On-Farm Tree Abundance and Biomass Carbon Stocks of <i>Grevillea robusta</i> and <i>Eucalyptus saligna</i> on Farms Around Kakamega Forest

Agevi Humphrey; Tsingalia Harrison; Muyekho Francis; Obiri John; Mukoya Wingred; Onwonga Richard

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11

| Peer-Reviewed

On-Farm Tree Abundance and Biomass Carbon Stocks of Grevillea robusta and Eucalyptus saligna on Farms Around Kakamega Forest

Agevi Humphrey, Tsingalia Harrison, Muyekho Francis, Obiri John, Mukoya Wingred, Onwonga Richard

Published in American Journal of Agriculture and Forestry (Volume 7, Issue 5)

Received: 18 July 2019 Accepted: 14 August 2019 Published: 26 August 2019

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

The integration of trees on farmlands has recently received attention due to their contribution to livelihoods improvement and climate change mitigation. They provide ecosystem services (ESs) like climate change mitigation, improvement of soil fertility, provision of timber and fuelwood among others. The choice of trees to plant depends on the role the farmer intends to put them into and the size of the farm. The trees can either be indigenous or exotic andare mostly planted along farm boundaries, in home gardens, as woodlots orientation among others. This study was conducted in western part of Kenya on farmlands that mostly border the Kakamega Forest. The study soughtto determine abundance, distribution and biomass carbon stocks of Grevillea robusta and Eucalyptus saligna for enhanced climate change mitigation. A total of (N=3,468) trees were inventoried in 80 farms with a total of 27.5ha. The average size of farms where the survey was done was about 1.28±1.01 ha. Eucalyptus saligna had a tree abundance 1133 (33%) of the total trees sampled while Grevillea robusta had 2,335 (67%). Two sites were purposively selected (Lubao and Tea zone area). In the Lubao site, Eucalyptus saligna abundance was 627 (29%) while Grevillea robusta abundance was 1565 (71%) of the total trees sampled. In Tea Zone site, Eucalyptus saligna abundance was 506 (40%) while Grevillea robusta tree abundance was 770 (60%). Total biomass estimated in the study area was 3.86±0.21Mgha^-1(1.96Mg C ha^-1). This was distributed as aboveground biomass (2.8±0.12Mgha^-1) and belowground biomass (0.87±0.41Mgha^-1). There was no significant difference in biomass among farms in Lubao (F=43.12; p=0.34) and in Tea zone sites (F=53.12; p=0.23). Lubao site had an estimated biomass of 1.97±0.023Mgha^-1 distributed as above ground biomass (1.31±0.043Mgha^-1) and below ground biomass (0.67±0.023Mgha^-1). Tea zone site had an estimated biomass of 1.99±0.38Mgha^-1. This was distributed as above ground biomass (1.58±0.023Mgha^-1) and below ground biomass (0.40±0.18Mgha^-1). Biomass was significantly different among the agroforestry practices in Lubao (F=13.1; p=0.002) and in Tea Zone (F=29.12; p=0.001). Hedgerow had the highest biomass among the agroforestry practices in Lubao (1.91±0.16Mgha^-1) and in Tea zone sites (1.7±0.23Mgha^-1). Alley cropping that was only practiced in Lubao had the least biomass (0.0044±0.009Mgha^-1). The twotree species provided benefits for household use and at the same time for monetarysale. Firewood and timber were the most mentioned (n=80). This was followed by construction material and fencing material. These functions/uses were most preferred by the Eucalyptus grandis.

Published in	American Journal of Agriculture and Forestry (Volume 7, Issue 5)
DOI	10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11
Page(s)	162-167
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2019. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Biomass, Tree Abundance, Climate Change, Livelihoods

References

[1]	Gebrewahid, Y., Gebre-Egziabhier, T. B., Teka, K. and Birhane, E., (2018). Carbon stock potential of scattered trees on farmland along an altitudinal gradient in Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. Ecological Processes7: 40 https://doirg/10.1186/s13717-018-0152-6.
[2]	Kuyah, S., Öborn, I., Jonsson, M., Dahlin, A. S., Barrios, E., Muthuri, C., Malmer, A., Nyaga, J., Magaju, C., Namirembe, S., Nyberg, Y., andSinclair, f. L. (2016) Trees in agricultural landscapes enhance provision of ecosystem services in Sub-Saharan Africa, International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management, 12: 4, 255-273, doi: 10.1080/21513732.2016.1214178.
[3]	Zomer, R. J., Neufeldt, H., Xu, J., Ahrends, A., Bossio, D., Trabucco, A., Noordwijk, M. &Mingcheng Wang, M. (2016). Global Tree Cover and Biomass Carbon on Agricultural Land: The contribution of agroforestry to global and national carbon budgets. Scientific Reports\|6: 29987\|DOI:10.1038/srep29987.
[4]	Zomer, R. J., Trabucco, A., Coe, R., Place, F., van-Noordwijk M, Xu JC. (2014). Trees on farms: an update and reanalysis of Agroforestry’s global extent and socio-ecological characteristics. Working Paper 179. Bogor: World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) Southeast Asia Regional Program. 33p.
[5]	Nyaga, J., Barrios, E., Muthuri, C. W, Öborn, I., Matiru, V., Sinclair, FL. (2015). Evaluating factors influencing heterogeneity in agroforestry adoption and practices within smallholder farms in Rift Valley, Kenya. Agriculture Ecosystem and Environment. 212: 106–118.
[6]	Omamo, A. O., Mugo, J. M. and M. J. K. (2018). Allometric Equations for Estimating Silk Oak (Grevillea robusta) Biomass in Agricultural Landscapes of Maragua Subcounty, Kenya. International Journal of Forestry Research Volume 2018, Article ID 6495271, 14 pages https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/6495271.
[7]	Kuyah S, Dietz J, Muthuri C et al (2012) Allometric equations for estimating biomass in agricultural landscapes: I. Aboveground biomass. Agriculture Ecosystem and Environment 158: 216-224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2012.05.011.
[8]	Daniel, P. and. Michael, K. (2012). “Estimating carbon emissions from forest degradation: implications of uncertainties and area sizes for a REDD+ MRV system, ”Canadian Journal of Forest Resources, vol. 42, Article ID 19962010, pp. 1996-2010.
[9]	Nair, PKR, Nair, V. D (2014) ‘Solid–fluid–gas’: the state of knowledge on carbon-sequestration potential of agroforestry systems in Africa. Current Opinion of Environmental Sustainability 6: 22–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust. 2013. 07. 014.
[10]	de Foresta H, Somarriba E, Temu A, Boulanger D, Feuilly H, Gauthier M (2013) Towards the Assessment of Trees Outside Forests. Resources Assessment Working Paper 183. FAO Rome.
[11]	Gachathi, F. N. (2007). Kikuyu botanical dictionary: A guide to plant names, uses and cultural values. Nairobi, Kenya: Tropical Botany.
[12]	Tsingalia, M. H, and Kassilly, F. N. (2009). The origins of Kakamega grasslands: `A critical review. Journal of Human Ecology, 27 (2): 129-135.
[13]	Tsingalia, H. M. (2009). Habitat destruction and severity patterns of abundance in Kakamega Forest, Western Kenya. African Journal of ecology 28: 213-226.
[14]	Henry M, Tittonell P, Manlay RJ et al (2009) Biodiversity, carbon stocks and sequestration potential in aboveground biomass in smallholder farming systems of western Kenya. Agriculture Ecosystem and Environment 129: 238-252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2008.09.006.
[15]	Kuyah S, Rosenstock TS (2015) Optimal measurement strategies for aboveground tree biomass in agricultural landscapes. Agroforestry Systems 89: 125–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-014-9747-9.
[16]	IPCC, (2006) Volume 4: agriculture, forestry and other land use. In: 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), IPCC/IGES, Hayama, Japan.
[17]	Kindt R, Van Damme P, Simons AJ, Beeckman H (2006) Planning tree species diversification in Kenya based on differences in tree species composition between farms. II. Analysis of tree niches. AgroforestrySystems 67: 229-241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-005-3824-z.
[18]	Reppin, S., Kuyah, S., Neergaard, A., Oelofse, M. and Rosenstock, T. S. (2019) Contribution of agroforestry to climate change mitigation and livelihoods in Western Kenya. AgroforestrySystems https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-019-00383-7.
[19]	Iiyama, M, Neufeldt, H, Dobie, P et al (2014) The potential of agroforestry in the provision of sustainable wood fuel in sub-Saharan Africa. Current Opinion of Environmental Sustainability 6: 138–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2013.12.003.
[20]	Albrecht, A, Kandji ST (2003) Carbon sequestration in tropical agroforestry systems. Agriculture Ecosystem and Environment 99 (1-3): 15-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809 (03) 00138-5.
[21]	Takimoto, A., Nair, PKR, Nair, VD (2008) Carbon stock and sequestration potential of traditional and improved agroforestry systems in the West African Sahel. AgricEcosyst Environ 125: 159–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Agevi Humphrey, Tsingalia Harrison, Muyekho Francis, Obiri John, Mukoya Wingred, et al. (2019). On-Farm Tree Abundance and Biomass Carbon Stocks of Grevillea robusta and Eucalyptus saligna on Farms Around Kakamega Forest. American Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 7(5), 162-167. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Agevi Humphrey; Tsingalia Harrison; Muyekho Francis; Obiri John; Mukoya Wingred, et al. On-Farm Tree Abundance and Biomass Carbon Stocks of Grevillea robusta and Eucalyptus saligna on Farms Around Kakamega Forest. Am. J. Agric. For. 2019, 7(5), 162-167. doi: 10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Agevi Humphrey, Tsingalia Harrison, Muyekho Francis, Obiri John, Mukoya Wingred, et al. On-Farm Tree Abundance and Biomass Carbon Stocks of Grevillea robusta and Eucalyptus saligna on Farms Around Kakamega Forest. Am J Agric For. 2019;7(5):162-167. doi: 10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11,
  author = {Agevi Humphrey and Tsingalia Harrison and Muyekho Francis and Obiri John and Mukoya Wingred and Onwonga Richard},
  title = {On-Farm Tree Abundance and Biomass Carbon Stocks of Grevillea robusta and Eucalyptus saligna on Farms Around Kakamega Forest},
  journal = {American Journal of Agriculture and Forestry},
  volume = {7},
  number = {5},
  pages = {162-167},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajaf.20190705.11},
  abstract = {The integration of trees on farmlands has recently received attention due to their contribution to livelihoods improvement and climate change mitigation. They provide ecosystem services (ESs) like climate change mitigation, improvement of soil fertility, provision of timber and fuelwood among others. The choice of trees to plant depends on the role the farmer intends to put them into and the size of the farm. The trees can either be indigenous or exotic andare mostly planted along farm boundaries, in home gardens, as woodlots orientation among others. This study was conducted in western part of Kenya on farmlands that mostly border the Kakamega Forest. The study soughtto determine abundance, distribution and biomass carbon stocks of Grevillea robusta and Eucalyptus saligna for enhanced climate change mitigation. A total of (N=3,468) trees were inventoried in 80 farms with a total of 27.5ha. The average size of farms where the survey was done was about 1.28±1.01 ha. Eucalyptus saligna had a tree abundance 1133 (33%) of the total trees sampled while Grevillea robusta had 2,335 (67%). Two sites were purposively selected (Lubao and Tea zone area). In the Lubao site, Eucalyptus saligna abundance was 627 (29%) while Grevillea robusta abundance was 1565 (71%) of the total trees sampled. In Tea Zone site, Eucalyptus saligna abundance was 506 (40%) while Grevillea robusta tree abundance was 770 (60%). Total biomass estimated in the study area was 3.86±0.21Mgha-1(1.96Mg C ha-1). This was distributed as aboveground biomass (2.8±0.12Mgha-1) and belowground biomass (0.87±0.41Mgha-1). There was no significant difference in biomass among farms in Lubao (F=43.12; p=0.34) and in Tea zone sites (F=53.12; p=0.23). Lubao site had an estimated biomass of 1.97±0.023Mgha-1 distributed as above ground biomass (1.31±0.043Mgha-1) and below ground biomass (0.67±0.023Mgha-1). Tea zone site had an estimated biomass of 1.99±0.38Mgha-1. This was distributed as above ground biomass (1.58±0.023Mgha-1) and below ground biomass (0.40±0.18Mgha-1). Biomass was significantly different among the agroforestry practices in Lubao (F=13.1; p=0.002) and in Tea Zone (F=29.12; p=0.001). Hedgerow had the highest biomass among the agroforestry practices in Lubao (1.91±0.16Mgha-1) and in Tea zone sites (1.7±0.23Mgha-1). Alley cropping that was only practiced in Lubao had the least biomass (0.0044±0.009Mgha-1). The twotree species provided benefits for household use and at the same time for monetarysale. Firewood and timber were the most mentioned (n=80). This was followed by construction material and fencing material. These functions/uses were most preferred by the Eucalyptus grandis.},
 year = {2019}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - On-Farm Tree Abundance and Biomass Carbon Stocks of Grevillea robusta and Eucalyptus saligna on Farms Around Kakamega Forest
AU  - Agevi Humphrey
AU  - Tsingalia Harrison
AU  - Muyekho Francis
AU  - Obiri John
AU  - Mukoya Wingred
AU  - Onwonga Richard
Y1  - 2019/08/26
PY  - 2019
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11
T2  - American Journal of Agriculture and Forestry
JF  - American Journal of Agriculture and Forestry
JO  - American Journal of Agriculture and Forestry
SP  - 162
EP  - 167
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-8591
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11
AB  - The integration of trees on farmlands has recently received attention due to their contribution to livelihoods improvement and climate change mitigation. They provide ecosystem services (ESs) like climate change mitigation, improvement of soil fertility, provision of timber and fuelwood among others. The choice of trees to plant depends on the role the farmer intends to put them into and the size of the farm. The trees can either be indigenous or exotic andare mostly planted along farm boundaries, in home gardens, as woodlots orientation among others. This study was conducted in western part of Kenya on farmlands that mostly border the Kakamega Forest. The study soughtto determine abundance, distribution and biomass carbon stocks of Grevillea robusta and Eucalyptus saligna for enhanced climate change mitigation. A total of (N=3,468) trees were inventoried in 80 farms with a total of 27.5ha. The average size of farms where the survey was done was about 1.28±1.01 ha. Eucalyptus saligna had a tree abundance 1133 (33%) of the total trees sampled while Grevillea robusta had 2,335 (67%). Two sites were purposively selected (Lubao and Tea zone area). In the Lubao site, Eucalyptus saligna abundance was 627 (29%) while Grevillea robusta abundance was 1565 (71%) of the total trees sampled. In Tea Zone site, Eucalyptus saligna abundance was 506 (40%) while Grevillea robusta tree abundance was 770 (60%). Total biomass estimated in the study area was 3.86±0.21Mgha-1(1.96Mg C ha-1). This was distributed as aboveground biomass (2.8±0.12Mgha-1) and belowground biomass (0.87±0.41Mgha-1). There was no significant difference in biomass among farms in Lubao (F=43.12; p=0.34) and in Tea zone sites (F=53.12; p=0.23). Lubao site had an estimated biomass of 1.97±0.023Mgha-1 distributed as above ground biomass (1.31±0.043Mgha-1) and below ground biomass (0.67±0.023Mgha-1). Tea zone site had an estimated biomass of 1.99±0.38Mgha-1. This was distributed as above ground biomass (1.58±0.023Mgha-1) and below ground biomass (0.40±0.18Mgha-1). Biomass was significantly different among the agroforestry practices in Lubao (F=13.1; p=0.002) and in Tea Zone (F=29.12; p=0.001). Hedgerow had the highest biomass among the agroforestry practices in Lubao (1.91±0.16Mgha-1) and in Tea zone sites (1.7±0.23Mgha-1). Alley cropping that was only practiced in Lubao had the least biomass (0.0044±0.009Mgha-1). The twotree species provided benefits for household use and at the same time for monetarysale. Firewood and timber were the most mentioned (n=80). This was followed by construction material and fencing material. These functions/uses were most preferred by the Eucalyptus grandis.
VL  - 7
IS  - 5
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Agevi Humphrey

Department of Biological Sciences, Moi University, Eldoret, Kenya
Tsingalia Harrison

Department of Biological Sciences, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga University of Science and Technology, Kisumu, Kenya
Muyekho Francis

School of Agriculture and Veterinary Technology (SAVET), Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology, Kakamega, Kenya
Obiri John

Department of Disaster Mitigation and Sustainable Development, Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology, Kakamega, Kenya
Mukoya Wingred

Department of Geography, Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology, Kakamega, Kenya
Onwonga Richard

Department of Land Resources Mapping and Agricultural Technology, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Agevi Humphrey, Tsingalia Harrison, Muyekho Francis, Obiri John, Mukoya Wingred, et al. (2019). On-Farm Tree Abundance and Biomass Carbon Stocks of Grevillea robusta and Eucalyptus saligna on Farms Around Kakamega Forest. American Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 7(5), 162-167. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Agevi Humphrey; Tsingalia Harrison; Muyekho Francis; Obiri John; Mukoya Wingred, et al. On-Farm Tree Abundance and Biomass Carbon Stocks of Grevillea robusta and Eucalyptus saligna on Farms Around Kakamega Forest. Am. J. Agric. For. 2019, 7(5), 162-167. doi: 10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Agevi Humphrey, Tsingalia Harrison, Muyekho Francis, Obiri John, Mukoya Wingred, et al. On-Farm Tree Abundance and Biomass Carbon Stocks of Grevillea robusta and Eucalyptus saligna on Farms Around Kakamega Forest. Am J Agric For. 2019;7(5):162-167. doi: 10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11,
  author = {Agevi Humphrey and Tsingalia Harrison and Muyekho Francis and Obiri John and Mukoya Wingred and Onwonga Richard},
  title = {On-Farm Tree Abundance and Biomass Carbon Stocks of Grevillea robusta and Eucalyptus saligna on Farms Around Kakamega Forest},
  journal = {American Journal of Agriculture and Forestry},
  volume = {7},
  number = {5},
  pages = {162-167},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajaf.20190705.11},
  abstract = {The integration of trees on farmlands has recently received attention due to their contribution to livelihoods improvement and climate change mitigation. They provide ecosystem services (ESs) like climate change mitigation, improvement of soil fertility, provision of timber and fuelwood among others. The choice of trees to plant depends on the role the farmer intends to put them into and the size of the farm. The trees can either be indigenous or exotic andare mostly planted along farm boundaries, in home gardens, as woodlots orientation among others. This study was conducted in western part of Kenya on farmlands that mostly border the Kakamega Forest. The study soughtto determine abundance, distribution and biomass carbon stocks of Grevillea robusta and Eucalyptus saligna for enhanced climate change mitigation. A total of (N=3,468) trees were inventoried in 80 farms with a total of 27.5ha. The average size of farms where the survey was done was about 1.28±1.01 ha. Eucalyptus saligna had a tree abundance 1133 (33%) of the total trees sampled while Grevillea robusta had 2,335 (67%). Two sites were purposively selected (Lubao and Tea zone area). In the Lubao site, Eucalyptus saligna abundance was 627 (29%) while Grevillea robusta abundance was 1565 (71%) of the total trees sampled. In Tea Zone site, Eucalyptus saligna abundance was 506 (40%) while Grevillea robusta tree abundance was 770 (60%). Total biomass estimated in the study area was 3.86±0.21Mgha-1(1.96Mg C ha-1). This was distributed as aboveground biomass (2.8±0.12Mgha-1) and belowground biomass (0.87±0.41Mgha-1). There was no significant difference in biomass among farms in Lubao (F=43.12; p=0.34) and in Tea zone sites (F=53.12; p=0.23). Lubao site had an estimated biomass of 1.97±0.023Mgha-1 distributed as above ground biomass (1.31±0.043Mgha-1) and below ground biomass (0.67±0.023Mgha-1). Tea zone site had an estimated biomass of 1.99±0.38Mgha-1. This was distributed as above ground biomass (1.58±0.023Mgha-1) and below ground biomass (0.40±0.18Mgha-1). Biomass was significantly different among the agroforestry practices in Lubao (F=13.1; p=0.002) and in Tea Zone (F=29.12; p=0.001). Hedgerow had the highest biomass among the agroforestry practices in Lubao (1.91±0.16Mgha-1) and in Tea zone sites (1.7±0.23Mgha-1). Alley cropping that was only practiced in Lubao had the least biomass (0.0044±0.009Mgha-1). The twotree species provided benefits for household use and at the same time for monetarysale. Firewood and timber were the most mentioned (n=80). This was followed by construction material and fencing material. These functions/uses were most preferred by the Eucalyptus grandis.},
 year = {2019}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - On-Farm Tree Abundance and Biomass Carbon Stocks of Grevillea robusta and Eucalyptus saligna on Farms Around Kakamega Forest
AU  - Agevi Humphrey
AU  - Tsingalia Harrison
AU  - Muyekho Francis
AU  - Obiri John
AU  - Mukoya Wingred
AU  - Onwonga Richard
Y1  - 2019/08/26
PY  - 2019
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11
T2  - American Journal of Agriculture and Forestry
JF  - American Journal of Agriculture and Forestry
JO  - American Journal of Agriculture and Forestry
SP  - 162
EP  - 167
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-8591
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajaf.20190705.11
AB  - The integration of trees on farmlands has recently received attention due to their contribution to livelihoods improvement and climate change mitigation. They provide ecosystem services (ESs) like climate change mitigation, improvement of soil fertility, provision of timber and fuelwood among others. The choice of trees to plant depends on the role the farmer intends to put them into and the size of the farm. The trees can either be indigenous or exotic andare mostly planted along farm boundaries, in home gardens, as woodlots orientation among others. This study was conducted in western part of Kenya on farmlands that mostly border the Kakamega Forest. The study soughtto determine abundance, distribution and biomass carbon stocks of Grevillea robusta and Eucalyptus saligna for enhanced climate change mitigation. A total of (N=3,468) trees were inventoried in 80 farms with a total of 27.5ha. The average size of farms where the survey was done was about 1.28±1.01 ha. Eucalyptus saligna had a tree abundance 1133 (33%) of the total trees sampled while Grevillea robusta had 2,335 (67%). Two sites were purposively selected (Lubao and Tea zone area). In the Lubao site, Eucalyptus saligna abundance was 627 (29%) while Grevillea robusta abundance was 1565 (71%) of the total trees sampled. In Tea Zone site, Eucalyptus saligna abundance was 506 (40%) while Grevillea robusta tree abundance was 770 (60%). Total biomass estimated in the study area was 3.86±0.21Mgha-1(1.96Mg C ha-1). This was distributed as aboveground biomass (2.8±0.12Mgha-1) and belowground biomass (0.87±0.41Mgha-1). There was no significant difference in biomass among farms in Lubao (F=43.12; p=0.34) and in Tea zone sites (F=53.12; p=0.23). Lubao site had an estimated biomass of 1.97±0.023Mgha-1 distributed as above ground biomass (1.31±0.043Mgha-1) and below ground biomass (0.67±0.023Mgha-1). Tea zone site had an estimated biomass of 1.99±0.38Mgha-1. This was distributed as above ground biomass (1.58±0.023Mgha-1) and below ground biomass (0.40±0.18Mgha-1). Biomass was significantly different among the agroforestry practices in Lubao (F=13.1; p=0.002) and in Tea Zone (F=29.12; p=0.001). Hedgerow had the highest biomass among the agroforestry practices in Lubao (1.91±0.16Mgha-1) and in Tea zone sites (1.7±0.23Mgha-1). Alley cropping that was only practiced in Lubao had the least biomass (0.0044±0.009Mgha-1). The twotree species provided benefits for household use and at the same time for monetarysale. Firewood and timber were the most mentioned (n=80). This was followed by construction material and fencing material. These functions/uses were most preferred by the Eucalyptus grandis.
VL  - 7
IS  - 5
ER  -

Copy | Download