National Institute for Research in the Amazon (INPA), C.P. 478, 69011-970 Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil
Center for Nuclear Energy in Agriculture (CENA), C.P. 96, 13400-970 Piracicaba, Sao Paulo, Brazil
Abstract
Biomass burning in tropical forests the normal practice to prepare land for agriculture and ranching has been a major source of
CO2 emitted to the atmosphere. Mass transformations by burning are still little studied in the tropics. The present study estimated
parameters, such as the stock of carbon contained in the biomass, burning efciency and the formation of charcoal and ashes
in a tropical moist forest. Two sets of plots arranged in the form of `stars' (720 m2 total) were installed in a 3.5 ha area of forest
that had been felled for planting pasture at Fazenda Nova Vida, Ariquemes, Rondonia. Each `star' had six rays measuring
2 m 30 m; alternating rays were designated for pre-burn and post-burn measurements. All above-ground biomass present in
the plots was weighed directly before the burn in the pre-burn rays and after the burn in the post-burn rays. Pieces of wood
with diameter 10 cm also had their biomasses estimated from volume estimates, using line-intersect sampling (LIS) in order to
increase the area of sampling and to allow volume loss to be estimated as an increment based on individual pieces measured
before, and after, the burn at the same point (as opposed to inferring change as a difference between independent estimates of
stocks). The initial above-ground biomass (dry weight) before the burn was estimated at 306.5 48.6 (mean SE) Mg ha1, with
an additional 4.5 Mg ha1 for trees left standing. Carbon stock in the initial biomass (including trees left standing) was 141.3
(Mg C) ha1. After burning, carbon stock was reduced by 36.8% (burning efciency). The stocks of charcoal and ash formed in
the burn were, respectively, 6.4 2.7 and 5.7 1.0 Mg ha1. The destructive and nondestructive (LIS) methods did not
differ signicantly (t-test, p > 0.05) in estimating post-burn stocks of wood and charcoal. The results of this study contribute to
improving the estimates of parameters needed for global carbon calculations and point to ways in which estimates of these
parameters could be further improved. # 1999 Published by Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Amazonia; Deforestation; Tropical forest; Biomass; Burning efciency; Carbon; Charcoal
1. Introduction
The Brazilian Legal Amazon is 5 106 km2 in
area, of which 4 106 km2 was originally covered
*Corresponding author. Tel.: +55-92-643-1822; fax: +55-92642-1838; e-mail: pmlag@inpa.gov.br
0378-1127/99/$ see front matter # 1999 Published by Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 3 7 8 - 1 1 2 7 ( 9 8 ) 0 0 5 4 7 - 7
180
P.M.L. de Alencastro Grac,a et al. / Forest Ecology and Management 120 (1999) 179191
P.M.L. de Alencastro Grac,a et al. / Forest Ecology and Management 120 (1999) 179191
181
According to Pires and Prance (1985), the most common palms are Orbignya barbosiana (babac,u), Oenocarpus spp. (bacaba), Jessenia bataua (pataua),
Euterpe precatoria (ac,a da mata), and Maximiliana
regia (inaja).
The soil in the study area was classied by Moraes
et al. (1996) as a latosolic redyellow podzolic soil in
the Brazilian system, or a kandiuldult (Ultisol) in the
U.S. soil taxonomy. An area of 3.5 ha of primary
forest was felled for the purpose of the study. Felling
began on 15 June and ended 26 June 1995. The forest
was cut using methods traditionally employed by
ranchers in the region. The trees were cut with a
chainsaw, which has replaced the axe in recent colonization areas in Amazonia. After felling the forest,
the biomass was left in place to dry for 98 days. Some
trees remained standing after the felling.
The burn in the experimental area was carried out
by workers on the ranch on 10 September, using
traditional Amazonian methods. The re was lit using
a aming strip of rubber from a tire attached to the end
of a stick. The re was started at the edges of the
clearing so the ames would meet in the middle of the
clearing and maximize the effect of burning. The
burning started at 13:00 h, the hottest time of the
day (368C), and lasted for three hours. At 16:00 h,
the ames had already gone out, the remaining burning being of the smoldering type.
Two methods were used to evaluate the transformations in the biomass provoked by burning: direct or
destructive harvesting and indirect or line-intersect
sampling (LIS).
2.2. Destructive harvesting (direct) method
The destructive harvesting (direct) method consisted of weighing all biomass in the completely felled
area. Two `stars' were implanted with plots (rays) for
destructive harvest (Fig. 2). The coordinates of the
center point of each `star' were chosen using a random
number generator, within the constraints imposed by
the conditions that `stars' should not overlap each
other or the boundaries of the clearing. The bearing
of the rst ray of each `star' was also chosen as a
random number. Each star consisted of six plots or
rays, measuring 2 m 30 m. The rays emanated from
a common center at angles of 608 and began 10 m
from the center point. The plots used in the post-burn
182
P.M.L. de Alencastro Grac,a et al. / Forest Ecology and Management 120 (1999) 179191
classes as those used for pre-burn biomass. The charcoal on the soil was collected manually. In this procedure, fragments were collected that were visible on
careful examination of the ground. A 5-mm mesh
sieve was used to separate the charcoal from the
ash deposits. A certain amount of charcoal of very
small dimensions could not be separated; however, we
believe that this represents a very small proportion of
the total. The charcoal attached to the biomass fractions (trunks, branches and vines) was scraped off with
machetes. The charred parts were removed by applying machete blows with moderate force to each piece,
enough to remove the charred part that is black in
color, but leaving behind the partially charred browncolored wood.
The procedures used in the destructive method for
collecting samples in the eld and for determining the
physical and chemical characteristics of the biomass
are described in the following paragraphs. The samples of biomass and of charcoal were taken from the
plant material in six plots (each plot was divided in
three sub-plots (2 m 10 m). For each class of biomass and charcoal one sample was separated, weighed
in the eld, placed in plastic bags and labeled with
information on the type of material, sub-plot and
diameter class. These samples were taken haphazardly
from the piles of material that had been weighed in the
sub-plots; samples were taken for each type of plant
material and diameter class, with the exception of
wood 10 cm diameter class, for which a disk was
taken from each piece.
On the day following the burn, the ash was sampled
in the post-burn rays. The ash samples were carefully
collected manually using a plastic shovel and a paintbrush, and placed in plastic bags, avoiding any contamination with clay aggregates, charcoal or other
plant fragments (pieces of leaves, twigs, etc.). The
ash was collected in six plots divided into three subplots, measuring 0.10 m 10 m (1 m2) along the
principal axis of the ray (plot). Ash collection was
done before beginning the process of cutting and
weighing biomass in the plots.
To determine the moisture content, all plant samples
and products of the burn were dried at 608C to constant
weight. The water content (percentage) was calculated
on a dry-weight basis.
Basic density (oven-dry weight of the sample/wet
volume of the sample) was calculated using the
P.M.L. de Alencastro Grac,a et al. / Forest Ecology and Management 120 (1999) 179191
183
184
P.M.L. de Alencastro Grac,a et al. / Forest Ecology and Management 120 (1999) 179191
(4)
Carbon content of biomass, ash and charcoal samples were determined by the `dry' method using a
LECO carbon analyzer (furnace at 13508C in pure
oxygen).
The values produced for carbon content of charcoal
by this method refer to the total content of carbon (not
just elemental carbon) in the sample. What appears
visually as charcoal contains, in fact, some carbon in
organic form, which can be expected to decay at a
more rapid rate than the elemental (`black') carbon.
Kuhlbusch and Crutzen (1995) have estimated that
5263% of the carbon contained in charcoal is in the
elemental form, assuming that carbon that resists
oxidation at temperatures up to 3408C is elemental
carbon. However, the amount of carbon remaining
unoxidized is highly sensitive to temperature: if 3008C
were used as the standard instead of 3408C, the
amount classied as elemental carbon would approximately double (Kuhlbusch and Crutzen, 1995).
3. Results
B a S BA H
(2)
or
B 0:03019 D2 H
where: B is the biomass (kg tree1), D the diameter at
breast height (cm at 1.3 m or above buttresses), and H
the total height (m).
P.M.L. de Alencastro Grac,a et al. / Forest Ecology and Management 120 (1999) 179191
185
Table 1
Mean SE, biomass stock (Mg ha1) on the ground (pre-burn) in
each compartment and its percentage in relation to total biomass
Table 2
Mean SE, remaining above-ground biomass stock (Mg ha1) in
each biomass class (post-burn)
Classa (cm)
Biomass stock
C.V.(%)c
Mg ha1 (mean SE)
Total
mass%
Classa (cm)
Biomass stockb
C.V. (%)c
(Mg ha1 (mean SE))
Wood <5
Wood 510
Wood 10b
Vines <5
Vines 510
Litter
Palms <10
Palms 10
Palm leaves
Rotten wood 10
Total
26.5 3.8
21.4 3.4
191.3 24.8
10.0 2.7
1.9 0.5
24.1 2.4
0.3 0.1
8.6 2.6
12.7 3.4
9.7 4.9
306.5 48.6
8.6
7.0
62.4
3.2
0.6
7.9
0.1
2.8
4.1
3.2
100
Wood <5
Wood 510
Wood 10d
Vines <5
Vines 510
Litter
Palms <10
Palms 10
Palm leaves
Rotten wood 10
Charcoal
Ashe
Total
2.2 0.4
12.4 1.7
155.9 20.2
1.1 0.3
1.8 0.6
1.0 0.5
0.9 0.6
7.1 3.1
2.0 1.9
0.1 0.1
6.4 2.7
5.7 1.0
196.6 33.1
14.3
15.9
13.0
27.0
26.3
10.0
33.3
30.2
26.8
50.5
18.2
13.7
13.0
27.3
33.3
50.0
66.6
43.7
95.0
100
42.2
17.5
Total
mass%
1.1
6.3
79.3
0.6
0.9
0.5
0.5
3.6
1.0
0.05
3.3
2.9
100
186
P.M.L. de Alencastro Grac,a et al. / Forest Ecology and Management 120 (1999) 179191
Table 3
Carbon concentration of biomass and charcoal at Ariquemes, Rondonia
Biomass fraction by diameter class (cm)
Wood <5
Wood 510
Wood 10 a
Vines <5
Vines 510
Palms <10
Palms 10
Palm leaves
Litter and leaves
Rotten wood 10
Charcoal
Ash
Standing trees b
Pre-burn
Post-burn
mean (%)
SE
mean (%)
SE
44.4
44.6
46.0
44.9
42.9
41.5
46.3
44.1
42.8
46.4
absent
absent
46.0
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.5
0.2
0.5
18
18
17
8
2
6
18
18
2
44.5
45.7
46.5
44.7
44.0
46.4
45.5
44.4
39.5
35.4
64.6
6.6
46.0
0.3
0.4
0.7
0.4
0.3
0.4
1.3
0.4
0.5
16
16
11
9
2
7
5
8
1
72
6
Pre-burn carbon content is a weighted mean of bark and wood: carbon content of bark was 41.7% (n 18; SE 0.4) and of wood was 46.4%
(n 18; SE 0.5); the dry weight of the 10-cm diameter class was composed of 8% bark and 92% wood. The post-burn mean is similarly
weighted: the mean carbon content of bark was 41.1% (n 18; SE 0.6) and wood was 46.8% (n 18; SE 0.5); the dry weight of the
10-cm diameter class was composed of 5% bark and 95% wood.
b
Percent carbon for standing trees was assumed the same as the fraction for pre-burn wood 10 cm in diameter.
Fig. 3. Percentages of biomass stocks consumed by the burn for each biomass fraction.
P.M.L. de Alencastro Grac,a et al. / Forest Ecology and Management 120 (1999) 179191
Table 4
Distribution of above-ground biomass carbon and carbon released
at Ariquemes, Rondonia
Biomass fraction
by diameter
class (cm)
Wood <5
Wood 510
Wood 10a
Vines <5
Vines 510
Palms <10
Palms 10
Palm leaves
Litter and leaves
Rotten wood 10
Charcoal
Ash
Standing trees
Total
Carbon released
Pre-burn
carbon
(Mg ha1)
11.8
9.5
88.0
4.5
0.8
0.1
4.0
5.6
10.3
4.5
absent
absent
2.1
141.3
Post-burn
carbon
(Mg ha1)
1.0
5.7
72.5
0.5
0.8
0.4
3.2
0.9
0.4
0.1
4.1
0.4b
2.1
92.1
49.2
0.7
4.0
51.3
0.4
0.6
0.3
2.3
0.6
0.3
0.1
2.9
0.3
1.5
65.2
34.8
187
188
P.M.L. de Alencastro Grac,a et al. / Forest Ecology and Management 120 (1999) 179191
P.M.L. de Alencastro Grac,a et al. / Forest Ecology and Management 120 (1999) 179191
189
References
Araujo, T.M., 1995. Investigac,ao das taxas de dioxido de carbono
gerado em queimadas na regiao Amazonica. Ph.D. dissertation
in mechanical engineering, Universidade Estadual Paulista
(UNESP), Guaratingueta, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Bassini, F., Becker, P., 1990. Charcoal's occurrence in soil depends
on topography in terra firme forest near Manaus, Brazil.
Biotropica 22(4), 420422.
Bastos, T.X., Diniz, T.D. de A.S., 1982. Avaliac,ao do clima do
Estado de Rondonia para o desenvolvimento agrcola. Boletim
de Pesquisa No. 44, Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agrop mido
ecuaria/Centro de Pesquisas Agropecuarias do Tropico U
(EMBRAPA/CPATU), Belem, Para, Brazil, pp. 28.
Bogdonoff, P., Detwiler, R.P., Hall, C.A.S., 1985. Land use change and
carbon exchange in the tropics: III. Structure, basic equations, and
sensitivity analysis of the model. Environ. Manage. 9(4), 345354.
190
P.M.L. de Alencastro Grac,a et al. / Forest Ecology and Management 120 (1999) 179191
P.M.L. de Alencastro Grac,a et al. / Forest Ecology and Management 120 (1999) 179191
tropicais: O exemplo de uma floresta situada no Estado de
Rondonia. In: Anais do Seminario Emissao Sequestro de
CO2: Uma Nova Oportunidade de Negocios para o Brasil.
Companhia Vale do Rio Doce (CVRD), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil,
pp. 197221.
Martins, P.F.S., Cerri, C.C., Volkoff, B., Andreaux, F., 1990.
Consequencias do cultivo e do pousio sobre a materia organica
do solo sob floresta natural na Amazonia Oriental. Acta
Amazonica 20, 1928.
Moraes, J.L., Volkoff, B., Cerri, C.C., Bernoux, M., 1996. Soil
properties under Amazon forest and changes due to pasture
installation in Rondonia, Brazil. Geoderma 70, 6381.
Nelson, B.W., 1992. Diversidade florstica de ecossistemas
amazonicos. Revista do Instituto Florestal 4, 111118.
Pires, J.M., Prance, G.T., 1985. The vegetation types of the
Brazilian Amazon. In: Prance, G.T., Lovejoy, T.E. (Eds.), Key
Environments: Amazonia. Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK, pp.
109145.
Sanford Jr., R.L., Saldarriaga, J., Clark, K.E., Uhl, C., Herrera, R.,
1985. Amazon rain-forest fires. Science 227, 5355.
Seiler, W., Crutzen, P.J., 1980. Estimates of gross and net fluxes of
191