1. abhijit mitra marine science calcutta university

How to Study StoredCarbon in Mangroves

A START UP

fold

BLACK

CSIR-NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION RESOURCES

New Delhi

MANUALAbhijit Mitra

J. Sundaresan

FINAL Title Page

Published by

HOW TO STUDY STORED CARBON IN MANGROVES: A START UP MANUAL

Preface

The biomass and productivity of mangrove forests have been studied mainly in terms of wood production,forest conservation, and ecosystem management (Putz and Chan, 1986; Tamai et al., 1986; Komiyama et

al., 1987; Clough and Scott, 1989; McKee, 1995; Ong et al., 1995). The contemporary understandingof the global warming phenomenon, however, has generated interest in the carbon-storing ability ofmangroves. Carbon sequestration in this unique producer community is a direct function of biomassproduction capacity, which in turn depends upon interaction between edaphic, climatic, and topographicfactors of the area. Hence, results obtained at one place may not be applicable to another. Thereforeregion based potential of different land types and forests need to be worked out. Carbon registries typicallysegregate a number of carbon pools within a mangrove forests that can be identified and quantified. Thesecarbon pools are categorized in a variety of ways, but typically include four major components, namely theabove ground biomass, below ground biomass, litter, and soil carbon. The mangrove ecosystem is uniquein terms of carbon dynamics as the litters and detritus contributed by the floral species are exported toadjacent water bodies in every tidal cycle.

The present handbook is a guide to estimate the biomass and carbon stock in major compartments ofmangrove system, which can be worked out in the field by lay man without the use of any sophisticatedinstrument.

This manual is the output of the programme entitled “Vulnerability assessment and development of adaptationstrategies for climate change impact with special reference to coasts and Island ecosystems of India(VACCIN)..”, whose main essence is to develop capacity to improve governance of coastal regimes andislands of India due to climate change impact. VACCIN Project is supported by Council of Scientific andIndustrial Research, Ministry of Science & Technology, Government of India.

The entire exercise of writing this manual would not have been possible without the active support ofLakshadweep administration (particularly Dept. of Environment and Forests, U. T of Lakshadweep), asthe embryonic development of this start up manual was initiated in the midst of Kadmath island during themeeting of the Principal Investigators of VACCIN Project, during 10-14 March 2016.

Abhijit Mitra

J. Sundaresan

ix


xi

CONTENTS

1. Important terminologies 1

2. Mangroves: An overview 3

3. Distribution of mangroves 4

4. Ecosystem services of mangroves 6

5. Importance of mangrove biomass estimation 9

6. Mangrove biomass estimation: A field level approach 10

7. Carbon stock estimation in mangrove forest 17

8. Worksheet for mangrove biomass and stored carbon estimation 20

9. Carbon score card of mangroves 23

10. Stored carbon potential series in mangroves and associate flora 31

11. References 37


1. Important terminologies

i) Biomass – It is the weight of living material at a particular instant of time. By definition, it is the totalamount of live and inert organic matter above and below ground and is expressed in tonnes of drymatter per unit area.

ii) Litter – Plant litter (sometimes called total litter or tree litter) is dead plant material, such as leaves,bark and twigs, that has fallen to the ground. Litter provides habitat to small animals, fungi andplants, and the material may be used to construct nests. As litter decomposes, nutrients are releasedto the environment. The portion of the litter that is not readily decomposable is known as “humus”.

iii) Detritus –In biology, detritus is non-living particulate organic matter (as opposed to dissolvedorganic matter). It includes the bodies or fragments of dead organisms as well as faecal material.Detritus is typically colonized by communities of microorganisms which act to decompose (orremineralize) the material.

iv) Diameter at breast height (DBH) – This has traditionally been the “sweet spot” on a treewhere measurements are taken and a multitude of calculation are made to determine things likegrowth, volume, yield and forest potential. Tree DBH is outside bark diameter at breast height.Breast height is defined as 4.5 ft (1.37 m) above the forest floor on the uphill side of the tree. Forthe purpose of determining the breast height, the forest floor includes the duff layer that may bepresent, but does not include unincorporated woody debris above the ground line. It is measuredby a diameter tape or tree caliper.

v) Above ground biomass (AGB) – The term actually denotes the upper part of the plant that isexposed above the soil. AGB component includes leaves, living branches, dead branches, flower,fruit, bark and wood. The value of AGB is an indicator of plant vigour and health.

vi) Below ground biomass (BGB) – BGB refers to the root system of the plant that is found belowthe soil. In case of mangroves the BGB is expected to be more than terrestrial plants.Pneumatophores are also part of BGB in case of mangroves.

vii) Carbon stock – It is the reservoir of carbon in various forms. Natural stocks include oceans,fossil fuel deposits, the terrestrial systems, and the atmosphere. In the terrestrial system, carbon issequestered in rocks, forests and soils, in swamps, wetlands, grasslands, and agricultural lands.

viii) Sink and source – A stock or reservoir that takes up or absorbs carbon is called a “sink,” andone that releases or emits carbon is called a “source.” Shifts or flows of carbon from one stock toanother, for example, from the atmosphere to the forest (as happens during photosynthesis), orfrom industrial units to atmosphere (as occurs during emission) are referred to as carbon “fluxes.”

ix) Carbon sequestration - It is the extraction of the atmospheric carbon dioxide and its storage inthe producer community of the ecosystems for a long period of time – many thousands of years.Forests offer considerable potential to act as a sink, that is, to promote net carbon sequestration.

x) Carbon credit – It is the key component of national and international attempts/strategies tomitigate the growth in concentrations of Green House Gases (GHG’s). Carbon trading is an

1


application of emission trading approach. GHG emissions are capped and then markets are usedto allocate the emissions among the group of regulated sources. The idea is to allow marketmechanisms to drive industrial and commercial processes in the direction of low emission or lesscarbon intensive approaches. The carbon offsetters (companies that sell carbon credits) purchasethe credits from an investment fund or a carbon development company that has aggregated thecredits from individual projects. The quality of the credit is based on the validation process andsophistication of the fund or development company that acted as the sponsor to the carbonproject.

xi) Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) – The CDM allows net global GHG emissions to bereduced at a much lower global cost by financing emissions reduction project in developing countrieswhere costs are lower than in industrialized countries. It was an arrangement under Kyoto Protocolallowing industrialized countries with GHG reduction commitment to invest in projects that reduceemission in developing countries as an alternative to more expensive emission reduction in theirown countries.

xii) Age of a tree (for a forest/site) – It is basically the mean age of the trees comprising a forest, cropor stand. In forests, the mean age of dominant trees are considered. The dominant trees (species)are identified by evaluating the relative abundance of each species in the forest. The plantation age isgenerally considered from the year the plantation was done, without adding the age of the nurserystock.

2


2. Mangroves: An overview

The term mangrove has originated from the Portuguese word ‘Mangue’, which means the community andthe English word ‘Grove’, which means trees or bushes. According to Mepham and Mepham (1984), theterm “mangrove” has been inconsistent and confusing in the past. Mangroves are basically the evergreensclerophyllous, broad-leaved trees with aerial root like pnuematophore or stilt root and viviparouslygerminated seedlings (UNESCO, 1973). They grow along protected sedimentary shores specially in tidallagoons, embayments and estuaries (Macnae, 1968). They also can grow far inland, but never isolatedfrom the sea. These emergent, evergreen canopies are found along the sedimentary shores of both tropicaland sub-tropical regions in association with intertidal flora and fauna commonly known as mangroveecosystem and the community of these mangroves (including micro and macro-organisms) was termed byMacnae (1968) as Mangal. The mangal is therefore a broad domain encompassing the entire bioticcommunity comprising of individual plant species, associated microbes (like bacteria and fungi), and animals.The mangal and its associated abiotic factors constitute the mangrove ecosystem, which is a uniqueecosystem of the globe.

Lear and Turner (1977) expressed the word ‘mangrove’ of coastal ecosystem in a holistic manner, includingits common habitat or inhabiting species. About 60 – 75 % of tropical coastline is fringed with mangroves(Reimold and Queen, 1974). Duke (1992) defined mangroves as “…. A tree, shrub, palm and groundfern, generally exceeding one half meter in height and which normally grows above mean sea level in theintertidal zone of marine coastal environments or estuarine margins….”. This definition is acceptable exceptthat ground ferns should be considered as mangrove associates rather than true mangroves.

3


3. Distribution of mangroves

Mangroves are circumtropical in distribution. This forest community occupies approximately 75% of thetotal tropical coastline. Northern extension of this coastline occurs in Japan (31022/ N) and Bermuda(32020/ N), whereas, southern extensions are in New Zealand (38003/ S), Australia (38045/ S) and on theeast coast of South Africa (32059/ S). Globally, mangroves are distributed in 112 countries and territories.It is interesting to note that mangrove plants are not native to the Hawaiian Islands - 6 species have beenintroduced there since the year 1900. The total global coverage of mangroves has been variously estimatedas 14-15 million hectares (Schwamborn and Saint-Paul, 1996), 10 million hectares (Bunt, 1992) and 24million hectares (Twilley et al., 1992). The major mangrove rich countries in Indian Ocean region are listedin Table 1.

TABLE 1

Country Mangrove Area (in Km2)

Indonesia 42,500

Myanmar 6,950

Malaysia 6,410

India 4,871

NW Australia 4,513

Bangladesh 4,500

Madagascar 4,200

Mozambique 4,000

Pakistan 2,600

Thailand 1,900

India’s distribution of mangrove forests comprises the western and eastern coasts of India. From thestatistical point of view, the eastern coast of India possesses about 70% of the total Indian mangroves,whereas, the western coast supports only 12%. The remaining 18% is concentrated in Andaman NicobarIslands of our country.

The East coast of the Indian sub-continent supports the following mangrove sectors:

1. The Gangetic Sundarbans in West Bengal

2. Mahanadi mangroves in Orissa

3. The Godavari and the Krishna mangrove forests in Andhra Pradesh

4


4. The Cauvery mangroves in Tamil Nadu

5. Mangroves of Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

On the other hand, mangroves of the West coast of India include the following zones:

1. Back water systems: Veli (a coastal lagoon near Thiruvanathapuram, Kerala)

2. Mangroves of Gujarat coast

3. Mangroves of Maharashtra coast: “The Sewri Mangrove Park”, which was declared as protectedarea by the Bombay Port Trust on January 15, 1996. (This park consists of 15 acres of mangrovesin the mudflats between Sewri and Trombay)

4. Mangroves of Goa region (covering seven estuarine areas of which the Mandovi and Zuari and theinter-connecting Cambarjua canal harbour occupy about 75% of the mangroves of this region)

5. Mangroves of Karnataka coast.

The state-wise distribution of mangroves in India is presented in Table 2.

TABLE 2

Distribution of mangrove forests along the East and West coasts of India

State/UT Very Dense Moderately Open TotalMangrove Dense Mangrove area(in km2) Mangrove (in km2) (in km2)

(in km2)

Andhra Pradesh 0 15 314 329

Goa 0 14 2 16

Gujarat 0 195 741 936

Karnataka 0 3 0 3

Kerala 0 3 5 8

Maharashtra 58 100 158

Orissa 0 156 47 203

Tamil Nadu 0 18 17 35

West Bengal 892 895 331 2118

Andaman & Nicobar 255 272 110 637

Daman & Diu 0 0 1 1

Pondicherry 0 0 1 1

Total 1147 1629 1669 4445

5


4. Ecosystem services of mangroves

The mangrove ecosystem forms the backbone of coastal economy in certain pockets of the globe for itsvarious benefits to coastal population. The multiple ecological, economic and aesthetic benefits offered bythis luxuriant ecosystem are pointed here in brief.

1. The mangrove vegetations and their associates are economically very important for their products liketimber, fire-wood, honey, wax, alcohol, tannins etc.

2. Mangroves are thought to possess the ability to control coastal water quality. The complexity of themangrove forest habitat increases the residence time, which assists in the assimilation of inorganicnutrients and traps suspended particulate matter.

3. The mangroves also function as flood control barrier and binder of sediment particles (http://

www.fao.org/gpa/sediments/habitat.htm). Mangrove associate species like Ipomoea pes-caprae,Porteresia coarctata stabilize the island by intricately binding the sediment particles. This feature ofmangroves is very important in context to climate change induced sea level rise.

4. The ecosystem forms an ideal ecological asset because the production of leaf litter and detritus matterfrom mangrove plants fulfill the nutritional requirements of prawn juveniles, adult shrimps, molluscsand fishes of high economic value. It is for this reason mangrove ecosystem is recognized as theworld’s most potential nursery.

5. The vibrating mangrove ecosystem provides nutritional inputs to adjacent shallow channels and baysystem that constitute the primary habitat of a large number of aquatic species, algae of commercialimportance, seaweeds, phytoplankton etc.

6. Mangroves and mangrove habitats contribute significantly to the global carbon cycle. Twilley et al.

(1992) estimated the total global mangrove biomass to be approximately 8.70 gigatons dry weight(which is equivalent to 4.00 gigatons of carbon). Accurate biomass estimation however needs themeasurement of the volumes of individual trees. Thus mangroves are vital carbon sink in the coastalecosystem. Mangrove destruction can release large quantities of stored carbon and exacerbate globalwarming trends, while mangrove rehabilitation will increase sequestering of carbon (Kauppi et al.,2001; Ramsar Secretariat, 2001; Chmura et al., 2003).

7. The highly specialized mangrove ecosystem also acts as the protector of the coastal landmass fromstorm surges, tropical cyclone, high winds, tidal bores, seawater seepage and intrusion. Large numbersof references are available in context to tsunami of 26th December, 2004 suggesting that mangrovesboth dissipated the force of the tsunami and caught the debris washed up by it, and thus helped toreduce damage (IUCN, 2005).

8. Bioaccumulation of heavy metals by certain mangrove species reveals a most surprising feature aboutthese plants as they can act as bio-purifier or bio-filter. Few species of mangroves are highly efficientin detecting or assessing the change of ambient environment. The concentration of heavy metal pollutantsin different parts of mangrove plants may act as a pathfinder for water quality monitoring programme.

6


9. Mangroves filter ground water and storm water run-off that often contain harmful pesticides, herbicidesand hydrocarbons. Mangroves also recharge underground water table by collecting rain water andslowly releasing it into the underground reservoir.

10. Mangrove prop roots protect and offer habitat for mammals, amphibians, reptiles, countless uniqueplants, juvenile fish and invertebrates that filter water such as sponges, barnacles, oysters, mussels,crabs, shrimps etc.

11. Mangroves are ideal nesting grounds for many water birds such as the great white heron, reddishegrets, roseate spoonbills, white-crowned pigeons, cuckoos and frigate birds. The excretory materialsof these birds (rich in phosphorus) serve as the fertilizers of the adjacent water bodies on which theprimary production of the aquatic phase depends.

12. Mangrove forests are the housing complexes for bees, birds, mammals and reptiles from which honey,wax, food etc. are obtained.

13. The molluscan species in the mangrove ecosystem (like oysters, gastropods, etc.) are the sources oflime.

14. Mangrove leaves are used as fodder and green manure. The cyanobacterial strains present on theforest floor of mangrove ecosystem are important sources of biofertilizer.

15. Extracts from mangrove and mangrove dependent species have proven activity against some animaland plant pathogens. Moreover, mangrove extracts kill larvae of the mosquitoes e.g., a pyrethrin likecompound in stilt roots of Rhizophora apiculata shows strong mosquito larvicidal activity (Thangam,1990).

16. Bioactive compound (ecteinascidin) extracted from the mangrove ascidian Ecteinascidia turbinata

have shown strong in vivo activity against a variety of cancer cells.

17. Phenols and flavonoids in mangroves leaves serve as UV-screening compounds. Hence, mangrovescan tolerate solar UV radiation and create a UV-free, under-canopy environment (Moorthy, 1995).

18. Bark of Ceriops sp. is an excellent source of tannin and a decoction of it is used to stop haemorrhageand as an application to malignant ulcers. Flowers of this plant are a rich source of honey and beewax.

19. Mangrove ecosystem affords recreation to hunters, fishermen, bird-watchers, photographers andothers who treasure natural areas. However, the intrusive actions of noisy jet-skis, campers andothers, which disturb nesting and breeding areas, chop down mangroves and otherwise damage thisfragile environment, threaten its existence. The recent trend of expanding shrimp culture activity at theexpense of mangroves is another major threat to mangrove biodiversity.

20. Mangroves can adapt to sea level rise if it occurs slowly enough (Ellison and Stoddart, 1991), ifadequate expansion space exists and if the ambient environmental conditions are congenial for theirsurvival and growth. They have special aerial roots, supporting roots, and buttresses to live in muddy,shifting, and saline conditions. Mangroves may adapt to changes in sea level by growing upward inplace, or by expanding landward or seaward. This property of mangroves is known as resilience.

7


Mangrove vegetation can expand their range despite sea level rise if the rate of sediment accretion issufficient to keep up with sea level rise. However, their ability to migrate landward or seaward is alsodetermined by local conditions, such as infrastructure (e.g., roads, agricultural fields, dikes, urbanization,seawalls, and shipping channels) and topography (e.g., steep slopes). If inland migration or growthcannot occur fast enough to account for the rise in sea level, then mangroves will become progressivelysmaller with each successive generation and may perish (UNEP 1994). The mangrove vegetationband width is thus directly proportional to their migration rate.

8


5. Importance of mangrove biomass estimation

Biomass is defined as “the total amount of live organic matter and inert organic matter above and below theground and is usually expressed as tonnes of dry matter per unit area”. The biomass of a mangrove tree(irrespective of species) is the sum of the biomass of its roots, pneumatophores, trunk, branches, leaves,and reproductive organs like flowers and fruits. Detailed estimations of biomass of mangrove species areextremely important in the present era due to following reasons:

1. Biomass estimation provides direct picture of commercial viability of mangrove species in terms oftimber, wood, honey, wax etc.

2. Biomass of mangroves provides information on their primary production capacity.

3. The detritus contributed by the mangrove vegetation not only nourishes the adjacent waterbodies andpromotes fisheries, but also act as the foundation of detritus food chain in the inter-tidal zone. Thedetritus are nothing but contributory components of leaves, branches, fruits, and flowers of mangroves.

4. Biomass of mangroves exerts a regulatory influence on coastal carbon cycle by way of sequestering(locking) or discharging (through detritus in the adjacent waterbodies) carbon.

5. Accurate estimations of mangrove biomass in different salinity zones are necessary for carbonaccounting. The impact of environmental variables (particularly salinity) on mangrove growth is reflectedthrough biomass study of mangroves growing in different environmental conditions.

9


6. Mangrove biomass estimation: A field level approach

There are four main phases of mangrove biomass estimation. They are: Above Ground Biomass (AGB)estimation, Below Ground Biomass (BGB) estimation, forest floor (detritus and litter) biomass estimationand soil mass estimation. After the mass of each compartment is assessed, carbon is estimated in each ofthese compartments, whose summation will yield the total carbon in tonnes per hectare in the system.

STEP 1: Above ground (foliage, stem, branches) biomass estimation

STEP 2: Below ground (root system) biomass estimation

STEP 3: Forest litter (fallen leaves, twigs, branches, flowers, fruits etc.) biomass estimation

STEP 4 : Soil mass estimation

Each of the above steps is discussed separately:

10


Fig. 1. A simple device tomeasure tree height

Fig. 2. Measurement of DBH

STEP 1: Above ground (foliage, stem, branches) biomass estimation

[A] Above ground stem biomass estimation:

The above ground stem biomass of individual trees of each species in the experimental plot (usually 10 m×10 m) is estimated using non-destructive method in which the diameter at the breast height (DBH) ismeasured with a caliper (or a tailor’s tape) and height with Ravi’s multimeter or theodolyte. Form factor isdetermined as per the expression outlined by Koul and Panwar (2008) with Spiegel relascope to find outthe tree volume (V) using the standard formula given by Pressler (1995) and Bitterlich (1984). Specificgravity (G) is estimated taking the stem cores, which is further converted into stem biomass (B

S) as per the

expression BS = GV. The expression for V is Ïr2HF, where F is the form factor, r is the radius of the tree

derived from its DBH and H is the height of the target tree.

Precautions for girth measurement

• If the tree is branched below breast height (1.3 m), the girth must be taken for individual branches,

and must be noted separately.

• All branches with a girth above 10 cm are taken into account.

• If the tree is at an incline, stand in the upper slope while taking the girth.

• If the tree branches at DBH, then measure the girth slightly below the swell.

[B] Above ground branch biomass estimation

The total number of branches irrespective of size is counted on each of the sample trees. These branchesare categorized on the basis of basal diameter into three groups, viz. <5cm, 5–10 cm and >10 cm. Fresh

11


weight of two branches from each size group is recorded separately. Total branch biomass (dry weight)per sample tree is determined as per the expression:

Bdb

= n1bw

1 + n

2bw

2 + n

3bw

3 = Ó n

ibw

i

where, Bdb

is the dry branch biomass per tree, ni the number of branches in the ith branch group, b

wi the

average weight of branches in the ith group and i = 1, 2, 3, . . .the branch groups.

[C] Above ground leaf biomass estimation

Leaves from ten branches (of all the three size groups) of individual trees of each species are removed.Two/three trees of each species per plot may be considered for estimation. The leaves are weighed andoven dried separately (species-wise) to a constant weight at 80 ± 50C. The species-wise leaf biomass isthen estimated by multiplying the average biomass of the leaves per branch with the number of branches ina single tree and the average number of trees per plot as per the expression:

Ldb

= n1Lw

1N

1 + n

2Lw

2N

2 + ……….n

5Lw

5N

5

Where, Ldb

is the dry leaf biomass of dominant mangrove species per plot, ni ….n

5 are the number of

branches of each tree of five dominant species, Lw1…...Lw

5 are the average dry weight of leaves removed

from ten branches of each of the five species and N1 to N

5 are the average number of trees per species in

the plot.

Note: Here only 5 dominant species have been considered on the basis of relative abundance, and so theexpression ended with subscript 5.

12


STEP 2: Below ground (root system) biomass estimation

Several methods exist to measure root biomass directly. These are essentially destructive methods that areused for measurements required in ecological and agronomic research. They are:

• Excavation method

• Auger core method

• Monolith method

The Winrock International Institute of Agriculture (MacDicken, 1997) reports that the auger core samplingand the monolith methods of measurement of roots are economically more feasible than excavation.Therefore, these two methods are described briefly.

The soil auger core method uses a cylindrical tube 15 cm in length and 7-10 cm in diameter, with anextension of about 1 m. It removes or displaces a known volume of soil from a soil profile of known depth.A core of 50-80 mm in diameter is considered sufficient. The auger corer can be inserted manually ormechanically. Manual insertion of the auger corer is not very feasible for depths greater than 50 cm or forclayey stony soils. In sandy dry soils, a small diameter core may be necessary in order to reduce soil losseswhile extracting the core. In stony soils, and particularly where many woody roots are present, coring maynot be possible. In these circumstances, it may be more practical to take a known volume of soil througha monolith taken from the face of a cut or cross section of soil corresponding to a cut, trench, and hole ornaturally occurring gully in the landscape. Ideally, the sample of the profile should be to the limit of thedepth of the root system. Root intensity changes with soil depth, but the spatial variability of root intensityis typically high. However, the limits of the sample can be based on initial observations of the walls of thesoil profile. In some cases, the sample can be based on an exponential model that relates root distributionto the mass of the main stem of the root. This function could be used to extrapolate root density in the soilsamples. As far as possible, soils must be sampled to a minimum depth of 30 cm.

Important steps to measure root biomass are (1) Wash them immediately after extraction from the cores.The core samples can be stored in polyethylene bags in a refrigerator for a few days or in a freezer untilexamination and processing (2) Dry weight must be verified by weighing of dry biomass or by loss-of-ignition methods. The texture, the structure, degree of compaction and the organic matter content havegreat influence on the precision and time required to extract the roots from the cores (3) The extraction ofroots from the cores (which is a function of structure, degree of compaction and organic matter content)involves a sieve or strainer of 0.3-0.5 mm mesh. The work can be simplified by a superficial washing andby combining strainers with 1.1 and 0.3 mm mesh. The first strainer will contain most roots, the second willcontain the rest (4) The material taken from the strainers can also be mixed with water and the suspendedmaterial may be poured off (live roots of most species have specific gravity near to 1.0). The remaindercan be classified manually in a container under water (to remove fragments of organic matter and deadroots).

The fine roots are a small but important part of the system for the assimilation of water and nutrients. Thisfunctional distinction helps in classifying the root systems according to size. The class limits need to fallbetween 1 and 2 mm of root diameter. Roots larger than 10 mm in diameter are not sampled by the soilcorer. For herbaceous perennial vegetation, roots can be separated into classes of greater than and less

13


than 2 mm. In mixed vegetation, the separation of roots of different species is difficult.

Remark: Sampling in homogenous soils may not capture the spatial variability of root density, which isclaimed to have weight variation coefficients commonly in excess of 40 percent. In heterogenous soils, thevariation coefficient can be much higher. This variability implies that many samples are required in order toestimate the weight of roots and the below ground biomass component. It is advisable to obtain experimentalinformation from one or two sites on the nature of spatial variation of both soils and root distribution, whereavailable.

The monolith method requires cutting a monolith of the soil, from which the roots are separated bywashing. This method is frequently used for quantitative determinations of roots. Small monoliths can besampled with simple tools such as a shovel. However, the source of machinery is required for the excavationof a trench front to be sampled.

The size of the monolith varies depending on the species of plant being investigated. Generally, the volumeof a monolith varies between 1 and 50 dm3. The samples of the monolith can be obtained with a board ofstainless steel pins nailed in wood. The size of the pin board is determined by the type of pins, based onprevious observations of depth and distribution of rooting. The soil collected with the pin board is heavy (asample of a block of 100 cm × 50 cm × 10 cm of soil can weigh almost 100 kg.) The soil is washed away,exposing the roots for observation. If rough soil fragments are shown in the mesh before putting the boardin the ground, it will be of help to maintain the roots in the original location while the sample is washed. Thewashing of the sample can be facilitated through cold water soaking for clayey soils and soaking in oxalicacid for calcareous soils. Washed root samples can be stored in polyethylene bags for a short time in arefrigerator, but preferably they should be stored in a freezer. The samples are dried for 5 hours at 1050Cin an oven. The results can be expressed in dry matter per unit of volume of soil.

14


Fig. 3. Litter constitute the forest floor

STEP 3: Forest litter (fallen leaves, twigs, branches, flowers, fruits etc.) biomass estimation

Litter fall is determined by setting rectangular traps in the selected plots. The traps are made of 1mm meshsize nylon screen, through which rainwater can pass (Brown and Lugo, 1984). The traps are positionedabove the high tide level (Jeffrie and Tokuyama, 1998) and contents of all the traps are collected andbrought to the laboratory after duration of one month. The collected materials are segregated into leavesand miscellaneous fractions (comprised of twigs, stipules, flowers, fruits etc.) where they are dried to aconstant weight at 80 ± 50C. Finally the mean weight per plot is estimated and transformed into tonnesha-1 y-1 or gm.m-2 day-1 unit.

15


STEP 4: Soil mass estimation

The soil mass of a particular site or area can be analyzed through a very crude and simple approach. Forthis the volume of the soil is to be estimated. Depth is therefore an important parameter for knowing the soilmass. As mass of soil is the product of its volume and density, therefore density may be determined byscooping 1cm3 of the soil from different portions (at random) of the site and weighing the oven driedsamples. The mean of all these masses will give a rough idea of density of the soil for the particular area.

Finally the mass of soil for a particular depth can be estimated by the expression:

ms = l x b x d x D

Where

ms= mass of the soil

l= length of the study site

b= breath of the study site

d= depth up to which the mass needs to be estimated

D= mean density of soil of the area.

16


Fig. 4. A view of CHN analyzer

7. Carbon stock estimation in mangrove forest

Carbon estimation in plant biomass

Carbon estimation in producer community has become very important now- a- days particularly to knowthe role of species in CDM. The sequestered carbon in the species can be evaluated by analyzing thecarbon content of the species at two different ages. Two common methods are used to estimate the carbonin plant biomass.

Method 1

In this method, the stem, branch, and leaf biomass for each species are dried at 800C and converted intocarbon by multiplying with a factor of 0.50 (Brown 1986; Montagnini and Porras 1998; Losi et al 2003)or 0.45 (Whittaker and Likens 1973; Woomer 1999). Any field worker can carry out this job without thehelp of any sophisticated instrument.

Method 2

Direct estimation of percent carbon is done by a CHN analyzer. For this a portion of fresh sample of stem,branch and leaf from of individual species are oven dried at 700C, randomly mixed and ground to passthrough a 0.5 mm screen (1.0 mm screen for leaves). The carbon content (in %) is finally analyzed onCHN analyzer. For litter, the same procedure may be followed after oven drying the net collection at 70ºC.

17


The CHN analyzer uses a combustion method to convert the sample elements to simple gases (CO2, H

2O,

and N2). The dried and ground sample is first oxidized using classical reagents like Silver Vanadate, Silver

Tungstate, and EA-1000, which is mixture of chrome and nickel oxides. Products produced in the combustionzone include CO

2, H

2O, and N

2. Elements such as halogens and sulfur are removed by scrubbing agents in

the combustion zone. The resulting gases are homogenized and controlled to exact conditions of pressure,temperature, and volume. The homogenized gases are allowed to de-pressurize through a column wherethey are separated in a stepwise steady-state manner and quantified as a function of their thermalconductivities.

Chemical method of estimating organic carbon in soil

Soil samples from the upper 5 cm are collected from all the selected plots and dried at 600C for 48 hrs. Foranalysis, visible plant particles are hand picked and removed from the soil. After sieving the soil through a2 mm sieve, the samples of the bulk soil (50 gm from each plot) are ground finely in a ball – mill. The finedried sample is randomly mixed to get a representative picture of the study site. Modified version ofWalkley and Black method (1934) can then be followed (as depicted in the flow chart) to determine theorganic carbon of the soil in %.

18


Walkley and Black (1934) method

1 gm of dried soil is taken in a conical flask

1ml of phosphoric acid (H3PO

4) and 1 ml of distilled water are added

The mixture is heated for 10 min at 100 to 1100C.

10 ml 1N potassium dichromate (K2Cr

2O

7) and 20 ml concentrated sulphuric acid (H

2SO

4) with

silver sulphate (Ag2SO

4) are added and mixed

Allowed the mixture to stand for 30 minutes

The mixture is diluted to 200 ml with distilled water and 10 ml of phosphoric acid (H3PO

4) and 1ml

of indicator (diphenyl amine) are added

The colour of the mixture changes to bluish purple

The mixture is titrated with Mohr salt solution [(NH4)

2 Fe(SO

4)

2.6 H

2O] until the colour of the

solution changes to brilliant green

The same titration is repeated without taking soil and the volume of the potassium dichromate

required to oxidize organic carbon is calculated from the difference.

Calculation:

% of carbon = 3.951 x (1- S/B)

g

where, g = weight of sample in grams

B= Mohr salt solution for blank

S = Mohr salt solution for sample

Flow chart of Walkley and Black (1934) method

19


Select the plots (10 m × 10 m) and fix the coordinatesthrough GPS; for associate species the dimension isusually 1.0 m × 1.0 m

Evaluate the relative abundance of species in the plotsto identify the dominant species

Estimate the AGB (stems, branches and leaves), andBGB (root system), litter biomass and sum up toevaluate carbon stock in the mangrove flora (in tonnes/ha); in case of associate species the unit is gm/sq. meter

Estimate the organic carbon in the soil (0.5 to 1 mdepth) and evaluate the carbon stock per hectare

Add the carbon stock in AGB, BGB, Litter and soil toget the carbon stock per hectare in the system for aparticular year

Repeat the same estimation for the same plots in thenext year and get the difference in carbon stock. Thisgives the sequestration of carbon per year by themangrove forest/stand under study

8. Worksheet for mangrove biomass and stored carbon estimation

Flow chart for biomass-carbon stock assessment in mangroves

20


Table A

Relative abundance of tree species (mean of 15 plots) in the study area

Species No./100m2 Relative abundance (%)

Sp.1

Sp.2

Sp.3

Sp.4

Sp.5

Sp.6

Table B

Field data sheet

Species Height [r] F value Volume Specific Stem Carbon Carbon

[H] (in m) =V/SH [FHËR2] gravity [G] Biomass (%) (in kg/tree)

(in m) (in m3) (in kg/m3) [BS]

(in kg)

Sp.1

Sp.2

Sp.3

Sp.4

Sp.5

Sp.6

H = Height of the tree; r = Radius at breast height; V= Volume of the tree; S = Surface areaat the base; G = Specific gravity

AGB = Stem Biomass + Branch Biomass + Leaf Biomass

Format for field level data acquisition

21


Table C

Above ground biomass (t/ha) of dominant plant species

Vegetative part Sp.1 Sp.2 Sp.3 Sp.4 Sp.5 Sp.6

Stem

Branch

Leaf

Total (AGB)

Table D

Above ground carbon stock (t/ha) of dominant plant species

Vegetative part Sp.1 Sp.2 Sp.3 Sp.4 Sp.5 Sp.6

Stem

Branch

Leaf

Total (AGB)

22


Species Identifying Character AGB AGC

(t ha-1) (t ha-1)

1. Shrub like with prominent stilt roots,

usually found in sheltered mangrove

areas commonly thrive on the

supralittoral zone.

2. Leaves lanceolate with serrated 9.66 – 4.46 –

margins armed with spines. 12.85a 5.94a

3. Flowers with long spike inflorescence,

light blue or violet in colour.

1. Shrub distributed in high saline areas,

bark reddish brown with leaves

elliptical, leaf-tip notched, cuneate

at base.

2. Fruit green to reddish in maturation, 23.20 - 10.93 –

sharply curved. 106.11a 49.98a

3. Fragrant white flowers, curved yellow

or pinkish fruits in clusters.

1. Trees are tolerant to high salinity,

pneumatophores spongy, narrowly

pointed with lender stilt roots.

2. Bark dark brown or even black. 61.29 – 28.75 –

3. Leaves lanceolate to elliptical, leaf-tip 403.86a 189.41a

acute, lower surface silver grey to

white; curved fruit with relatively

long beak.Scientific name: Avicennia alba

Common name: Kalo baen

D = 592 kgm-3

Scientific name: Acanthus ilicifolius

Common name: Hargoja

D = 340 kgm-3

Scientific name: Aegiceros corniculatum

Common name: Khalsi

D = 552 kgm-3

9. Carbon score card of mangroves

23



(t ha-1) (t ha-1)

1. Trees are tolerant to high salinity, 51.22 – 24.23 –

pneumatophores pencil like. 302.83a 143.24a

2. Bark yellowish brown. Leaves

elliptical, leaf-tip rolling, lower 45.55 – 21.64 –

surface white to light grey. 209.32b 99.43b

3. Inflorescence terminal or axillary,

orange yellow in colour.


pneumatophores pencil like.

2. Bark yellowish brown. Leaves 56.95 – 27.11 –

elliptical, leaf-tip roundish, obtuse 315.45a 150.01a

apex, lower surface white

to light grey.

3. Inflorescence terminal or axillary,

orange yellow in colour.

1. Trees are with long, corky, forked

pneumatophores and stem light

brown in colour.

2. Leaves thick, coriaceous, narrowly 37.42 – 16.88 –

elliptic oblong tapering towards apex. 219.45a 98.98a

3. Flowers are cream coloured in

axilliary cymes with globose berry

seated in flattened calyx tube.Scientific name: Sonneratia apetala

Common name: Keora

D = 561 kgm-3

Scientific name: Avicennia marina

Common name: Piara baen

D = 652 kgm-3

Scientific name: Avicennia

officinalis

Common name: Sada baen

D = 586 kgm-3

24



(t ha-1) (t ha-1)

Scientific name: Ceriops decandra

Common name: Goran

D = 885 kgm-3

Scientific name: Bruguieragymnorrhiza

Common name: Kankra

D = 728 kgm-3

Scientific name: Aegialitisrotundifolia

Common name: Tora

D = 460 kgm-3

1. Trees generally found on elevated

interior parts of mangrove forest

with prominent buttress roots.

2. Bark dark grey. Leaves simple, 17.84 – 8.60 –

elliptical-oblong, leathery and 23.71a 11.43a

leaf-tip acuminate.

3. Flowers axillary, single with red

calyx, red in colour and almost

16 lobed; fruits are cigar shaped,

stout and dark green.


straight conical stem base enlarged

with numerous stilt roots.

2. Bark brown and smooth. Leaves 13.45 – 6.44 –

sub-orbicular or ovate with long 33.46 a 17.46a

petiole. Leathery, fleshy, dense

towards the end of shoot, bluntly

pointed.

3. Flowers axillary panicle and fruit

elongated with plumular cap.

1. Stilt roots arising from pyramidal

stem base.

2. Light grey barked stem. Leaves

elliptic-oblong, emarginated at 17.80 – 8.15 –

apex, cuneate at base. 105.91a 48.51a

3. Flowers axillary in condensed

cymes; fruit is berry, dark red when

mature, warty towards tip, ridged,

not hanging down.

25



(t ha-1) (t ha-1)

1. Prominent main root absent, many

laterally spreading snake like roots 12.06 – 5.58 –

producing elbo-shaped pegs. 183.76a 85.08a

Bark grayish.

2. Poisonous milky latex highly

irritating to eyes. Leaves light

green with wavy margin.

3. Catkin inflorescence terminal 9.98 – 4.64 –

or axillary, orange yellow. 130.65b 60.8b

1. Trees with numerous peg-like

pneumatophores and bind root

suckers.

2. Young branches covered with

shining golden-brown scales. 5.33 – 2.38 –

Leaves elliptic with lower surface 6.02a 2.69a

shining with silvery scales.

3. Flowers golden yellow with

reddish tinge inside and fruits

sub-globose, woody, indehiscent

with longitudinal and transverse ridges.

1. Palm tree like appearance with no

aerial roots.

2. Leaves lanceolate, palm leaves

arising from root stock, leaf tip 7.19 – 3.03 –

acute. 9.34a 3.94a

3. Flowers female in globose head,

males in catkin-like red to yellow;

fruit dark brown or brick red, globose,

pericarp fleshy, fibrous.

Scientific name: Nypa fruiticans

Common name: GolpataD = 332 kgm-3

Scientific name: Excoecaria

agallocha

Common name: GenwaD = 730 kgm-3

Scientific name: Heritiera fomes

Common name: SundariD = 692 kgm-3

26



(t ha-1) (t ha-1)

1. Palm tree like appearance with no

aerial roots, generates found on hard

muddy soil of mangrove swamps.

2. Leaves held in crown above the 43.05 – 18.04 –

trunk, petiole armed with hard 91.98a 38.54a

spines.

3. Flowers dioecious, yellowish white,

trimerous spadices arising in

between leaves; Spathes about

30 cm long, enclosing the flowers;

fruit drupe, oblong, 1 seeded,

shining black when ripe.

1. Trees with prominent stilt roots.

2. Leaves narrowly elliptical, leathery

midrib, lower leaf surface yellowish 43.02 – 19.88 –

green with black dots scattered. 76.85a 35.50a

3. Flowers in 2 cymes on stout

peduncle; fruit viviparous with

cotyledonary collar, red when mature

and about 30 cm long.

1. Pnuematophores completely absent.

Bark yellowish white, peeling off

as papery flakes.

2. Leaflets bijugate or unijugate, 57.13 – 26.17 –

obovate, rounded apex and tapering 115.32a 52.82a

base.

3. White flowers with reddish gland

within; large fruit with pyramidal

seeds.

Scientific name: Xylocarpusgranatum

Common name: Dhundul

D = 688 kgm-3

Scientific name: Phoenix paludosa

Common name: Hental

D = 345 kgm-3

Scientific name: Kandelia candel

Common name: Garjan

D = 522 kgm-3

27



(t ha-1) (t ha-1)

Scientific name: Xylocarpusmekongenesis

Common name: Pasur

D = 730 kgm-3

1. Presence of blind suckers and

plank like roots.

2. Bark is pale greenish or yellowish

with alternate, elliptical to obovate, 23.65 – 10.95 –

rounded leaf tip and tapering 73.80a 34.17a

at base.

3. Flowers small, white, axillary;

fruits yellowish brown, small ball

shaped.

28


Mangrove associate species and coastal vegetation (unit: gmm-2)

Scientific name: Acrostichumaureum

Common name: Hudo (Mangrovefern)

Scientific name: Scaevolataccada

Common name: Beach cabbage

D = 435 kgm-3

1. Bushy shrubs that form rounded

mounds with height ranging

from 1 – 4 m.

2. Young stems are soft and fleshy. - -

3. Multi-stemmed shrub with green

elliptic, alternately arranged

succulent and waxy leaves.

1. Erect terrestrial fern, about

1.5 m tall growing in degraded

mangrove areas, stipes woody,

glabrous arising from woody

rhizome. 1389 - 543.09 –

2. Leaves unipinnate, linear-oblong, 2695a 1053.75a

red when young, leaf tip blunt.

3. Sori-densely present on

undersurface of leaves.


(t ha-1) (t ha-1)

29


AGB and AGC of true mangroves have been expressed in tonnes per hectare (t ha-1)

AGB and AGC of mangrove associate species and other coastal vegetation have in expressed in grams persquare meter (gmm-2)a stands for Indian Sundarbans; b stands for Bahuda estuary in Odisha; c implies Mandovi estuary; Goa;d stands for Kalapet coast in Puducherry and e represents Kadmath island in Lakshadweep


(t ha-1) (t ha-1)

1. Erect, grassy appearances mostlyremain inundated.

2. Leaf blades are narrowly linear 186.9 – 58.3 –and leathery. 262.8a 82.0a

3. Below ground biomass extends toa large distance.

98.7 – 32.8 –173.7c 57.7c

1. Herbaceous vines that creep along 61.8 – 19.1 –the ground. 140.3a 43.4a

2. Stems creep along the beach to a 89.3 – 29.8 –length of 75 feet. 163.0c 54.4c

3. Leaves are smooth, to some extent 102.2 – 36.7 –waxy with two distinct lobes. 192.4d 69.1d

116.9 – 42.2 –221.4e 79.9e

1. Stout, rigid, grass with thorny edge.2. Leaves are long (10-15 cm) 109.69 – 34.1 –

and margins spinulose-serrulate. 196.40e 61.1e

3. Presence of long, underground orsuperficial stolons.

Scientific name: Spinifex littoreusCommon name: Ravan’s moustache

Scientific name: Porteresia coarctataCommon name: Dhani ghas

Scientific name: Ipomoea pes-capraeCommon name: Goat’s foot

30


10. Stored carbon potential series in mangroves and associate flora

The selected species under blue carbon have pronounced variation in carbon sequestration potential whichare arranged here in descending order.

31


32


33


34


35


36


11. References consulted

1. Bitterlich, W. (1984). The relaskop idea slough: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureause, Farnham Royal,England.

2. Brown, S. and Lugo, A. E. (1984). Biomass of tropical forests: a new estimate based on forestvolumes, Science, 223, 1290-1293.

3. Brown, S. (1986). Estimating biomass and biomass change of tropical forests: a primer, FAO Forestry

Paper, 134.

4. Bunt, J. S. (1992). Introduction. In: Tropical Mangrove Ecosystem (A.I. Robertson and D. M. Alongi,eds.), Americal Geophysical Union, Washington D.C., USA, 1-6.

5. Chidumaya, E. N. (1990). Aboveground woody biomass structure and productivity in a Zambezianwoodland, For. Ecol. Management , 36, 33-46.

6. Clough, B.F and Scott, K.(1989). Allometric relationship for estimating above ground biomass in sixmangrove species, For. Ecol. & Manage., 27, 117-127.

7. Duke, N.C. (1992). Mangrove floristics and biogeography. In: Tropical Mangrove Ecosystem (A.I.Robertson and D. M. Alongi, eds.), Americal Geophysical Union, Washington D.C., USA, 63-100.

8. Fearnside, P.M. (1999). Forests and global warming mitigation in Brazil: opportunities in the Brazilianforest sector for responses to global warming under the “clean development mechanism,” Biomass

Bioenergy, 16, 171-189.

9. Jeffrie, F. M., and Tokuyama, A. (1998). Litter production of Mangrove Forests at the Gesashi River,Bull. Coll. Sci., Univ. Ryukyus. 65, 73-79.

10. Komiyama, A., Ogino, K., Aksomkoae, S. and Sabhasri, S. (1987). Root biomass of a mangrove forestin southern Thailand 1. Estimation by the trench method and the zonal structure of root biomass, J. Trop.

Ecol., 3, 97-108.

11. Koul, D. N. and Panwar, P. (2008). Prioritizing Land-management options for carbon sequestrationpotential, Curr. Sci., 95 5-10.

12. Lear, R. and Turner, T. (1977). In: Mangrove of Australia, University of Queensland Press.

13. Losi, C. J., Siccama, T. G., Condit, R and Morales, J. E. (2003). Analysis of alternative methods forestimating carbon stock in young tropical plantations, For. Ecol. and Manage., 184 (1-3), 355-368.

14. Mac Dicken, K. G. (1997). Guide to monitoring forest carbon storage in forestry and agroforestryprojects. Forest carbon monitoring programme, Winrock International Institute for AgriculturalDevelopment. i-v+ 87 pp.

15. MacNae, W. (1968). A general account of a fauna and flora of mangrove swamps and forests in theIndo-Pacific region. Advances in Marine Biology, 6, 73-270.

16. McKee, K. L. (1995). Interspecific variation in growth, biomass partitioning, and defensive characteristicsof neotropical mangrove seedlings: response to light and nutrient availability, Amer. J. Bot., 82, 299-307.

17. Mepham, R. H. and Mepham, J. S. (1984). The flora of tidal forests – a rationalization of the use of theterm ‘mangrove’. South African Jr. Bot. 51, 75-99.

37


18. Montagnini, F. and Porras, C. (1998). Evaluating the role of plantations as carbon sinks an example ofan integrative approach from the humid tropics, Environ. Manage., 22 (3), 459-470.

19. Ong, J.E., Gong, W.K. and Clough, B.F.(1995). Structure and productivity of a 20-year old stand ofRhizophora apiculata BL mangrove forest, J. Biogeogr., 55, 417-424.

20. Pressler, M.(1995). Das Gesetz der stambildung Leipzig. pp. 153.

21. Putz, F.E. and Chan, H.T. (1986). Tree growth, Dynamics, and productivity in a mature mangrove forestin Malaysia, For. Ecol & Manage., 17, 211-230.

22. Reimold, R.J. and W.H. Queen (eds.). (1974). Ecology of Halophytes, New York: Academic Press, Inc,605 pp.

23. Sampson, R. Neil., Moll, Gary A., and Kielbaso, J. James. (1992). In: Opportunities to increase urbanforests and the potential impacts on carbon storage and conservation. In: Forests and Global Change;Volume One: Opportunities for Increasing Forest Cover (Dwight Hair and R Neil Sampson, eds.).American Forests, Washington, DC. pp. 51-72.

24. Schwamborn, R and Saint-Paul, U. (1996). Mangroves – Forgotten Forests? Natural Resources andDevelopment, 43-44, 13-36.

25. Tamai, S., Nakasuga, T., Tabuchi, R. and Ogino, K. (1986). Standing biomass of mangrove forests inSouthern Thailand. J. Jpn. For. Soc. 68, 384-388.

26. Twilley, R. R., Chen, R. H. and Hargis, T. (1992). Carbon sinks in mangrove forests and their implicationsto the carbon budget of tropical coastal ecosystems, Water Air Soil Pollut., 64, 265-288.

27. UNESCO (1973). International Classification and Mapping of Vegetation, UNESCO, parts Linden, O.and A. Jernelov 1980. The Mangrove Swamp – An Ecosystem in Danger, Ambio, 9(2), 81-88.

28. Walkley, A. and Black, I. A. (1934). “An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soilorganic matter, and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method”. Soil Sci., 37, 29-38.

29. Whittaker, R. H. and Likens, G. E (1973). Carbon in the biota, Proceedings of the 24th Brookhaven

Symposium in Biology, United States Atomic Energy Commission, Upton, New York, pp. 281-302.

30. Woomer, P. L. (1999). Impact of cultivation of Carbon Fluxes in woody savannas of Southern Africa,Water Air Soil Pollut., 70, 403- 412.

38


List of ContributorsLocation Name Designation

Indian Sundarbans Dr. Abhijit Mitra Faculty Member, Department of(Data for true Marine Science, University of Calcuttamangrove species)

Dr. Tanmay Ray Chaudhuri, IPS Researcher, Department ofOceanography, Techno India University,Salt Lake, Kolkata 700091, W.B.

Dr. Kakoli Banerjee Assistant Professor, School ofBiodiversity & Conservation of NaturalResources, Central University of Orissa,Landiguda, Koraput, Orissa 764 021

Dr. Sufia Zaman Adjunct Professor, Department ofOceanography, Techno India University,Salt Lake, Kolkata 700091, W.B.

Mr. Prosenjit Pramanick Senior Research Fellow, Department ofOceanography, Techno India University,Salt Lake, Kolkata 700091, W.B.

Ms. Upasana Dutta Junior Research Fellow, Department ofOceanography, Techno India University,Salt Lake, Kolkata 700091, W.B.

Ms. Nabonita Pal Junior Research Fellow, Department ofOceanography, Techno India University,Salt Lake, Kolkata 700091, W.B.

Ms. Ankita Mitra Student, Department of Ecology andEnvironmental Science, School of LifeScience, Pondicherry Central University,Kalapet, Puducherry – 605014, India

Indian Sundarbans Dr. Abhijit Mitra Faculty Member, Department of Marine(Data for mangrove Science, University of Calcuttaassociate species)

Dr. Somaiah Sundarapandian Assistant Professor (Stage III),Department of Ecology andEnvironmental Science, School of LifeScience, Pondicherry Central University,Kalapet, Puducherry – 605014, India

Subhra Bikash Bhattachayya Aquaculturist, ICAR-Central Institute ofBrackish Water Aquaculture (CIBA),Kakdwip-743 347, W.B.

39


Harekrishna Jana Faculty Member, Department ofMicrobiology, Panskura BanamaliCollege, Vidyasagar University, EastMidnapore – 721152

Dr. Sufia Zaman Adjunct Professor, Department ofOceanography, Techno India University,Salt Lake, Kolkata 700091, W.B.

Mr. Prosenjit Pramanick Senior Research Fellow, Department ofOceanography, Techno India University,Salt Lake, Kolkata 700091, W.B.

Ms. Upasana Dutta Junior Research Fellow, Department ofOceanography, Techno India University,Salt Lake, Kolkata 700091, W.B.

Ms. Nabonita Pal Junior Research Fellow, Department ofOceanography, Techno India University,Salt Lake, Kolkata 700091, W.B.

Ms. Ankita Mitra Student, Department of Ecology andEnvironmental Science, School of LifeScience, Pondicherry Central University

Bhitarkanika Dr.Kakoli Banerjee Assistant Professor, School ofmangrove (Odisha) Biodiversity & Conservation of Natural

Resources, Central University of Orissa,Landiguda, Koraput, Orissa 764 021

Mandovi Dr. Subhadra Devi Gadi Associate Professor, Department ofmangrove (Goa) Zoology, Carmel College of Arts, Science

nad Commerce for Women, NUVEM,Salcete, Goa – 403604

Dr. Abhijit Mitra Faculty Member, Department of MarineScience, University of Calcutta

Mr. Preshit G.Priolkar Project Fellow, Department of Zoology,Carmel College of Arts, Science nadCommerce for Women, NUVEM,Salcete, Goa – 403604

Kalapet coast Dr. Somaiah Sundarapandian Assistant Professor (Stage-III),(Puducherry) Department of Ecology and

Environmental Science,School of Life Science, PondicherryCentral University, Kalapet,Puducherry– 605014, India


40


Ms. Ankita Mitra Student, Department of Ecology andEnvironmental Science, School of LifeScience, Pondicherry Central University,Kalapet, Puducherry – 605014, India

Kadmath Island Dr. J. Sundaresan Head-Climate Change Informatics, CSIR-(Lakhsadweep) NISCAIR


Mr. Mutum Ibomcha Singh Project Assistant –II, VACCIN, CSIR-NISCAIR, Pusa Campus, New Delhi

Dr. K. Syed Ali Environment Warden, Dept. ofEnvironment and Forests, U. T ofLakshadweep, Kiltan Island - 682 558

41

1. abhijit mitra marine science calcutta university

Education