an estimated 25% - 75% of the carbon stocks in soils
worldwide have been lost due to inappropriate vegetation management and til-
lage activities, among other things. Multiple studies investigating the conversion

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 147 American Journal of Climate Change

J. A. Adombire et al.

of natural forests to croplands discovered a considerable loss of soil carbon

stores (Conant et al., 2001; Guo & Gifford, 2002). Soil organic carbon promotes
climate change adaptation through enhancing physical characteristics of soil and
boosting resistance to climatic extreme events. Land use practices that involve
converting land from annual cropping to forest, grassland or perennial crops
sequester C from atmospheric CO2 and greatly contribute to climate change mi-
tigation (Powlson et al., 2011).
Soil status as a net source or net sink of the atmospheric carbon dioxide
greatly depends on management practices. Soil organic carbon loss is worsened
by excessive soil drainage, bad ploughing techniques (e.g. ploughing across con-
tours, deep ploughing), removal of residues and biomass, burning, inadequate soil
amendment practices and soil erosion accelerative practices (Lal, 2011). Practic-
ing recommended management practices (RMP) such as zero tillage farming
with crop residue mulch, integration of forages in the rotation cycle, ensuring a
positive nutrient balance, use of organic manures, turning arable lands to a pe-
rennial land use, and restoration of depleted soils can foster SOC pool.
Activities that promote potential increase in emission of CO2 from soil, con-
tribute to an increase in global warming (Rastogi et al., 2002). Land management
strategies and fertilizer use that causes potential increase in emissions of N2O and
CH4 from soils contribute to climate change as well (McDaniel et al., 2019).
Boosting C (as CO2) accumulation in soils leading to soil storage rate of about 3
Giga tons (GT) C/yr (Ontl & Schulte, 2012), prevent CO2 increases in the atmos-
phere.
In addition to climate change, SOC plays beneficial vital physical, chemical
and biological roles in the terrestrial biosphere as summarized in Chart 1 below
(Lal et al., 2013).
Soil carbon sequestration is catalyzed by management practices that incorpo-
rate more carbon into the soil and reduce soil respiration (Euliss et al., 2008).
Research has proven that management practices that minimally disturb the soil
and increase biomass production through soil amendments can avert soil carbon
losses through oxidation and erosion. Appropriate land management can foster
increase carbon inputs into the soil and this will consequently lead to apprecia-
ble decadal soil carbon storage due to long turn over times of soil carbon. Con-
servation tillage, which consists of no-tillage or reduced tillage, is one of the
strategies, which promote carbon sequestration by reducing soil respiration (Eu-
liss et al., 2008).
Soil characteristics, climate, land use, and other factors can make soil either a
source or sink of carbon (Eglin et al., 2010). The collective objective of increas-
ing global carbon stocks in forests, grasslands, and crops where human behavior
is oriented toward C storage is projected to improve food security and mitigate
climate change (Paustian et al., 2016). Table 5 below shows the Carbon storage
potentials of soils in different agroforestry systems and climatic zones.
Von Lützow et al. (2008) identified three soil conceptual C pools based on
their rate of degradation. They included the labile OM with turnover between

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 148 American Journal of Climate Change

 J. A. Adombire et al.

Chart 1. Soil Organic Carbon and its importance in Agriculture (Lal et al., 2013).

Table 5. Global Soil Carbon stocks in different agroforestry (AF) systems and Climatic
zones.

Soil C in AF (Mega
Region Agroforestry system Δ Soil C (Mg C∙ha−1)
gram, Mg C∙ha−1)

Alley cropping 38.6 5.3

Tropics and Homegardens 40.8 8.7/23.4

subtropics Silvopasture 28.1 −1.8

Windbreaks 30.1 6.3

Alley cropping 17.7 2.2

Homegardens 30.2 10
Temperate
Silvopasture 36.8 0.7

Windbreaks 66.5 0.9

Δ: Soil C represents additional C sequestered in soils under AF compared to pure crop-

land (or pasture); *Δ: Soil C of homegardens highly varied between tropical and subtrop-
ical climates (8.7 vs 23.4 Mg C∙ha−1); Source: Shi et al. (2018); 1 Mg = 1 metric ton =
1,000,000 grams.

days to a year. The intermediate pool has a turn over within a few years to dec-
ades. The labile and intermediate pools consist of plant, animal, bacterial and
fungal wastes. The stable OM pool has a turn over ranging from decades to cen-
turies. It is derived from labile and intermediate pools and comprises most of the
organic carbon in the soil (Torn et al., 2009). The stable OM also consists of
plant, animal, bacterial, or fungal leftovers, as well as microbial metabolic prod-

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 149 American Journal of Climate Change

J. A. Adombire et al.

ucts. The stable pool is present in aggregates and/or adsorbed on mineral sur-
faces.
To optimize the sustainability of increased carbon storage and extend the time
that this additional carbon remains in the soil, the 4 per 1000 initiative aimed to
increase the size of the intermediate and stable carbon pools (Dignac et al.,
2017). Biotic and abiotic factors influence the storage and release of C from these
pools (Dignac et al., 2017).
OM fluxes from plants to soils C inputs include not only above and below-
ground litter (leaves, branches, stems, roots), but also rhizodeposits and chemi-
cals that are directly delivered to mycorrhizal fungus (Villarino et al., 2021).
Root litter makes up around one-third of the total litter inputs in grassland soils
and half in forest soils (Freschet et al., 2013). Rhizodeposition contributes
appproximately 11% of carbon assimilated by plants and roots assimilate 27% of
that carbon (Zhu et al., 2019).
Recent research proves belowground inputs play a major role in OM, which
contribute to the intermediate to static pools of OM in deeper soil horizons
(Mendez-Millan et al., 2012). Root litter breakdown is determined by root che-
mistry and happens at rate 30% slower than leaf decomposition (Birouste et al.,
2012; Freschet et al., 2013).
Inputs of litter from above ground are partially incorporated into mineral soil
with decomposition rates decreasing with increasing depth (Pries et al., 2018).
The structure of plant species and rooting system are very important charac-
teristics that influence the quantity of carbon fixed into the soil (Luo et al.,
2017). Species with lengthy root density such as monocots as well as annual
which also have high root branching intensity on top soil minimizes surface ru-
noff and therefore reducing carbon loss (Gyssels et al., 2005). Lange et al. (2015)
reported that increased plant diversity enhanced rhizosphere carbon imports.

3.3.3. Processes Affecting Carbon Sequestration in Soils

The amount of carbon stored in the soil is determined by the rate and magnitude
of the under listed processes which are influenced by Agricultural management
practices (Follett, 2001).
Organic production
Through photosynthesis, the permanent vegetation can store significant
amount of CO2 thereby serving as a sink for the sequestration of CO2. The car-
bon state of the soil system can be greatly impacted by farming methods and
land use (Rabbi et al., 2014). Atmospheric carbon is sequestered and stored as
carbon compounds in plants making plants the primary source of carbon.
Minimal organic carbon breakdown
Organic residue breakdown and oxidation increase carbon loss resulting in
the production of greenhouse gases. Soil moisture, pH, temperature, chemical
properties, and nutrient status influence this phenomenon. Minimal soil distur-
bance promotes carbon storage thereby improves the physical and chemical
properties of soil and adds to nutrient pools. Appropriate soil management

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 150 American Journal of Climate Change

 J. A. Adombire et al.

techniques protect the soil from erosion and improve microbial populations
(Unger et al., 1991).
Soil erosion
Inappropriate soil and residue handling lead to accelerated water and wind
erosion (Wilson et al., 2004). Soil erosion is a principal cause of soil degradation
because of loss of organic matter, which is the “glue” or adhesive element in soil.
The most effective way to lessen soil erosion is through conservation tillage
(Seitz et al., 2019). The impact of no-tillage methods on improving soil quality
with regard to the carbon content at the upper section of the soil profile is evi-
dent in situations where grasslands are turned to permanent vegetation. Tillage
can result in appreciable carbon loss (as CO2 bursts) immediately after tillage
(Reicosky, 1995). Exposed soil organic carbon to aeration as a result of soil ero-
sion emit more CO2. Erosion dislodges soil carbon and causes it to aggregate
with soil sediments that is carried away causing loss of soil carbon pool. This
consequently causes loss of soil fertility and aggregate stability. Figure 2 below
illustrates soil carbon loss through erosional processes.
Tillage
Although, tillage provides a number of benefits to farmers, it is also associated
with the loss of carbon from agricultural soils (Haddaway et al., 2017). The
recommendation and adoption of less intensive tillage practices and no tillage

Figure 2. Fate of Soil Organic Carbon (SOC) transport by erosional processes modified and adapted from Lal
(2003).

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 151 American Journal of Climate Change

J. A. Adombire et al.

techniques helps prevent the adverse effects of tillage on soil quality and retain
soil organic carbon (SOC) (Haddaway et al., 2017).
Conservation agriculture (CA), which encompasses little soil disturbance,
plant residues retention, and crop rotations has proven to be beneficial to soil
and farmers (Govaerts et al., 2009). A reduction in tillage practices tremendously
reduces emissions, hence, mitigating climate change (González-Sánchez et al.,
2012). CO2 in the atmosphere is affected by changes in soil C (Schlesinger, 1995).
Agriculture can be one of several potential solutions to the issue of greenhouse
gas emissions if appropriate soil and residue management practices are practiced
(Haddaway et al., 2017).
The oxidation and breakdown of plant residue will accelerate the loss of car-
bon as CO2 (Olson et al., 2016). To completely store carbon in the soil system,
there must be very little residue breakdown from conventional tillage and soil
disturbance (Al-Kaisi et al., 2008).
Worldwide, the change in tillage practice from conventional tillage to no-tillage
is effectively conserving soils in arable lands as well as reducing decline of soil
organic matter and improving resilient agrarian systems (Mehra et al., 2018).
Reducing the need for mechanical tillage practices lessens energy consump-
tion and C emissions through the use of fossil fuels (Holland, 2004). Increased
Net Primary Productivity (NPP) through tillage methods may result in the sto-
rage of higher SOC stocks, which could mitigate the effects of climate change
(Virto et al., 2012).
Effects of crop types and farming in carbon sequestration
According to Brakas and Aune (2011), tree crops sequester carbon at a higher
rate than grasslands or annual crops because tree crops accumulate carbon
through their roots, litter, and aboveground biomass, while annual crops only
accumulate carbon through their roots and the retention of crop residue (Ra-
machandran et al., 2009; Jose, 2009).
According to Asbjornsen et al. (2013), perennial crops may be a viable choice
for assisting climate-smart agricultural systems. Research has proven that peren-
nial crops have the propensity to increase soil C stocks than annual crops (Fer-
chaud et al., 2016; Ledo et al., 2020).
Perennial crops in agroforestry systems have the potential to be significant
carbon sinks, whereas annual crops in agroforestry systems under intensive man-
agement are more akin to conventional agriculture, which is a carbon source
(Nair et al., 2010).
Depending on the type of growth, root morphology and physiology, leaf
morphology, climate, soil texture, structure, and aggregation, dominant crop-
ping system, and agronomic interventions during crop growth period, different
plant species have different capacities for sequestering carbon and the amount of
organic carbon (Jarecki & Lal, 2003). The aboveground plant biomass, plant
leaves branches, stem, foliage, fruits, wood, litter-fall and below ground plant
biomass such as dead roots, excretes substances from root exudates including
rhizospheric deposition, and plant microbial biomass C, adding to the SOC

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 152 American Journal of Climate Change

 J. A. Adombire et al.

buildup. Crop management practices that ensures increased nitrogen (N) availa-
bility is more sustainable and fosters C input in the soil ecosystem (Jarecki & Lal,
2003). Reduced tillage together with surface residue retention and integration of
leguminous crops in a rotation reduce surface runoff and erosion and increase N
availability and SOC sequestration (Meena et al., 2020). The application of or-
ganic manure, green manures, growing leguminous crops, cover crops, biologi-
cal N-fixing microbes, and farm and kitchen waste materials adds nitrogen to
the soil, which is essential for agricultural productivity and stores SOC (Meena
et al., 2020). Practicing green manuring with leguminous crops (LGM) im-
proves SOC, makes available nutrients, enhances physical, chemical and bio-
logical properties of soil thereby increasing crop productivity (Meena et al.,
2018). When practiced with no-till farming practices, crop rotations can increase
soil carbon storage, improve SOC concentration, and reduce soil erosion (Lal,
2011). Cover crops have the potential to store more carbon to enhance SOC and
reduce climate change (Lal, 2004).

4. Discussion
Applied organic materials, respiration, plant residue removal and erosion de-
termine the carbon balance in an agro-ecosystem (Brady & Weil, 1996). Tillage
promotes good aeration in the soil, facilitates quick breaks down of organic
matter, enhancing microbial decomposition to occur (Brady & Weil, 1996).
Rapid organic matter decomposition has a positive correlation with CO2 emis-
sions, global warming and consequently, climate change (Kirschbaum, 2000). It
is therefore indicative that processes that slow microbial decomposition of or-
ganic matter could be one of the sustainable approaches to sustained soil quality
for agricultural productivity and also, mitigating climate change.
Eliminating soil tillage and inversion, maintaining crop residue cover, and
ensuring proper crop rotation, have proven to improve SOM level and ensure
carbon accumulation and sequestration in soils (Kassam et al., 2012). This has
been termed as a Conservation or Climate Smart Agriculture practice. Funda-
mentally, conservation practices are linked to residue management, i.e., full, par-
tial stubble retention on arable lands (Sommer et al., 2011). Conservation tillage
facilitates surface residues accumulation leading to higher soil organic C storage.
Common land preparation methods in the Upper East of Ghana involve ga-
thering all farm residues and burning to have a clean land for ploughing and
other farm operations do not only contribute tremendously to the Green House
effect but also antagonize the contribution of vegetation in mitigating climate
change. These practices deteriorate soil carbon and make soils carbon sources
than sinks.
With almost 79.0% of its inhabitants residing in rural areas and majority of
them in dispersed villages, Ghana’s Upper East region is the least urbanized
(Ghana Statistical Service (GSS), 2014). The region is characterized by unimod-
al/ single rainfall pattern with a long dry season (no rains) seven months in a

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 153 American Journal of Climate Change

J. A. Adombire et al.

year. Due to this, the vegetation is savannah having sparse short fire resistant
trees such as Vitellaria paradoxa, Parkia biglobosa, Lannea micocarpa, Pilios-
tigma thonningii, Diospyros mespiliformis, Combretum spp, Tectona grandis
with vast grasses understorey. As an agrarian region, livestock such as cattle,
sheep, goats, donkey and birds (chicken, guinea fowls) are also kept dominantly on
subsistence scale. Annual crops such as maize, sorghum, groundnuts, Bambara
groundnuts, millet, guinea corn, rice are grown largely for family consumption.
Despite, efforts by the government and non-governmental organizations to
minimize bushfires in the region, the rainfall pattern coupled with vast dry
grasses in the dry season catalyzes bushfires. Hence, the region records bushfires
on large hectares of land annually (Amoako et al., 2018). This undoubtedly con-
tributes to global warming.
It is therefore, worth noting that if conservation land preparation methods are
not adopted, no matter the hectares of agroforestry systems in the Upper East
region of Ghana, they may not be able to contribute significantly to carbon se-
questration and hence, mitigating climate change since CO2 sources might out-
weigh the sinks.
It is logical to deduce from the above findings that no tillage land preparation
methods leads to a buildup of soil organic carbon (SOC), storing substantial
amount of carbon and consequently, sequestrating CO2. Six et al. (2006) re-
ported an increase in SOC stocks of both tropical and temperate soils under no
tillage than with conventional tillage for the 0 - 10 cm layer. Conservation tillage
is another feasible sustainable means of storing SOC and hence, contributing to
CO2 sequestration.
Busari et al. (2015) defines Conservation tillage as any tillage system that
leaves at least 30% of the soil surface covered with crop residue after planting to
reduce soil erosion by water splash and runoff. Conservation tillage, which en-
compasses maintenance of surface soil cover through retention of crop residues,
is achievable by practicing zero tillage and minimal mechanical soil disturbance.
Retention of crop residue protects the soil from direct impact of raindrops
and sunlight reducing soil erosion and evaporation, and processes that accelerate
emission of CO2 into the atmosphere (Busari et al., 2015). Bullock ploughing
which is one of the land preparation methods in Upper East of Ghana ploughs a
depth of 10 - 15 cm (Acharya et al., 2014) which is characteristic of climate smart
agriculture practices should be a viable option in the savannah in fighting cli-
mate change since the rainfall pattern does not favour perennials growth in-
cluding afforestation. Scharlemann et al. (2014) reported global soils store more
C at average of 1500 Pg C in the top metre lone than vegetation and the atmos-
pheric reservoirs combined.
Most of carbon in grassland ecosystems is stored in soils, where turnover du-
rations are rather long (100 - 10,000 years). As a result, changes in the global
carbon cycle have a major and long-term impact (Schimel et al., 1994). The slow
turnover of the soil organic carbon (SOC) sink makes it a more secure carbon
sequestration mechanism than plant biomass (Lugo & Brown, 1993).

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 154 American Journal of Climate Change

 J. A. Adombire et al.

5. Conclusion
From the results obtained in this review, tillage practices that ensure retention
and storage of SOC could be much effective in carbon sequestration in the Sa-
vannah zones. Practices that enhance the rapid decomposition of soil organic
carbon such as conventional tillage, gathering and burning of farm residues,
bush burning etc. increase the buildup of CO2 in the atmosphere. It is therefore,
very imperative to consider soil organic carbon retention as a viable and sus-
tainable approach in fighting climate change in this context since the rainfall
pattern (unimodal) does not favour much vegetative (perennials) growth espe-
cially afforestation.
In the savannah, where annual plants are dominant, carbon sequestration
could be enhanced by undertaking land management practices that ensure these
grasses are not removed from the soil surface for fuels, thatch and other craft
works while promoting bullocks ploughing and or no tillage practices. Promot-
ing bullock ploughing alongside conserving the sparse indigenous and planted
trees while discouraging mechanical ploughing with tractors could enhance CO2
sequestration. This will consequently foster the synergistic mitigation of vegeta-
tion and soil of climate change mitigation in the Upper East region of Ghana.

Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this pa-
per.

References
Acharya, S., Mahapatra, N., & Ghosal, M. K. (2014). Draft Requirement of Bullock Drawn
Mouldboard Ploughs in Sandy Loam Soil of Coastal Odisha. Indian Journal of Dryland
Agricultural Research and Development, 29, 89-92.
https://doi.org/10.5958/2231-6701.2014.01201.9
Albrecht, A., & Kandji, S. T. (2003). Carbon Sequestration in Tropical Agroforestry Sys-
tems. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 99, 15-27.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(03)00138-5
Al-Kaisi, M. M., Kruse, M. L., & Sawyer, J. E. (2008). Effect of Nitrogen Fertilizer Appli-
cation on Growing Season Soil Carbon Dioxide Emission in a Corn-Soybean Rotation.
Journal of Environmental Quality, 37, 325-332. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2007.0240
Amoako, E. E., Kranjac-Berisavljevic, G., Ballu Duwieja, A., Misana, S., & Zizinga, A.
(2018). Effect of the Seasonal Burning on Tree Species in the Guinea Savanna Wood-
land, Ghana: Implications for Climate Change Mitigation. Applied Ecology and Envi-
ronmental Research, 16, 1935-1949. https://doi.org/10.15666/aeer/1602_19351949
Arehart, J. H., Hart, J., Pomponi, F., & D’Amico, B. (2021). Carbon Sequestration and Sto-
rage in the Built Environment. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 27, 1047-1063.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.02.028
Asbjornsen, H., Hernandez-Santana, V., Liebman, M., Bayala, J., Chen, J., Helmers, M.,
Ong, C. K., & Schulte, L. A. (2013). Targeting Perennial Vegetation in Agricultural
Landscapes for Enhancing Ecosystem Services. Renewable Agriculture and Food Sys-
tems, 29, 101-125. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170512000385

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 155 American Journal of Climate Change

J. A. Adombire et al.

Atangana, A., Khasa, D., Chang, S., Degrande, A., Atangana, A., Khasa, D., & Degrande,
A. (2014). Phytoremediation in Tropical Agroforestry (pp. 343-351). Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7723-1_19
Bai, X., Huang, Y., Ren, W., Coyne, M., Jacinthe, P. A., Tao, B., Hui, D., Yang, J., & Ma-
tocha, C. (2019). Responses of Soil Carbon Sequestration to Climate-Smart Agriculture
Practices: A Meta-Analysis. Global Change Biology, 25, 2591-2606.
https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14658
Bedada, A. B., & Goshu, T. A. (2021). Farmland Trees for the Improvement of Crop
Yield, Soil Fertilities, Soil and Water Conservation, and Carbon Sequestration: A Re-
view. Agricultural Science Research Journal, 11, 154-168.
Betts, R. A., Falloon, P. D., Goldewijk, K. K., & Ramankutty, N. (2007). Biogeophysical
Effects of Land Use on Climate: Model Simulations of Radiative Forcing and Large
Scale Temperature Change. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 142, 216-233.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2006.08.021
Birouste, M., Kazakou, E., Blanchard, A., & Roumet, C. (2012). Plant Traits and Decom-
position: Are the Relationships for Roots Comparable to Those for Leaves? Annals of
Botany, 109, 463-472. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcr297
Brady, N. C., & Weil, R. R. (1996). The Nature and Properties of Soils.
Brakas, S. G., & Aune, J. B. (2011). Biomass and Carbon Accumulation in Land Use Sys-
tems of Claveria, the Philippines. In B. Mohan Kumar, & P. K. Ramachandran Nair
(Eds.), Carbon Sequestration Potential of Agroforestry Systems: Opportunities and Chal-
lenges (pp. 163-175). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1630-8_9
Busari, M. A., Kukal, S. S., Kaur, A., Bhatt, R., & Dulazi, A. A. (2015). Conservation Til-
lage Impacts on Soil, Crop and the Environment. International Soil and Water Con-
servation Research, 3, 119-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iswcr.2015.05.002
Choudhury, S. G., Srivastava, S., Singh, R., Chaudhari, S. K., Sharma, D. K., Singh, S. K.,
& Sarkar, D. (2014). Tillage and Residue Management Effects on Soil Aggregation, Or-
ganic Carbon Dynamics and Yield Attribute in Rice-Wheat Cropping System under
Reclaimed Sodic Soil. Soil and Tillage Research, 136, 76-83.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2013.10.001
Conant, R. T., Paustian, K., & Elliott, E. T. (2001). Grassland Management and Conver-
sion into Grassland: Effects on Soil Carbon. Ecological Applications, 11, 343-355.
https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2001)011[0343:GMACIG]2.0.CO;2
Das, B., Khara, U., & Bandyopadhyay, A. (2012). Main Physical Causes of Climate Change
and Global Warming—A General Overview.
Dias Rodrigues, C. I., Brito, L. M., & Nunes, L. J. R. (2023). Soil Carbon Sequestration in
the Context of Climate Change Mitigation: A Review. Soil Systems, 7, Article No. 64.
https://doi.org/10.3390/soilsystems7030064
Dignac, M. F., Derrien, D., BarrÉ, P., Barot, S., CÉCillon, L., Chenu, C., & Basile-Doelsch,
I. (2017). Increasing Soil Carbon Storage: Mechanisms, Effects of Agricultural Practices
and Proxies. A Review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 37, 1-27.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-017-0421-2
Dixon, R. K., & Krankina, O. N. (1993). Forest Fires in Russia: Carbon Dioxide Emissions
to the Atmosphere. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 23, 700-705.
https://doi.org/10.1139/x93-091
Eglin, T., Ciais, P., Piao, S., BarrÉ, P., Bellassen, V., Cadule, P., Chenu, C., Gasser, T., Ko-
ven, C., Reichstein, M., & Smith, P. (2010). Historical and Future Perspectives of Glob-
al Soil Carbon Response to Climate and Land-Use Changes. Tellus B, 62, 700-718.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2010.00499.x

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 156 American Journal of Climate Change

 J. A. Adombire et al.

Euliss, N. H., Smith, L. M., Wilcox, D. A., & Browne, B. A. (2008). Linking Ecosystem
Processes with Wetland Management Goals: Charting a Course for a Sustainable Fu-
ture. Wetlands, 28, 553-562. https://doi.org/10.1672/07-154.1
Fagodiya, R. K., Verma, K., & Verma, V. K. (2023). Climate Resilient Agricultural Prac-
tices for Mitigation and Adaptation of Climate Change. In Social Science Dimensions
of Climate Resilient Agriculture (pp. 1-14). ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute.
FAO and ITPS (2015). Status of the World’s Soils Resources.
Feliciano, D., Ledo, A., Hillier, J., & Nayak, D. (2018). Which Agroforestry Options Give
the Greatest Soil and above Ground Carbon Benefits in Different World Regions?
Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 254, 117-129.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.11.032
Ferchaud, F., Vitte, G., & Mary, B. (2016). Changes in Soil Carbon Stocks under Perennial
and Annual Bioenergy Crops. Global Change Biology Bioenergy, 8, 290-306.
https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12249
Follett, R. F. (2001). Soil Management Concepts and Carbon Sequestration in Crop-Land
Soils. Soil and Tillage Research, 61, 77-92.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-1987(01)00180-5
Freschet, G. T., Cornwell, W. K., Wardle, D. A., Elumeeva, T. G., Liu, W., Jackson, B. G.,
& Cornelissen, J. H. (2013). Linking Litter Decomposition of Above- and Be-
low-Ground Organs to Plant-Soil Feedbacks Worldwide. Journal of Ecology, 101,
943-952. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12092
Gebre, A. B. (2016). Potential Effects of Agroforestry Practices on Climate Change Mitiga-
tion and Adaptation Strategies: A Review. Journal of Natural Sciences Research, 6, 83-89.
Gentles, S. J., Charles, C., Ploeg, J., & McKibbon, K. A. (2015). Sampling in Qualitative
Research: Insights from an Overview of the Methods Literature. The Qualitative Re-
port, 20, 1772-1789. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2015.2373
Ghana Statistical Service (GSS) (2014). Ghana Living Standards Survey Round 6 (GLSS
6), Main Report, 2012/2013. GSS.
González-Sánchez, E. J., Ordóñez-Fernández, R., Carbonell-Bojollo, R., Veroz-González,
O., & Gil-Ribes, J. A. (2012). Meta-Analysis on Atmospheric Carbon Capture in Spain
through the Use of Conservation Agriculture. Soil and Tillage Research, 122, 52-60.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2012.03.001
Govaerts, B., Verhulst, N., Castellanos-Navarrete, A., Sayre, K. D., Dixon, J., & Dendoo-
ven, L. (2009). Conservation Agriculture and Soil Carbon Sequestration: Between Myth
and Farmer Reality. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences, 28, 97-122.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07352680902776358
Guo, L. B., & Gifford, R. M. (2002). Soil Carbon Stocks and Land Use Change: A Me-
ta-Analysis. Global Change Biology, 8, 345-360.
https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1354-1013.2002.00486.x
Gyssels, G., Poesen, J., Bochet, E., & Li, Y. (2005). Impact of Plant Roots on the Resistance
of Soils to Erosion by Water: A Review. Progress in Physical Geography, 29, 189-217.
https://doi.org/10.1191/0309133305pp443ra
Haddaway, N. R., Hedlund, K., & Jackson, L. E. (2017). How Does Tillage Intensity Affect
Soil Organic Carbon? A Systematic Review. Environmental Evidence, 6, Article No. 30.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-017-0108-9
Hemida, M., Yasin, E. H., Kheiry, M. A., Hammad, Z. M., & Vityi, A. (2023). Assessment
of Taungya Agroforestry System in Dryland Forests Rehabilitation in Sudan. Journal of
Degraded and Mining Lands Management, 10, 4495-4507.
https://doi.org/10.15243/jdmlm.2023.103.4495

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 157 American Journal of Climate Change

J. A. Adombire et al.

Holland, J. M. (2004). The Environmental Consequences of Adopting Conservation Til-

lage in Europe: Reviewing the Evidence. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 103,
1-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2003.12.018
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2007). Fourth Assessment Report.
Climate Change (AR4).
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml
Jarecki, M. K., & Lal, R. (2003). Crop Management for Soil Carbon Sequestration. Critical
Reviews in Plant Sciences, 22, 471-502. https://doi.org/10.1080/713608318
Jose, S. (2009). Agroforestry for Ecosystem Services and Environmental Benefits: An
Overview. Agroforestry Systems, 76, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-009-9229-7
Kandji, S. T., Verchot, L.V., Mackensen, J., Boye, A., Van, N.M., et al. (2006). Opportuni-
ties for Linking Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation through Agroforestry Sys-
tems. In D. P. Garrity, A. Okono, M. Grayson, & S. Parrott (Eds.), World Agroforestry
into the Future (pp. 113-121). World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF).
Kassam, A., Friedrich, T., Derpsch, R., Lahmar, R., Mrabet, R., Basch, G., & Serraj, R.
(2012). Conservation Agriculture in the Dry Mediterranean Climate. Field Crops Re-
search, 132, 7-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2012.02.023
Kirschbaum, M. U. (2000). Will Changes in Soil Organic Carbon Act as a Positive or
Negative Feedback on Global Warming? Biogeochemistry, 48, 21-51.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006238902976
Krankina, O. N., & Dixon, R. K. (1994). Forest Management Options to Conserve and
Sequester Terrestrial Carbon in the Russian Federation. World Resource Review, 6,
88-101.
Kumar, B. M., & Nair, P. K. R. (2011). Carbon Sequestration in Agroforestry Systems:
Opportunities and Challenges. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1630-8
Lal, R. (2003). Soil Erosion and the Global Carbon Budget. Environment International,
29, 437-450. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-4120(02)00192-7
Lal, R. (2004). Soil Carbon Sequestration Impacts on Global Climate Change and Food
Security. Science, 304, 1623-1627. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1097396
Lal, R. (2011). Soil Carbon and Climate Change. In D. Hillel, & C. Rosenzweig (Eds.),
Handbook of Climate Change and Agroecosystems: Impacts, Adaptation, and Mitiga-
tion (pp. 287-305). World Scientific Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1142/9781848166561_0016
Lal, R., Lorenz, K., Hüttl, R., Schneider, B., & Von Braun, J. (2013). Ecosystem Services
and Carbon Sequestration in the Biosphere. Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6455-2
Lamb, W. F., Wiedmann, T., Pongratz, J., Rew, R., Crippa, M., Olivier, J. G., & Minx, J.
(2021). A Review of Trends and Drivers of Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Sector from
1990 to 2018. Environmental Research Letters, 16, Article ID: 073005.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abee4e
Lange, M., Eisenhauer, N., Sierra, C. A., Bessler, H., Engels, C., Griffiths, R. I. G. P., Ma-
lik, A. A., Roy, J., Scheu, S., Steinbeiss, S., Thomson, B. C., Trumbore, S. E., & Gleixner,
G. (2015). Plant Diversity Increases Soil Microbial Activity and Soil Carbon Storage.
Nature Communications, 6, Article No. 6707. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms7707
Lasocki, T. J. (2001). Climate Change Mitigation through Forestry: Theory and Practice.
Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 14, 147-166. https://doi.org/10.1300/J091v14n02_09
Leakey, R. R. B. (1996). Definition of Agroforestry Revisited. Agroforestry Today, 8, 5-7.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-805356-0.00001-5

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 158 American Journal of Climate Change

 J. A. Adombire et al.

Ledo, A., Smith, P., Zerihun, A., Whitaker, J., Vicente-Vicente, J. L., Qin, Z. C., McNa-
mara, N. P., Zinn, Y. L., Llorente, M., Liebig, M., Kuhnert, M., Dondini, M., Don, A.,
Diaz-Pines, E., Datta, A., Bakka, H., Aguilera, E., & Hillier, J. (2020). Changes in Soil
Organic Carbon under Perennial Crops. Global Change Biology, 26, 4158-4168.
https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15120
Lorenz, K., & Lal, R. (2014). Soil Organic Carbon Sequestration in Agroforestry Systems.
A Review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 34, 443-454.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-014-0212-y
Lugo, A. E., & Brown, S. (1993). Management of Tropical Soils as Sinks or Sources of
Atmospheric Carbon. Plant and Soil, 149, 27-41. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00010760
Luo, Y. Q., Zhao, X.-Y., Wang, T., & Li, Y.-Q. (2017). Characteristics of the Plant-Root
System and Its Relationships with Soil Organic Carbon and Total Nitrogen in a De-
graded Sandy Grassland. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 26, 200-206.
Ma, Z., Chen, H. Y., Bork, E. W., Carlyle, C. N., & Chang, S. X. (2020). Carbon Accumu-
lation in Agroforestry Systems Is Affected by Tree Species Diversity, Age and Regional
Climate: A Global Meta-Analysis. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 29, 1817-1828.
https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.13145
Mahajan, A., Sojitra, A., Gupta, H., & Arora, D. (2021). Carbon Sequestration in Forest
and Agroforestry—A Global Perspective. In Advances in Forestry and Agro-Forestry
(p. 437). Stella International Publication.
Mbow, C., Smith, P., Skole, D., Duguma, L., & Bustamante, M. (2014). Achieving Mitiga-
tion and Adaptation to Climate Change through Sustainable Agroforestry Practices in
Africa. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 6, 8-14.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2013.09.002
McDaniel, M. D., Saha, D., Dumont, M. G., HernÁNdez, M., & Adams, M. A. (2019). The
Effect of Land-Use Change on Soil CH4 and N2O Fluxes: A Global Meta-Analysis. Eco-
systems, 22, 1424-1443. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-019-00347-z
Meena, B. L., Fagodiya, R. K., Prajapat, K., Dotaniya, M. L., Kaledhonkar, M. J., Sharma,
P. C., & Kumar, S. (2018). Legume Green Manuring: An Option for Soil Sustainability.
In R. S. Meena, et al. (Eds.), Legumes for Soil Health and Sustainable Management
(387-408). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0253-4_12
Meena, R. S., Kumar, S., & Yadav, G. S. (2020). Soil Carbon Sequestration in Crop Pro-
duction. In R. S. Meena (Ed.), Nutrient Dynamics for Sustainable Crop Production (pp.
1-39). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8660-2_1
Mehra, P., Baker, J., Sojka, R. E., Bolan, N., Desbiolles, J., Kirkham, M. B., & Gupta, R.
(2018). A Review of Tillage Practices and Their Potential to Impact the Soil Carbon
Dynamics. Advances in Agronomy, 150, 185-230.
https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.agron.2018.03.002
Mendez-Millan, M., Dignac, M. F., Rumpel, C., Rasse, D. P., Bardoux, G., & Derenne, S.
(2012). Contribution of Maize Root Derived C to Soil Organic Carbon throughout an
Agricultural Soil Profile Assessed by Compound Specific 13C Analysis. Organic Geo-
chemistry, 42, 1502-1511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orggeochem.2011.02.008
Mir, K. A., Purohit, P., & Mehmood, S. (2017). Sectoral Assessment of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions in Pakistan. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 24, 27345-27355.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-0354-y
Murthy, I. K., Gupta, M., Tomar, S., Munsi, M., Tiwari, R., Hegde, G. T., & Ravindranath,
N. H. (2013). Carbon Sequestration Potential of Agroforestry Systems in India. Journal
of Earth Science & Climatic Change, 4, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.4172/2157-7617.1000131
Nair, P. K. R., & Garrity, D. (2012). Agroforestry—The Future of Global Land Use.

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 159 American Journal of Climate Change

J. A. Adombire et al.

Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4676-3
Nair, P. R., Kumar, B. M., Nair, V. D., Nair, P. R., Kumar, B. M., & Nair, V. D. (2021).
Definition and Concepts of Agroforestry. In P. K. R. Nair, B. M. Kumar, & V. D. Nair
(Eds.), An Introduction to Agroforestry: Four Decades of Scientific Developments (pp.
21-28). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-75358-0_2
Nair, P. R., Nair, V. D., Kumar, B. M., & Showalter, J. M. (2010). Carbon Sequestration in
Agroforestry Systems. In Advances in Agronomy (Vol. 108, pp. 237-307). Elsevier.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(10)08005-3
Olson, K. R., Al-Kaisi, M., Lal, R., & Cihacek, L. (2016). Impact of Soil Erosion on Soil
Organic Carbon Stocks. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 71, 61A-67A.
https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.71.3.61A
Ontl, T. A., & Schulte, L. A. (2012). Soil Carbon Storage. Nature Education Knowledge, 3,
35.
Parrotta, J. A. (1999). Productivity, Nutrient Cycling, and Succession in Single- and
Mixed-Species Plantations of Casuarina equisetifolia, Eucalyptus robusta, and Leucae-
na leucocephala in Puerto Rico. Forest Ecology and Management, 124, 45-77.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(99)00049-3
Paustian, K., Lehmann, J., Ogle, S., Reay, D., Robertson, G. P., & Smith, P. (2016). Cli-
mate-Smart Soils. Nature, 532, 49-57. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17174
Paustian, K., Six, J., Elliott, E. T., & Hunt, H. W. (2000). Management Options for Re-
ducing CO2 Emissions from Agricultural Soils. Biogeochemistry, 48, 147-163.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006271331703
Powlson, D. S., Whitmore, A. P., & Goulding, K. W. (2011). Soil Carbon Sequestration to
Mitigate Climate Change: A Critical Re-Examination to Identify the True and the
False. European Journal of Soil Science, 62, 42-55.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2389.2010.01342.x
Pries, C. E. H., Sulman, B. N., West, C., O’Neill, C., Poppleton, E., Porras, R. C., & Torn,
M. S. (2018). Root Litter Decomposition Slows with Soil Depth. Soil Biology and Bio-
chemistry, 125, 103-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.07.002
Rabbi, S. F., Tighe, M., Cowie, A., Wilson, B. R., Schwenke, G., Mcleod, M., & Baldock, J.
(2014). The Relationships between Land Uses, Soil Management Practices, and Soil
Carbon Fractions in South Eastern Australia. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environ-
ment, 197, 41-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2014.06.020
Ramachandran Nair, P. K., Mohan Kumar, B., & Nair, V. D. (2009). Agroforestry as a
Strategy for Carbon Sequestration. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science, 172,
10-23. https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.200800030
Rao, K., Verchot, L., & Laarman, J. (2007). Adaptation to Climate Change through Sus-
tainable Management and Development of Agroforestry Systems. Journal of SAT Agri-
cultural Research, 4, 1-30.
Rastogi, M., Singh, S., & Pathak, H. (2002). Emission of Carbon Dioxide from Soil. Cur-
rent Science, 82, 510-517. https://doi.org/10.4141/S02-SI
Reicosky, D. C. (1995). Impact of Tillage on Soil as a Carbon Sink. In Farming for a Better
Environment (pp. 50-53). Soil and Water Conservation Society.
Saha, R., & Jha, P. (2012). Carbon Sequestration Potentials of Agroforestry Systems under
Climate Change Scenario—Brief Review with Special Emphasis on North-Eastern Hill
Regions. Journal of Agricultural Physics, 12, 100-106.
Scharlemann, J. P., Tanner, E. V., Hiederer, R., & Kapos, V. (2014). Global Soil Carbon:
Understanding and Managing the Largest Terrestrial Carbon Pool. Carbon Manage-

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 160 American Journal of Climate Change

 J. A. Adombire et al.

ment, 5, 81-91. https://doi.org/10.4155/cmt.13.77

Schimel, D. S., Braswell, B. H., Holland, E. A., McKeown, R., Ojima, D. S., Painter, T. H.,
Parton, W. J., & Townsend, A. R. (1994). Climatic, Edaphic, and Biotic Controls over
Storage and Turnover of Carbon in Soils. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 8, 279-293.
https://doi.org/10.1029/94GB00993
Schlesinger, W. H. (1995). Soil Respiration and Changes in Soil Carbon Stocks. In G. M.
Woodwell, & F. T. Mackenzie (Eds.), Biotic Feedbacks in the Global Climatic System:
Will the Warming Feed the Warming (pp. 159-168). Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195086409.003.0010
Schroeder, P. (1994). Carbon Storage Benefits of Agroforestry Systems. Agroforestry Sys-
tems, 27, 89-97. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00704837
Seitz, S., Goebes, P., Puerta, V. L., Pereira, E. I. P., Wittwer, R., Six, J., & Scholten, T.
(2019). Conservation Tillage and Organic Farming Reduce Soil Erosion. Agronomy for
Sustainable Development, 39, Article No. 4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-018-0545-z
Shi, L., Feng, W., Xu, J., & Kuzyakov, Y. (2018). Agroforestry Systems: Meta-Analysis of
Soil Carbon Stocks, Sequestration Processes, and Potential. Land Degradation and De-
velopment, 29, 3886-3897. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.3136
Six, J., Frey, S. D., Thiet, R. K., & Batten, K. M. (2006). Bacterial and Fungal Contribu-
tions to Carbon Sequestration in Agroecosystems. Soil Science Society of America
Journal, 70, 555-569. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2004.0347
Sohi, S. P., Krull, E., Lopez-Capel, E., & Bol, R. (2010). A Review of Biochar and Its Use
and Function in Soil. Advances in Agronomy, 105, 47-82.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(10)05002-9
Sommer, R., Ryan, J., Masri, S., Singh, M., & Diekmann, J. (2011). Effect of Shallow Til-
lage, Moldboard Plowing, Straw Management and Compost Addition on Soil Organic
Matter and Nitrogen in a Dryland Barley/Wheat-Vetch Rotation. Soil and Tillage Re-
search, 115, 39-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2011.06.003
Toknok, B. (2013). Carbon Stock of Agroforestry Systems at Adjacent Buffer Zone of
Lore Lindu National Park, Central Sulawesi. Journal of Tropical Soils, 16, 123-128.
https://doi.org/10.5400/jts.2011.v16i2.123-128
Torn, M. S., Swanston, C. W., Castanha, C., & Trumbore, S. E. (2009). Storage and Turn-
over of Organic Matter in Soil. In N. Senesi, et al. (Eds.), Biophysico-Chemical
Processes Involving Natural Nonliving Organic Matter in Environmental Systems (pp.
219-272). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470494950.ch6
Torquebiau, E. F. (2000). A Renewed Perspective on Agroforestry Concepts and Classifi-
cation. Comptes Rendus De L’Academie Des Sciences-Series III-Sciences De La Vie,
323, 1009-1017. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0764-4469(00)01239-7
Unger, P. W., Stewart, B. A., Parr, J. F., & Singh, R. P. (1991). Crop Residue Management
and Tillage Methods for Conserving Soil and Water in Semi-Arid Regions. Soil and
Tillage Research, 20, 219-240. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-1987(91)90041-U
United Nations (2011). Global Drylands: A UN System-Wide Responses. United Nation
Environment Management Group.
Unruh, J. D., Houghton, R. A., & Lefebvre, P. A. (1993). Carbon Storage in Agroforestry:
An Estimate for Sub-Saharan Africa. Climate Research, 3, 39-52.
https://doi.org/10.3354/cr003039
Villarino, S. H., Pinto, P., Jackson, R. B., & Piñeiro, G. (2021). Plant Rhizodeposition: A
Key Factor for Soil Organic Matter Formation in Stable Fractions. Science Advances, 7,
Eabd3176. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abd3176

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 161 American Journal of Climate Change

J. A. Adombire et al.

Virto, I., BarrÉ, P., Burlot, A., & Chenu, C. (2012). Carbon Input Differences as the Main
Factor Explaining the Variability in Soil Organic C Storage in No-Tilled Compared to
Inversion Tilled Agrosystems. Biogeochemistry, 108, 17-26.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-011-9600-4
Von Lützow, M., Kögel-Knabner, I., Ludwig, B., Matzner, E., Flessa, H., Ekschmitt, K., &
Kalbitz, K. (2008). Stabilization Mechanisms of Organic Matter in Four Temperate
Soils: Development and Application of a Conceptual Model. Journal of Plant Nutrition
and Soil Science, 171, 111-124. https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.200700047
Warming, C. R. F. T. G., & Rays, G. C. (2011). INCCA: Indian Network for Climate
Change Assessment.
Wilson, G. V., Dabney, S. M., McGregor, K. C., & Barkoll, B. D. (2004). Tillage and Resi-
due Effects on Runoff and Erosion Dynamics. Transactions of the ASAE, 47, 119-128.
Winjum, J. K., Dixon, R. K., & Schroeder, P. E. (1992). Estimating the Global Potential of
Forest and Agroforest Management Practices to Sequester Carbon. Water, Air, and Soil
Pollution, 64, 213-227.
Zhu, X., Hu, Y., Wang, W., & Wu, D. (2019). Earthworms Promote the Accumulation of
Maize Root-Derived Carbon in a Black Soil of Northeast China, Especially in Soil from
Long-Term No-Till. Geoderma, 340, 124-132.

DOI: 10.4236/ajcc.2024.132008 162 American Journal of Climate Change