Search

Improved agricultural management plays a vital role in protecting soils from degradation in eastern Africa. Changing practices such as reducing tillage, fertilizer use, or cover crops are expected to enhance soil organic carbon (SOC) storage, with climate change mitigation co-benefits, while increasing crop production. However, the quantification of cropland management effects on agricultural ecosystems remains inadequate in this region. Here, we explored seven management practices and their potential effects on soil carbon (C) pools, nitrogen (N) losses, and crop yields under different climate scenarios, using the dynamic vegetation model LPJ-GUESS. The model performance is evaluated against observations from two long-term maize field trials in western Kenya and reported estimates from published sources. LPJ-GUESS generally produces soil C stocks and maize productivity comparable with measurements and mostly captures the SOC decline under some management practices that is observed in the field experiments. We found that for large parts of Kenya and Ethiopia, an integrated conservation agriculture practice (no-tillage, residue and manure application, and cover crops) increases SOC levels in the long term (+11 % on average), accompanied by increased crop yields (+22 %) in comparison to the conventional management. Planting nitrogen-fixing cover crops in our simulations is also identified as a promising individual practice in eastern Africa to increase soil C storage (+4 %) and crop production (+18 %), with low environmental cost of N losses (+24 %). These management impacts are also sustained in simulations of three future climate pathways. This study highlights the possibilities of conservation agriculture when targeting long-term environmental sustainability and food security in crop ecosystems, particularly for those with poor soil conditions in tropical climates.

Croplands are vital ecosystems for human well-being and provide important ecosystem services such as crop yields, retention of nitrogen and carbon storage. On large (regional to global)-scale levels, assessment of how these different services will vary in space and time, especially in response to cropland management, are scarce. We explore cropland management alternatives and the effect these can have on future C and N pools and fluxes using the land-use-enabled dynamic vegetation model LPJ-GUESS (Lund–Potsdam–Jena General Ecosystem Simulator). Simulated crop production, cropland carbon storage, carbon sequestration and nitrogen leaching from croplands are evaluated and discussed. Compared to the version of LPJ-GUESS that does not include land-use dynamics, estimates of soil carbon stocks and nitrogen leaching from terrestrial to aquatic ecosystems were improved. Our model experiments allow us to investigate trade-offs between these ecosystem services that can be provided from agricultural fields. These trade-offs are evaluated for current land use and climate and further explored for future conditions within the two future climate change scenarios, RCP (Representative Concentration Pathway) 2.6 and 8.5. Our results show that the potential for carbon sequestration due to typical cropland management practices such as no-till management and cover crops proposed in previous studies is not realised, globally or over larger climatic regions. Our results highlight important considerations to be made when modelling C–N interactions in agricultural ecosystems under future environmental change and the effects these have on terrestrial biogeochemical cycles.

Land management for carbon storage is discussed as being indispensable for climate change mitigation because of its large potential to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and to avoid further emissions from deforestation. However, land-based mitigation's prospect of success depends on potential side-effects on important ecosystem services. Here, we use projections of future land use and land cover for different land-based mitigation options from two land-use models (IMAGE and MAgPIE) and evaluate their effects with a global dynamic vegetation model (LPJ-GUESS). In the land-use models, a cumulative carbon removal target of 130 GtC by the end of the 21st century was set to be achieved either via growth of bioenergy crops combined with carbon capture and storage, via avoided deforestation and afforestation, or via a combination of both. We compare these scenarios to a reference scenario without land-based mitigation and analyse the LPJ-GUESS simulations with the aim to assess synergies and trade-offs across a range of ecosystem service indicators: carbon sequestration, surface albedo, evapotranspiration, water runoff, crop production, nitrogen loss, and emissions of biogenic volatile organic compounds. In our mitigation simulations carbon removal by year 2099 ranged between 55 and 89 GtC, and thus lower than the removal simulated by the land-use models. Other ecosystem service indicators were influenced heterogeneously both positively and negatively, with large variability across regions and land-use scenarios. Avoided deforestation and afforestation led to an increase in evapotranspiration and enhanced emissions of biogenic volatile organic compounds, and to a decrease in albedo, runoff, and nitrogen loss. Also crop production decreased in the afforestation scenario as a result of reduced crop area, especially for MAgPIE land-use patterns. Bioenergy-based climate change mitigation was projected to affect less area globally than in the forest expansion scenarios, and resulted in less pronounced changes in most ecosystem service indicators than forest-based mitigation, but included a decrease in crop production, nitrogen loss and biogenic volatile organic compounds emissions.