1

Chapter I

Introduction

The challenge of carbon sequestration in trees is increasingly urgent amidst

escalating climate concerns. Specifically, the need to understand the efficacy of carbon

sequestration in trees, especially in the context of Mindanao State University (MSU)

Buug, remains a pressing research question.

Carbon sequestration in trees plays a pivotal role in mitigating climate change by

capturing and storing atmospheric carbon dioxide. However, the efficiency of this

process can vary significantly depending on various factors such as tree species,

environmental conditions, and management practices. Given the ecological significance

of trees and the growing imperative to combat climate change, comprehensively

understanding the dynamics of carbon sequestration in trees is paramount.

Carbon sequestration is natural method for the removal of carbon from the

atmosphere by storing it in the biosphere (Chavan and Rasal 2010). A carbon sink

absorbs CO2, from the atmosphere, and stores it as carbon. Trees serve as a sink for CO 2,

by fixing carbon during photosynthesis and storing excess carbon as biomass. As more

photosynthesis occurs, more CO2, is converted into biomass, reducing carbon in the

atmosphere and sequestering in plant tissues above and below ground (IPCC 2003, Gorte

2009) resulting in the growth of different parts (Chavan and Rasal 2010). The concept of

CO2, sinks has become more widely known after the Kyoto Protocol emphasized the

significance of CO2, sinks as a form of carbon offset.

 2

This research endeavors to shed light on the of carbon sequestration in trees

within MSU Buug Campus. By conducting a thorough investigation, it aims to provide

insights about the carbon sequestration rates in trees within this particular ecosystem.

Understanding these dynamics will not only contribute to the broader scientific

understanding of carbon sequestration but will also offer valuable guidance for

optimizing carbon sequestration efforts within the MSU Buug campus and similar

environments.

Statement of the Problem

This study aimed to determine the amount and variations of carbon sequestration

of trees in MSU Buug Campus.

Specifically, it sought to verify the following statement:

1. The difference in the use of land affects the amount of carbon sequestration of

trees.

2. Anthropogenic activities affect the carbon sequestration of trees.

Objectives of the Study

The following were the objectives of this study:

1. To determine the amount of carbon sequestration of trees in the MSU Buug

Campus.

2. To determine if there is a significant difference between the selected sites in

MSU Buug Campus.

 3

3. To determine which of the main trees in the MSU Buug Campus shows the

greatest amount of carbon sequestration result.

Hypothesis

Alternative Hypothesis (Ha) : There is a significant difference in the amount of

carbon sequestration of trees in MSU, Buug Campus. Zamboanga Sibugay.

Scope and Limitation

The study will only determine the amount of carbon sequestration of trees;

particularly on the three (3) selected sites in MSU Buug Campus. The minimum

measurement of the tree width was four (4) inches. The study will be conducted at

Mindanao State University Buug Campus.

Significance of the Study

The significance of a study on the carbon sequestration of trees at Mindanao State

University (MSU) Buug encompasses several important aspects:

To The Environmental Benefits

By quantifying the carbon sequestration capacity of trees, the study contributes to

understanding how MSU Buug's forests and tree plantations help mitigate climate change

by absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

To The Biodiversity Conservation

The study can highlight the role of these trees in supporting local ecosystems,

promoting biodiversity, and maintaining habitat for various species.

To the Scientific Contribution

 4

The research adds to the body of knowledge on carbon sequestration, providing

valuable data that can be used by scientists, ecologists, and environmentalists.

To the Educational Resource

It serves as an educational tool for students and researchers at MSU Buug,

enhancing their understanding of environmental science and sustainability practices.

To the Informed Decision-Making

The findings can inform campus and regional policies on forest management,

urban planning, and environmental conservation, ensuring that these policies are backed

by scientific data.

To the Community Awareness

Raising awareness among the local community about the importance of trees in

carbon sequestration can encourage community participation in conservation efforts.

To the Economic Benefits

Identifying high carbon sequestration areas can lead to potential opportunities for

carbon credit and funding for conservation projects.

Operational Definition of Terms

The following terms are defined in accordance to their use in the study:

Carbon Pool

Refers to carbon reservoirs that have the capacity to both take in and release

carbon.

Carbon Sequestration
 5

It is a natural process by which carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere

and held in solid or liquid form in the plant body.

Carbon Stock

Is the amount of carbon that has been sequestered from the atmosphere and is

now stored within the forest ecosystem mainly within living biomass and soil, and to

lesser extent also in dead wood and litter.

MSU Buug

A specific initiative undertaken by MSU Buug (Mindanao State University, Buug

Campus) focused on planting and maintaining trees to enhance environmental

sustainability and offset carbon emissions.

Anthropogenic

Environmental change caused or influenced by people, either directly or

indirectly.
 6

Chapter II

Review of Related Literature

Carbon Sequestration and its Role in Climate Change Mitigation

Carbon sequestration, the process by which trees and other vegetation absorb

carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the atmosphere and store it in biomass, is a significant

method for mitigating climate change. According to Lal (2004), forests and tree

plantations play an important role in the global carbon cycle by acting as carbon sinks.

This is essential as the increase in greenhouse gases, particularly CO₂, is a major driver

of global warming. Forest ecosystems, through photosynthesis, remove CO₂ from the

atmosphere, helping to balance global carbon levels.

Carbon Sequestration Potential of Trees

Different tree species vary in their carbon sequestration potential. Factors such as

species type, growth rate, and local environmental conditions affect the amount of carbon

a tree can sequester. According to McGroddy et al. (2004), trees with faster growth rates

generally sequester more carbon during their early years compared to slower-growing
 7

species. However, slow-growing trees tend to sequester more carbon over the long term

due to their extended lifespan and larger biomass.

Research by Nowak and Crane (2002) highlighted the role of urban forests in

carbon sequestration, revealing that urban trees in the United States sequester an

estimated 22.8 million tons of carbon annually. The study noted that species selection and

forest management practices are critical in optimizing carbon sequestration in various

ecosystems.

In the Philippines, a tropical country rich in biodiversity, trees serve not only as a

source of timber but also as a major carbon sink. A study by Lasco and Pulhin (2009)

assessed the carbon storage and sequestration potential of Philippine Forest ecosystems.

The results showed that forests in the Philippines are capable of sequestering

approximately 3.9 to 8.5 tons of carbon per hectare per year, depending on forest type

and location.

According to Jithila (2018) The carbon sequestration of 610 trees belonging to 45

species was estimated. Diameter at breast height (DBH) and the approximate age of trees

were documented to measure the rate of carbon sequestration. The average carbon

content of these trees was 50.391t/tree. The total carbon sequestered by these trees was

138.367t/year. Highest (33709 kg/year) sequestration was observed in Artocarpus

heterophyllus and the lowest (52.69 kg/year) in Spondias pinnata. Melia azedarach

showed the highest average DBH and more carbon sequestration potential, whereas

Azadirachta indica showed the minimum carbon sequestration potential. The regression

analyses indicated that both DBH and number of trees have a positive relation with

carbon sequestration rate of tree species.

 8

Related Studies

Muhammad Afzal, Aqeela Mobeen Akhtar Journal of Agricultural Research (03681157)

51 (1), 2013

A study was conducted at Punjab Forestry Research Institute, Faisalabad,

Pakistan, during the year 2009-10. The objective was to determine the factors that affect

carbon sequestration in trees. For this purpose, 773 trees of 75 different species were

chosen for this purpose from the Punjab Forest Department's arboretum in Changa

Manga. These trees were 40 years old on average. Thus, tree height and diameter had a

big impact on CO2 sequestration. The results additionally demonstrated that age has no

discernible effect on CO2 sequestration. The overall findings demonstrated that diameter

was the most important factor influencing the sequestration of carbon in trees by crop

density, which was shown to be non-significant.

Ajay Kumar Mishra, J Singh, V Kumar, R Srivastava, Shalini Srivastava Col Environ

Conserv 19 (2), 401-407, 2013

This study was conducted by Mishra et al at Central Soil Salinity Research

Institute, Karnal, Haryana, India during the year 2013 to look into the overall

sequestration of carbon in ten major tree species in Rajiv Gandhi South Campus, Banaras
 9

Hindu University, Barkaccha, Mirzapur, India that were planted on 2760 acres. Because

it is not advisable to chop specific tree species for biomass estimation, a non-destructive

method is used instead. Height, girth, and wood density are the three key dimensions

needed to quantify biomass and carbon stock. The shadow method is used to measure

height, and the circumference is calculated as the diameter at breast height (dbh), which

is above the floor. According to the study, the selecting tree species exhibited a positive

association with their carbon store and were superior to the destructive method used to

estimate biomass and carbon stock.

Vikram Singh, Sharda R Gupta, Narender Singh International Journal of Ecology and

Environmental Sciences 42 (5), 51-64, 2017

This study was conducted by Singh and Gupta at the International Journal of

Ecology and Environmental Sciences during the year 2017 to analyze plant biomass and

carbon sequestration in the soil–plant system of the tropical dry deciduous forest

ecosystems. The study was carried out in three protected forests in the tropical dry

deciduous forest region in Gurgaon district, southern Haryana, India. The forests are

dominated by Ailanthus excelsa and Cassia Fistula (AE-CF) at Bhondsi; Acacia

leucophloea, and Balanites aegyptiaca (AL-BA) at GawalpahariAnogeissus pendula and

Acacia leucophloea (AP-AL) at Raisina. The studied forests showed an appreciable

carbon sequestration potential in the plant soil system, which could play an important role

in climate change mitigation and adaptation.

An investigation was conducted by Singh and Gill at Range Management and

Agroforestry during the year 2014 to quantify the biomass production, C and CO2
 10

storage in the biomass, nutrient content (N, P and K) and their removal by five tree

species namely toon after seven years of growth in an Agri silviculture system (trees

intercropped with pearl millet -wheat rotation) in Punjab. Depth wise, the status of soil

organic carbon (OC) and available N, P, and K in the surface soil were also determined

before planting and at the time of harvesting of the trees. The aboveground and

belowground fresh biomass was the lowest and the highest in eucalyptus, whereas the dry

biomass was the lowest and the highest in poplar. Available N, P, and K were highest

under poplar at the end of the experiment. Poplar, eucalyptus, and dek had higher

biomass production and thus more C and CO2 sequestration than maharukh and toon.

Baljit Singh, RIS Gill Range Management and Agroforestry 35 (1), 107-114, 2014

An investigation was conducted by Singh and Gill at Range Management and

Agroforestry during the year 2014 to quantify the biomass production, C and CO2

storage in the biomass, nutrient content (N, P and K) and their removal by five tree

species namely toon after seven years of growth in an Agri silviculture system (trees

intercropped with pearl millet -wheat rotation) in Punjab. Depth wise, the status of soil

organic carbon (OC) and available N, P, and K in the surface soil were also determined

before planting and at the time of harvesting of the trees. The aboveground and

belowground fresh biomass was the lowest and the highest in eucalyptus, whereas the dry

biomass was the lowest and the highest in poplar. Available N, P, and K were highest

under poplar at the end of the experiment. Poplar, eucalyptus, and dek had higher

biomass production and thus more C and CO2 sequestration than maharukh and toon.
 11

Asha A Juwarkar, AO Varghese, SK Singh, VV Aher, PR Thawale Eco-

restoration Division, National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI)

October 12, 2011

This study was conducted by Juwarkar et al at Eco-restoration Division, National

Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI), during the year 2011 to find the

potential for forestry techniques to lessen climate change. Deforestation without purpose

reduces photosynthetic biomass, which damages the self-regulating system that

eliminates carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through burning. Using conventional

carbon inventory techniques, the biomass densities and carbon stocks of the Tadoba

Andhari Tiger Reserve Forest (TATR), located in Chandrapur, Maharashtra, India, were

calculated in this study. The current methods for estimating the carbon stock for large

forest areas primarily rely on data from forest inventories in addition to other variables

like biomass equations that convert diameter, height, or volume data into estimates of

biomass. The current state of carbon sequestered and stored in a tropical dry forest

ecosystem is better understood thanks to this work.

 12

CHAPTER lll

Methodology

This chapter presents the materials and methods that are used and followed in the

conduct of study.

Research Design

This study employs survey methods of research. This study involves sampling in

three (3) sites with an area of 1,902 square meters or site. Inside Mindanao State

University Buug Campus. The study chooses to include the areas of MSU Buug where

there are growing trees. Rope will be used to measure the quadrants.

Location of the Area

This study will be conducted inside MSU Buug Campus. Three sites were chosen

inside the campus as shown in figure 1. These sites were chosen based on the number of

growing trees.
 13

A B

2 3
1

1
 14

Figure 1: Map A. Mindanao showing the location of Buug. Map B.Buug showing the
location of MSU Buug. Map C. MSU Buug showing the location of study areas.

MSU Buug is a seven hectares campus. It is one of the campuses of the Mindanao

State University System. Currently, MSU Buug has many growing trees inside it. These

trees are used in laboratory activities of the course BS Forestry. Figure 1 shows the

location of the trees in MSU Buug Campus considered as study sites for this research.

Survey Procedures

The three (3) sites in MSU Buug were plotted with one (1) each site consisting of

1,902 square meters each quadrat. Trees with a minimum width measurement of four (4)

inches in every quadrat was measured for its carbon sequestered.

Data Collection

The following is considered in collecting the data:

1. Tree species in each plotted quadrat were identified with the use of taxonomic

books and a Dendrologist's assistance.

2. Estimated Tree Height (in Feet): Using the Biltmore stick, the researcher

measured the height of a tree by standing fifteen (15) meters away from it,

holding the stick at breast height, and carefully turning it upright to see the

estimated measurement.

3. Using a tree caliper, measure the diameter of the tree stem (in inches) by placing

the tool at the tree's breast height. The study comprised trees with a minimum

width measurement of four (4) inches.

 15

4. Calculating the Tree's Total Green Weight with the Formula TGW-W(120%),

where W=0.25 D2H for D<1 inch and W=0.15 D² H for D>11 inch (Tye, 2018).

5. Calculating the Total Dry Weight: To find the tree's total dry weight, multiply

the green weight figure by 72.5% (Tye, 2018).

6. Calculating the Weight of Carbon: Generally, a tree's average carbon content is

50% of its total volume. Thus, the dry weight of the tree was multiplied by 50%

to find the weight of the carbon in the tree (Tye, 2018).

7. Calculating the Total Carbon Dioxide Sequestration: Two (2) molecules of

oxygen and one (1) molecule of carbon make up carbon dioxide. Carbon has an

atomic weight of 12.001115. Oxygen has an atomic weight of 15.9994. CO2 has

a weight of C+2*0-43.999915. CO2 to Cis ratio is 43.999915/12.001115 3.6663.

As a result, the weight of the carbon in a tree was multiplied by 3.6663 to get the

weight of carbon dioxide stored in the tree (Tye, 2018).

8. The researchers will be wearing the proper attire during collection of data

including jacket, boots, cap, sun protection, insect repellent.

Data analysis

To analyze these is a significant difference between the sites, ANOVA will be

used. ANOVA is a statistical method that compares the average carbon sequestration of

trees in each location to see if one site captures more or less carbon than the others. We

start by assuming that there is no difference in the carbon sequestration between the sites

(null hypothesis) and then test whether there is a significant difference (alternative
 16

hypothesis). If the ANOVA test shows a p-value less than 0.05, it indicates that at least

one site has a significantly different rate of carbon capture compared to the others.

If the ANOVA result shows a significant difference, it suggests that some sites on

campus are better at sequestering carbon, possibly due to factors like tree species, age, or

environmental conditions. This could provide useful information for improving tree

management and increasing carbon capture in specific areas. On the other hand, if no

significant difference is found, it means that all sites are similar in their carbon

sequestration, implying consistent carbon storage across the campus.

CHAPTER IV

This chapter presents, analyses, and interprets the data gathered from 3 sites

quadrant in MSU-Buug Campus carbon sequestration.

4.1 Amount of Carbon Sequestration of Trees in MSU Buug

Table 1. Amount of Carbon Sequestered by Trees in MSU-BUUG

NO. TREES SITE 1 SITE 2 SITE 3 TOTAL
10184.3131
T1 3759.121225 2550.9262 3874.265758 8
21685.5169
T2 10079.49259 7271.054739 4334.969606 4
20455.7665
T3 5274.215649 8528.801426 6652.749471 5
T4 12208.38266 3138.43726 1991.82118 17338.6411
14558.0423
T5 2736.85194 5948.415396 5872.774982 2
6066.87060
T6 1061.58963 1597.094065 3408.186907 3
21456.2624
T7 631.0560581 1703.723084 19121.48333 7
15208.3712
T8 1328.477512 3960.72388 9919.169834 3
 17

10628.2334
T9 1454.705151 2837.576452 6335.951877 8
11010.8457
T10 1285.484347 2541.893406 7183.467997 5
14600.6770
T11 1967.112332 1244.888237 11388.67648 5
20762.0829
T12 6055.087284 1643.436127 13063.55952 3
23521.2772
T13 12123.4298 7867.64999 3530.197468 6
T14 1094.283964 4289.228959 1843.929707 7227.44263
11939.2571
T15 1632.832312 5659.702058 4646.722783 5
9193.53380
T16 3960.72388 5232.809921 1
22178.1094
T17 5773.952604 16404.15683 3
14336.1015
T19 1751.583753 12584.51782 7
2398.63995
T20 2398.639953 3
6409.26041
T21 6409.260411 1
3346.29232
T22 3346.292328 8
2726.54952
T23 2726.549526 6
1195.09270
T24 1195.092708 8
T25 12676.0365 12676.0365
3908.44981
T26 3908.449815 5
2354.70110
T27 2354.701108 8
3667.33692
T28 3667.336926 6
3411.39904
T29 3411.399044 4
314445.103
TOTAL 116,272.141 60,783.55128 137,389.4115 7
5279.18609
MEAN 4,152.576465 4,052.236752 7632.745081 9

Table 1 above shows the amount of carbon sequestration of trees in MSU-Buug

Campus. It shows that site 1 located at the back of Senior High has 29 trees in total of
 18

116,272.141 carbon sequestration, followed by Site 2 located at the back of Junior High

has 15 trees in total of 60,783.55128 carbon sequestration. Site 3 located at the back of

the library has 19 trees in total of 137,389.4115 carbon sequestration. As a result, Site 3

has the greatest carbon sequestration because there are no anthropogenic activities such

as burning of waste and cutting of trees that can active the growth of trees. Followed by

Site 1 that has significant result in site 3. Site 2 has the lowest carbon sequestration

because there is a stunted of growth caused by human activities such as dumping trash

and deforestation.

4.2 Carbon Sequestration Comparison Among the Sites

Figure 2. Graft of the Weight of the Carbon Sequestration of trees in MSU-BUUG

160000

140000

120000

100000

80000

60000

40000

20000

0
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 T12 T13 T14 T15 T16 T17 T19 T20 T21 T22 T23 T24 T25 T26 T27 T28 T29 TAL
TO

Site 1 site 2 site 3

Figure 2 shows the graph of the total mean amount of Carbon Sequestration of

trees in MSU-BUUG. Site 3 shows the highest amount of Carbon Sequestration of trees
 19

with the mean of 7632.745081, followed by Site 1 which has a mean Carbon

Sequestration of 4,152.576465, and the least Carbon Sequestration of trees among the

trees is site 2 with a mean of 4,052.236752.

4.3 Variation Between the Study Sites

Table 2. ANOVA and DMRT Result for the Data in Table 1.

Source of P-
Variation SS df MS F value F crit
1568831 7844157 5.33717 0.0074 3.1559
Between Groups 55 2 7.5 61 54 32
8524379 1469720
Within Groups 57 58 6.1

1009321
Total 112 60

Table 2 above shows that the P-value (0.007454) is less than the F at 5%

(5.3371761) level of significance. This warrant that the rejection of the null hypothesis

and the acceptance of the alternative hypothesis. Thus, there is a significant difference on

the weight of the carbon sequestration of trees in MSU-Buug Campus.

 20

Table 3. Post Hoc

Treatments Mean Tukey HSD Tukey HSD Tukey HSD

pair Difference Q statistic p-value inference

Site 1 vs Site 100.3397

0.1157 0.8999947 insignificant
2

Site 1 vs Site 3480.17

4.2495 0.0107751 * p<0.05
3

Site 2 vs Site 3580.51

3.7780 0.0260950 * p<0.05
3

Table 3 above shows the difference between the groups. It shows that site 1 and site 2

have insignificant results. Site 1 and Site 3 have significant results that have 0.0107751 p-

value. Site 2 and site 3 have significant results that have 0.0260950 p-value.

Chapter V

Summary
 21

The study was conducted for purpose of determining if there is a significant

difference on the amount of carbon sequestration of Trees MSU-Buug Campus and in

determining which of the three (3) sites in the Campus shows the greatest carbon

sequestration result. This study was conducted March 8-9, 2025, at MSU-Buug Campus.

This study focused on the amount of carbon sequestration of trees in three (3)

sites of MSU Buug Campus. Each site has an area of 1,902 square meters.

The Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) revealed that there is a significant difference

in the amount of carbon sequestration of trees in MSU Buug Campus. The Duncan’s

Range Test (DMRT) revealed that the trees in Site 3 shows the greatest weight of carbon

sequestration, which is followed by Site 1, and the lowest carbon sequestration of trees is

obtained by Site 2.

These findings confirmed with the work of Chavan and Rasal (2010), where

urban trees are said to be very important especially in reducing automobile pollution. In

terms of atmospheric carbon reduction, trees in urban areas offer the double benefit of

direct carbon dioxide storage and maintenance of climatic conditions by its

biogeochemical processes (Chavan & Rasal,2010), and the study of Dacallos et al.,

(2019) where trees assimilate to grow and survive.

Conclusions

Based on the findings of the study, the following can be concluded:

 22

1. The difference in the use of land affects the amount of carbon sequestration of

trees are Site 3 and Site1 have the significant effect amount of carbon

sequestration because has an active growth and Site 2 has lowest effect of carbon

sequestration because of stunted growth that caused by human activities and

deforestation.

2. Anthropogenic activities that affect the carbon sequestration of trees are human

activities such as dumping trash, and deforestation.

Recommendation

Based on the results of the studies, the researcher recommends the following:

1. To preserve trees, especially large trees instead of doing anthropogenic activities.

2. To plant more trees; and

3. Before collecting the data, identify first the trees for easier to access; and

4. Further study shall be conducted to confirm and validate this study.

Appendix A
 23

DOCUMENTATION
 24

Appendix A

DOCUMENTATION
 25

Appendix B

RAW DATA

Table 4. Weight of the Carbon Sequestration of the Trees in Site 1 on MSU Buug.
NO. D
INFEE DIAMETE
TREE SQUAERE W TGW TDW C C02 SEQ
T R
S D
2357.051 2828.4618 2050.6348 1025.3174 3759.1212
T1 62 15.92 253.4464
52 24 22 11 25
6320.063 7584.0757 5498.4548 2749.2274 10079.492
T2 65 25.46 648.2116
1 2 97 49 59
3307.048 3968.4587 2877.1326 1438.5663 5274.2156
T3 67 18.14 329.0596
98 76 13 06 49
7654.923 9185.9086 6659.7837 3329.8918 12208.382
T4 65 28.02 785.1204
9 8 93 97 66
1716.066 2059.2794 1492.9776 746.48881 2736.8519
T5 64 13.37 178.7569
24 88 29 44 4
1061.5896
T6 36 8.6 73.96 665.64 798.768 579.1068 289.5534
3
631.05605
T7 21.4 8.6 73.96 395.686 474.8232 344.24682 172.12341
81
832.9845 999.58147 724.69656 362.34828 1328.4775
T8 36 12.42 154.2564
6 2 72 36 12
912.1320 1094.5584 793.55489 396.77744 1454.7051
T9 49 11.14 124.0996
6 72 22 61 51
806.0269 967.23228 701.24340 350.62170 1285.4843
T10 43.3 11.14 124.0996
02 24 47 24 47
1233.422 1480.1071 1073.0776 536.53883 1967.1123
T11 46 13.37 178.7569
61 32 71 54 32
3796.672 4556.0071 3303.1051 1651.5525 6055.0872
T12 61 20.37 414.9369
64 62 92 96 84
7601.656 9121.9879 6613.4412 3306.7206 12123.429
T13 66 27.71 767.8441
59 08 33 17 8
686.1400 823.36807 596.94185 298.47092 1094.2839
T14 39 10.83 117.2889
65 8 66 83 64
1023.821 1228.5860 890.72487 445.36243 1632.8323
T15 55 11.14 124.0996
7 4 9 95 12
2483.460 2980.1529 2160.6109 1080.3054 3960.7238
T16 54 17.51 306.6001
81 72 05 52 8
3620.395 4344.4740 3149.7436 1574.8718 5773.9526
T17 53 21.34 455.3956
02 24 67 34 04
1098.281 1317.9377 955.50487 477.75243 1751.5837
T19 59 11.14 124.0996
46 52 02 51 53
1503.999 1804.7998 1308.4799 654.23995 2398.6399
T20 65 12.42 154.2564
9 8 13 65 53
4018.746 4822.4963 3496.3098 1748.1549 6409.2604
T21 51 22.92 525.3264
96 52 55 28 11
2098.198 2517.8384 1825.4329 912.71645 3346.2923
T22 44 17.83 317.9089
74 88 04 19 28
1709.606 2051.5276 1487.3575 743.67878 2726.5495
T23 40 16.88 284.9344
4 8 68 4 26
749.3493 899.21923 651.93394 325.96697 1195.0927
T24 36 11.78 138.7684
6 2 32 16 08
T25 52.3 31.83 1013.1489 7948.153 9537.7837 6914.8932 3457.4466 12676.036
 26

12 45 15 07 5
2450.683 2940.8205 2132.0949 1066.0474 3908.4498
T26 54.4 17.33 300.3289
82 89 27 63 15
1476.449 1771.7391 1284.5108 642.25543 2354.7011
T27 48 14.32 205.0624
28 36 74 68 08
2299.500 2000.5656 1000.2828 3667.3369
T28 50 17.51 306.6001 2759.4009
75 53 26 26
2139.022 2566.8264 1860.9492 930.47460 3411.3990
T29 52 16.56 274.2336
08 96 1 48 44

Table 5. Weight of the Carbon Sequestration of the Trees in Site 2 on MSU Buug.
NO. D
INFE DIAME
TRE SQUAE W TGW TDW C C02 SEQ
ET TER
ES RED
205.062 1599.486 1919.384 1391.553 695.7767 2550.926
T1 52 14.32
4 72 064 446 232 2
389.667 4559.110 5470.933 3966.426 1983.213 7271.054
T2 78 19.74
6 92 104 5 25 739
648.211 5347.745 6417.294 4652.538 2326.269 8528.801
T3 55 25.46
6 7 84 759 38 426
187.416 1967.869 2361.442 1712.046 856.0230 3138.437
T4 70 13.69
1 05 86 074 368 26
469.155 3729.787 4475.744 3244.914 1622.457 5948.415
T5 53 21.66
6 02 424 707 354 396
317.908 1001.413 1201.695 871.2293 435.6146 1597.094
T6 21 17.83
9 035 642 405 702 065
187.416 1068.271 1281.926 929.3964 464.6982 1703.723
T7 38 13.69
1 77 124 399 2 084
306.600 2483.460 2980.152 2160.610 1080.305 3960.723
T8 54 17.51
1 81 972 905 452 88
223.801 1779.222 2135.067 1547.923 773.9618 2837.576
T9 53 14.96
6 72 264 766 832 452
295.152 1593.822 1912.587 1386.625 693.3129 2541.893
T10 36 17.18
4 96 552 975 876 406
138.768 780.5722 679.0978 339.5489 1244.888
T11 37.5 11.78 936.6867
4 5 575 288 237
196.280 1030.470 1236.564 896.5093 448.2546 1643.436
T12 35 14.01
1 525 63 568 784 127
554.602 4933.189 5919.827 4291.874 2145.937 7867.649
T13 59.3 23.55
5 238 085 637 318 99
284.596 2689.440 3227.328 2339.813 1169.906 4289.228
T14 63 16.87
9 705 846 413 707 959
454.968 3548.757 4258.508 3087.418 1543.709 5659.702
T15 52 21.33
9 42 904 955 478 058
 27

Table 6. Weight of the Carbon Sequestration of the Trees in Site 3 on MSU Buug
NO. D
INFEE DIAMETE
TRE SQUAER W TGW TDW C C02 SEQ
T R
S D
2429.2496 2915.0996 2113.4472 1056.7236 3874.2657
T1 58 16.71 279.2241 7 04 13 06 58
2718.1210 3261.7453 2364.7653 1182.3826 4334.9696
T2 57 17.83 317.9089 95 14 53 76 06
4171.4199 5005.7039 3629.1353 1814.5676 6652.7494
T3 63 21.01 441.4201 45 34 52 76 71
1498.6987 1086.5565 543.27828 1991.8211
T4 60 11.78 138.7684 1248.9156 2 72 6 8
3682.3588 4418.8305 3203.6521 1601.8260 5872.7749
T5 63 19.74 389.6676 2 84 73 87 82
1859.1969 3408.1869
T6 50 16.88 284.9344 2137.008 2564.4096 6 929.59848 07
1248.915 11989.589 14387.507 10430.943 5215.4715 19121.483
T7 64 35.34 6 76 71 09 46 33
6219.5372 7463.4446 5410.9973 2705.4986 9919.1698
T8 54 27.71 767.8441 1 52 73 86 34
4767.3370 3456.3193 1728.1596 6335.9518
T9 60 21.01 441.4201 3972.7809 8 83 92 77
4504.1921 5405.0305 3918.6471 1959.3235 7183.4679
T10 66 21.33 454.9689 1 32 36 68 97
7140.9501 8569.1401 6212.6266 3106.3133 11388.676
T11 62 27.71 767.8441 3 56 13 07 48
8191.1385 9829.3662 7126.2905 3563.1452 13063.559
T12 61 29.92 895.2064 6 72 47 74 52
2656.2135 1925.7548 962.87741 3530.1974
T13 55 16.38 268.3044 2213.5113 6 31 55 68
1387.4212 1005.8804 502.94021 1843.9297
T14 35 14.84 220.2256 1156.1844 8 28 4 07
2913.5971 3496.3166 2534.8295 1267.4147 4646.7227
T15 57 18.46 340.7716 8 16 47 73 83
3281.0866 3937.3040 2854.5454 1427.2727 5232.8099
T16 58 19.42 377.1364 8 16 12 06 21
1054.950 10285.766 12342.919 8948.6167 4474.3083 16404.156
T17 65 32.48 4 4 68 68 84 83
9468.9226 6864.9689 3432.4844 12584.517
T18 60 29.61 876.7521 7890.7689 8 43 72 82
 28

Appendix C

ANOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
1568831 7844157 5.33717 0.0074 3.1559
Between Groups 55 2 7.5 61 54 32
8524379 1469720
Within Groups 57 58 6.1

1009321
Total 112 60

Post Hoc

Treatments Mean Difference Tukey HSD Tukey HSD Tukey HSD

pair Q statistic p-value inferfence

100.3397
Site 1 vs Site 2 0.1157 0.8999947 insignificant

3480.17
Site 1 vs Site 3 4.2495 0.0107751 * p<0.05

3580.51
Site 2 vs Site 3 3.7780 0.0260950 * p<0.05
 29

Appendix D

Location map

Figure3: Map of MSU Buug Campus

 30

Appendix D

Figure4: Quadrants and location of the trees

Site 3

Site1
Site 2
 31

REFERENCE

Afzal, M., & Akhtar, A. M. (2013). FACTORS AFFECTING CARBON

SEQUESTRATION IN TREES. Journal of Agricultural Research (03681157),
51(1).

Chavan, B. L., & Rasal, G. B. (2010). Sequestered standing carbon stock in selective
tree species grown in university campus at Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India.
International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 2(7), 3003-3007.

Gorte, R. W. (2009). Carbon sequestration in forests. DIANE Publishing.

Juwarkar, A. A., Varghese, A. O., Singh, S. K., Aher, V. V., & Thawale, P. R. (2011).
Carbon sequestration potential in aboveground biomass of natural reserve forest
of Central India.

McGroddy: McGroddy, M. E., Daufresne, T., & Hedin, L. O. (2004). Scaling of C: N: P

stoichiometry in forests worldwide: Implications of terrestrial Redfield‐type
ratios. Ecology, 85(9), 2390-2401.

Mishra, A. K., Singh, J., Kumar, V., Srivastava, R., & Srivastava, S. (2013). Standing
carbon stock estimation in different tree species grown in dry tropical forests of
Vindhyan highland, Mirzapur, India. Ecol Environ Conserv, 19(2), 401-407.

Nowak and Crane: Nowak, D. J., & Crane, D. E. (2002). Carbon storage and
sequestration by urban trees in the USA. Environmental pollution, 116(3), 381-
389.

Priego Santander: Priego-Santander, -Rosas, (2013). Carbon sequestration potential of

trees in a university campus in Mexico. Journal of Environmental Management,
114, 226-233.

Rattan Lal: Lal, R. (2004). Soil carbon sequestration to mitigate climate change.
Geoderma, 123(1-2), 1-22.

Singh, B., & Gill, R. I. S. (2014). Carbon sequestration and nutrient removal by some
tree species in an Agri silviculture system in Punjab, India. Range Management
and Agroforestry, 35(1), 107-114.
 32

Singh, V., Gupta, S. R., & Singh, N. (2017). Carbon sequestration potential of tropical
dry deciduous forests in Southern Haryana, India. International Journal of
Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 42(5), 51-64.

Tye, K. M. (2018). Neural circuit motifs in valence processing. Neuron, 100(2), 436-
452.

CURRICULUM VITAE

ELLAH A. BALURAN

[email protected]

09550361586

PERSONAL INFORMATION

BIRTHDATE : October 07,2008

BIRTHPLACE :Pagadian City
RELIGION : Roman Catholic

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL : Mindanao State University Buug Campus

Datu Panas, Buug, Zamboanga Sibugay
2025
ELEMENTARY : Kumalarang Central Elementary SPED
School 2021
 33

CURRICULUM VITAE

PRINCESS RAINE B. EDRALIN

[email protected]

PERSONAL INFORMATION

BIRTHDATE : August 06,2009

BIRTHPLACE : Pagadian City
RELIGION : Catholic

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL : Mindanao State University Buug Campus

Datu Panas, Buug, Zamboanga Sibugay
2025
ELEMENTARY : Buug Central SPED Center
2021
 34

CURRICULUM VITAE

YANNE REVIENE B. FLORES

[email protected]

09975635189

PERSONAL INFORMATION

BIRTHDATE : July 25,2009

BIRTHPLACE :Diplo Kumalarang Center
RELIGION : Catholic

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL : Mindanao State University Buug Campus

Datu Panas, Buug, Zamboanga Sibugay
2025
ELEMENTARY : Diplo Elementary School
2021
 35

CURRICULUM VITAE

SASHA D. GULTIA

[email protected]

09615876981

PERSONAL INFORMATION

BIRTHDATE : February 16,2009

BIRTHPLACE : Pagadian City
RELIGION : Assembly Of God

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL : Mindanao State University Buug Campus

Datu Panas, Buug, Zamboanga Sibugay
2025
ELEMENTARY : Buug Central SPED Center
2021
 36

CURRICULUM VITAE

XUI KOINE L. MIRASOL

[email protected]

09104076857

PERSONAL INFORMATION

BIRTHDATE : March 22,2008

BIRTHPLACE :Buug, Zamboanga Sibugay
RELIGION : Roman Catholic

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL : Mindanao State University Buug Campus

Datu Panas, Buug, Zamboanga Sibugay
2025
ELEMENTARY : St.Paul School of Buug
2021
37