ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Environ. Sci.

Sec. Soil Processes

Volume 13 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2025.1555628

Effects of different urban vegetation cover and green space types on soil greenhouse gas emissions and carbon sequestration

Provisionally accepted
Ruisha  ZhangRuisha Zhang1Xuekun  ChengXuekun Cheng1Wu  ChenWu Chen2Feng  LuFeng Lu3Shuhan  LiuShuhan Liu1Haitao  ShiHaitao Shi1Zelong  NiZelong Ni1Yangen  ChenYangen Chen4Dabiao  LiDabiao Li5Yongjun  ShiYongjun Shi1*
  • 1State Key Laboratory of Subtropical Silviculture, Zhejiang Agriculture and Forestry University, Hangzhou, China
  • 2Baiyunshan Forest Farm, Lishui 323000, Lishui, China
  • 3Yuhang District Forestry and Water Conservancy Bureau of Hangzhou, Hangzhou, China
  • 4Agriculture and Rural Bureau of Lin’an District, Hangzhou, China
  • 5Suichang County Natural Resources and Planning Bureau, Suichang, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

The development of urbanization has led to the creation of various types of green spaces, which have a direct influence which have direct influence on vegetation types and soil management , This, in turn,results in differences in soil carbon sequestration capacities.however, the factors affecting soil carbon sequestration in different vegetation types within urban green spaces remain largely unexplored. To address this gap, the study focused on the soil of urban green space . A one-year field observation was conducted, utilizing local management archives and historical data, to evaluate variations in soil greenhouse gas (GHG) emission and soil organic carbon sequestration across grassland (GL), shrubs (SH), and forests stands (FS) within three types of green spaces: park green space (P), residential green space (Ra), and street green space (s). The results indicated that: (1) In comparison to grassland (GL), the CO2 flux of shrubs (SH) and forests stands (FS) declined by 10.73% and 14.46%, respectively, while the N2O and CH4 fluxes remained insignificant. Additionally, the annual increase in soil organic carbon was lower by 8.92% and 10.80% in shrubs and forests stand, respectively; (2) Variations in greenhouse gas fluxes were also observed among the three types of green spaces. In comparison to parks green spaces, the CO2 flux of residential and street soils decreased by 2.11% and 3.25%, respectively, while the N2O flux dropped by 16.61% and 22.41%, respectively. The CH4 flux remained insignificant. The annual increase of SOC in residential and streets was notably lower than that in parks green spaces, by 9.59% and 15.20%, respectively, indicating significant differences. This suggests that soil carbon sequestration capacity highly responsive to changes in vegetation coverage and green space types, with WSOC, NH4+-N, and pH identified as the primary factors influencing the greenhouse gas flux in the three soils. This study provides data and a theoretical basis for the strategic selection of urban soil management measures, particularly in the context of achieving carbon neutrality goals.

Keywords: Urban green space (UGS), vegetation cover, soil carbon sequestration, Soil GHG fluxes, Urban soil

Received: 11 Jan 2025; Accepted: 09 Apr 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 Zhang, Cheng, Chen, Lu, Liu, Shi, Ni, Chen, Li and Shi. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Yongjun Shi, State Key Laboratory of Subtropical Silviculture, Zhejiang Agriculture and Forestry University, Hangzhou, China

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.