Fabrizio Albanito
University of Aberdeen
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Fabrizio Albanito.
Plant Physiology | 2008
Johannes Kromdijk; Hans E. Schepers; Fabrizio Albanito; Nuala Fitton; Faye Carroll; Michael Jones; John Finnan; Gary Lanigan; Howard Griffiths
Perennial species with the C4 pathway hold promise for biomass-based energy sources. We have explored the extent that CO2 uptake of such species may be limited by light in a temperate climate. One energetic cost of the C4 pathway is the leakiness (ϕ) of bundle sheath tissues, whereby a variable proportion of the CO2, concentrated in bundle sheath cells, retrodiffuses back to the mesophyll. In this study, we scale ϕ from leaf to canopy level of a Miscanthus crop (Miscanthus × giganteus hybrid) under field conditions and model the likely limitations to CO2 fixation. At the leaf level, measurements of photosynthesis coupled to online carbon isotope discrimination showed that leaves within a 3.3-m canopy (leaf area index = 8.3) show a progressive increase in both carbon isotope discrimination and ϕ as light decreases. A similar increase was observed at the ecosystem scale when we used eddy covariance net ecosystem CO2 fluxes, together with isotopic profiles, to partition photosynthetic and respiratory isotopic flux densities (isofluxes) and derive canopy carbon isotope discrimination as an integrated proxy for ϕ at the canopy level. Modeled values of canopy CO2 fixation using leaf-level measurements of ϕ suggest that around 32% of potential photosynthetic carbon gain is lost due to light limitation, whereas using ϕ determined independently from isofluxes at the canopy level the reduction in canopy CO2 uptake is estimated at 14%. Based on these results, we identify ϕ as an important limitation to CO2 uptake of crops with the C4 pathway.
Gcb Bioenergy | 2016
Fabrizio Albanito; Tim Beringer; R. Corstanje; Benjamin Poulter; Anna Stephenson; J. Zawadzka; Pete Smith
The potential for climate change mitigation by bioenergy crops and terrestrial carbon sinks has been the object of intensive research in the past decade. There has been much debate about whether energy crops used to offset fossil fuel use, or carbon sequestration in forests, would provide the best climate mitigation benefit. Most current food cropland is unlikely to be used for bioenergy, but in many regions of the world, a proportion of cropland is being abandoned, particularly marginal croplands, and some of this land is now being used for bioenergy. In this study, we assess the consequences of land‐use change on cropland. We first identify areas where cropland is so productive that it may never be converted and assess the potential of the remaining cropland to mitigate climate change by identifying which alternative land use provides the best climate benefit: C4 grass bioenergy crops, coppiced woody energy crops or allowing forest regrowth to create a carbon sink. We do not present this as a scenario of land‐use change – we simply assess the best option in any given global location should a land‐use change occur. To do this, we use global biomass potential studies based on food crop productivity, forest inventory data and dynamic global vegetation models to provide, for the first time, a global comparison of the climate change implications of either deploying bioenergy crops or allowing forest regeneration on current crop land, over a period of 20 years starting in the nominal year of 2000 ad. Globally, the extent of cropland on which conversion to energy crops or forest would result in a net carbon loss, and therefore likely always to remain as cropland, was estimated to be about 420.1 Mha, or 35.6% of the total cropland in Africa, 40.3% in Asia and Russia Federation, 30.8% in Europe‐25, 48.4% in North America, 13.7% in South America and 58.5% in Oceania. Fast growing C4 grasses such as Miscanthus and switch‐grass cultivars are the bioenergy feedstock with the highest climate mitigation potential. Fast growing C4 grasses such as Miscanthus and switch‐grass cultivars provide the best climate mitigation option on ≈485 Mha of cropland worldwide with ~42% of this land characterized by a terrain slope equal or above 20%. If that land‐use change did occur, it would displace ≈58.1 Pg fossil fuel C equivalent (Ceq oil). Woody energy crops such as poplar, willow and Eucalyptus species would be the best option on only 2.4% (≈26.3 Mha) of current cropland, and if this land‐use change occurred, it would displace ≈0.9 Pg Ceq oil. Allowing cropland to revert to forest would be the best climate mitigation option on ≈17% of current cropland (≈184.5 Mha), and if this land‐use change occurred, it would sequester ≈5.8 Pg C in biomass in the 20‐year‐old forest and ≈2.7 Pg C in soil. This study is spatially explicit, so also serves to identify the regional differences in the efficacy of different climate mitigation options, informing policymakers developing regionally or nationally appropriate mitigation actions.
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B | 2012
Pete Smith; Fabrizio Albanito; Madeleine Jane Bell; Jessica Bellarby; Sergey Blagodatskiy; Arindam Datta; Marta Dondini; Nuala Fitton; Helen Flynn; Astley Hastings; Jon Hillier; Edward O. Jones; Matthias Kuhnert; Dali Rani Nayak; Mark Pogson; Mark Richards; Gosia Sozanska-Stanton; Shifeng Wang; Jagadeesh Yeluripati; Emily Bottoms; Chris Brown; Jenny Farmer; Diana Feliciano; Cui Hao; Andy D. Robertson; Sylvia H. Vetter; Hon Man Wong; Jo Smith
Systems approaches have great potential for application in predictive ecology. In this paper, we present a range of examples, where systems approaches are being developed and applied at a range of scales in the field of global change and biogeochemical cycling. Systems approaches range from Bayesian calibration techniques at plot scale, through data assimilation methods at regional to continental scales, to multi-disciplinary numerical model applications at country to global scales. We provide examples from a range of studies and show how these approaches are being used to address current topics in global change and biogeochemical research, such as the interaction between carbon and nitrogen cycles, terrestrial carbon feedbacks to climate change and the attribution of observed global changes to various drivers of change. We examine how transferable the methods and techniques might be to other areas of ecosystem science and ecology.
Scientific Reports | 2017
Fabrizio Albanito; Ulrike Lebender; Thomas Cornulier; Tek B. Sapkota; Frank Brentrup; Clare M. Stirling; Jon Hillier
There has been much debate about the uncertainties associated with the estimation of direct and indirect agricultural nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions in developing countries and in particular from tropical regions. In this study, we report an up-to-date review of the information published in peer-review journals on direct N2O emissions from agricultural systems in tropical and sub-tropical regions. We statistically analyze net-N2O-N emissions to estimate tropic-specific annual N2O emission factors (N2O-EFs) using a Generalized Additive Mixed Model (GAMM) which allowed the effects of multiple covariates to be modelled as linear or smooth non-linear continuous functions. Overall the mean N2O-EF was 1.2% for the tropics and sub-tropics, thus within the uncertainty range of IPCC-EF. On a regional basis, mean N2O-EFs were 1.4% for Africa, 1.1%, for Asia, 0.9% for Australia and 1.3% for Central & South America. Our annual N2O-EFs, estimated for a range of fertiliser rates using the available data, do not support recent studies hypothesising non-linear increase N2O-EFs as a function of applied N. Our findings highlight that in reporting annual N2O emissions and estimating N2O-EFs, particular attention should be paid in modelling the effect of study length on response of N2O.
Archive | 2018
Marta Dondini; M. Abdalla; Fitri K. Aini; Fabrizio Albanito; Marvin R. Beckert; Khadiza Begum; Alison Brand; Kun Cheng; Louis-Pierre Comeau; Edward O. Jones; Jennifer Ann Farmer; Diana Feliciano; Nuala Fitton; Astley Hastings; Dagmar Nadja Henner; Matthias Kuhnert; Dali Rani Nayak; Joseph Oyesikublakemore; Laura Phillips; Mark Richards; Vianney Tumwesige; William F.A. van Dijk; Sylvia H. Vetter; K. Coleman; Joanne Ursula Smith; Pete Smith
Abstract Soil carbon sequestration can be estimated from field to global scale using numerical soil/ecosystem models. In this chapter, we describe the structure and development of models that have been widely used at international level, from simple models that include carbon only to models that include descriptions of the dynamics of a range of nutrients. We also present examples of the application from field to global scale of different models to answer a range of different questions on the impact of land use and climate changes on soil carbon sequestration. A full discussion of the impact of soil carbon modeling on political and socioeconomical aspects is included to emphasize the need of a close interaction between model developers, researchers, land owners/users and policy makers to ensure the development of robust approaches to climate change, food security and soil protection. Whatever type of models are used to meet future challenges, it is important that they continue to be tested using appropriate data, and that they are used in regions and for land uses where they have been developed and validated.
Global Change Biology | 2018
Amy Molotoks; Elke Stehfest; Jonathan C. Doelman; Fabrizio Albanito; Nuala Fitton; Terence P. Dawson; Pete Smith
Abstract Cropland expansion threatens biodiversity by driving habitat loss and impacts carbon storage through loss of biomass and soil carbon (C). There is a growing concern land‐use change (LUC) to cropland will result in a loss of ecosystem function and various ecosystem services essential for human health and well‐being. This paper examines projections of future cropland expansion from an integrated assessment model IMAGE 3.0 under a “business as usual” scenario and the direct impact on both biodiversity and C storage. By focusing on biodiversity hotspots and Alliance for Zero Extinction (AZE) sites, loss of habitat as well as potential impacts on endangered and critically endangered species are explored. With regards to C storage, the impact on both soil and vegetation standing C stocks are examined. We show that if projected trends are realized, there are likely to be severe consequences for these resources. Substantial loss of habitat in biodiversity hotspots such as Indo‐Burma, and the Philippians is expected as well as 50% of species in AZE sites losing part of their last remaining habitat. An estimated 13.7% of vegetation standing C stocks and 4.6% of soil C stocks are also projected to be lost in areas affected with Brazil and Mexico being identified as priorities in terms of both biodiversity and C losses from cropland expansion. Changes in policy to regulate projected cropland expansion, and increased measures to protect natural resources, are highly likely to be required to prevent these biodiversity and C losses in the future.
Archive | 2013
John Sweeney; Fabrizio Albanito; Anthony Brereton; Amelia Caffarra; Rosemary Charlton; Alison Donnelly; Rowan Fealy; Joanne Fitzgerald; Nicholas M. Holden; Mike Jones; Conor Murphy; Johnstown Castle
Synthesis and Modeling of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Carbon Storage in Agricultural and Forest Systems to Guide Mitigation and Adaptation | 2016
Jon Hillier; Mohammed Abdalla; Jessica Bellarby; Fabrizio Albanito; Arindam Datta; Marta Dondini; Nuala Fitton; Paul D. Hallett; Astley Hastings; Edward O. Jones; Matthias Kuhnert; Dali Rani Nayak; Mark Pogson; Mark Richards; Jo Smith; Sylvia H. Vetter; Jagadeesh Yeluripati; Pete Smith
Archive | 2018
Fabrizio Albanito; Nuala Fitton; Peter G. Smith
Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment | 2018
Qian Yue; Alicia Ledo; Kun Cheng; Fabrizio Albanito; Ulrike Lebender; Tek B. Sapkota; Frank Brentrup; Clare M. Stirling; Pete Smith; Jianfei Sun; Genxing Pan; Jonathan Hillier