Abstract
Understanding the processes governing lateral terrestrial organic carbon transfer is confounded by the fact that organic carbon deposits on land have not yet been fully explored. Despite recent advances in understanding organic carbon deposition in aquatic ecosystems, the burial of organic carbon in dry depositional environments remains unclear. Here, combining large-scale field surveys and remote sensing techniques, we provide a robust estimate for sediment retention and organic carbon burial of check dams on the Chinese Loess Plateau. We find that the 50,226 active check dams have intercepted 10.2 ± 0.6 Pg eroded sediment during 1970-2020, which equals to 46% of the sediment load of Yellow River. Based on 86 deep sediment cores, we estimate that 21.6 ± 9.9 Tg of organic carbon was buried over the past 50 years by check dams with a burial rate of 468 ± 204 g C m−2 yr−1, approximately one order of magnitude higher than that of global lakes/reservoirs. We also find that the organic carbon burial efficiency of check dams (~80%) is significantly higher than in other depositional environments. We argue that organic carbon burial by check dams represents a significant terrestrial carbon sink and must be accounted for in global carbon budget.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
The fate of lateral terrestrial organic carbon (OC) transfer remains highly controversial in the global carbon budget1. Soil-derived OC is not only passively transferred but also biogeochemically processed and sequestered in depositional areas2. It is reported that ~34–82% of the eroded OC is deposited in terrestrial depositional systems, constituting important terrestrial carbon sinks3,4,5. The latest compilation indicated that sediment and OC burial in terrestrial depositional environments are predicted to increase due to accelerated erosion and reduced sediment export fluxes caused by climate change and human activities6. Understanding the carbon fate in depositional areas is an important prerequisite for shedding light on the debate on whether the erosion-transport-deposition process is a net atmospheric C source or sink7,8,9, and is critical to refining our knowledge of the carbon cycle10.
Terrestrial depositional systems usually include dry depositional environments such as alluvial fans, floodplains, and check dams, as well as aqueous depositional environments such as reservoirs, lakes, and ponds5,11,12. Current research has focused primarily on reservoirs and lakes3,12,13, while the burial of OC in dry depositional environments with higher sediment and OC storage remains poorly constrained5,11,14. Moreover, the carbon emissions of reservoirs and lakes are significantly higher than their carbon burial, and are usually regarded as important atmospheric carbon sources3,12. In contrast, the completely different OC properties and environmental characteristics of dry depositional systems may lead to the different fates of the buried OC, which deserves further exploration11.
Check dams are widely distributed worldwide to control soil erosion and sediment losses, especially in arid and semi-arid areas with severe erosion15,16. As typical terrestrial dry depositional environments, check dams intercept large amounts of eroded sediment and associated OC17. Previous studies have paid particular attention to the hydrological, ecological, and geomorphological functions of check dams at the watershed scale18,19,20. However, there is still a lack of systematic studies to clarify the carbon burial and sequestration of check dams, which may lead to an underestimation of terrestrial carbon sequestration11. The Chinese Loess Plateau is a typical arid and semi-arid region in the world, with the most severe soil erosion and the densest distribution of check dams21. Since the 1970s, check dams have been widely promoted by the central government and local people as an effective way to control soil erosion and sediment loss on the Chinese Loess Plateau17. The construction of check dams contributes greatly to the sediment reduction of the Yellow River, which used to have the largest riverine sediment flux in the world but has undergone a substantial reduction of sediment by about 90% in recent decades (i.e., average annual load decreased from 1.8 Pg yr−1 before 1970 to 0.2 Pg yr−1 after 2000)22. The dry conditions and high sedimentation rates, coupled with the widespread distribution of check dams, make the Chinese Loess Plateau an ideal natural archive for studying OC burial and budget in terrestrial depositional environments11. Here we combine satellite and UAV remote sensing, as well as large-scale field surveys to quantify the sediment retention and OC burial in check dams, estimate the OC burial rate and efficiency, and determine the fate of the buried OC behind check dams. We find that check dams are hotspots of terrestrial carbon sinks and are worthy of further attention and application in arid and semi-arid regions around the world.
Results and discussion
Sediment trapped by check dams
Using an object-oriented classification method based on multi-source remote sensing data, we obtain the spatial distribution map (Fig. 1b) of check dams on the Chinese Loess Plateau (See Supplementary Note 1). A total of 50,226 existing check dams are identified, which silted farmland area of 93,100 hm2 (Fig. 1b, c). The area of silted land of each check dam ranges from 0.01 to 625 hm2 with an average of 1.8 hm2, of which 50% is concentrated in 0.2–20 hm2 (Fig. 2a). We then combine Unmanned Aerial Vehicle photogrammetry and virtual dam construction to establish an empirical formula to link the silted area to sediment volume (See methods and Supplementary Note 2). Based on measured bulk density data from the surface to the deep depth (n = 60), we further estimate the corresponding sediment mass of each check dam (See methods). The amount of sediment retaining mass of check dams varies between 0.01 and 5 million tons (Fig. 2b), of which 80% are <0.2 million tons. The existing 50,226 check dams intercept a total of 10.2 ± 0.6 Pg sediment, which equals ~46% of the Yellow River’s sediment load to the Bohai Sea during the period 1970–2020 (Fig. 3a), indicating that check dams are a major contributor to the drastic sediment decline of the Yellow River. We then selected eight main tributaries of the Yellow River (i.e., Huangpuchuan, Tuweihe, Wudinghe, Qingjianhe, Yanhe, Beiluohe, Sanchuanhe, Xishuihe) to further quantify the sediment retaining effect of check dams. The results show that dense check dams reduced sediment load in the tributaries by 11–53% (Fig. 3b).
Carbon burial rates of check dams
We collect 2121 samples from 86 deep drillings or profiles on the Chinese Loess Plateau to evaluate the OC dynamics in the depositional environments (Figs. 4 and 5, Supplementary Table 1). The mean OC content of the check dam sediment is 0.22 ± 0.21% (n = 2121), significantly lower than previously reported in depositional areas worldwide12,23,24. Combined with the spatial distribution of OC contents obtained by Kriging interpolation (Fig. 5) and sediment mass of each check dam, we estimate that check dams on the Chinese Loess Plateau have collectively retained 21.6 ± 9.9 Tg OC (Fig. 6a and Supplementary Note 3). The corresponding OC burial rate is 0.43 ± 0.19 Tg C yr−1 (Fig. 6b), which is ~36% and 24% of the OC burial rate of the Chinese reservoirs (~1.21 Tg C yr−1) (ref. 3) and Chinese lakes (~1.80 Tg C yr−1) (ref. 25), respectively. If expressed as per unit area, however, the OC burial rate of check dams (468 ± 204 g C m−2 yr−1) is significantly higher than that of global reservoirs (~169 g C m−2 yr−1) (ref. 12) and lakes (~24 g C m−2 yr−1) (ref. 12). Compared with other previously reported ecosystems with high C stocks, such as mangroves (~163 g C m−2 yr−1) (ref. 26) and fjords (~40 g C m−2 yr−1) (ref. 27), check dams are also substantially efficient in sequestering terrestrial OC (Fig. 6c).
Buried carbon and its fate
The deposition or burial of OC only represents the total amount of OC input into the depositional system. Only when the extent of OC preservation in the depositional environment (defined as OC burial efficiency) is considered can the actual carbon sequestration potential of the depositional area be reflected28. Based on the regression slope of OC content with depth in 86 sediment cores (Fig. 7), we estimate the OC burial efficiency of check dams to be ~80% (n = 86) (See methods), which is significantly higher than other typical depositional environments, such as reservoirs (~44%, n = 36)29,30,31,32, lakes (~43%, n = 35)33,34, colluvial and alluvial sediments (~18%, n = 312)5,35,36,37, and marine sediments (~24%, n = 82)38,39,40 (Fig. 8a).
High OC burial efficiency in check dams mainly depends on the intrinsic characteristics of the eroded OC41. Firstly, the OC content in check dam on the Chinese Loess Plateau is 0.22% (n = 2265), which is significantly lower than other reported depositional area worldwide12,13. The impoverishment of OC content is usually accompanied by low SOC decomposition potential35. Secondly, our radiocarbon isotope data indicate that the OC buried in the check dams is quite old, with an average radiocarbon age of 5509 ± 2679 yr BP (n = 40). Combined with the binary mixing model (See methods), we further find that the content of petrogenic OC was 0.07 ± 0.02% (Fig. 8b), which accounted for 29.9% of the buried OC in check dams. The linear trend shows that the mean ∆14C activity of biospheric OC buried in the check dams is 0.76 ± 0.04 (Fig. 8b), and the corresponding radiocarbon age is 2205 yr BP. The mixture of the high percentage of petrogenic and pre-aged biospheric OC means that the OC buried in the check dams is highly recalcitrant42. Then, the significant positive correlation between the OC content and fine particles (P < 0.01, n = 540) (Fig. 8c) also shows that OC is more adsorbed by fine particles. Previous studies also show that OC buried in check dams consists mainly of a stable organic carbon pool combined with fine particles, of which mineral-associated OC accounts for 70% (ref. 43) and microaggregate-associated OC accounts for 80% (ref. 44). We further compare δ13C and C/N ratio, two important indicators of OC degradation or mineralization, between the erosion area and the check dams (depositional area)45. We found no significant difference in δ13C and C/N between the erosion area and the check dams (Fig. 8d), which may represent a low OC decomposition rate in check dams for several decades.
Additionally, the physical, chemical, and biological drivers of the depositional environment also significantly affect the OC burial efficiency. The dry, high bulk density and anoxia depositional environment of check dams have significantly reduced the biomass and activity of microorganisms, which further limited the decomposition of OC17,46. The low OC content coupled with the high recalcitrance in the dry depositional environment on the Chinese Loess Plateau has made it an efficient yet unquantified terrestrial carbon sink that has not been previously recognized.
Implications
The sediment retention and carbon burial of check dams analyzed in this study have at least three important implications for sediment and carbon management at regional and global scales. First, we have provided the most accurate estimate to date of the sediment retention of existing check dams on the Chinese Loess Plateau, and found that efficient sediment retention of check dams has resulted in an 11–53% reduction in sediment load to the Yellow River. These data will be beneficial to understanding the anthropogenic influences on the unprecedented changes in sediment reduction in the Yellow River and beyond22. According to the outline of the comprehensive management plan for the Chinese Loess Plateau, another 56,161 additional check dams will be built by 2030 (ref. 47). Those built and planned check dams will further change the hydrological conditions of the Chinese Loess Plateau. Our study provides an important baseline for assessing the environmental influence of building check dams in the future.
Second, our results highlight that check dams are a substantial component of China’s terrestrial carbon pool, possibly as important as reservoirs and lakes. It is noteworthy that check dams are more effective in terms of OC burial rate per unit area than lakes and reservoirs and other typical depositional environments. More importantly, inland water systems such as reservoirs and lakes are usually accompanied by stronger carbon emissions than carbon burial12, which is usually represented as an atmospheric carbon source48. Conversely, check dams with dry depositional environments have higher OC burial rates and lower OC decomposition efficiencies, which is a hotspot of terrestrial carbon sink. Our analysis also indicates that check dams can considerably modify the carbon cycling associated with soil erosion processes. Check dams built at the low-order stream network can rapidly bury and effectively preserve the eroded OC and thus reduce the OC export flux from the Yellow River by 35–39% (refs. 4,49). Furthermore, the rapid burial due to sediment deposition can also avoid further decomposition of OC by about 0.21 Tg C yr−1 during the long-distance fluvial transport according to the decomposition ratio (~48%) in this region48. Noticeably, our results show that large quantities of petrogenic OC have been buried in the check dams. Without the interception of these check dams, the decomposition of this eroded petrogenic OC during fluvial transport will represent an important carbon source on a geological time scale17,50.
Third, we argue that the construction of check dams in global arid and semi-arid regions, such as Spain, Australia, America, India, Iran, and Ethiopia (Fig. 1a), can contribute to a triple-win scenario of erosion reduction, carbon neutrality, and food security. Predictable global warming and increased human activities may aggravate soil erosion in these arid and semi-arid regions51. Check dams not only intercept eroded sediment, but also effectively preserve large amounts of OC during the deposition process. Additionally, the farmland formed by intercepting sediment will provide additional food production and carbon sequestration52. Overall, check dams provide unexpected synergies between multiple ecosystem services, thus providing a new potential solution for arid and semi-arid regions to achieve sustainable development goals 2, 13, and 15 in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development53. This is particularly true when soil erosion, global warming, and food security are expected to further exacerbate in a human intensified near future10,54.
Methods
Study area and fieldwork
The Chinese Loess Plateau covers an area of approximately 640,000 km2, mainly within the middle reaches of the Yellow River, and is a major source of sediment for the Yellow River (Fig. 1b). The mean annual precipitation varies between 200 and 600 mm from the northwest to the southeast. Precipitation occurs mainly from June to September, in the form of high-intensity storms. The Chinese Loess Plateau suffers the most severe soil erosion due to deep erodible loess, fragmentary topography, intensive slope cropland, and arid to semi-arid climate. The Chinese Loess Plateau is sparsely vegetated and covered mainly by grassland ecosystems. Check dams have been one of the most commonly utilized structural measures for channel stabilization and erosion control in catchments on the Chinese Loess Plateau.
Fieldwork was carried out throughout the Chinese Loess Plateau during 2017–2021. We conducted field surveys at more than 400 dam-controlled catchments and ultimately selected 86 intact check dams for sampling (Supplementary Table 1). Sampling included the collection of representative samples of both the source materials of the dam-controlled catchments and check dam sediment. Each source sample consists of 10 subsamples collected from surface soils (0–5 cm depth) in a 5 × 5 m grid. Check dam sediment samples were collected using a variety of tools, including manual drill, impact drill, well-drilling machine, excavator, and manual well digging (Fig. 4). Because most of the check dams are located in the upper stream and with traffic inconvenience, we, therefore, choose the sampling method according to local conditions. We usually choose the center of the silted land as the sampling location. Vertical sampling was done at 25 cm intervals at depths above 600 cm, and we sampled every 50 cm at depths below 600 cm. Noticeably, since the check dams we selected are all planted with crops, sampling is usually carried out from 50 cm to reduce the influence of crops and their roots. Totally, we obtained 315 source samples and 2121 sediment samples throughout the Chinese Loess Plateau.
Experimental analysis of soil/sediment samples
Bulk density (BD) was obtained for 60 samples from 6 deep profiles. The maximum BD was 1.68 g cm−3, and the BD sampling depth reached 11.3 m. A good linear relationship was found between sediment depth and bulk density (See Supplementary Note 2). We used BD at 1/2 depth due to the homogeneity and small variability of BD in loess sediments, and we assume that the sampled sediments are representative of the study area. The depth of each check dam was calculated based on the relationship between depth and silted area (See Supplementary Note 2). The particle size distribution was tested using a laser analyzer (Mastersizer 2000, Malvem, England). The concentration of OC and total nitrogen in the samples was measured using the K2Cr2O7-H2SO4 oxidation method and Kjeldahl method, respectively, after passing through the 0.25 mm sieve44.
The isotopic analyses were performed at the Beta Analytic Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory (Miami, USA). The ∆14C activity was determined using accelerator mass spectrometry. The ∆14C results were expressed as the fraction of modern carbon and as a conventional radiocarbon age (cal yr BP). For the measurement of stable carbon isotopes (δ13C), 2 g of sieved soil sample was pretreated with 10 ml H3PO4 solution for 12 h to remove the carbonate. The pretreated soil samples were combusted at 1020 °C and analyzed using the isotope ratio mass spectrometer (IRMS) (DELTA V Advantage, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc., USA). The δ13C was reported in delta notation relative to the Vienna Pee Dee Belemnite (VPDB).
Estimation of sediment retention, OC burial rate, and OC burial efficiency of check dams
We obtained the locations and silted areas of 50,226 check dams by combining high-resolution Google Earth images and an object-oriented classification method (Details See Supplementary Note 1). Then, we used Unmanned Aerial Vehicle photogrammetry and the virtual dam construction method to determine the relationship between silted area and sediment volume55. The sediment volume and mass of each check dam were estimated based on the area-volume empirical equation and measured bulk density (Supplementary Note 2).
We used the measured OC content of each depositional profile, combined with Kriging interpolation, to obtain the spatial distribution of OC content. Combing the total sediment mass of each check dam, we, therefore, estimated the OC storage of check dams (Supplementary Note 3). The Yellow River Water Resources Commission of the Ministry of Water Resources has provided the total amount and proportion of sediment trapped by check dams in different periods according to statistical data of grass-roots water conservancy departments56. Combined with this proportion and our estimated total sediment retention and OC burial of check dams (Supplementary Table 2), we roughly estimated the sediment retention rate and OC burial rate of check dams in different periods (Fig. 3a and Fig. 6a).
The burial depth of sediment and OC in check dam ranges from 3–30 m, corresponding to a burial time of 7–60 years. We simply estimated the OC burial efficiency based on the variation trend of OC content with burial depth (or burial time)57. We carried out regression analysis on 86 representative check dams, and the regression slope (S) represents the OC decomposition rate. We then determined the OC burial efficiency (OCbe) based on the decomposition of OC with burial depth (D) and the OC content of the topsoil sample (OCtopsoil).
Quantification of petrogenic OC and biospheric OC by binary mixing model
The sediment buried in the check dam is a mixture of erosion sediment from different sources (e.g., gully, cropland, and grassland). The buried sediment contains petrogenic OC (OCpetro) from bedrock and the ancient loess in the gully and biospheric OC (OCbio) from pre-aged soil and modern plant debris in the sloping cropland/grassland. Based on the binary mixing model of radiocarbon isotopes57, we quantify the petrogenic and biospheric OC in the sediment of check dams.
As Fmpetro = 0, equation (4) can be simplified as:
Where Fm, Fmpetro, and Fmbio are the radiocarbon compositions of the total, petrogenic, and biospheric OC, respectively. Similarly, %OC, %OCpetro and %OCbio represent the contents of OC, OCpetro, and OCbio, respectively.
Every sample plotting on a straight line in a diagram representing the product %OC × Fm as a function of %OC is characterized by similar %OCpetro. The content of petrogenic OC can be simply determined as the intersection between the trend and the X axis, and the mean ∆14C activity of biospheric OC can be determined by the regression slope. More details can be found in Galy et al.58.
Reporting summary
Further information on research design is available in the Nature Portfolio Reporting Summary linked to this article.
Data availability
The following datasets were used in this study: digital elevation model (DEM) data were obtained from Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) DEM with a resolution of 30 m (https://dwtkns.com/srtm30m/). The official statistics of the total amount and proportion of sediment trapped by check dams in different periods were obtained from the Yellow River Water Resources Commission of the Ministry of Water Resources56. The sediment load of the Yellow River and its tributaries were obtained from the Yellow River Sediment Bulletin 2021 (http://www.yrcc.gov.cn/zwzc/gzgb/gb/nsgb/). Geographic information and sampling information of 86 dam-controlled catchments in this study are available at Figshare (https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.22002578).
References
Galy, V., Peucker-Ehrenbrink, B. & Eglinton, T. Global carbon export from the terrestrial biosphere controlled by erosion. Nature 521, 204–207 (2015).
Lugato, E. et al. Soil erosion is unlikely to drive a future carbon sink in Europe. Sci. Adv. 4, eaau3523 (2018).
Maavara, T., Lauerwald, R., Regnier, P. & Van Cappellen, P. Global perturbation of organic carbon cycling by river damming. Nat. Commun. 8, 15347 (2017).
Ran, L., Lu, X., Fang, N. & Yang, X. Effective soil erosion control represents a significant net carbon sequestration. Sci. Rep. 8, 12018 (2018).
Wang, Z. et al. Human-induced erosion has offset one-third of carbon emissions from land cover change. Nat. Clim. Chang. 7, 345–349 (2017).
Syvitski, J. et al. Earth’s sediment cycle during the Anthropocene. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 3, 179–196 (2022).
Lal, R. & Pimentel, D. Soil erosion: a carbon sink or source? Science 319, 1040–1042 (2008).
Doetterl, S. et al. Erosion, deposition and soil carbon: a review of process-level controls, experimental tools and models to address C cycling in dynamic landscapes. Earth Sci. Rev. 154, 102–122 (2016).
Van Oost, K. et al. The impact of agricultural soil erosion on the global carbon cycle. Science 318, 626–629 (2007).
Berhe, A. A., Barnes, R. T., Six, J. & Marín-Spiotta, E. Role of soil erosion in biogeochemical cycling of essential elements: carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 46, 521–548 (2018).
Yao, Y., Song, J. & Wei, X. The fate of carbon in check dam sediments. Earth Sci. Rev. 224, 103889 (2022).
Mendonça, R. et al. Organic carbon burial in global lakes and reservoirs. Nat. Commun. 8, 1694 (2017).
Heathcote, A. J., Anderson, N. J., Prairie, Y. T., Engstrom, D. R. & Del Giorgio, P. A. Large increases in carbon burial in northern lakes during the Anthropocene. Nat. Commun. 6, 10016 (2015).
Sun, D., Tang, J., He, Y., Liao, W. & Sun, Y. Sources, distributions, and burial efficiency of terrigenous organic matter in surface sediments from the Yellow River mouth, northeast China. Org. Geochem. 118, 89–102 (2018).
Abbasi, N. A., Xu, X., Lucas-Borja, M. E., Dang, W. & Liu, B. The use of check dams in watershed management projects: Examples from around the world. Sci. Total Environ. 676, 683–691 (2019).
Lucas-Borja, M. E., Piton, G., Yu, Y., Castillo, C. & Antonio Zema, D. Check dams worldwide: objectives, functions, effectiveness and undesired effects. Catena 204, 105390 (2021).
Zeng, Y., Fang, N. & Shi, Z. Effects of human activities on soil organic carbon redistribution at an agricultural watershed scale on the Chinese Loess Plateau. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 303, 107112 (2020).
Guyassa, E., Frankl, A., Zenebe, A., Poesen, J. & Nyssen, J. Effects of check dams on runoff characteristics along gully reaches, the case of Northern Ethiopia. J. Hydrol. 545, 299–309 (2017).
Mongil-Manso, J., Díaz-Gutiérrez, V., Navarro-Hevia, J., Espina, M. & San Segundo, L. The role of check dams in retaining organic carbon and nutrients. A study case in the Sierra de Ávila mountain range (Central Spain). Sci. Total Environ. 657, 1030–1040 (2018).
Zema, D. A., Bombino, G., Denisi, P., Lucas-Borja, M. E. & Zimbone, S. M. Evaluating the effects of check dams on channel geometry, bed sediment size and riparian vegetation in Mediterranean mountain torrents. Sci. Total Environ. 642, 327–340 (2018).
Zhang, Y. et al. Morphometrics of China’s Loess Plateau: the spatial legacy of tectonics, climate, and loess deposition history. Geomorphology. 354, 107043 (2020).
Wang, S. et al. Reduced sediment transport in the Yellow River due to anthropogenic changes. Nat. Geosci. 9, 38–41 (2016).
Berhe, A. A. et al. Persistence of soil organic matter in eroding versus depositional landform positions. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 117, G0219 (2012).
Nahlik, A. M. & Fennessy, M. S. Carbon storage in US wetlands. Nat. Commun. 7, 13835 (2016).
Zhang, F., Yao, S., Xue, B., Lu, X. & Gui, Z. Organic carbon burial in Chinese lakes over the past 150 years. Quat. Int. 438, 94–103 (2017).
Breithaupt, J. L., Smoak, J. M., Smith, T. J., Sanders, C. J. & Hoare, A. Organic carbon burial rates in mangrove sediments: strengthening the global budget. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 26, GB3011 (2012).
Smith, R. W., Bianchi, T. S., Allison, M., Savage, C. & Galy, V. High rates of organic carbon burial in fjord sediments globally. Nat. Geosci. 8, 450–453 (2015).
Van de Broek, M. et al. Long-term organic carbon sequestration in tidal marsh sediments is dominated by old-aged allochthonous inputs in a macrotidal estuary. Glob. Chang. Biol. 24, 2498–2512 (2018).
Mendonca, R. et al. Organic carbon burial efficiency in a subtropical hydroelectric reservoir. Biogeosciences 13, 3331–3342 (2016).
Kunz, M. J. et al. Sediment accumulation and carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus deposition in the large tropical reservoir Lake Kariba (Zambia/Zimbabwe). J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 116, IssueG3 (2011).
Sobek, S., Delsontro, T., Wongfun, N. & Wehrli, B. Extreme organic carbon burial fuels intense methane bubbling in a temperate reservoir. Geophys. Res. Lett. 39, L01401 (2012).
Sikar, E. et al. Silicon as a permanent-carbon sedimentation tracer. Inland Waters 2, 119–128 (2012).
Sobek, S. et al. Organic carbon burial efficiency in lake sediments controlled by oxygen exposure time and sediment source. Limnol. Oceanogr. 54, 2243–2254 (2009).
Sobek, S., Anderson, N. J., Bernasconi, S. M. & Del Sontro, T. Low organic carbon burial efficiency in arctic lake sediments. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 119, 1231–1243 (2014).
Wang, Z. et al. The fate of buried organic carbon in colluvial soils: a long-term perspective. Biogeosciences 11, 873–883 (2014).
Van Oost, K. et al. Legacy of human-induced C erosion and burial on soil-atmosphere C exchange. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109, 19492–19497 (2012).
Omengo, F. O., Geeraert, N., Bouillon, S. & Govers, G. Deposition and fate of organic carbon in floodplains along a tropical semiarid lowland river (Tana River, Kenya). J. Geophys. Res. G Biogeosci. 121, 1131–1143 (2016).
Burdige, D. J. Burial of terrestrial organic matter in marine sediments: a re-assessment. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 19, GB4011 (2005).
Burdige, D. J. Preservation of organic matter in marine sediments: controls, mechanisms, and an imbalance in sediment organic carbon budgets? Chem. Rev. 107, 467–485 (2007).
Hartnett, H. E., Keil, R. G., Hedges, J. I. & Devol, A. H. Influence of oxygen exposure time on organic carbon preservation in continental margin sediments. Nature 391, 572–574 (1998).
de Nijs, E. A. & Cammeraat, E. L. H. The stability and fate of Soil Organic Carbon during the transport phase of soil erosion. Earth-Sci. Rev. 201, 103067 (2020).
Zhang, Y., Galy, V., Yu, M., Zhang, H. & Zhao, M. Terrestrial organic carbon age and reactivity in the Yellow River fueling efficient preservation in marine sediments. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 585, 117515 (2022).
Boix-Fayos, C. et al. Carbon redistribution by erosion processes in an intensively disturbed catchment. Catena 149, 799–809 (2017).
Wang, Y. et al. Effects of erosion on the microaggregate organic carbon dynamics in a small catchment of the Loess Plateau, China. Soil Tillage Res. 174, 205–213 (2017).
Wang, Z. et al. Catchment-scale carbon redistribution and delivery by water erosion in an intensively cultivated area. Geomorphology 124, 65–74 (2010).
Zhang, H. et al. Loess Plateau check dams can potentially sequester eroded soil organic carbon. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosciences 121, 1449–1455 (2016).
National Development and Reform Commission People’s Republic of China. Outline of the comprehensive management plan for the Loess Plateau (2010–2030). Beijing, China, 2010.
Hotchkiss, E. R. et al. Sources of and processes controlling CO2 emissions change with the size of streams and rivers. Nat. Geosci. 8, 696–699 (2015).
Zhao, J., Van Oost, K., Chen, L. & Govers, G. Moderate topsoil erosion rates constrain the magnitude of the erosion-induced carbon sink and agricultural productivity losses on the Chinese Loess Plateau. Biogeosciences 13, 4735–4750 (2016).
Bouchez, J. et al. Oxidation of petrogenic organic carbon in the Amazon floodplain as a source of atmospheric CO2. Geology 38, 255–258 (2010).
Borrelli, P. et al. An assessment of the global impact of 21st century land use change on soil erosion. Nat. Commun. 8, 1–13 (2017).
Gao, X. et al. Carbon budget of a rainfed spring maize cropland with straw returning on the Loess Plateau, China. Sci. Total Environ. 586, 1193–1203 (2017).
Scown, M. W. The sustainable development goals need geoscience. Nat. Geosci. 13, 714–715 (2020).
Barbier, E. B. & Hochard, J. P. Land degradation and poverty. Nat. Sustain. 1, 623–631 (2018).
Zeng, Y. et al. Estimation of the volume of sediment deposited behind check dams based on UAV remote sensing. J. Hydrol. 612, 128143 (2022).
Liu, X., Gao, Y., Tian, Y., LI, X. & Ma, J. Sediment intercepted by dams and the sediment production situation restoration of the last 100 years in the Yellow River Basin. Yellow River. 43, 19–23 (2021).
Quezada, J. C., Etter, A., Ghazoul, J., Buttler, A. & Guillaume, T. Carbon neutral expansion of oil palm plantations in the neotropics. Sci. Adv. 5, eaaw4418 (2019).
Galy, V., Beyssac, O., France-Lanord, C. & Eglinton, T. Recycling of graphite during Himalayan erosion: a geological stabilization of carbon in the crust. Science. 322, 943–945 (2008).
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41930755, 42177335, 42107361, and 42207405). X.L. acknowledges MOE Tier 2 grant (A-0003626-00-00).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
N.F., Y.Z., and Z.S. conceived and designed the study. N.F. and Y.Z. wrote the paper. L.N. and C.L. analyzed the data. L.R., Z.W., Q.Y., and X.L. contributed discussion. X.Y. provided assistance with data analysis and software development. L.R., Z.W., X.L., Z.S., Z.G.W., J.J., and C.Y. commented and edited the manuscript.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review
Peer review information
Communications Earth & Environment thanks Changchun Huang, Jorge Mongil-Manso, and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Primary Handling Editors: Clare Davis. Peer reviewer reports are available.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Fang, N., Zeng, Y., Ran, L. et al. Substantial role of check dams in sediment trapping and carbon sequestration on the Chinese Loess Plateau. Commun Earth Environ 4, 65 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-023-00728-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-023-00728-2
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.