See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/343364312

Carbon Sequestration Potential of Oil Palm Plantations in Tamil Nadu Regimes,

India

Article in International Research Journal of Pure and Applied Chemistry · July 2020
DOI: 10.9734/irjpac/2020/v21i1130220

CITATION READS
1 53

7 authors, including:

Rakesh Subramanian Srirangarayan Veeraswamy Davamani

Tamil Nadu Agricultural University 45 PUBLICATIONS 24 CITATIONS
60 PUBLICATIONS 8 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Kamaludeen Sara Parwin Banu Parameswari E.

Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Tamil Nadu Agricultural University
26 PUBLICATIONS 446 CITATIONS 50 PUBLICATIONS 183 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Hydrothermal carbonization of ETP sludge from paper board mill View project

Assessment on the utility of water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) biomass as potential biosorbent for sequestration of heavy metals from tannery effluent and desorption
of chromium from biosorbent for effective reuse View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Rakesh Subramanian Srirangarayan on 04 August 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Research Journal of Pure & Applied Chemistry

21(11): 7-17, 2020; Article no.IRJPAC.59094

ISSN: 2231-3443, NLM ID: 101647669

Carbon Sequestration Potential of Oil Palm

Plantations in Tamil Nadu Regimes, India
S. S. Rakesh1, V. Davamani1*, Sara P. B. Kamaludeen1, S. Maragatham2,
A. Lakshmanan3, E. Parameswari1 and M. Velmurugan4
1
Department of Environmental Sciences, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 641003,
India.
2
Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University,
Coimbatore, 641003, India.
3
Department of Nano Science and Technology, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore,
641003, India.
4
Department of Floriculture and Landscape Architecture, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University,
Coimbatore, 641003, India.

Authors’ contributions

This work was carried out in collaboration among all authors. Author SSR as a part of doctoral thesis
under the guidance of authors SPBK and VD is responsible for preparation of manuscript, performed
the statistical analysis, wrote the protocol and the first draft of the manuscript. Authors AL, SM, MV
and EP provided technical guidance and assisted in statistical analysis. All authors read and approved
the final manuscript.

Article Information

DOI: 10.9734/IRJPAC/2020/v21i1130220
Editor(s):
(1) Hao-Yang Wang, Shanghai Institute of Organic Chemistry, China.
Reviewers:
(1) Pei Sun Loh, Zhejiang University, China.
(2) Jaime Espinosa-Tasón, Instituto de Investigación Agropecuaria de Panamá, Panama.
Complete Peer review History: http://www.sdiarticle4.com/review-history/59094

Received 15 May 2020

Accepted 21 July 2020
Original Research Article
Published 28 July 2020

ABSTRACT

Oil palm (Elaeis guineensis), being a potential carbon sequestering perennial crop by biological
means, has helped in mitigating global warming and climatic fluctuations. In our study, we selected
Tenera hybrids in three oil palm plantations of major oil palm growing regions of Theni and
Thanjavur districts of Tamil Nadu, India during the year 2019. Carbon sequestration potential was
assessed by the standard procedures and methodology. The present study revealed that carbon
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

*Corresponding author: E-mail: [email protected];

 Rakesh et al.; IRJPAC, 21(11): 7-17, 2020; Article no.IRJPAC.59094

sequestration was higher in trunks, which was found to be 2.57 t C/ha (tons of carbon per hectare)
in 4 years, 22.33 t C/ha in 8 years and 59.79 t C/ha in 15 years with respect to the age of
plantation. The roots sequestered carbon for about 0.67 t C/ha in 4 years, 5.80 t C/ha in 8 years
and 15.54 t C/ha in 15 years old plantations and the fronds sequesters about 1.41 t C/ha in 4 years,
2.44 t C/ha in 8 years and 3.01 t C/ha in 15 years old oil palm plantations. The findings
evidenced that the biomass production in oil palm increased proportionally with different
age group of oil palm. This findings established the importance of oil palm plantation for
carbon sequestration to reduce natural as well as anthropogenic sources for climatic
fluctuations.

Keywords: Carbon sequestration; biomass; tenera hybrid; climatic fluctuations.

1. INTRODUCTION palm plantation regimes. The management

practices such as prevention of biomass
Oil palm (Elaeis guineensis) is one of the most burning, mulching of fronds, returning of empty
important agricultural crops in the tropics with the fruit bunches to the estates, biochar
extensive production of 85% of global palm oil by production, precise fertilization and co-
Malaysia followed by Indonesia. Oil palm one of composting are effective in a way of balancing
the most valuable cash crop of the tropical world carbon pools.
which covers to the extent of 12 million hectares
[1,2]. In consequences, this agro ecosystem Sustainable intensification of oil palm can be
seems to be a good candidate to sequester achieved by higher net dry matter production and
carbon in the tropical countries. It initially higher partitioning assimilates into fruit bunches
involves the capital expenditure when compared [6]. The ratio of fruit bunch weight partitioning to
to other annual crops such as paddy for the the total aboveground dry matter production, the
period of the first four years to final yield of the bunch index (BI), is an indicator for fruit
crop. Now a days, land conversion causes production efficiency [7]. Comprehensive
negative environmental impacts viz., loss of plantation and carbon measurements are
natural vegetation, reduction in biodiversity, imperative to assess the long-term effects of
water pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions plantation carbon balance on greenhouse gases
are the critical issues in many oil palm in the atmosphere. It is currently unprecedented
plantations [3]. In Indonesia, the oil palm interest to explore the contribution of oil palm as
plantations during the year 2015 reached up to a potential carbon sink. The oil palm retain
11.4 million hectares [4]. approximately 90-96% of total annual dry
production in the above ground biomass as
Moreover it sequesters the carbon in the trunk, fronds, and bunches [8,9]. Maintenance is
biomass and trunk which was equivalent to the mainly by pruning of palms and continuous
rainforest systems. Oil palm is one of the higher recycling of fronds contribute to annual dry
biomass and oil yielding plant per unit area than matter production at approximately 10 t/ha per
other oilseed crops which had been grown widely year in the Ivory Coast [10]. The standing stock
in Southeast Asia especially in Malaysia and of palms provides a semi permanent carbon
Indonesia. In India, oil palm estates extended up pool, which is to be depend on the alternative
to 0.33 million hectares in Andhra Pradesh, land uses, would otherwise it enter into the
Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala. In Tamil atmosphere. Forest clearing contributes CO2 to
Nadu, oil palm growing districts are Tanjore, the atmosphere through combustion and
Nagapatinam, Cuddalore, Theni, Dindigul and decomposition of woody biomass. Over a 25-
Coimbatore covers approximately 30,900 year typical oil palm plantation lifetime,
hectares with the annual production of 16,25,463 intact forest conversion is estimated to
Metric tons of Fresh fruit bunches and 2,70,322 contribute net emissions of approximately 9–20
Metric tons of Crude Palm Oil [5]. The best t/ha per year [11]. Carbon emissions
management practices in oil palm plantation disconnected from plantations either in time or
helps to obtain maximum yield and biomass. space and remain unaccounted for by
Increase in the biomass yield helps in the current research. Logging before land
sequestration of CO2 and proper management clearing for oil palm may contribute 30–60% of
practices after the biomass generation helps in emissions from plantation development
storage of carbon and other nutrients in the oil [12,11].

8
 Rakesh et al.; IRJPAC, 21(11): 7-17, 2020; Article no.IRJPAC.59094

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS of the commercial block, 15 palms were selected

as sampling palms to account for 1% of the total
2.1 Experimental Site number of palms in each block of one hectare
plantation. Every tenth palm of every tenth row,
2.1.1 Field measurements and estimation of excluding all abnormal palms and palms closest
dry matter production to the roadside were selected as sampling
The aboveground dry matter production (fronds, palms. The trunk dry matter was estimated by
fruit bunches and trunk) and biomass measuring trunk volume and trunk density. The
accumulation in the oil palms depended on key trunk diameter was obtained at 1.3 m
site factors which includes soil organic carbon, above ground level. The trunk height was
palm age, and annual rainfall had been measured by means of Blume-leiss altimeter.
estimated. The annual production of total aboveground dry
matter and the partitioning to fruit bunches,
2.2 Soil Sampling and Analysis fronds, and trunk were calculated during the
study period.
The soil samples were collected from the oil palm
plantations in the study sites of Theni and 2.3 Weather Conditions
Thanjavur districts. The soil samples were air
dried and sieved by means 0.2 mm sieve and The prevailing monthly wise weather parameters
subjected for analysis of pH, Electrical viz., maximum temperature, minimum
conductivity, soil organic carbon, total N temperature, relative humidity and rainfall for
concentration, extractable P and K as per Theni and Thanjavur districts during the period of
standard procedure by Jackson [13]. 2017 - 2019 were obtained from Agro Climatic
Research Centre, Tamil Nadu Agricultural
Field measurements of vegetative growth University, Coimbatore (Table 3, Fig. 2 and Fig.
parameters were recorded depending on the size 3).

Table 1. Description parameters of the study location in Theni and Thanjavur

S. Oil palm plantation Age group Latitude Longitude Area Yielding

No (Years) (Hectares) palms(No’s)
Theni
1 Muthalakampatti 4 10°03 E 77°61 N 10.0 1520
2 Bommaiyagoundenpatti 8 10°04 E 77°47 N 3.30 450
3 Upparpatti 15 9°93 E 77°41 N 2.05 270
Thanjavur
1 Eachankottai 4 10°66 E 79°15 N 1.0 140
2 Vizhar 8 10°74 E 79°15 N 3.1 429
3 Nadur, Marungulam 15 10°64 E 79°16 N 3.8 450

Table 2. Soil characteristics of oil palm plantations

Parameters Theni Thanjavur

4 years 8 years 15 years 4 years 8 years 15 years
pH 6.97 6.81 7.30 7.20 6.91 7.54
Electrical Conductivity (dS m-1) 0.25 0.40 0.58 0.43 0.56 0.25
Organic carbon (%) 0.52 0.68 0.59 0.60 0.42 0.71
Available N (kg ha-1) 249 288 227 210 190 175
-1
Available P (kg ha ) 11.7 10.0 13.6 10.5 8.7 9.0
Available K (kg ha-1) 198 144 128 250 237 210

Table 3. Weather parameters for Theni and Thanjavur districts

S. Place Maximum Minimum Relative Monthly Rainy

No Temperature Temperature Humidity Rainfall days
(°C) (°C) (%) (mm) (No’s)
1 Theni 33 25 80 764.6 66
2 Thanjavur 34 24 74 890.1 70

9
 Rakesh et al.; IRJPAC, 21(11): 7-17, 2020; Article no.IRJPAC.59094

Fig. 1. Overview of experimental sites

Fig. 2. Monthly wise weather parameters for Theni district from 2017-2019

10
 Rakesh et al.; IRJPAC, 21(11): 7-17, 2020; Article no.IRJPAC.59094

Fig. 3. Monthly wise weather parameters for Thanjavur district from 2017-2019

2.4 Quantitative Estimation of Carbon  Total Biomass production = Above

Sequestration in Oil Palm ground biomass generation (kg/palm) +
Below ground biomass production
The carbon stock in the oil palm plantations (kg/palm)
were estimated in four, eight and fifteen years  Total Carbon Stock (kg/palm) = Above
age group plantation with the standard ground Carbon sequestered (kg/palm) +
management practices and, the non-destructive Below ground Carbon sequestered
method of carbon stock estimation was done by (kg/palm)
using the formula  Total Carbon stock (t C/ha) = Average
V= πr2h Total Carbon Stock (kg per palm) ×
3 Planting density (Palms/hectares)
Where V is Volume of the oil palm in m ; r = [14,15]
radius of the oil palm trunk at 1.3 m height from
the ground in inches; h = height of the oil palm
2.4.1 Frond carbon estimation
tree in meters
Diameter of the palm at 1.30 m above the ground The fronds attached to the trunk were estimated
level (dbh) measured in tape in cm and in four in the oil palm plantation of different age groups
years palm trees and the basal diameter was and the single frond dry weight was c
calculated. alculated using the digital weighing balance.
Estimation of frond carbon stock in oil palm
 Above ground biomass generation trees were calculated by following formula
(kg/palm) = Volume × Wood density (400- [16].
600 kg/m3)
 Above ground carbon sequestered Frond carbon stock = N × SFDW × 0.38
(kg/palm) = Above ground biomass
(kg/palm) × 0.50 Where N is number of fronds, SFDW is Single
 Below ground biomass production frond dry weight (kg/frond)
(kg/palm) = Above ground biomass
(kg/palm) × 0.26 2.5 Statistical Analysis
 Below ground Carbon sequestered
(kg/palm) = Below ground biomass Data were analyzed by statistical average and
(kg/palm) × 0.50 standard deviation.

11
 Rakesh et al.; IRJPAC, 21(11): 7-17, 2020; Article no.IRJPAC.59094

3. RESULTS found to be 40.87 kg/palm or 5.85 t/ha, 348.7

kg/palm or 49.8 t/ha and 880.17 kg/palm or 125.8
3.1 Carbon Sequestration by Fronds t/ha, respectively. The above ground biomass
production in four, eight and fifteen years
The fronds were found in Theni oil palm plantation of Thanjavur was recorded 31.19
plantations of 4, 8 and 15 years sequesters kg/palm or 4.46 t/ha, 275.92 kg/palm or 39.46
carbon of 1.07 t C/ha, 2.20 t C/ha and 3.28 t t/ha and 792.4 kg/palm or 113.31 t/ha,
C/ha, respectively. The Thanjavur plantations of respectively.
4, 8 and 15 years sequester about 1.76 t C/ha, The above ground carbon stock in four, eight and
2.68 t C/ha and 2.74 t C/ha, respectively (Tables fifteen years plantation of Theni was found to be
4 & 5). 20.44 kg/palm or 2.92 t C/ha, 174.38 kg/palm or
24.94 t C/ha and 440.09 kg/palm or 62.93 t C/ha,
3.2 Above Ground Drymatter Production respectively. The above ground carbon stock in
and Carbon Stock four, eight and fifteen years plantation of
Thanjavur was noticed 15.59 kg/palm or 2.23 t
The above ground biomass production in four, C/ha, 137.96 kg/palm or 19.73 t C/ha and 396.20
eight and fifteen years plantations of Theni was kg/palm or 56.66 t C/ha, respectively

Table 4. Carbon stock distribution in oil palm plantations at Theni

S. Parameter Four years Eight years Fifteen years

No
1 Total drymatter production (t/ha) 5.62(2.21) 49.72(10.29) 142.78(48.53)
2 Frond drymatter production 33.09(5.20) 50.41(5.72) 50.47(5.64)
(kg/palm/year)
3 Frond drymatter production (t/ha/year) 4.63(0.73) 7.06(0.80) 7.07(0.79)
4 Above ground Carbon stock (kg/palm) 15.59(6.54) 137.96(28.56) 396.20(134.67)
5 Above ground Carbon stock (t C/ha) 2.23(0.88) 19.73(4.08) 56.66(19.26)
6 Below ground Carbon stock (kg/palm) 4.05(1.60) 35.87(7.43) 103.01(35.01)
7 Below ground Carbon stock (t C/ha) 0.58(0.23) 5.13(1.06) 14.73(5.01)
8 Total Carbon stock (kg/palm) 19.65(7.73) 173.83(35.99) 499.21(169.68)
9 Total Carbon stock (t C/ha) 2.81(1.11) 24.86(5.15) 71.39(24.26)
10 Frond carbon stock (kg/palm/year) 12.58(1.98) 19.16(2.17) 19.18(2.14)
11 Frond carbon stock (t C/ha/year) 1.76(0.28) 2.68(0.30) 2.74(0.31)
*The values presented in the table are the average of 15 oil palm trees with standard deviation is given in
parantheses

Table 5. Carbon stock distribution in oil palm plantations at Thanjavur

S. Parameter Four years Eight years Fifteen years

No
1 Total drymatter production (t/ha) 7.36(2.59) 62.84(15.37) 158.59(28.87)
2 Frond drymatter production (kg/palm/year) 20.14(5.27) 41.39(5.52) 61.66(9.41)
3 Frond drymatter production (t/ha/year) 2.82(0.74) 5.79(0.77) 8.63(1.32)
4 Above ground Carbon stock (kg/palm) 20.44(7.75) 174.38(42.66) 440.09(80.10)
5 Above ground Carbon stock (t C/ha) 2.92(1.11) 24.94(6.10) 62.93(11.46)
6 Below ground Carbon stock (kg/palm) 5.31(2.02) 45.34(11.09) 114.42(20.83)
7 Below ground Carbon stock (t C/ha) 0.76(0.29) 6.48(1.59) 16.36(2.98)
8 Total Carbon stock (kg/palm) 25.75(9.77) 219.72(53.75) 554.51(100.93)
9 Total Carbon stock (t C/ha) 3.68(1.40) 31.42(7.69) 79.29(14.43)
10 Frond carbon stock (kg/palm/year) 7.65(2.0) 15.73(2.10) 23.43(3.58)
11 Frond carbon stock (t C/ha/year) 1.07(0.28) 2.20(0.29) 3.28(0.50)
*The values presented in the table are the average of 15 oil palm trees with standard deviation is given in
parantheses

12
 Rakesh et al.; IRJPAC, 21(11): 7-17, 2020; Article no.IRJPAC.59094

3.3 Below Ground Biomass Production and the trunk of a 5 year old oil palm
-1
and Carbon Stock sequestered 15.3 t Cha whereas that of a 10
year old oil palm sequestered 26.6t C ha-1.
The below ground biomass production in four,
eight and fifteen years plantation of Theni was 4.1.2 Fronds
found to be 10.63 kg/palm or 1.52 t/ha, 90.68
kg/palm or 7.13 t/ha and 228.85 kg/palm or 32.72 Oil palm is being a heavy biomass generating
t/ha, respectively. The below ground biomass crop in which, the fronds sequesters the carbon
production in four, eight and fifteen years considerably. The frond encompasses nearly
plantation of Thanjavur was registered 8.11 52% of the total biomass. In E. oleifera × E.
kg/palm or 1.16 t/ha, 71.74 kg/palm or 10.26 t/ha guineensis F1 hybrid population, a wild palm was
and 206.02 kg/palm or 29.46 t/ha, respectively discovered that in addition to short trunk, had
(Tables 4 & 5). relatively short leaves due to spontaneous
heritable changes in the leaf length. The fronds
4. DISCUSSION carbon stock was found to be 3 fold lower in 4
years plantation, while eight and fifteen year
plantations carbon stock was still comparable
4.1 Carbon Sequestration in Different with the research findings of Suresh and Kumar
Parts of Oil Palm [31]. The increasing carbon stock was noticed in
the fronds of oil palm with respect to age and this
4.1.1 Trunk results may be similar to the findings of Leblanc
and Russo [18] in which the fronds sequesters
The above ground biomass is one of the 59 % higher carbon stocks. Under irrigated
indicators of carbon budget in oil palm plantation. condition, the carbon content in different fronds
The carbon stock in oil palm plantations was of a mature palm varied between 0.413 and
largely due to trunk biomass as it increases with 1.314 kg (Suresh et al., 2018). Simanihuruk et al.
palm age which tends to increase of oil palm [32] reported that the dry weight of the fronds
height [17]. The four years plantations recorded ranged from 4 to 5 kg and pruned fronds ranged
carbon stock which was found similar to the from 64 – 120 kg/tree/year or nearly 8.3 – 15.6
studies by Leblanc and Russo [18] and Suresh et ton/ha/year [33]. Melling et al. [34] stated that
al., [19] on oil palm hybrids with the carbon stock. frond biomass significantly increased from 1.2
The carbon sequestration is higher in trunks 8 Mg ha-1 in 3 year old plantation to 20.5 Mg ha-1 in
years and 15 years plantations which was a ten year old plantation, after which it declined
-1
comparable to studies in forests in North eastern to 2.3 and 3.4 Mg ha in 20 and 30 years old,
Brazil [20] and tropical deciduous forests has two respectively. Rakesh et al. [30] reported that the
fold increased carbon sequestration [21,22,23] fronds of a 5 year old oil palm sequestered 1.39 t
and the lower carbon stocks are observed in 10 C ha-1 whereas 10 year old oil palm sequestered
-1
to 30 years of Oil palm in Malaysia [24,25]. The 2.1 t C ha .
annual carbon sequestration in eight and fifteen
years age group is still comparable with the 4.1.3 Roots
studies of Suresh and Kumar [26] with 10 years
age group plantations under irrigated and rainfed In oil palm root biomass is tedious to estimate
conditions. The oil palm possess higher annual and its measurement requires destructive
carbon stock than eight forest species of 14 sampling [35]. The root biomass varies with
years which includes stems, branches, and difference in soil type. The carbon sequestered in
leaves [27]. Ziegler et al., [28] reported that the the roots of 4-15 years age of oil palm
carbon stocks are comparable to four and eight plantations was comparable with the study of
years age groups of oil palm. The carbon Syahrinudin [24] 3- 30 years plantations while, it
benefits depends very much on the land use was recorded similar to study of Khoon et al.,
history, length or rotational fallow period, [17], which is 11 – 29 years plantations. Henson
pedoagroclimatic conditions between sites, [36] reported that the below ground carbon stock
plantation management practices, irrigation as for the replanting cycle of 25 years was
practices and supply of nutrients influences the comparable with our study on 8 years age group
oil palm growth and the degree of disturbance of oil palm. Dufrene [37] observed a total root
during cultivation [8,29,24,28]. Rakesh et al. [30] biomass of 31.5 t ha-1 for ten year old palms in
reported that among various parts of the plant, Ivory Coast. Furthermore, several studies has
the trunk region sequestered the highest carbon shown a significant increase in the root biomass

13
 Rakesh et al.; IRJPAC, 21(11): 7-17, 2020; Article no.IRJPAC.59094

with plantation age [38,39,40,24,41]. Kirankumar under rainfed condition respectively [26].
-
et al. [42] stated that root accumulates 2.20 t ha Rakesh et al. [30] reported that the roots of a 5
1 -1
and sequesters 1.07 t C ha . The quantity of dry year old oil palm sequestered 4.0 t C ha-1
-1
matter accumulated by the roots was 0.61 t ha whereas 10 year old oil palm sequestered 6.93 t
-1 -1 -1
y under irrigated condition and 1.35 t ha y C ha-1.

Theni
4.5 Thanjavur

4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
AGCS (t C/ha) BGCS (t C/ha) FCS (t C/ha/year)

Fig. 4. Carbon stock distribution among four years oil palm plantation
*AGCS-Above ground carbon stock; BGCS-Below ground carbon stock; FCS-Fronds carbon stock

Theni
35 Thanjavur

30

25

20

15

10

0
AGCS (t C/ha) BGCS (t C/ha) FCS (t C/ha/year)

Fig. 5. Carbon stock distribution among eight years oil palm plantations
*AGCS-Above ground carbon stock; BGCS-Below ground carbon stock; FCS-Fronds carbon stock

14
 Rakesh et al.; IRJPAC, 21(11): 7-17, 2020; Article no.IRJPAC.59094

Theni
Thanjavur
80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
AGCS (t C/ha) BGCS (t C/ha) FCS (t C/ha/year)

Fig. 6. Carbon stock distribution among fifteen years oil palm plantations
*AGCS-Above ground carbon stock; BGCS-Below ground carbon stock; FCS-Fronds carbon stock

5. CONCLUSION ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The present study revealed that the standing This work was financially supported by the DST-
stocks of palm provide a semi-permanent carbon SERB, INDIA (EMR/2016/005436).
pool, which depends on the alternative land
uses, otherwise it would enter into the COMPETING INTERESTS
atmosphere. The organic carbon content of oil
palm plantations ranges from 0.42% - 0.68% and Authors have declared that no competing
the Stocks of Soil Organic Carbon (SOC) interests exist.
depends on the balance between soil carbon
inputs from vegetation and outputs from SOC REFERENCES
mineralization, erosion, and leaching. The height
of the oil palm trees was one of the main factor in 1. Henderson J, Osborne DJ. The oil palm in
terms of biomass production and accumulation all our lives: how this came about.
in oil palm trees and its increment mainly by Endeavour. 2000;24:63-68.
genome sequence of asparagines synthase 2. FAO, Food and Agriculture Organization of
related proteins which might responsible for the the United Nations. 2015.
tree height variations, that would play a major Available:http://www.fao.org/faostat
role for biomass production. The height, diameter 3. Dislich C, Keyel AC, Salecker J, Kisel Y,
and age of the trees specifies the carbon Meyer KM, Auliya M, et al., A review of the
sequestration process in increasing rate of oil ecosystem functions in oil palm
palm growing areas of Theni and Thanjavur. plantations, using forests as a
Based on the age of oil palm, different areas reference system. Biol. Rev., 2017;
showed a evidence in increasing rate of above 92:1539-1569.
ground biomass, below ground biomass, above 4. Ditjenbun. Indonesian oil palm plantation
ground carbon, below ground carbon and area: data from 1999 to 2014. Directorate
carbondioxide uptake. Hence, the cultivation of general of plantations and estates, Ministry
oil palm plantation is a right key role to sequester of Agriculture, Indonesia; 2014.
atmospheric carbon and to mitigate the green 5. National Food Security Mission (NFSM).
house gas emission under changing Present Status of Oilseed crops and
environmental conditions. vegetable oils in India. 2018.

15
 Rakesh et al.; IRJPAC, 21(11): 7-17, 2020; Article no.IRJPAC.59094

Available:https://www.nfsm.gov.in/StatusP of mature oil palm. J. Oil. Palm. Res.

aper/NMOOP2018.pdf 2019;31:521-527.
6. Fairhurst T, Griffiths W. Oil palm: best 18. Leblanc, HA, Russo RO. Carbon
management practices for yield sequestration in an oil palm crop system
intensification." International Plant Nutrition (Elaeisguineensis) in the Caribbean
Institute (IPNI), Singapore; 2014. lowlands of Costa Rica. Proc. Fla. State
7. Corley RHV, Gray BS, Kee NS. Hort. Soc. 2008;121:52–54.
Productivity of the oil palm 19. Suresh K, Mathur RK, Babu MK.
(ElaeisguineensisJacq.) in Malaysia. Exp. Screening of oil palm duras for drought
Agric., 1971;7:129-136. tolerance-stomatal responses, gas
8. Corley RHV, Tinker PBH. The Oil Palm. exchange and water relations. J.
4th ed. Wiley-Blackwell; Oxford, UK; 2003. Plantation. Crops. 2008;36:270-275.
9. Kotowska MM, Leuschner C, Triadiati T, 20. Sanquetta CR, PellicoNetto S, Dalla Corte
MeriemS, Hertel D. Quantifying above‐and AP, Lourenco A. Quantifying biomass and
belowground biomass carbon loss with carbon stocks in oil palm
forest conversion in tropical lowlands of S (ElaeisguineensisJacq.) in Northeastern
umatra (Indonesia). Glob. Change. Biol. Brazil. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2015;10:4067-
2015;21:3620-34. 4075.
10. Hartmann C. Evolution etcomportement de 21. Murphy PG, Lugo AE. Structure and
sols sablo-argileuxferralitiques sous culture biomass of a subtropical dry forest in
de palmiers à huile: cas de la plantation R. Puerto Rico. Biotropica. 1986;89-96.
Michaux à Dabou (Côte d'Ivoire). Thèse de 22. Becknell JM, Powers JS. Stand age and
doctorat :Pédologie. Université Pierre et soils as drivers of plant functional traits and
Marie Curie, Paris; 1991. aboveground biomass in secondary
11. Carlson KM, Curran LM, Ratnasari D, tropical dry forest. Can. J. Forest. Res.
Pittman AM, Soares-Filho BS, Asner GP et 2014;44:604-613.
al., Committed carbon emissions, 23. Gandhi, DS, Sundarapandian S. Large-
deforestation, and community land scale carbon stock assessment of woody
conversion from oil palm plantation vegetation in tropical dry deciduous forest
expansion in West Kalimantan, Indonesia. of Sathanur reserve forest, Eastern Ghats,
Proceedings of the National Academy of India. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2017;
Sciences, 2012;109:7559-64. 189:187.
12. Curran LM, Trigg SN, McDonald AK, 24. Syahrinudin. The potential of palm oil and
Astiani D, Hardiono YM, Siregar P, et al., forest plantations for carbon sequestration
Lowland forest loss in protected areas of on degraded land in Indonesia. In: Vlek
Indonesian Borneo. Science. 2004; PLG, Denich M, Martiuns C, Rodgers C,
303:1000-1003. van de Giesen N, editors. Ecol. Dev.
13. Jackson ML. Soil Chemical Analysis. Series No. 27.CuvillierVerlag, Göttingen;
Prentic Hall (India) Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi. 2005.
India; 1973. 25. Sitompul SM, Hairiah K, Cadisch G, Van
14. Chave J, Andalo C, Brown S, Cairns MA, Noordwijk M. Dynamics of density fractions
Chambers JQ, Eamus D, et al., Tree of macro-organic matter after forest
allometry and improved estimation of conversion to sugarcane and woodlots,
carbon stocks and balance in tropical accounted for in a modified Century model.
forests. Oecologia, 2005;145:87-99. NJAS-Wagen. J. Life. Sc. 2000;48:61-73.
15. Ravindranath NH, Ostwald M. Carbon 26. Suresh, K, Kumar MK. Carbon
inventory methods: handbook for Sequestration Potential of Oil Palm
greenhouse gas inventory, carbon under Irrigated and Rainfed Conditions.
mitigation and roundwood production Indian. J. Dryland. Agr. Res. Dev.
projects. Springer Science & Business 2011;26:55-57.
Media. 2007;29:113-147. 27. Alvarez Escoto NR, Russo RO, Leblanc
16. Henson IE. Modelling the impact of climatic Ureña HA. Fijación de carbono en la
and climate-related factors on oil palm biomasa y en el suelo de
growth and productivity. Malaysian Palm especiesforestalesnativasdeltrópicohúmed
Oil Board, Malaysia; 2006. o. Escuela de Agricultura de la Región
17. Khoon K, Rumpang E, Kamarudin N, Tropical Húmeda, (EARTH) Biblioteca
Harun MH. Quantifying total carbon stock W.K. Kellogg, Costa Rica; 2005.

16
 Rakesh et al.; IRJPAC, 21(11): 7-17, 2020; Article no.IRJPAC.59094

28. Ziegler AD, Phelps J, Yuen JQ, Webb EL, al., Carbon dioxide emission in land use
Lawrence D, Fox JM, et al., Carbon transitions to plantation; 2009.
outcomes of major land‐cover transitions in 36. Henson IE. A Review of Models for
SE Asia: great uncertainties and REDD+ Assessing Carbon Stocks and Carbon
policy implications. Glob. Change. Biol. Sequestration in Oil Palm Plantations. J.
2012; 8:3087-3099. Oil. Palm. Res. 2017;29:1-10.
29. Henson IE. The Malaysian national 37. Dufrene E. Photosynthese, consummation
average oil palm: concept and evaluation. en eauetmodelistion de la productionchez
Oil Palm Bulletin. 2003;46:15-27. le palmier a huila (ElaeisguineensisJacq.)
30. Rakesh SS, Davamani V, Sara Parwin (Photosynthesis, water consumption and
Banu K, Maragatham S, Lakshmanan modeling of production of oil palm
A,Parameswari E, Velmurugan M. (ElaeisguineensisJacq.)). PhD thesis,
Assessing the potential of Elaeis University of Paris – sud, Centre D’Orsay,
guineensis plantaions for carbon France, 1989;154.
sequestration and fresh fruit bunch yield in 38. Henson IE, Chai SH. Analysis of oil palm
Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu. Current Journal productivity. II. Biomass, distribution,
of Applied Science and Technology, productivity and turnover of the root
2020;39(6):80 – 90. system. Elaeis, 1997;9(2):78-92.
31. Suresh K,Kiran Kumar M. Carbon 39. Khalid H, Zakaria Z, Anderson JM. Effects
sequestration potential of oil palm under of oil palm residues management at
irrigated and rainfed conditions." Indian replanting on soil nutrient dynamics and oil
Journal of Dryland Agricultural Research palm growth. In: Proceedings of the 1999
and Development 2011;26(2):55-57. PORIM international palm oil congress
32. Simanihuruk K, Junjungan K, Tarigan A. (Agriculture). Palm Oil Research Institute
Pemanfaatanpelepahkelapasawitsebagaip of Malaysia, Bangi, 1999;235–246.
akan basal 40. Henson IE. Modelling carbon sequestration
kambingkacangfasepertumbuhan. and emissions related to oil palm
Prosiding Seminar Nasional Teknologi cultivation and associated land use change
Peternakandan Veteriner. 2007;417-424. in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian
33. Khalil HA, Jawaid M, Hassan A, Paridah Palm Oil Board; 2004.
MT, Zaidon A. Oil palm biomass fibres and 41. Smith DR, Townsend TJ, Choy AW, Hardy
recent advancement in oil palm biomass IC, Sjögersten S. Short‐term soil carbon
fibres based hybrid biocomposites; 2012. sink potential of oil palm plantations. GCB
34. Melling L, Hatano R, Goh KJ. Methane bioenergy, 2012;4(5):588-596.
fluxes from three ecosystems in tropical 42. Kiran Kumar M, RajasekharPinnamaneni
peatland of Sarawak, Malaysia. Soil T, Vijaya Lakshmi T, Suresh K. Carbon
Biology and Biochemistry, Sequestration Potential in a Ten Year Old
2005;37(8):1445-1453. Oil Palm under Irrigated Conditions.
35. Fahmuddin A, Runtunuwu E, Tania J, Int.J.Curr.Microbiol. App. Sci.
Susanti E, Komara H, Syahbuddin H, et 2017;6(8):1339-1343
_________________________________________________________________________________
© 2020 Rakesh et al.; This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited.

Peer-review history:
The peer review history for this paper can be accessed here:
http://www.sdiarticle4.com/review-history/59094

17

View publication stats