カムノエトウィディヤ科学アカデミーにおける森林再生エリアの植物群落構造と炭素隔離
Plant Community Structure and Carbon Sequestration of the Forest Restoration Areas at Kamnoetvidya Science Academy (原題)
Worawut Ngampiboonwet, Karun Chaivanich, Praphaiphan Kewkasem, Amnuayvit Thitibordin, Yutthana Theunglom
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
タイ・ラヨーン県の森林再生地で、ゴム–パーム混作（RPP）と混合果樹園（OP）の2モデルを比較した研究。OPは36種でRPPの25種より多様性・均等度が高く、ゴムが単独占となるRPPに対しOPは多種が共優占した。炭素蓄積量はRPP 45.59 tC/ha、OP 46.23 tC/haとほぼ同等で、両モデルとも生物多様性と炭素吸収を両立する劣化農地再生策として有効と示された。
English
This study compares two forest restoration models in Rayong, Thailand: rubber–palm intercropping (RPP) and mixed-orchard plots (OP). OP showed higher species richness (36 vs 25) and diversity, while carbon stocks were comparable (RPP 45.59 vs OP 46.23 tC/ha). Both integrated models enhance biodiversity and act as substantial carbon sinks, supporting degraded-land rehabilitation and climate mitigation.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本企業のScope 3や自然資本・生物多様性開示（TNFD連動）に関心のある読者には、農林地の炭素・生物多様性を定量する手法例として参考になる。ただし日本の制度・政策との直接の接点は薄い。
In the global GX context
Adds empirical evidence on nature-based carbon sinks and biodiversity co-benefits relevant to TNFD and land-sector accounting, though it sits outside mainstream TCFD/ISSB disclosure frameworks and offers limited direct policy transfer.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:熱帯の森林再生・アグロフォレストリーにおける炭素と生物多様性のトレードオフを定量する手法例として有用。
🏢実務担当者:自然資本・生物多様性開示（TNFD）に向けた農林地炭素・多様性評価の考え方の参考になる。
📄 Abstract（原文）
This study evaluated the plant community structure, species diversity, and carbon sequestration potential of two distinct forest restoration models at Kamnoetvidya Science Academy, Rayong Province, Thailand. Two silvicultural approaches were observed: (1) Rubber–Palm Intercropping Plots (RPP) and (2) Mixed-Orchard Plots (OP). Vegetation data were collected from 20 x 50 m sample plots in each restoration approach, with each plot subdivided into ten 10 × 10 m subplots, to determine species composition, canopy architecture, and the Importance Value Index (IVI). Biodiversity was quantified using the Shannon–Wiener Index, while biomass and carbon stocks were estimated via established allometric equations. The results revealed higher taxonomic richness in OP (36 species) compared to RPP (25 species), with OP exhibiting higher diversity and evenness indices. Phytosociological analysis identified Hevea brasiliensis as the sole dominant species in RPP, whereas OP displayed a co-dominance of various fruit and indigenous forest species. Despite differences in composition, total carbon stocks were comparable between the two systems, with RPP yielding 45.59 tC/ha and OP yielding 46.23 tC/ha. Carbon distribution was highly concentrated in rubber trees within RPP, while OP exhibited a more heterogeneous distribution across multiple taxa. These findings demonstrate that both integrated agricultural models effectively enhance biodiversity and structural complexity while providing substantial carbon sinks. Consequently, RPP and OP represent viable strategies for rehabilitating degraded agricultural landscapes, contributing to both sustainable land management and global climate change mitigation efforts.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://li01.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/rmutsvrj/article/view/270817first seen 2026-10-23 05:05:42 · last seen 2026-10-29 04:37:02
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。