Download PDF
Review  |  Open Access  |  20 Jul 2023

Current status and emerging perspectives of coastal blue carbon ecosystems

Views: 1088 |  Downloads: 396 |  Cited:  8
Carbon Footprints 2023;2:12.
10.20517/cf.2023.04 |  © The Author(s) 2023.
Author Information
Article Notes
Cite This Article

Abstract

Blue carbon ecosystems require conservation and restoration to maximize organic carbon (CORG) sequestration to ameliorate greenhouse gas emissions. Salt marshes, mangrove forests and seagrass meadows are all autotrophic and are considered blue carbon ecosystems. Macroalgae and tidal flats are currently not considered blue carbon habitats. Blue carbon ecosystems contribute globally to climate change mitigation and at local and national scales, especially in the provision of other ecosystem goods and services. Financial investment is constrained by large uncertainties in CORG dynamics and best practices in restoration, rehabilitation and conservation. Several key emerging perspectives include (1) the fact that groundwater discharge of dissolved carbon is a major pathway of blue carbon loss; (2) allochthonous CORG inputs are required to achieve ecosystem carbon mass balance; (3) blue carbon dynamics are enhanced by habitat connectivity and biotic activities; (4) CH4 and N2O emissions reduce blue carbon potential; (5) habitat destruction causes blue carbon stock losses, but variable gas emissions; (6) sediment blue carbon stocks are increasing at the poles; and (7) land-use and land-cover changes (LULCC) drive changes in blue carbon stocks and emissions. Further research is needed to clarify the applicability of these emerging perspectives.

Keywords

Blue carbon, carbon sequestration, coastal, ecosystem, mangrove, mangrove forest, organic carbon, salt marsh, seagrass, seagrass meadow

INTRODUCTION

The term “blue carbon” is defined as the sequestration or burial of CORG by coastal ecosystems[1,2]. The term was first coined in a report[3] highlighting the role of ocean ecosystems in the earth’s climate. Blue carbon science and management focus on adaptation and mitigation by these ecosystems to help ameliorate greenhouse gas emissions to reduce the effects of a changing climate.

Blue carbon ecosystems, namely tidal salt marshes, mangrove forests, and seagrass meadows, and possibly tidal flat and macroalgal habitats, are important sources of food and wood for fuel and housing, shoreline protection and other ecosystem services for coastal residents. These habitats can be restored or rehabilitated and sustainably managed, and are important because they provide a wide variety of ecological and economic services and goods in addition to the ability to sequester carbon[4].

The United Nations, in collaboration with Conservation International (CI) and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), has established initiatives aimed at mitigating climate change by restoring, rehabilitating, and sustainably using marine ecosystems. One policy has dealt with policy matters to integrate blue carbon activities into both global policy and financing of the United Nations Framework on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to (1) facilitate climate change mitigation and other carbon finance processes, including carbon markets; (2) develop pilot projects to test their viability; (3) meld blue carbon into other frameworks and policies; and (4) include the carbon value of coastal ecosystems into the financial accounting of ecosystem services[3,5]. Empirical data was therefore urgently needed to fill in knowledge gaps in coastal blue carbon cycling. It has been well known that coastal habitats store large amounts of CORG in their sediment and biomass, confirming that they must play a major role in blue carbon science and management[1,4]. Salt marshes, mangroves and seagrass meadows must therefore be considered in the provision of ecosystem services, particularly in fostering CORG sequestration and in minimizing conversion of these habitats which results in their stored CORG being emitted as greenhouse gases, negating REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation; +refers to conservation and sustainable management to enhance C stocks) efforts and other rehabilitation projects[3,5].

By 2010, it was necessary to know how coastal habitats acquire and store CORG, how burial can be maximized while minimizing CORG losses and determining under what conditions sequestration occurs. It was also necessary to understand how quickly these habitats were being destroyed or altered to other habitats (e.g., human dwellings, factories, agriculture establishments) and the likelihood that CORG will be lost, including CO2 and CH4 emissions that follow destruction and conversion of coastal habitats. Three components of carbon biogeochemistry need to be better understood to improve the knowledge base of blue carbon: (1) the annual burial rate (i.e., yearly flux of organic carbon incorporated into reducing sediments where oxidation and subsequent loss of CO2 to the atmosphere does not occur); (2) the magnitude of CORG stored in above- and belowground biomass; and (3) the total sediment CORG stock due to earlier sequestration (i.e., geological burial over a given habitat’s lifetime).

This paper offers a critical overview and some key perspectives that have emerged from what is now over a decade of empirical research and management attempts to foster blue carbon sequestration in coastal ecosystems. The purpose of presenting these perspectives is to provide clarity of progress and direction to future blue carbon science and management.

BLUE CARBON PROCESSES IN COASTAL ECOSYSTEMS: CURRENT STATUS

A schematic [Figure 1] illustrates the main carbon fluxes between coastal habitat, sea, and atmosphere, showing that most CORG captured and stored (buried) in seagrass meadows, tidal salt marshes and mangroves (and possibly macroalgal beds and tidal flats) is blue carbon. The remaining CORG is respired to the atmosphere by plants, sediment microbes and animals, or lost to the coastal ocean as dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC), dissolved organic (DOC) carbon, particulate organic carbon (POC) and alkalinity. Only in mangrove forests are large amounts of CORG stored in aboveground tree and root biomass. Rates of gross (PGPP or GPP) and net forest production (PNPP or NPP) are important aspects of blue carbon because tree growth leads to an increase in biomass as forests mature. It is important to understand spatial and temporal variations in rates of CORG sequestration in order to accurately scale up local estimates to larger scales. It is further necessary to better understand land-cover and land-use changes and to identify priority areas for rehabilitation, restoration, conservation, and management.

Current status and emerging perspectives of coastal blue carbon ecosystems

Figure 1. Diagram of major blue carbon pathways in coastal marine ecosystems. Note that nearly all macroalgal DOC and POC is exported to adjacent coastal ocean sediments. "Ocean Import" refers to allochthonous CORG inputs to blue carbon ecosystems. GPP: Gross primary production; NPP: net primary production; R: respiration; CO2: carbon dioxide; CH4: methane.

Productivity and carbon balance in blue carbon ecosystems

Ecosystem respiration (RE = sum of all respiration within an ecosystem) is greatest in mangroves, followed by seagrasses and tidal marshes [Table 1]. Global RE (= total RE × global area of each ecosystem) is greatest for seagrasses [Table 1] whereas mangroves account for most gross primary production (GPP or PGPP), but seagrass meadows contribute the most to global GPP. All three ecosystems are net autotrophic (ratio of PGPP/RE > 1), producing more plant CORG than is lost via respiration (RE). In contrast, the coastal ocean is in overall carbon balance with a mean PGPP/RE ratio of 0.98 [Table 1].

Table 1

Contribution of coastal ecosystems to the carbon balance of the global coastal ocean. Percent values indicate percentage contribution of each ecosystem to gross primary production and ecosystem respiration in the global coastal ocean. Global areas are in Table 2. Table is cited with permission from Alongi[6]

EcosystemREGlobal REGPPGlobal GPPMean PGPP/RENEPGlobal NEP
Mangrove forest35306
1.1%
4,186360
1.3%
1.1862854
Salt marsh1795
0.33%
2,109116
0.41%
1.2238221
Seagrass meadow21342
1.2%
2,752441
1.56%
1.2961999
Global Coastal Ocean1028,4351,02828,2700.98-6-165

Net ecosystem production (NEP = ecosystem GPP - RE) differs among the three ecosystems, with salt marshes having the lowest NEP and mangrove and seagrasses the highest NEP. However, all three ecosystems contribute disproportionately to oceanic CORG storage.

Blue carbon stocks, sequestration rates and CO2 emissions

Unsurprisingly, such highly autotrophic ecosystems are carbon-rich habitats. Estimates of area-specific and global CORG stocks, CORG burial rates and CO2 emissions due to habitat conversion [Table 2] show large differences between habitats, with seagrasses encompassing the most global area, CORG sequestration, the highest loss rates and subsequent CO2 emissions. Mangroves have the greatest mean CORG stocks and lowest mean CORG sequestration rates, whereas salt marshes occupy the least global area, and have the lowest global mean CORG stocks and lowest global sequestration rates. Mangrove habitat losses are lowest among the coastal habitats, but all three have similar rates of CO2 emissions [Table 2]. Most of these habitat differences reflect their global areas, but some differences do reflect inherent differences in rates of various biogeochemical processes[1,4,5].

Table 2

Area-specific and global CORG stocks, CORG burial rates and CO2 emission losses from habitat conversion. Data sources: Alongi[6]; Hill et al.[7]; Gao et al.[8]; Duarte et al.[9]

MangroveSalt marshSeagrass
Global area (106 ha)8.345.5016.0
Mean C Stock (Mg CORG ha-1)738.9317.2163.3
Global Mean C Stock (Pg CORG)6.171.742.61
Mean C Sequestration (g CORG m-2 year-1)179.6212.0220.7
Global C Sequestration (Tg CORG year-1)14.9811.6635.31
Current Conversion Rate (% year-1) 0.161.321.5
C Emissions (Pg CO2-eq year-1)0.0880.0840.144

There is considerable uncertainty in these mean and global carbon values, given the inherent differences in various methods used and the masking of large and certain spatial and temporal trends in the data. Therefore, caution must be applied in assessing comparisons within and between ecosystems. For instance, wet tropical mangroves on average have larger CORG stocks and greater rates of greenhouse gas emissions than those measured in arid-zone mangroves[1].

RESTORATION, REHABILITATION AND CONSERVATION

Fostering blue carbon storage requires augmenting conservation efforts by restoring and rehabilitating coastal habitats that have been lost. This is urgent as losses of blue carbon, particularly when sediment carbon is oxidized during disturbance and/or removal, result in erosional losses as well as subsequent oxidation upon exposure of sediment CORG and CO2 efflux to the atmosphere, negating the impacts of burial.

Trajectories for blue carbon

Nations can directly offset their carbon emissions, restore and preserve sequestered CORG and facilitate other ecosystem services (e.g., coastal protection, wood, fisheries) by protecting, planting, and rehabilitating blue carbon ecosystems. Having information on sediment sequestration rates and increases in plant CORG biomass with the growth and maturity of restored ecosystems is important to more accurately measure CORG increases via restoration and rehabilitation. These management tools assist in climate change mitigation via removal and burial of CORG in sediments.

Re-establishment of mangroves, seagrasses, and salt marshes results in a progressive increase in biomass CORG from early pioneering phases to maturity. A detailed example of such increases in a restored mangrove stand was found in Avicennia marina forests in southern Australia[10]. Using dating techniques and gas measurements to estimate carbon increases in restored 13-35 year old forests had a positive impact on CORG additionality and CORG sequestration rate. The older forests (17- and 35-year old) had twice the total CORG standing amounts and sediment sequestration rates than the youngest stand [Figure 2]. Although sediment CORG stocks increased with forest age, aboveground stocks were greatest in the 17-year old forest. Older mangroves released 25% of CH4 emissions and twice the CO2 flux compared to young stands, reflecting the fact that forest age had a significant impact on sediment CORG dynamics. This study and others[11-13] show that restored mangroves store increased amounts of CORG as they age, but this sink stabilizes once forests reach maturity. Blue carbon dynamics appears to be more complex in naturally regenerated (NR) mangroves[14].

Current status and emerging perspectives of coastal blue carbon ecosystems

Figure 2. Increases in CORG stocks since establishment of mangrove forests aged 13-, 17- and 35-year old. Sediment CORG stocks (sediment CORG + belowground CORG stock) are brown bars. Values indicate mean ± 1 SE with different letters indicating significant differences in aboveground CORG stock (lowercase), sediment CORG stock (uppercase), and CORG accretion rate (italics). Reproduced with permission from Carnell et al.[10].

In naturally expanding mangroves in Malaysia, standing amounts of ecosystem CORG in intact and different aged, naturally regenerated forests were similar despite a wide age difference (3-, 6-, 12-, 18-, 25- year). Sediment CORG stocks were unchanged, driving the constancy of total ecosystem CORG stocks over many years. Younger stands had greater CORG sequestration rates than the more mature stands. As the mangroves expand seaward, high suspended sediment loads upstream support higher bulk sediment density and CORG accumulation rates, suggesting that naturally regenerated mangroves composed mainly of young forests are significant CORG sequestrators, suggesting that nature-based solutions can be sought through avoidance of replanting[14].

Like mangroves, standing stocks of blue carbon and burial rates in restored salt marshes often show positive trajectories of establishment and growth, but no clear linear increase in sediment CORG storage and accumulation[15-18]. In restored salt marshes in England[15], CORG accumulation rates over a 150-year restoration period were initially rapid during the first 20-year, then slowly declined at a steady rate thereafter. In the century following restoration, a total accumulation of 74 t CORG ha-1 was estimated, with comparisons to natural marsh CORG content, inferring that about 100 year is needed for restored marsh CORG to approximate that in natural marshes. A comparison of CORG accumulation rates in restored versus old salt marshes in the United States[16] found that restored salt marshes can rapidly accumulate sediment CORG, although both old and restored habitats can have nearly identical CORG accumulation rates. In a naturally restored chronosequence of Chinese marshes[17], sediment CORG storage increased rapidly for the first 8-year after which it slowed down to the point that storage at the oldest restoration marsh (27-year) was 45% lower than in an adjacent natural marsh. Blue carbon may accumulate early in the chronosequence, but the patterns are complex and restoration of sediment CORG to the level of natural marshes may take decades. Across a 32-year chronosequence in Louisiana marshes[18], there was no significant difference in CORG accumulation rates among marshes with increasing age; all marshes were influenced by site-specific environmental conditions such as plant stem density and sediment type, with sites with high stem densities facilitated high long-term CORG accumulation[18].

Plant invasion

Warming temperatures and subsequent habitat contraction and expansion are impacting CORG sequestration and standing stocks in mangroves and marshes. A pattern has emerged of increased concentrations of mangrove sediment and tree carbon as mangrove trees invade salt marsh habitats in warm temperate regions. In created Spartina marshes in Florida, most marshes have transitioned to mangrove habitat[19]. Mature habitats had greater CORG stocks than middle-aged transitional sites or young salt marshes; belowground CORG stocks were similar along the ecotone, indicating that aboveground CORG stocks (mangrove and marsh) were responsible for the difference in total ecosystem stocks. Over the salt marsh-mangrove ecotone, CORG storage correlated with ecosystem age, indicating that these transitional habitats can potentially become significant sites of CORG storage.

Restoration is an important climate mitigation strategy for seagrass meadows[20-24]. Across the Gulf of Mexico[20], seagrass restoration sites increased in sediment CORG stocks with an increase in restoration age from 13 (young meadow) to 22 (15-16-year-old meadows) Mg CORG ha-1 with a significant increase to 64 Mg CORG ha-1 (30-35-year-old meadows). CORG content between natural and restored sediments was similar, suggesting the potential for seagrass restoration to offset anthropogenic losses. In Virginia, USA[21], restored Zostera marina meadows of different ages (0-, 4-, and 10-year) showed higher sediment CORG content and accumulation rates in the 10-year meadow relative to the younger beds with restored seagrasses accumulating CORG at a similar rate to those in natural seagrass beds. Revegetated Posidonia australis meadows in Western Australia[22] restored seagrass CORG standing stocks [Figure 3A] and sequestration capacity [Figure 3B] 18-year after planting, like that in natural seagrass meadows (26 g CORG m-2 year-1). Although seagrass restoration facilitated autochthonous and allochthonous CORG sedimentation and burial, sediment profiles indicated that seagrass losses triggered the erosion of historic CORG deposits. In carbonate seagrass meadows, CO2 emissions driven by calcification can surpass CORG burial[23]. Eddy covariance measurements in Floridan seagrass meadows indicated that net consumption of alkalinity by calcification explained most of the measured CO2 emissions, exceeding anaerobic alkalinity production and CORG burial. In seagrass meadows containing carbonate-rich sediments, CORG sequestration may, therefore, be overestimated if CO2 emissions from calcification are not considered.

Current status and emerging perspectives of coastal blue carbon ecosystems

Figure 3. Blue carbon stock (A) and burial rate (B) changes across revegetated plots of the seagrass Posidonia australis at Oyster Harbour, Western Australia. The fitted linear regression line in (A) is significant (P < 0.01). The horizontal and darkened lines in (B) are the mean and 95% confidence limits, respectively, of the carbon burial rate. Reproduced with permission from Marbá et al.[22].

Macroalgal beds, such as kelp forests, may produce large standing stocks of blue carbon[24], but such habitats do not sequester CORG but export CORG to adjacent coastal sediments[1,25,26]. Measurements of carbon flux within a Japanese Sargassum bed[26] found that 6%-35% of net community production was transported offshore as DOC.

BLUE CARBON PROJECTS: FACTORS DETERMINING SUCCESS OR FAILURE

Restored mangroves and seagrasses usually show a positive blue carbon trajectory, but commercial restoration or rehabilitation projects designed to provide an income for local community participants and to utilize carbon offset methodology to participate in voluntary carbon markets have mostly been unsuccessful[1-5]. Many lessons still need to be learned to establish a successful project. A typical experience has been a blue carbon wetland pilot project located in Louisiana[27], where carbon offset methodology published by the American Carbon Registry was applied. Although modeling indicated a strong potential for CORG sequestration, the project was withdrawn due to very large uncertainty estimates mostly associated with greenhouse gas emissions and limitations of in situ sampling. Several steps were identified to increase the commercial viability of carbon offsets:

• Develop a strategy to minimize monitoring, reporting, and verification costs.

• Accounting fully for losses and preventing losses.

• Develop biogeochemical models and remote sensing methods to predict, monitor and verify greenhouse gas emissions and CORG sequestration and stock changes.

These problems have been universal in early and currently operating projects[1]. Most projects have had problems from poor management issues, such as improper success or failure criteria and poor or uncertain methodology. Many factors have constrained restoration, including habitat settings and types, hydrology, sediment characteristics, disturbance history, adequate seed banks and biodiversity issues.

Several restoration principles[28,29], if properly applied, can result in some successful blue carbon projects:

• Proper site selection.

• Utilizing local community participation and knowledge is highly recommended.

• Restoring natural hydrological processes.

• Adhering to clear and measurable ecological objectives, including success and failure criteria.

• Recognition that these habitats are immature ecosystems that require a long period of time to mature.

• Monitoring changes in blue carbon stocks, sequestration rates and greenhouse gas fluxes.

• Permit sufficient manipulation of physical processes to allow for habitat development.

• Understand the disturbance history of the site.

• Identify factors preventing natural recolonization

• Select a reference site for comparing plantation with natural forest processes, including topography.

• Construct, where deemed necessary, tidal channels.

• Assess costs early in the project design to ensure its cost-effectiveness.

Principles specifically for seagrass restoration include:

• Cover transplanted rhizomes for protection against storms and sediment movement.

• Application of a shell layer works to stabilize sediments.

From a policy viewpoint[30], most blue carbon conservation and restoration require not only community engagement, but several additional considerations, including:

• Need for genuine community participation.

• Need to maintain indigenous livelihoods and income.

• Need to integrate local work into government practices and policies.

• Need to include project governance.

• Need to simplify accounting and verification procedures.

Three potential management strategies[31] may help optimize the acquisition of blue carbon:

1. Reducing human disturbances, including flow of excess nutrients.

2. Restoring and maximizing proper tidal and hydrological flows.

3. Restoring top-down control of populations of bioturbating organisms.

Excessive nutrient additions, increasing stocks of sediment CORG, high densities of bioturbators and restrictions in water flow all result in disruption of sequestration and a decrease in CORG storage and net losses. Avoiding these disturbances serves to increase primary production and minimize blue carbon losses, either via greenhouse gas fluxes or surface and/or groundwater discharges.

Key international policy and carbon market frameworks

Restoration, management and conservation of blue carbon habitats have led to the development of climate mitigation, finance and policy frameworks that can be complex[1,30,32,33]. For instance, sufficient financing remains a problem for starting and sustaining blue carbon projects.

Climate finance and carbon markets

Loans, grants, or investments can all be mechanisms to finance projects[32]. Other forms may include bonds that are meant to generate profits for investors. Other finance mechanisms require strict processes for measurement of net abatement, such as payments within a REDD+ scheme. Carbon markets are a widely used means for generating finance. Such markets have standards because grants and donations are insufficient to generate significant funds to properly finance a project; the private sector has been seen as possibly resolving such monetary problems.

Ecosystems such as mangroves and salt marshes are covered by standards of voluntary carbon markets[32]. Some schemes link net emissions reductions to a greenhouse gas inventory and are therefore limited by blue carbon activities in IPCC guidance. Three main principles for blue carbon viability from a marketing perspective are: additionality, permanence, and leakage[33]. Additionality ensures that reduced emissions occur not only to project activities, but also when restoration gains are greater than ecosystem losses. Coral reefs do not meet the additionality principle because they produce a net release of CO2. Mangroves, salt marshes and seagrasses, in contrast, produce a net uptake of CO2 and thus meet the additionality principle[33]. Permanence means sustainable net greenhouse gas reductions. This is a requirement in carbon markets. Leakage refers to any activity likely to cause an unforeseen enhanced rate of emissions. For instance, increased emissions of CH4 and/or N2O, both of which have higher global warming potentials than CO2, can create leakage[33].

Blue carbon accounting and return-on-investment

Few credit- or revenue-generating projects have been successful due to (1) low incentives for credit buyers; (2) high uncertainty of credible reductions in emissions; (3) high project costs; (4) limited guidance to measure return-on-investment (ROI); and (5) unknown viability of new projects, are all factors that reduce and/or limit investment. For example, in the Philippines, mapping and modeling of mangrove natural regeneration (NR) versus manual replanting (ANR) in abandoned shrimp ponds[34] indicated that return-on-investment was greater under manual replanting, but neither mode of restoration strategy was profitable at the current carbon market prices.

EMERGING PERSPECTIVES

Blue carbon research has now been ongoing for more than twelve years, and therefore, some perspectives have emerged regarding blue carbon science and management. The perspectives offered below are not comprehensive but do provide some guidance as a way forward on this issue. These perspectives are not necessarily listed in order of importance.

Only net autotrophic ecosystems that sequester carbon meet the carbon market criteria of additionality and permanence

A genuine blue carbon ecosystem produces more net ecosystem CORG than it loses as ecosystem respiration (P:R ratio > 1). That is, it must be a net producer of blue carbon to allow sufficient CORG sequestration and storage. Coral reefs are not blue carbon systems because they are in overall metabolic balance (P:R ratio ≈ 1). Tidal flats, which store large amounts of CORG, are most often net heterotrophic (P:R ratio < 1). Tidal salt marshes mangroves and seagrass beds qualify, being net autotrophic and CORG storage habitats [Table 1]. Arguments have been raised suggesting that tidal flats, seaweeds and macroalgal beds constitute blue carbon ecosystems. Negative arguments have been raised[34,35], including critical data gaps such as rates of CO2 emissions and, in the case of macroalgae, the proportion of algal CORG exported to adjacent ecosystems, such as adjacent beaches and the deep ocean. Other workers, however, have concluded that macroalgae constitute a blue carbon ecosystem[36-40]. For example, macroalgae contributed more CORG to seagrass sediments in Malaysia[40] than seagrasses themselves , with mangrove CORG contributing the bulk of the material. Off Singapore[41], Ulva and Sargassum assemblages accounted for 650 Mg CORG in biomass, greater than aboveground seagrass CORG but lower than mangrove CORG with a potential sequestration rate comparable to tropical grasslands and temperate forests. Similarly, arguments have been raised that although tidal flats are not necessarily net autotrophic, they often sequester large amounts of CORG. A global meta-analysis[42] calculated that tidal flats accumulate CORG at a mean rate of 129.8 g C m-2 year-1 , slightly less than rates in acknowledged blue carbon habitats [Table 2]. However, as measured in Chinese tidal flats[43], CORG sequestration rates vary widely from 35 to 361 g C m-2 year-1. Tidal flat sediments to a depth of 1 meter contain an average of 86.3 Mg C ha-1 which is less than in blue carbon environments[40]. At this stage, insufficient evidence exists to support the notion that macroalgal and tidal flat habitats are blue carbon ecosystems, especially since in the former case most macroalgal CORG tends to be sequestered in other habitats[1,34,35]. In the latter case, tidal flats are declining globally due to extensive coastal degradation due to human developments, reduced riverine sediment export, sinking of river deltas, increased erosion and sea-level rise[44].

Constraints on carbon accounting and investment are the large ecological and economic uncertainties; investor interest indicates a huge demand, but supply of blue carbon credits remains small

All ecosystems have large natural uncertainties that limit carbon accounting and investment that rely on knowing precise details to attract investors[1]. Risk must be reduced to maximize the probability of return-on- investment; the likelihood of attractive returns needs to be demonstrated[45]. Constraints include: (1) measurement uncertainty and significant variability in blue carbon storage, burial and greenhouse gas emissions; (2) logistical problems; (3) technical infrastructure and capacity; (4) governance issues; (5) existence (or not) of proper regulatory frameworks; (6) habitat permanence; (7) viability of property tenure; (8) long timeframe of blue carbon ecosystem maturity; and (9) possible need for different policy mechanisms for a specified finance type (e.g., public or private funding).

The potential need for carbon credits from investors and companies may be as much as $10 billion, but market-related challenges currently limit project implementation and the sale of resulting credits. Problems include blue carbon verification and costs, the small scale of blue carbon projects, and dual credit counting between national and commercial institutions[46]. Other financial instruments such as ecosystem service insurance and bonds may be viable alternatives to more conventional forms of funding. A detailed analysis of the role of economics in blue carbon ecosystem marketing[47] concluded that several actions are needed to view coastal blue carbon habitats as a natural climate solution: (1) improving legal and policy arrangements to ensure equitable sharing of benefits; (2) improving stewardship by incorporating local community knowledge and values; (3) clarifying property rights; (4) improving financial approaches and accounting tools to incorporate co-benefits; (5) developing technological solutions for low-cost measurement of blue carbon sequestration; and (6) clarifying information gaps of blue carbon cycling. Additional improvements to current practices include better stakeholder engagement, targeted use of public and philanthropic funding to subsidize pilot projects, reduce financial risks through collaterals, and promote low-risk but high-profit projects[46,47].

Salt marshes, seagrasses and mangroves contribute to climate change mitigation at national, regional and global scales

Early studies[3,31] justified their interest in blue carbon by asserting, without any empirical data, that blue carbon ecosystems must sequester significant amounts of CORG to the extent that they play a globally significant role in mitigating greenhouse gas emissions. Global areas of salt marshes and mangroves are small[48] and their contributions are disproportionate, but recent calculations show that they mitigate only 0.4% (including seagrasses) of global CO2 emissions related to fossil fuel use[49]. Another estimate for mangroves indicates that they mitigate only 0.2% of total fossil fuel emissions. However, mangroves contribute significantly (18%) to emissions from the tropical ocean[6] and both mangroves and salt marshes account for ≈70% of air-sea CO2 exchange from global wetlands, and ≈30% of DIC export and ≈15% of DOC and POC export to the global coastal ocean[6]. Nevertheless, revised estimates of global areas and CORG standing stocks of seagrasses [Tables 1 and 2] suggest that they are likely to be the main contributors to climate change mitigation. Global sequestration rates of seagrasses are ≈3 and 15 times, respectively, greater than salt marshes and mangroves [Table 2]. However, due to high habitat losses, seagrasses currently emit nearly double the amounts of CO2 from salt marshes and mangroves [Table 2]. Salt marshes, mangroves and seagrasses account for 1.0%, 2.4% and 4.5% of global NEP of the global ocean, respectively[42].

Climate change impacts on blue carbon dynamics are complex and highly variable over space and time

Climate change-related disturbances usually result in highly variable and significant changes in blue carbon stocks, sequestration rates, and greenhouse gas fluxes. Increasing sea temperatures, increasing frequency and intensity of heat waves, and extreme weather events lead to positive, negative or complex changes in blue carbon dynamics. A long-term record of sediment CORG stocks in a restored Zostera marina meadow[50], depending on the position in the meadow, showed that a single heat wave led to significant losses of sediment CORG, with patterns of CORG losses and re-accumulation lagging seagrass recovery times within the central meadow. However, in the outer meadow, there was a net increase of 60% of sediment CORG throughout the following 3-year. Overall, areas of higher seagrass recovery maintained nearly twice as much CORG compared to areas of lower recovery. Under conditions of extreme weather events that result in mangrove dieback, degraded mangroves lose significant amounts of blue carbon, often as DIC outwelled to the adjacent coastal ocean[51]. Degraded mangroves in the Dutch Caribbean, for example, lost 1.5 Mg CO2 ha-1 year-1 from a 10% loss of sediment CORG compared with intact mangroves. Modeling exercises[52,53] suggest complex effects of climate change on blue carbon dynamics will depend on future rates of sea-level rise and rates of temperature and precipitation increases and patterns. One model[52] found a rise in global CORG storage by coastal tidal wetlands by 2100 based on projected emissions scenarios and current climate factors, with a rapid change driven by sea-level rise in salt marshes and higher temperature changes and changes in precipitation patterns in mangrove forests. Modeling the effects of two IPCC climate change scenarios ("business-as-usual" and "high-emissions") and using model estimates of past, present, and future deforestation rates of mangroves[53], another model found that global CORG stocks will increase by ~7% regardless of scenario; this gain will be greater than losses from mangrove deforestation by 2100. However, results will vary regionally, with some areas seeing a drop in sediment sequestration rates. Thus, both empirical data and models indicate the complex effects of climate change on these ecosystems.

Export of porewater dissolved carbon and alkalinity via subsurface groundwater discharge is a major pathway of blue carbon loss, but alkalinity and DIC discharge can result in localized buffering of coastal acidification

Two preliminary mangrove carbon budgets[54,55] show that ≈50% of mangrove carbon fixation was unaccounted for (known as "the missing carbon"), representing a large global carbon flux. This gap prompted extensive research, which ultimately revealed that large amounts of porewater DIC and DOC are exported from mangroves via subsurface discharge. This finding has resulted in a revision of the blue carbon budget[56], in which the missing carbon is a large export of dissolved carbon. Tidal pumping[57] is a major driver of mangrove porewater exchange and associated dissolved CO2 export; global porewater-derived CO2 export from mangroves (83 Tg C year-1) was considerably greater than earlier estimates of flow via water-air exchange (34.1 Tg C year-1) and C burial (18.4-34.4 Tg C a-1), suggesting that the escape of porewater CO2 is an important pathway of CO2 flux to adjacent coastal waters[57]. Work in Chinese mangroves[58] indicates that about half of DIC produced in mangrove sediments is derived from both sulfate reduction and terrestrial groundwater discharge. Salt marshes are also an important reservoir of dissolved carbon in the coastal waters[59-62], with most DIC generated in summer when higher temperatures stimulate anaerobic respiration[59-62]. In some salt marshes, groundwater export of dissolved carbon exceeds sediment CORG burial rates[62], reflecting the large amounts of dissolved carbon released to adjacent waters. Seagrass meadows laterally transport DOC with their rapid metabolism causing overlying waters to contain low CO2 concentrations and enhancing atmospheric CO2 uptake[63,64]. Carbon fluxes are more complex in seagrasses inhabiting carbonate environments[64], with variable rates of CO2 flux in relation to seagrass composition. Downward fluxes were found only over seagrasses, whereas the presence of calcifying algae resulted in CO2 release.. DIC export from a Posidonia meadow[65] exceeded above-meadow CO2 outgassing, with DIC uncoupled from alkalinity fluxes. The slight release of alkalinity suggested that ≈90% of exported DIC was eventually lost offshore as CO2 was released to the atmosphere; combined flows indicated a carbon loss exceeding CORG sequestration.

Microbial decomposition of benthic organic matter via fermentation, sulfate, iron and manganese reduction, and methanogenesis results in several metabolic by-products (e.g., DIC and alkalinity) that are then transported via subsurface groundwater to adjacent coastal waters[56,66]. In mangroves inhabiting carbonate deposits in the Red Sea[66], total alkalinity emission from carbonate dissolution supported a CO2 uptake of 345 g C m-2 year-1, 23-fold the CORG sequestration rate; total alkalinity emission was large (403 mmol m-2 d-1). In the Everglades[67], most DIC was exported as total alkalinity (97 mmol m-2 d-1 of a total dissolved carbon export of 142 mol m-2 d-1), with both values several times greater than CORG burial rates. Large alkalinity export was also measured across an inshore to offshore mangrove continuum on the Amazon coast[68], with export rates of DIC (20 mmol m-2 d-1) and alkalinity (15.2 mmol m-2 d-1) equating to nearly 80% of C burial rates. Globally, mangroves export 17 TMOL year-1 of alkalinity[56]. Seagrass meadows and salt marshes produce and export alkalinity but at lower rates than mangroves[68,69]. Alkalinity is produced via sulfate reduction coupled with pyrite formation, with greater pyrite stocks in mangroves than in salt marshes and seagrasses[69]. Global alkalinity release from mangroves, apparently linked to the formation of pyrite, equals ~24% of the global mangrove CORG sequestration rate. Macrotidal salt marshes such as those in China[70] export large amounts of DIC (202 mmol m-2 d-1) and alkalinity (78 mmol m-2 d-1) with a ratio which implies alkalinity production from anaerobic mineralization in sediment. Further, lateral exports were equivalent to CORG burial rates.

DIC and alkalinity export results in an observable, localized increase in pH in adjacent coastal waters, partially counteracting coastal acidification. The magnitude and impact of this effect will be site-specific, depending on residence times of tidal waters and on other sources or sinks of DIC and alkalinity. For mangroves[71,72], a pH change is likely to be greater in greater areas of mangrove and likely to be more significant where coral reefs also occur. For seagrasses[73], several factors influence their ability to buffer ocean pH, including photosynthetic activity[73], mode of DIC uptake[74], extent of seagrass loss[75] and seasonality[76]. For instance, in 7 Zostera marina meadows spanning the US west coast[76], amelioration by seagrasses showed an improvement compared to non-vegetated areas, with an overall increase of 65% over 6 years, accompanied by a mean pH increase of 0.07. Sustained elevations of pH > 0.1 occurred for up to 21 days, even at night, with maximum pH increases in warmer months during maximum growth season. The buffering influence of seagrasses on ocean pH can also positively impact their epibionts and neighboring calcifying algae[77,78]. Salt marshes similarly exhibit variations in pH, reflecting oscillations in DIC and alkalinity export[79], complex mixing of estuarine water[80], and climate[81]. Macroalgae in the form of kelp beds[82] and seaweed farms[83] have the capacity to locally ameliorate ocean acidification via photosynthetic drawdown of CO2 and may serve as refugia for carbonate-rich organisms, such as sea urchins and foraminifera[84]. Furthermore, coastal acidification stimulates macroalgal germination[85], growth[86] and photosynthetic[87] rates.

Mineralization of ancient wetland deposits contributes to DIC and DOC groundwater discharge to adjacent coastal waters

The large rates of dissolved carbon and alkalinity export from blue carbon ecosystems imply correspondingly rapid rates of microbial CORG mineralization in sediments, the source of these solutes. It was once assumed that the bulk of bacterial activity in wetland sediments occurs mostly in surface sediments (< 1-20 cm), mainly in association with recent deposition and subsequent decomposition of fresh organic material or surface microalgae and in proximity to roots and rhizomes, animal tubes and burrows[55,56]. However, large CORG stocks exist several meters into the sediment and, in at least one location, to a mangrove sediment depth of 6 meters[88]. Such deep deposits have been dated to 1,000-5,000 14C BP (before present)[56] and are thus derived from extinct habitats that are not directly linked to contemporary wetland habitats. Studies have also found that old porewater can be exported and that bioturbation can stimulate the decomposition of ancient, buried carbon[89,90]. 226Ra measurements in mangrove sediments indicate that construction of new crab burrows exposes old deposits, enhancing mineralization of old carbon via deep sediment oxygenation by crab bioturbation[89]. Measurements of ∆14C in exported DIC from subtropical Australian mangroves indicate the release of old DIC that is isotopically depleted, derived from at least a century-old sediment deposit[90]. Century-old CORG buried in deep deposits is still in the process of being decomposed and transported via porewater and/or submarine groundwater discharge. This scenario is reminiscent of results in a coastal marsh[91] where sediment ∆14C profiles indicated that sequestration rates at the decadal scale were much higher than rates at the millennial scale. This finding indicates either that old buried carbon was still being mineralized or that there was a recent increase in plant productivity. Bacterial metabolism in mangrove sediments has been measured to a depth of 1 meter[56], showing no clear trends in bacterial metabolism with increasing depth, suggesting that mineralization of old buried carbon may persist to even greater depths. More research is needed to clarify the role of ancient wetland deposits on blue carbon cycling and wetland biogeochemistry.

Blue carbon ecosystems require allochthonous organic carbon inputs to achieve carbon mass balance

A recent carbon mass balance for mangrove ecosystems[56] found that rates of autochthonous CORG incorporation (root, wood, leaf litter production) into forest sediments were not sufficient to balance microbial decomposition rates. One possibility to redress this imbalance is to include mineralization from deep ancient deposits (Perspective 6) as an ecosystem carbon input. Another possibility is that mangroves are reliant on allochthonous inputs to balance ecosystem carbon flow. In fact, about 58% of δ13C data of mangrove sediment[92] is low (< -25‰), suggesting mangrove litter, but relatively high values indicate large inputs of 13C-enriched carbon sources, such as various algae and river-derived POC rather than mangrove-derived plant matter. About 60% of known mangrove study sites[56] show that sediment CORG is derived mostly from allochthonous sources, including seaweed and algal-derived detritus from seagrasses and coral reefs, higher terrestrial land plants, dead bacterial biomass, and phytoplankton and POC derived from adjacent rivers, estuaries, coastal and open ocean sources. However, the proportion of mangrove litter, roots and wood detritus to the sediment CORG pool increases with stand age. In many seagrass meadows, non-seagrass detritus accounts for ~50% of sediment CORG, likely originating from allochthonous organic material that is transported and trapped by seagrass sediments. The percentage of allochthonous inputs to seagrasses is partly a function of distance from the source[93]. For example, salt marshes at San Quintin (an arid Eastern Pacific lagoon) receive 40% of their CORG from external inputs, whereas in seagrass meadows open to lagoonal currents, the CORG source is largely allochthonous[94].

Restored ecosystems often reveal temporal differences in blue carbon sources. In restored and pristine salt marshes in Washington, USA[95], autochthonous marsh C3 plants contributed 73%-89% to unaltered marshes, whereas restored marshes received a wide array of mostly allochthonous CORG, which varied in relative contribution by distance from the source and abundance. All three coastal ecosystems thus receive and are greatly reliant on allochthonous sources of CORG to maintain their metabolic requirements and to balance their carbon inputs and outputs.

Habitat connectivity enhances blue carbon uptake and release

The export of allochthonous matter from one ecosystem to another illustrates the importance of connectivity between habitats, enhancing the flow of blue carbon. Mangrove-derived seston exported to adjacent seagrasses in Gazi Bay, Kenya[96] resulted in increased CO2 concentrations and increased CORG content in the water column; flow reverses via tides transport high-quality seagrass carbon to the mangrove forest. The extent of input from one habitat to another partly depends on distance. On the north Sulawesi coast, Indonesia[97], seagrasses adjacent to mangroves have significantly higher sediment CORG concentrations than in non-adjacent meadows; in the adjacent meadows, mangrove CORG contributes 34%-83% to sediment C. Several mechanisms exist through which one blue carbon habitat may influence CORG concentration and sequestration in adjacent habitats, such as outwelling, sediment trapping, nutrient fluxes, wave dampening, trophic cascades, and tidal regimes[98]. The co-metabolism effect may also result in enhanced carbon flow[99]. In experiments where macroalgal detritus was mixed with seagrass detritus, high density macroalgal addition stimulated the decomposition of 20% more seagrass compared to other treatments. Coral reefs and seagrass meadows often co-occur and are connected by various ways, including enhancement of water column and sediment carbon. For instance, seagrasses benefited by close association with Colombian coral reefs[100], with seagrasses within reef barriers having greater sediment CORG concentrations than seagrasses without a reef barrier. Seagrasses also benefit from close physical proximity to mangroves as found on the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, India[101], and along a mangrove-seagrass-reef continuum fringing Iriomote Island, Japan[102], where carbon transport from adjacent mangroves and rivers offsets uptake of CO2 by seagrasses; the coral reefs take up DIC, DOC and alkalinity, fostered by suppression of high sedimentation by the ability of mangroves to trap sediment particles.

Bioturbation, grazing, and predation affect blue carbon dynamics

Biota can affect several aspects of blue carbon via a network of trophic interactions among plants, animals and microbes, exerting strong effects on biogeochemical dynamics in blue carbon habitats[103]. For instance, a variety of predators influence blue carbon stocks and sequestration rates[104], including the effects of reduced predation on CORG sequestration in salt marshes and mangroves and CORG concentrations in seagrasses. Declines in various predators (e.g., New England blue crabs, predatory mangrove fish in Australia) result in an increase in bioturbator numbers but a decline in the capacity for CORG sequestration[104]; in Shark Bay, Western Australia, the presence of tiger sharks results in sea turtles and dugongs foraging in seagrass communities that are low in terms of risk from predation, but leads to these seagrasses having lower CORG stocks than areas associated with high predation risk. Arguably the greatest and most direct impacts by biota on blue carbon are produced by bioturbators[105,106]. For example, salt marsh crabs produce burrows that enhance CO2 release across the sediment-water interface due to tidally- driven hydraulic gradients[105,106]. Grazing has a similar effect on seagrass meadows, resulting in a several-fold increase in CH4 emissions; this increase can be attributed to the decline in loss of downward oxygen transport caused by the grazing decline in living seagrass biomass[107]. An assessment of risks[108] indicates that indirect, large-scale threats from ocean warming, heatwaves, and sea-level rise and direct small-scale threats from activities such as dredging and the building of jetties or a marina have a higher risk of increasing CO2 emissions from seagrass than to recover their ability to sequester CORG.

Calcium carbonate chemistry affects blue carbon budgets

The presence of calcium carbonate (CaCO3), especially in tropical seagrass meadows, plays a crucial role in inorganic carbon cycling (Perspective 5) and cycling of blue carbon. CaCO3 production emits CO2, partially offsetting the role of carbonate-rich ecosystems as CO2 sinks through CORG sequestration[109]. A global analysis[109] of inorganic carbon (CINORG) burial rates indicates rates of 0.8 Tg CINORG year-1 and 15 to 62 Tg CINORG year-1 in mangroves and seagrasses, respectively. Burial of CaCO3 may correspond to an offset of as much as ≈30% of seagrass CO2 sequestration. Seagrasses living in CaCO3-rich sediments may have CO2 sequestration neutralized by CO2 released via calcification[110]. Thus, CO2 emissions driven by calcification processes may exceed rates of CORG sequestration in carbonate seagrass habitats[23]. In Florida seagrass meadows, net consumption of alkalinity by calcification accounts for nearly all CO2 emissions[23]. Therefore, net carbon sequestration in carbonate-rich environments may be overestimated if calcification is not included in chemical budgets. Some tropical seagrass meadows with calcareous algae may have higher seagrass productivity and CORG storage[111]. Off Zanzibar, Tanzania, biomass production was higher in meadows containing both seagrass and calcareous algae than in meadows without algae; sediment CORG levels were also highest in seagrass meadows with calcareous algae.

Methane and nitrous oxide emissions reduce blue carbon potential

As both CH4 and N2O are significantly more potent greenhouse gases than CO2, their emissions reduce the value of a given habitat as a carbon sink, and in salt marshes, may negate the value of stored CORG towards mitigating climate change[112]. In coastal marshes in Georgia, USA[113], CH4 fluxes via groundwater average ≈3 g CH4 m-2 year-1 as a greenhouse gas over a century timeframe, which is equal to rates from other salt marshes. Submarine groundwater discharge results in a large increase in CH4 export that offsets about 30% of the cooling potential from CORG sequestration. In mangroves, CH4 efflux rates similarly have the potential to partly offset CORG burial rates, possibly by as much as 20%[114]. Both dead and living mangrove tree stems release CH4 to the atmosphere, with rates 8-fold higher from standing dead stems than from living stems; upscaling to mangrove dieback in the Gulf of Carpentaria, Australia, dead tree emissions may account for as much as 26% of net ecosystem CH4 flux[115]. Processes regulating CH4 and N2O fluxes in mangroves, marshes, and seagrasses are complex, complicating efforts to derive blue carbon benefits[116].

Black carbon reduces estimates of labile carbon in blue carbon budgets

"Black carbon", defined as carbon formed by incomplete combustion of fossil fuels, burning biomass, and other pollution, is highly recalcitrant and found in increasing abundance and proportion in soils and sediments, entering coastal waters via rivers and atmospheric deposition. Black carbon can account for as much as 9% to 25% of organic carbon content in subtropical-temperate deltas of the major rivers in China[117], with an accumulation rate of 33 g m-2 year-1 in China’s coastal wetlands, suggesting they act as a hotspot for black carbon and a substantial contributor to blue carbon storage. Similar results have been measured in a temperate salt marsh in Tasmania, Australia, and in a tropical Malaysian seagrass meadow[118]. Black carbon accounted for 38% and 22% of the sediment TOC fraction in the seagrass and marsh ecosystems, respectively, demonstrating the need to account for black carbon in future blue carbon assessments. The contribution of black carbon to total CORG standing stocks depends partly on environmental history of the ecosystem[119]. For example, in a fire-affected region of Malaysia[120], the black carbon to total CORG ratio was 43% in an adjacent seagrass meadow but 18% in a sandy, low organic content meadow; in moderately polluted mangroves, the ratio was 2% but higher (6%) in highly polluted mangroves. The black carbon to total CORG ratio for seagrasses also varies between urban and rural meadows and is twice as predicted, at 28% and 36%, respectively. The high fractions are likely the result of variability of black carbon atmospheric supply, an increase in seagrass litter loss close to exposed meadow edges, and sediment resuspension within the dispersed patchy meadow. Black carbon thus has an overall negative impact on the storage of labile blue carbon.

Habitat destruction results in blue carbon stock losses, but variable gas emissions

Rates of sediment CORG changes and greenhouse gas emissions vary partially depending on the type of disturbance to which an ecosystem is subjected. Clear-felling of mangroves, for instance, reduces sediment CORG stocks via erosion and subsequent transport[1], but short-term increases in CO2 release may occur[121]. In Mexican mangroves[122] subjected to hydrological perturbations, CH4 emissions were highest in the wet season in a dead mangrove area, whereas CO2 emissions were highest during the dry season with no significant differences among disturbance levels; N2O release did not vary among seasons and degradation levels. In a mangrove area in Vietnam[123] that was cleared 2-year prior to sampling, sediment losses amounted to ~10 Mg CORG ha-1 year-1 with mean sediment CO2 fluxes of 24 mmol m-2 d-1, nearly 3 times lower than rates in planted 16-year old forests. Reforested and rehabilitated forests reveal different rates of greenhouse gas release depending on the state of the forest and the type of gas. In managed forests in the Ranong Biosphere Reserve, Thailand[124], the highest CO2 effluxes were measured in an undisturbed primary forest compared to reforested and naturally rehabilitated forests. However, CH4 emissions were significantly higher from the natural rehabilitation forest, especially in low-intertidal areas with longer tidal flooding; N2O emissions did not vary among mangrove forest types. In cyclone areas, mangroves can lose blue carbon mostly as enhanced export of litter and DIC[125]. For salt marshes, various disturbances can affect blue carbon fluxes such as sediment metabolism. In high salt marshes in Virginia, USA[126], impacted by sea-level rise, modeling indicates that increased inundation would reduce respiration rates to a greater extent than primary production, resulting in a moderate loss of blue carbon. Impoundment can also have significant impacts on blue carbon gas emissions in salt marshes. In Phragmites- invaded marshes in Massachusetts, USA, freshening to lower salinity led to a 50-fold increase in CH4 emissions but with only moderate increases in CO2 efflux[127]. Although freshened, impounded marshes can be strong carbon sinks with CH4 release partially offsetting C sink capacity.

Benthic blue carbon stocks are increasing in polar and subpolar regions

Blue carbon stocks are increasing in polar seas partly due to prolonged phytoplankton blooms driven by losses of sea ice and collapsing ice shelf as a result of climate change; these blooms, in turn, fuel productivity of benthic infauna and, to a much lesser extent, epibenthos[128]. Sea ice losses also make the West Antarctica continental shelf a central location for iceberg disturbance as ice scour limits CORG storage and resets succession of benthic biota, fertilizing the ocean with nutrients and generating phytoplankton blooms in which excess organic carbon eventually deposits onto the seabed where it is partly consumed and buried[129]. Along Antarctic fjords, glacial retreat also results in blue carbon gains, leading to an increase in zoobenthic blue carbon of up to 4,536 t CORG year-1[130]. At three fjords along the West Antarctic Peninsula, further pathways of CORG storage were measured along a temporal gradient since the last glacier cover to test the idea that seabed carbon standing stocks would be a function of glacial ice cover[131]. The results were complex, with highly variable infauna numbers and carbon concentrations over time, like the epifauna. However, sediment CORG concentrations were much greater than total benthic faunal carbon. In shallower waters around the Antarctic Peninsula, infauna contained 60% less blue carbon (391 t CORG km-2) than epibenthic communities (648 t CORG km-2)[132]. This carbon sink may double as climate-mediated ice loss continues. Increasing melt from glaciers not only results in blue carbon storage but shifts benthic communities from net autotrophs to heterotrophs[133]. Clear waters during cold El Niño in spring 2015 facilitated high benthic microalgal productivity, shifting the benthic community to net autotrophy. However, increased glacial melt during the La Niña spring of 2016 resulted in water column turbidity, limiting benthic algal productivity, and turning the benthic faunal community from net autotrophic to net heterotrophic.

Data from the Arctic is extensive for carbon accumulation in infauna and sediments, whereas most Antarctic blue carbon data was confined until recently to epifauna. In Arctic fjords, pelagic and benthic carbon is abundant, with high rates of CORG deposition, sediment burial and faunal consumption[134-136]. Both terrestrial and macroalgal CORG were important sources of sedimentary CORG in most fjords, many of which are hotspots of CORG sequestration. However, there are strong spatial gradients in sedimentation rate and primary productivity that in turn impact benthic CORG uptake and burial[135,136]. Driven by warmer temperatures, glaciated fjords may become less efficient at burying CORG in deep sediments[136]. One cause for the long-term persistence and high CORG sequestration rates in Arctic sediments may lie in the tight binding of CORG to reactive iron and manganese, resulting in preservation for thousands of years[137]. In Arctic coastal wetlands in Norway[138], carbon sequestration rates were highly variable over space and time (9-603 g CORG m-2 year-1), correlating with an increased growing season. Blue carbon storage is low mostly due to new marsh formation with a thin organic sediment layer. Stocks of CORG and the increasing frequency of shallow polar habitats may be greater than previously assumed, equating to negative feedback on the rapidly changing polar climate.

Historical ecological shifts occur among blue carbon ecosystems

Historical ecological shifts occur in coastal blue carbon ecosystems. Tidal mudflats can be colonized by mangrove propagules until successive changes result in a mangrove forest beneath which lies the remnants of the original tidal flat. These historical deposits can continue to participate in contemporary carbon cycles (Perspective 6). In four Australian wetlands, environmental histories were reconstructed with respect to blue carbon conditions to assess the impact of historical factors on modern CORG stocks and burial rates[139]. High CORG stocks were linked to thick mangrove peat layers below the modern salt marsh deposits in both marine and fluvial sites where historic mangrove roots were found to be chemically stable, considering their advanced age. Cores from marine-influenced and fluvial-influenced salt marshes did not contain mangrove root CORG, but there was significant preservation of charcoal at the fluvial-influenced marsh. These results suggest that both classification of modern vegetation structure and geomorphic setting are insufficient to account for carbon stock variability and accumulation rates. Ecosystem changes are not uncommon and can still result in the preservation of old CORG. Stratigraphic evidence of extensive mangrove root networks beneath modern grasslands and salt flats in northern Australia suggests the existence of extensive, pre-historic mangroves approximately 5,500-7,000 years BP[140]. Other studies such as in the Mekong River delta have similarly revealed the presence of ancient mangroves, salt marshes, and tidal flats below modern deltaic sediments[141]. The significance of this ancient preserved carbon remains unknown, but may be of great biogeochemical and geological significance considering the sizes of many deltaic systems. Evidence of successional patterns in mangrove vegetation in locations such as the Mekong Delta[142] may also be of great importance with regard to blue carbon, but similarly are undetermined. Molecular fingerprinting can now identify sources and preservation state of organic matter in blue carbon habitats[143,144]. Moreover, habitat shifts affecting blue carbon stocks have occurred, and continue to occur, among coastal communities in Spencer Gulf, South Australia. The main source of sediment organic matter in these habitats is vascular plant material that is well-preserved due to enhanced lignocellulose preservation under anoxic conditions[145]. There was a clear molecular change discovered at a salt marsh where encroachment of young mangroves is occurring, but with a sediment core from the marsh-mangrove location reflecting a complex history. However, most CORG sequestered in the upper sediment layers may have originated from invading mangroves. Further, a sediment core from a mangrove habitat shows a dramatic shift in CORG content between surficial and deeper sediment layers, coinciding with a major shift in δ13C. This change indicates that about a millennia ago, seagrasses inhabited this area, delimiting a change from a subtidal to a more intertidal environment, coinciding with a known sea-level decrease in this region[144].

Land-use and land-cover changes (LULCC) drive changes in emissions and blue carbon stocks

Blue carbon ecosystems are impacted by various types of natural and anthropogenic changes due to LULCC, the most common being unsustainable extraction of wood and other products, clearing and conversion for agriculture (pastures, plantations) and aquaculture (shrimp ponds, salt farms), impoundment and drainage for pest control, urban development (construction for housing and industry), constructed and restored wetlands, pollution, climate change, and natural and coastal erosion induced by land-use change. The level of impact depends on factors such as spatial and temporal change, and the frequency and magnitude of the disturbance. A meta-analysis determining the blue carbon response of coastal wetlands to LULCC[145] concluded that conversion to various land-use changes resulted in decreased sediment CORG concentrations and stocks by an average of 18%, with the loss of sediment CORG causing likely CO2 emissions in the range of 2 to 23 Mg CO2eq ha-1 year-1; in contrast, conversion to artificial wetlands may result in a net uptake of about -3 Mg CO2eq ha-1 year-1.

A model forecast of CO2 emissions from blue carbon ecosystems post-disturbance[146] indicates that more than 40-year post-disturbance, the total CO2 emitted from blue carbon habitats was about 70%-80% of the initial CORG standing stock. Empirical evidence from blue carbon ecosystems along the Mexican coasts[147-149] indicates historical changes in blue carbon stocks in sediments. Increasing salinization in the Gulf of Mexico[147], as a result of sea-level rise, resulted in higher CORG stocks and sequestration in Halodule wrightii beds than in Thalassia testudinium meadows where only sequestration rates increased due to erosion caused by land-use change and sea-level rise. In Mexican mangroves, seagrasses, and salt marshes[148], most stored sediment CORG (60%-86%) during the Anthropocene (circa 1950) and contemporary mangrove CORG stocks were up to 6 times higher than pre-1950, probably because of land-use changes. Increased CORG sequestration rates in seagrasses were primarily due to increases in sediment accumulation as a result of land erosion and changes in sea level. Changes in CORG concentrations in mangroves and salt marshes were likely due to productivity increases in the runoff of fertilizer and sewage. Salt marshes in the northeast Pacific coast of Mexico have low input rates of terrestrial matter and sediment accumulation rates than in adjacent seagrass meadows. However, throughout the past century, accumulation rates have steadily increased due to soil erosion from land-use change (agriculture, aquaculture)[149]. In tropical seagrass meadow sediments off Zanzibar, Tanzania, mass accumulation rates similarly increased due to land-use change from 1998 until 2018, linked to shifts in CORG sources[150]. However, different land-based activities resulted in different δ13C signatures of sediment CORG between two meadows, with one meadow indicating increased δ13C signatures after a sewage outlet was moved and the other meadow showing a decrease in δ13C signatures because of increased sediment runoff post-deforestation. Long-term data from salt marshes in the Yellow River delta, China, show that continuous LULCC transformation driven by natural and anthropogenic processes decreased carbon storage by 10.2% during 1970-2010[151].

Globally, mangrove conversion to shrimp ponds remains the most common type of land-use change, with significant loss of sediment and vegetation carbon from land clearing. In the Dominican Republic[152], where such conversion and subsequent abandonment of ponds is common, CORG stocks were lowest in abandoned shrimp ponds (11% of that of mangroves) and highest in intact mangroves. Estimated emissions from such conversions range from 2,244-3,799 Mg CO2eq ha-1. The conversion of mangroves to aquaculture ponds in the Dominican Republic resulted in total emissions of ≈4 million Mg CO2eq or ~21% of pre-converted blue carbon. Shrimp ponds similarly led to massive losses of mangrove carbon in Brazil[153] with 58%-82% loss of CORG stocks and estimated emissions of 1,390 Mg CO2eq ha-1 year-1. In Thailand, where mangrove losses to aquaculture and agriculture have been historically severe[154], high-resolution data sets were used to quantify mangrove CORG stock changes over the past 60-year. Net loss of mangrove carbon over the period was about 32.3 million Mg CORG, but during the same period, 2.6 million Mg CORG accumulated due to recovery gains in mangrove extent, mostly in areas of pristine forests; substantial increases in CORG stock (1.3 million Mg C) were measured as a result of the establishment of new mangrove on accreting tidal flats. Conversion to other land uses similarly resulted in large losses of mangrove CORG and CO2 as such pasture conversion[155] resulted in emissions of ~ 1,460 Mg CO2eq ha-1.

Several estimates[156,157] have documented the net loss of mangrove carbon stocks globally from LULCC. These estimates reveal a net reduction in mangrove CORG biomass by 82%, while sediment CORG experienced a reduction of 54%, with relative losses depending on LULCC type, the time since LULCC occurred, and the geographical and climatic conditions of the respective locations. Losses of sediment CORG stocks are linked to decreased sediment CORG content and increased sediment bulk density over the upper 1 m depth, but there are no significant effects of LULCC on greenhouse gas emissions from mangrove sediments. The global mangrove CORG stock declined by 158.4 million t CORG between 1996 and 2016[157], representing a 1.8% reduction compared to the stock present in 1996. The relatively small to moderate losses of CORG stocks over the last two decades can be partly attributed to efforts to conserve and restore mangroves.

CONCLUSION

Much progress has been made in blue carbon science, management and economics since the term “blue carbon” was coined 14 years ago. Unsurprisingly, the dynamics of blue carbon in mangroves, salt marshes and seagrasses is perceived as being more complex than first thought. Blue carbon investment remains constrained by large uncertainties inherent in natural ecosystem carbon dynamics and in the uncertainties of applying economic concepts to ecosystem science. All blue carbon ecosystems sequester carbon and are net autotrophic with PGPP/RE ratios > 1. Mangrove forest chronosequences show net increases in blue carbon stocks with ecosystem maturity, indicating that habitat restoration leads to increased carbon sequestration and standing stocks. Salt marshes, seagrasses and mangroves contribute to climate change mitigation at local and national levels as well as on the global scale. Submarine groundwater discharge of dissolved carbon and alkalinity is a major pathway of blue carbon loss, resulting in localized buffering of acidified coastal waters. Mineralization of ancient, deep subsurface deposits contributes to groundwater discharge of dissolved microbial by-products due to deep, metabolically active, and highly diverse bacterial assemblages in deep deposits which originate from historical changes and habitat shifts and from LULCC over time. Further, allochthonous CORG inputs are necessary to achieve carbon mass balance. Other complexities of management and science that must be addressed in future are the enhancement of blue carbon fluxes by habitat connectivity, biotic activities, and climate-induced changes in polar regions. Other factors often result in negative feedback, such as CaCO3 dynamics in carbonate environments, methane and nitrous oxide emissions, inputs and dilution of blue carbon by black carbon, fisheries extraction, and various types, aerial extent, intensity, and frequency of habitat disturbance. It is also necessary to determine if macroalgal and tidal flat ecosystems qualify as blue carbon ecosystems, as further research and empirical data are urgently needed.

DECLARATIONS

Author contribution

The author contributed solely to the article.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Financial support and sponsorship

None.

Conflicts of interest

The author declares that there are no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Copyright

© The Author(s) 2023.

REFERENCES

1. Alongi DM. Blue carbon: coastal sequestration for climate change mitigation. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2018. pp. 1-8.

2. Crooks S, Windham-Myers L, Trozler TG. Defining blue carbon: the emergence of a climate content for coastal carbon dynamics. In: Windham-Myers L, Crooks S, Troxler TG, editors. A blue carbon primer: the state of coastal wetland carbon science, practice, and policy. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2019. pp. 1-8.3.

3. Nelleman C, Corcoran E, Duarte CM, et al. Blue carbon: a rapid response assessment. Arendal, Norway: UNEP; 2009. pp. 1-78.4.

4. Littles CJ, Jackson CA, DeWitt TH, Harwell MC. Linking people to coastal habitats: a meta-analysis of final ecosystem goods and services on the coast. Ocean Coast Manag 2018;165:356-69.

5. Sifleet S, Pendleton L, Murray BC. State of the science on coastal blue carbon: a summary for policy makers. Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions Report NI R 11-06. Durham, USA: Duke University; 2011. pp. 1-43.

6. Alongi DM. Carbon balance in salt marsh and mangrove ecosystems: a global synthesis. J Mar Sci Eng 2020;8:767.

7. Hill R, Bellgrove A, Macreadie PI, et al. Can macroalgae contribute to blue carbon? An Australian perspective. Limnol Oceanogr 2015;60:1689-706.

8. Gao G, Beardall J, Jin P, Gao L, Xie S, Gao K. A review of existing and potential blue carbon contributions to climate change mitigation in the Anthropocene. J Appl Ecol 2022;59:1686-99.

9. Duarte CM, Gattuso J, Hancke K, et al. Global estimates of the extent and production of macroalgal forests. Global Ecol Biogeogr 2022;31:1422-39.

10. Carnell PE, Palacios MM, Waryszak P, Trevathan-Tackett SM, Masqué P, Macreadie PI. Blue carbon drawdown by restored mangrove forests improves with age. J Environ Manag 2022;306:114301.

11. Marchand C. Soil carbon stocks and burial rates along a mangrove forest chronosequence (French Guiana). For Ecol Manag 2017;384:92-9.

12. Monga E, Mangora MM, Trettin CC. Impact of mangrove planting on forest biomass carbon and other structural attributes in the Rufiji Delta, Tanzania. Global Ecol Conserv 2022;35:e02100.

13. Thura K, Serrano O, Gu J, et al. Mangrove restoration built soil organic carbon stocks over six decades: a chronosequence study. J Soil Sediment 2023;23:1193-203.

14. Azman M, Sharma S, Liyana Hamzah M, Mohamad Zakaria R, Palaniveloo K, Mackenzie RA. Total ecosystem blue carbon stocks and sequestration potential along a naturally regenerated mangrove forest chronosequence. For Ecol Manag 2023;527:120611.

15. Burden A, Garbutt A, Evans CD. Effect of restoration on saltmarsh carbon accumulation in Eastern England. Biol Lett 2019;15:20180773.

16. Drexler JZ, Woo I, Fuller CC, Nakai G. Carbon accumulation and vertical accretion in a restored versus historic salt marsh in southern Puget Sound, Washington, United States. Restor Ecol 2019;27:1117-27.

17. Wang C, Li H, Cai T, Sun X. Variation of soil carbon and nitrogen storage in a natural restoration chronosequence of reclaimed temperate marshes. Global Ecol Conserv 2021;27:e01589.

18. Abbott KM, Elsey-Quirk T, DeLaune RD. Factors influencing blue carbon accumulation across a 32-year chronosequence of created coastal marshes. Ecosphere 2019;10:e02828.

19. Dontis EE, Radabaugh KR, Chappel AR, Russo CE, Moyer RP. Carbon storage increases with site age as created salt marshes transition to mangrove forests in Tampa Bay, Florida (USA). Estuar Coast 2020;43:1470-88.

20. Thorhaug A, Poulos HM, López-Portillo J, Ku TCW, Berlyn GP. Seagrass blue carbon dynamics in the Gulf of Mexico: stocks, losses from anthropogenic disturbance, and gains through seagrass restoration. Sci Total Environ 2017;605-6:626-36.

21. Greiner JT, McGlathery KJ, Gunnell J, McKee BA. Seagrass restoration enhances "blue carbon" sequestration in coastal waters. PLoS One 2013;8:e72469.

22. Marbà N, Arias-Ortiz A, Masqué P, et al. Impact of seagrass loss and subsequent revegetation on carbon sequestration and stocks. J Ecol 2015;103:296-302.

23. Van Dam BR, Zeller MA, Lopes C, et al. Calcification-driven CO2 emissions exceed “blue carbon” sequestration in a carbonate seagrass meadow. Sci Adv 2021;7:eabj1372.

24. Smale D, Burrows M, Evans A, et al. Linking environmental variables with regional- scale variability in ecological structure and standing stock of carbon within UK kelp forests. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 2016;542:79-95.

25. Krause-Jensen D, Lavery P, Serrano O, Marbà N, Masque P, Duarte CM. Sequestration of macroalgal carbon: the elephant in the blue carbon room. Biol Lett 2018;14:20180236.

26. Watanabe K, Yoshida G, Hori M, Umezawa Y, Moki H, Kuwae T. Macroalgal metabolism and lateral carbon flows can create significant carbon sinks. Biogeosciences 2020;17:2425-40.

27. Mack SK, Lane RR, Holland K, Bauer J, Cole J, Cowan R. A blue carbon pilot project: lessons learned. Carbon Manag 2022;13:420-34.

28. Williams P, Faber P. Salt marsh restoration experience in San Francisco Bay. J Coast Res 2001;27:203-11. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267198245_Salt_Marsh_Restoration_Experience_in_San_Francisco_Bay [Last accessed on 19 July 2022]

29. Lewis RR. Ecological engineering for successful management and restoration of mangrove forests. Ecol Eng 2005;24:403-18.

30. Dencer-Brown AM, Shilland R, Friess D, et al. Integrating blue: how do we make nationally determined contributions work for both blue carbon and local coastal communities? Ambio 2022;51:1978-93.

31. Macreadie PI, Nielsen DA, Kelleway JJ, et al. Can we manage coastal ecosystems to sequester more blue carbon? Front Ecol Environ 2017;15:206-13.

32. Vanderklift MA, Herr D, Lovelock CE, Murdiyarso D, Raw JL, Steven ADL. A guide to international climate mitigation policy and finance frameworks relevant to the protection and restoration of blue carbon ecosystems. Front Mar Sci 2022;9:872064.

33. Lovelock CE, Duarte CM. Dimensions of blue carbon and emerging perspectives. Biol Lett 2019;15:20180781.

34. Duncan C, Primavera JH, Hill NAO, Wodehouse DCJ, Koldewey HJ. Potential for return on investment in rehabilitation-oriented blue carbon projects: accounting methodologies and project strategies. Front For Glob Chang 2022;4:775341.

35. Gallagher JB, Shelamoff V, Layton C, Rodil I. Seaweed ecosystems may not mitigate CO2 emissions. ICES J Mar Sci 2022;79:585-92.

36. Ricart AM, Krause-Jensen D, Hancke K, Price NN, Masqué P, Duarte CM. Sinking seaweed in the deep ocean for carbon neutrality is ahead of science and beyond the ethics. Environ Res Lett 2022;17:081003.

37. Trevathan-Tackett SM, Kelleway J, Macreadie PI, Beardall J, Ralph P, Bellgrove A. Comparison of marine macrophytes for their contributions to blue carbon sequestration. Ecology 2015;96:3043-57.

38. Queirós AM, Stephens N, Widdicombe S, et al. Connected macroalgal-sediment systems: blue carbon and food webs in the deep coastal ocean. Ecol Monogr 2019;89:e01366.

39. Perkins AK, Santos IR, Rose AL, et al. Production of dissolved carbon and alkalinity during macroalgal wrack degradation on beaches: a mesocosm experiment with implications for blue carbon. Biogeochemistry 2022;160:159-75.

40. Hidayah N, Ng CT, Arina N, Fairoz M, Rozaimi M. Macroalgal and mangrove provenances demonstrate their relevance in contributing to the blue carbon pool of a tropical seagrass meadow. Ecol Res 2022;37:21-32.

41. Kwan V, Fong J, Ng CSL, Huang D. Temporal and spatial dynamics of tropical macroalgal contributions to blue carbon. Sci Total Environ 2022;828:154369.

42. Chen ZL, Lee SY. Tidal flats as a significant carbon reservoir in global coastal ecosystems. Front Mar Sci 2022;9:900896.

43. Chen J, Wang D, Li Y, et al. The carbon stock and sequestration rate in tidal flats from coastal China. Global Biogeochem Cycles 2020;34:e2020GB006772.

44. Murray NJ, Phinn SR, DeWitt M, et al. The global distribution and trajectory of tidal flats. Nature 2019;565:222-5.

45. Warner R, Kaidonis M, Dun O, et al. Opportunities and challenges for mangrove carbon sequestration in the Mekong River Delta in Vietnam. Sustain Sci 2016;11:661-77.

46. Macreadie PI, Robertson AI, Spinks B, et al. Operationalizing marketable blue carbon. One Earth 2022;5:485-92.

47. Vanderklift MA, Marcos-Martinez R, Butler JRA, et al. Constraints and opportunities for market-based finance for the restoration and protection of blue carbon ecosystems. Mar Policy 2019;107:103429.

48. Davidson NC, Fluet-chouinard E, Finlayson CM. Global extent and distribution of wetlands: trends and issues. Mar Freshwater Res 2018;69:620-7.

49. Taillardat P, Friess DA, Lupascu M. Mangrove blue carbon strategies for climate change mitigation are most effective at the national scale. Biol Lett 2018;14:20180251.

50. Aoki LR, Mcglathery KJ, Wiberg PL, et al. Seagrass recovery following marine heat wave influences sediment carbon stocks. Front Mar Sci 2021;7:576784.

51. Senger DF, Saavedra Hortua DA, Engel S, Schnurawa M, Moosdorf N, Gillis LG. Impacts of wetland dieback on carbon dynamics: a comparison between intact and degraded mangroves. Sci Total Environ 2021;753:141817.

52. Wang F, Sanders CJ, Santos IR, et al. Global blue carbon accumulation in tidal wetlands increases with climate change. Natl Sci Rev 2021;8:nwaa296.

53. Chatting M, Al-maslamani I, Walton M, et al. Future mangrove carbon storage under climate change and deforestation. Front Mar Sci 2022;9:781876.

54. Bouillon S, Borges AV, Castañeda-Moya E, et al. Mangrove production and carbon sinks: a revision of global budget estimates. Global Biogeochem Cycles 2008;22:GB2013.

55. Alongi DM. The energetics of mangrove forests. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer; 2009, pp. 163-7.

56. Alongi DM. Lateral export and sources of subsurface dissolved carbon and alkalinity in mangroves: revising the blue carbon budget. J Mar Sci Eng 2022;10:1916.

57. Chen X, Santos IR, Call M, et al. The mangrove CO2 pump: tidally driven pore-water exchange. Limnol Oceanogr 2021;66:1563-77.

58. Wu Z, Zhu H, Tang D, Wang Y, Zidan A, Cui Z. Submarine groundwater discharge as a significant export of dissolved inorganic carbon from a mangrove tidal creek to Qinglan Bay (Hainan Island, China). Cont Shelf Res 2021;223:104451.

59. Wang ZA, Kroeger KD, Ganju NK, Gonneea ME, Chu SN. Intertidal salt marshes as an important source of inorganic carbon to the coastal ocean. Limnol Oceanogr 2016;61:1916-31.

60. Chen X, Du J, Yu X, Wang X. Porewater-derived dissolved inorganic carbon and nutrient fluxes in a saltmarsh of the Changjiang River Estuary. Acta Oceanol Sin 2021;40:32-43.

61. Osburn CL, Mikan MP, Etheridge JR, Burchell MR, Birgand F. Seasonal variation in the quality of dissolved and particulate organic matter exchanged between a salt marsh and its adjacent estuary. J Geophys Res Biogeosci 2015;120:1430-49.

62. Codden CJ, Edwards CR, Stubbins A. Non-conservative behavior of dissolved organic carbon in a Georgia salt marsh creek indicates summer outwelling. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 2022;265:107709.

63. Correa RE, Xiao K, Conrad SR, et al. Groundwater carbon exports exceed sediment carbon burial in a salt marsh. Estuar Coast 2022;45:1545-61.

64. Ismail RO, Asplund ME, Gullström M, et al. Effects of calcification on air-water CO2 fluxes in tropical seagrass meadows: a mesocosm experiment. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 2023;561:151864.

65. Majtényi-hill C, Reithmaier G, Yau YY, Serrano O, Piñeiro-juncal N, Santos IR. Inorganic carbon outwelling from a Mediterranean seagrass meadow using radium isotopes. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 2023;283:108248.

66. Saderne V, Fusi M, Thomson T, et al. Total alkalinity production in a mangrove ecosystem reveals an overlooked Blue Carbon component. Limnol Oceanogr Lett 2021;6:61-7.

67. Reithmaier GMS, Ho DT, Johnston SG, Maher DT. Mangroves as a source of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere and alkalinity and dissolved carbon to the coastal ocean: a case study from the everglades national park, Florida. J Geophys Res Biogeosci 2020;125:e2020JPG005812.

68. Cabral A, Dittmar T, Call M, et al. Carbon and alkalinity outwelling across the groundwater-creek-shelf continuum off Amazonian mangroves. Limnol Oceanogr Lett 2021;6:369-78.

69. Reithmaier GMS, Johnston SG, Junginger T, et al. Alkalinity production coupled to pyrite formation represents an unaccounted blue carbon sink. Global Biogeochem Cycles 2021;35:e2020GB006785.

70. Yau YY, Xin P, Chen X, et al. Alkalinity export to the ocean is a major carbon sequestration mechanism in a macrotidal saltmarsh. Limnol Oceanogr 2022;67:S158-70.

71. Sippo JZ, Maher DT, Tait DR, Holloway C, Santos IR. Are mangroves drivers or buffers of coastal acidification? Insights from alkalinity and dissolved inorganic carbon export estimates across a latitudinal transect. Global Biogeochem Cycles 2016;30:753-66.

72. Banerjee K, Paul R. Role of abiotic factors in enhancing the capacity of mangroves in reducing ocean acidification. Ecotoxicology 2022;31:1169-88.

73. Hendriks IE, Olsen YS, Ramajo L, et al. Photosynthetic activity buffers ocean acidification in seagrass meadows. Biogeosciences 2014;11:333-46.

74. Luan W, Li H, Zhang L, Liu J. Enhalus acoroides efficiently alleviate ocean acidification by shifting modes of inorganic carbon uptake and increasing photosynthesis when pH drops. Mar Environ Res 2023;186:105896.

75. Job S, Sekadende B, Yona G, George R, Lugendo BR, Kimirei IA. Effect of seagrass cover loss on seawater carbonate chemistry: implications for the potential of seagrass meadows to mitigate ocean acidification. Reg Stud Mar Sci 2023;60:102816.

76. Ricart AM, Ward M, Hill TM, et al. Coast-wide evidence of low pH amelioration by seagrass ecosystems. Glob Chang Biol 2021;27:2580-91.

77. Guilini K, Weber M, de Beer D, et al. Response of Posidonia oceanica seagrass and its epibiont communities to ocean acidification. PLoS ONE 2017;12:e0181531.

78. Bergstrom E, Silva J, Martins C, Horta P. Seagrass can mitigate negative ocean acidification effects on calcifying algae. Sci Rep 2019;9:1932.

79. Wallace RB, Peterson BJ, Gobler CJ. Ecosystem metabolism modulates the dynamics of hypoxia and acidification across temperate coastal habitat types. Front Mar Sci 2021;8:611781.

80. Hunt CW, Salisbury JE, Vandemark D. Controls on buffering and coastal acidification in a temperate estuary. Limnol Oceanogr 2022;67:1328-42.

81. Chen X, Zhu P, Zhang Y, Li L. Plum rain enhances porewater greenhouse gas fluxes and weakens the acidification buffering potential in saltmarshes. J Hydrol 2023;616:128686.

82. Ling SD, Cornwall CE, Tilbrook B, Hurd CL. Remnant kelp bed refugia and future phase-shifts under ocean acidification. PLoS One 2020;15:e0239136.

83. Xiao X, Agustí S, Yu Y, et al. Seaweed farms provide refugia from ocean acidification. Sci Total Environ 2021;776:145192.

84. Doo SS, Leplastrier A, Graba-Landry A, Harianto J, Coleman RA, Byrne M. Amelioration of ocean acidification and warming effects through physiological buffering of a macroalgae. Ecol Evol 2020;10:8465-75.

85. Leal PP, Hurd CL, Fernández PA, Roleda MY. Ocean acidification and kelp development: reduced pH has no negative effects on meiospore germination and gametophyte development of Macrocystis pyrifera and Undaria pinnatifida. J Phycol 2017;53:557-66.

86. Young CS, Gobler CJ. Ocean acidification accelerates the growth of two bloom-forming macroalgae. PLoS One 2016;11:e0155152.

87. Britton D, Cornwall CE, Revill AT, Hurd CL, Johnson CR. Ocean acidification reverses the positive effects of seawater pH fluctuations on growth and photosynthesis of the habitat-forming kelp, Ecklonia radiata. Sci Rep 2016;6:26036.

88. Matsui N, Meepol W, Chukwamdee J. Soil organic carbon in mangrove ecosystems with different vegetation and sedimentological conditions. J Mar Sci Eng 2015;3:1404-24.

89. Gleeson J, Santos IR, Maher DT, Golsby-Smith L. Groundwater-surface water exchange in a mangrove tidal creek: evidence from natural geochemical tracers and implications for nutrient budgets. Mar Chem 2013;156:27-37.

90. Maher DT, Santos IR, Schulz KG, Call M, Jacobsen GE, Sanders CJ. Blue carbon oxidation revealed by radiogenic and stable isotopes in a mangrove system. Geophys Res Lett 2017;44:4889-96.

91. Choi Y, Wang Y. Dynamics of carbon sequestration in a coastal wetland using radiocarbon measurements. Global Biogeochem Cycles 2004;18.

92. Kristensen E, Bouillon S, Dittmar T, Marchand C. Organic carbon dynamics in mangrove ecosystems: a review. Aquat Bot 2008;89:201-19.

93. Oreska MPJ, Wilkinson GM, Mcglathery KJ, Bost M, Mckee BA. Non-seagrass carbon contributions to seagrass sediment blue carbon. Limnol Oceanogr 2018;63:S3-18.

94. Krause JR, Hinojosa-Corona A, Gray AB, et al. Beyond habitat boundaries: organic matter cycling requires a system-wide approach for accurate blue carbon accounting. Limnol Oceanogr 2022;67:S6-18.

95. Drexler JZ, Davis MJ, Woo I, De La Cruz S. Carbon sources in the sediments of a restoring vs. historically unaltered salt marsh. Estuar Coast 2020;43:1345-60.

96. Hemminga MA, Slim FJ, Kazungu J, Ganssen J, Nieuwenhuize J, Kruyt NM. Carbon outwelling from a mangrove forest with adjacent seagrass beds and coral reefs. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 1994;106:291-301. Available from: https://www.int-res.com/articles/meps/106/m106p291.pdf [Last accessed on 19 July 2022]

97. Chen G, Azkab MH, Chmura GL, et al. Mangroves as a major source of soil carbon storage in adjacent seagrass meadows. Sci Rep 2017;7:42406.

98. Huxham M, Whitlock D, Githaiga M, Dencer-Brown A. Carbon in the coastal seascape: how interactions between mangrove forests, seagrass meadows and tidal marshes influence carbon storage. Curr For Rep 2018;4:101-10.

99. Liu S, Trevathan-Tackett SM, Ewers Lewis CJ, Huang X, Macreadie PI. Macroalgal blooms trigger the breakdown of seagrass blue carbon. Environ Sci Technol 2020;54:14750-60.

100. Guerra-Vargas LA, Gillis LG, Mancera-Pineda JE. Stronger together: do coral reefs enhance seagrass meadows “blue carbon” potential? Front Mar Sci 2020;7:628.

101. Mishra AK, Apte D, Farooq SH. Ecological connectivity of seagrasses with mangroves increases the carbon storage of tropical seagrass meadows of an island ecosystem. Res Square 2021.

102. Akhand A, Watanabe K, Chanda A, et al. Lateral carbon fluxes and CO2 evasion from a subtropical mangrove-seagrass-coral continuum. Sci Total Environ 2021;752:142190.

103. Ren L, Jensen K, Porada P, Mueller P. Biota-mediated carbon cycling-A synthesis of biotic-interaction controls on blue carbon. Ecol Lett 2022;25:521-40.

104. Atwood TB, Connolly RM, Ritchie EG, et al. Predators help protect carbon stocks in blue carbon ecosystems. Nat Clim Chang 2015;5:1038-45.

105. Xiao K, Wilson AM, Li H, et al. Large CO2 release and tidal flushing in salt marsh crab burrows reduce the potential for blue carbon sequestration. Limnol Oceanogr 2021;66:14-29.

106. Grow AK, Schutte CA, Roberts BJ. Fiddler crab burrowing increases salt marsh greenhouse gas emissions. Biogeochemistry 2022;158:73-90.

107. Lyimo LD, Gullström M, Lyimo TJ, et al. Shading and simulated grazing increase the sulphide pool and methane emission in a tropical seagrass meadow. Mar Pollut Bull 2018;134:89-93.

108. Dahl M, Mcmahon K, Lavery PS, Hamilton SH, Lovelock CE, Serrano O. Ranking the risk of CO2 emissions from seagrass soil carbon stocks under global change threats. Glob Environ Chang 2023;78:102632.

109. Saderne V, Geraldi NR, Macreadie PI, et al. Role of carbonate burial in blue carbon budgets. Nat Comm 2019;10:1106.

110. Howard JL, Creed JC, Aguiar MVP, Fourqurean JW. CO2 released by carbonate sediment production in some coastal areas may offset the benefits of seagrass “Blue Carbon” storage. Limnol Oceanogr 2018;63:160-72.

111. Kalokora OJ, Gullström M, Buriyo AS, Mtolera MSP, Björk M. Seagrass meadows mixed with calcareous algae have higher plant productivity and sedimentary blue carbon storage. Ecol Evol 2022;12:e8579.

112. Roughan BL, Kellman L, Smith E, Chmura GL. Nitrous oxide emissions could reduce the blue carbon value of marshes on eutrophic estuaries. Environ Res Lett 2018;13:044034.

113. Schutte CA, Moore WS, Wilson AM, Joye SB. Groundwater-driven methane export reduces salt marsh blue carbon potential. Global Biogeochem Cycles 2020;34:e2020GB0006587.

114. Rosentreter JA, Maher DT, Erler DV, Murray RH, Eyre BD. Methane emissions partially offset “blue carbon” burial in mangroves. Sci Adv 2018;4:eaao4985.

115. Jeffrey LC, Reithmaier G, Sippo JZ, et al. Are methane emissions from mangrove stems a cryptic carbon loss pathway? Insights from a catastrophic forest mortality. New Phytol 2019;224:146-54.

116. Malerba ME, Friess DA, Peacock M, et al. Methane and nitrous oxide emissions complicate the climate benefits of teal and blue carbon wetlands. One Earth 2022;5:1336-41.

117. Li Y, Fu C, Zeng L, et al. Black carbon contributes substantially to allochthonous carbon storage in deltaic vegetated coastal habitats. Environ Sci Technol 2021;55:6495-504.

118. Gallagher JB, Prahalad V, Aalders J, Inorganic and black carbon hotspots constrain blue carbon mitigation services across tropical seagrass and temperate tidal marshes. Wetlands 2021;41:65-72.

119. Chew ST, Gallagher JB. Accounting for black carbon lowers estimates of blue carbon storage services. Sci Rep 2018;8:2553.

120. Gallagher JB, Chuan CH, Yap TK, Fredelina Dona WF. Carbon stocks of coastal seagrass in Southeast Asia may be far lower than anticipated when accounting for black carbon. Biol Lett 2019;15:20180745.

121. Lovelock CE, Ruess RW, Feller IC. CO2 efflux from cleared mangrove peat. PLoS One 2011;6:e21279.

122. Romero-Uribe HM, López-Portillo J, Reverchon F, Hernández ME. Effect of degradation of a black mangrove forest on seasonal greenhouse gas emissions. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 2022;29:11951-65.

123. Grellier S, Janeau JL, Nhon DH, et al. Changes in soil characteristics and C dynamics after mangrove clearing (Vietnam). Sci Total Environ 2017;593-4:654-63.

124. Kitpakornsanti K, Pengthamkeerati P, Limsakul A, Worachanant P, Diloksumpun S. Greenhouse gas emissions from soil and water surface in different mangrove establishments and management in Ranong Biosphere Reserve, Thailand. Reg Stud Mar Sci 2022;56:102690.

125. Zhao X, Rivera-Monroy VH, Farfán LM, et al. Tropical cyclones cumulatively control regional carbon fluxes in Everglades mangrove wetlands (Florida, USA). Sci Rep 2021;11:13927.

126. Miller WD, Neubauer SC, Anderson IC. Effects of sea level induced disturbances on high salt marsh metabolism. Estuaries 2001;24:357-67.

127. Sanders-DeMott R, Eagle MJ, Kroeger KD, et al. Impoundment increases methane emissions in Phragmites-invaded coastal wetlands. Glob Chang Biol 2022;28:4539-57.

128. Barnes DKA. Blue carbon on polar and subpolar seabeds. In: Agarwal RK, editor. Carbon capture, utilization and sequestration. London: IntechOpen; 2018. pp. 37-56.

129. Barnes DKA, Fleming A, Sands CJ, Quartino ML, Deregibus D. Icebergs, sea ice, blue carbon and Antarctic climate feedbacks. Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci 2018;376:20170176.

130. Barnes DKA, Sands CJ, Cook A, et al. Blue carbon gains from glacial retreat along antarctic fjords: what should we expect? Glob Chang Biol 2020;26:2750-5.

131. Zwerschke N, Sands CJ, Roman-Gonzalez A, et al. Quantification of blue carbon pathways contributing to negative feedback on climate change following glacier retreat in West Antarctic fjords. Glob Chang Biol 2022;28:8-20.

132. Morley SA, Souster TA, Vause BJ, Gerrish L, Peck LS, Barnes DKA. Benthic biodiversity, carbon storage and the potential for increasing negative feedbacks on climate change in shallow waters of the Antarctic peninsula. Biology 2022;11:320.

133. Braekman U, Pasotti F, Hoffmann R, et al. Glacial melt disturbance shifts community metabolism of an Antarctic seafloor ecosystem from net autotrophy to heterotrophy. Commun Biol 2021;4:148.

134. Zaborska A, Włodarska-Kowalczuk M, Legeżyńska J, Jankowska E, Winogradow A, Deja K. Sedimentary organic matter sources, benthic consumption and burial in west Spitsbergen fjords - signs of maturing of Arctic fjordic systems? J Mar Syst 2018;180:112-23.

135. Włodarska-Kowalczuk M, Mazurkiewicz M, Górska B, Michel LN, Jankowska E, Zaborska A. Organic carbon origin, benthic faunal consumption, and burial in sediments of northern Atlantic and Arctic fjords (60-81°N). J Geophys Res Biogeosci 2019;124:3737-51.

136. Herbert LC, Michaud AB, Laufer-meiser K, et al. Tight benthic-pelagic coupling drives seasonal and interannual changes in iron-sulfur cycling in Arctic fjord sediments (Kongsfjorden, Svalbard). J Mar Syst 2022;225:103645.

137. Faust JC, Tessin A, Fisher BJ, et al. Millennial scale persistence of organic carbon bound to iron in Arctic marine sediments. Nat Comm 2021;12:275.

138. Ward RD. Carbon sequestration and storage in Norwegian Arctic coastal wetlands: impacts of climate change. Sci Total Environ 2020;748:141343.

139. Kelleway JJ, Saintilan N, Macreadie PI, et al. Geochemical analyses reveal the importance of environmental history for blue carbon sequestration. J Geophys Res Biogeosci 2017;122:1789-805.

140. Woodroffe CD, Thom BG, Chappell J. Development of widespread mangrove swamps in mid-Holocene times in northern Australia. Nature 1985;317:711-3.

141. Hanebuth TJ, Proske U, Saito Y, Nguyen VL, Ta TKO. Early growth stage of a large delta - Transformation from estuarine-platform to deltaic-progradational conditions (the northeastern Mekong River Delta, Vietnam). Sediment Geol 2012;261-2:108-19.

142. Li Z, Saito Y, Mao L, et al. Mid-holocene mangrove succession and its response to sea-level change in the upper Mekong River delta, Cambodia. Quat Res 2012;78:386-99.

143. Kaal J, Martínez Cortizas A, Mateo MÁ, Serrano O. Deciphering organic matter sources and ecological shifts in blue carbon ecosystems based on molecular fingerprinting. Sci Total Environ 2020;742:140554.

144. Kaal J, González JA, Emeterio LMS, Serrano O. Fingerprinting macrophyte blue carbon by pyrolysis-GC-compound specific isotope analysis (Py-CSIA). Sci Total Environ 2022;836:155598.

145. Tan L, Ge Z, Ji Y, et al. Land use and land cover changes in coastal and inland wetlands cause soil carbon and nitrogen loss. Global Ecol Biogeogr 2022;31:2541-63.

146. Lovelock CE, Fourqurean JW, Morris JT. Modeled CO2 emissions from coastal wetland transitions to other land uses: tidal marshes, mangrove forests, and seagrass beds. Front Mar Sci 2017;4:143.

147. Ruiz-Fernández AC, Sanchez-Cabeza J, Cuéllar-Martínez T, et al. Increasing salinization and organic carbon burial rates in seagrass meadows from an anthropogenically-modified coastal lagoon in southern Gulf of Mexico. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 2020;242:106843.

148. Cuéllar-Martínez T, Ruiz-Fernández AC, Sanchez-Cabeza JA, et al. Temporal records of organic carbon stocks and burial rates in Mexican blue carbon coastal ecosystems throughout the Anthropocene. Global Planet Chang 2020;192:103215.

149. Cuellar-Martinez T, Ruiz-Fernández AC, Sanchez-Cabeza JA, Pérez-Bernal LH, Sandoval-Gil J. Relevance of carbon burial and storage in two contrasting blue carbon ecosystems of a north-east Pacific coastal lagoon. Sci Total Environ 2019;675:581-93.

150. Dahl M, Ismail R, Braun S, et al. Impacts of land-use change and urban development on carbon sequestration in tropical seagrass meadow sediments. Mar Environ Res 2022;176:105608.

151. Ma T, Li X, Bai J, Ding S, Zhou F, Cui B. Four decades’ dynamics of coastal blue carbon storage driven by land use/land cover transformation under natural and anthropogenic processes in the Yellow River Delta, China. Sci Total Environ 2019;655:741-50.

152. Kauffman JB, Heider C, Norfolk J, Payton F. Carbon stocks of intact mangroves and carbon emissions arising from their conversion in the Dominican Republic. Ecol Appl 2014;24:518-27.

153. Kauffman JB, Bernardino AF, Ferreira TO, Bolton NW, de O Gomes LE, Nobrega GN. Shrimp ponds lead to massive loss of soil carbon and greenhouse gas emissions in northeastern Brazilian mangroves. Ecol Evol 2018;8:5530-40.

154. Bukoski JJ, Dronova I, Potts MD. Net loss statistics underestimate carbon emissions from mangrove land use and land cover change. Ecography 2022;2022:ecog.05982.

155. Kauffman JB, Hernandez Trejo H, del Carmen Jesus Garcia M, Heider C, Contreras WM. Carbon stocks of mangroves and losses arising from their conversion to cattle pastures in the Pantanos de Centla, Mexico. Wetlands Ecol Manag 2016;24:203-16.

156. Sasmito SD, Taillardat P, Clendenning JN, et al. Effect of land-use and land-cover change on mangrove blue carbon: a systematic review. Glob Chang Biol 2019;25:4291-302.

157. Richards DR, Thompson BS, Wijedasa L. Quantifying net loss of global mangrove carbon stocks from 20 years of land cover change. Nat Commun 2020;11:4260.

Cite This Article

Review
Open Access
Current status and emerging perspectives of coastal blue carbon ecosystems
Daniel M. Alongi

How to Cite

Alongi, D. M. Current status and emerging perspectives of coastal blue carbon ecosystems. Carbon Footprints. 2023, 2, 12. http://dx.doi.org/10.20517/cf.2023.04

Download Citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click on download.

Export Citation File:

Type of Import

Tips on Downloading Citation

This feature enables you to download the bibliographic information (also called citation data, header data, or metadata) for the articles on our site.

Citation Manager File Format

Use the radio buttons to choose how to format the bibliographic data you're harvesting. Several citation manager formats are available, including EndNote and BibTex.

Type of Import

If you have citation management software installed on your computer your Web browser should be able to import metadata directly into your reference database.

Direct Import: When the Direct Import option is selected (the default state), a dialogue box will give you the option to Save or Open the downloaded citation data. Choosing Open will either launch your citation manager or give you a choice of applications with which to use the metadata. The Save option saves the file locally for later use.

Indirect Import: When the Indirect Import option is selected, the metadata is displayed and may be copied and pasted as needed.

About This Article

© The Author(s) 2023. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, for any purpose, even commercially, 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.

Data & Comments

Data

Views
1088
Downloads
396
Citations
8
Comments
0
16

Comments

Comments must be written in English. Spam, offensive content, impersonation, and private information will not be permitted. If any comment is reported and identified as inappropriate content by OAE staff, the comment will be removed without notice. If you have any queries or need any help, please contact us at support@oaepublish.com.

0
Download PDF
Share This Article
Scan the QR code for reading!
See Updates
Contents
Figures
Related
Carbon Footprints
ISSN 2831-932X (Online)

Portico

All published articles are preserved here permanently

https://www.portico.org/publishers/oae/

Portico

All published articles are preserved here permanently

https://www.portico.org/publishers/oae/