The effect of forest cover, wooded and non-wooded rangeland on the properties of the organic and mineral soil layer

Document Type : Complete scientific research article

Authors

1 . Corresponding Author, Associate Prof., Dept. of Range Management, Faculty of Natural Resources, Tarbiat Modares University, Noor, I. R. Iran.

2 Ph.D. Student of Rangeland Management, Faculty of Natural Resources, Tarbiat Modares University, Noor, I. R. Iran.

Abstract

Background and Objective :Vegetation cover type, particularly various tree species, plays a pivotal role in enhancing the physical and chemical structure of soil through the production of litter and organic residues. Differences in vegetation types, such as forests, wooded pastures, and non-wooded grasslands, lead to variations in organic matter content, nutrient availability, and soil biological activities. Soil microorganisms and enzyme activities, influenced by plant species, serve as critical indicators for assessing soil quality, fertility, and sustainability. In this context, the present study investigates the characteristics of organic and mineral soil layers in areas with different vegetation covers in the Gil-Kala summer pasture region of Nowshahr, Mazandaran Province, Iran. The study focuses on four vegetation types: a forest dominated by Oriental beech (Fagus orientalis), a mixed shrub land of hawthorn and barberry (Crataegus microphylla and Berberis integerrima), a shrubland dominated by blackthorn (Prunus spinosa), and a grassland dominated by wheatgrass (Agropyron longiaristatum).
Materials and Methods :To evaluate the effects of different land covers on the properties of organic and mineral soil layers, preliminary surveys and field visits were conducted to select contiguous areas with minimal variations in elevation (1600–1610 meters above sea level), slope gradient (5–8%), and slope aspect. In each of the four vegetation types under study, two one-hectare plots (100 m × 100 m) were selected, with a minimum distance of 500 meters between them. Within each plot, five samples of the organic layer (litter or fine debris) and the mineral layer (30 cm × 30 cm to a depth of 10 cm) were collected, resulting in a total of 10 litter samples and 10 soil samples per vegetation type for laboratory analysis. One portion of the soil samples was air-dried and sieved through a 2-mm mesh for physical and chemical analyses, while another portion was stored at 4°C for biological tests. The nutrient content of the litter—including nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), potassium (K), calcium (Ca), and magnesium (Mg)—was measured through standard laboratory mineralization procedures. Laboratory incubation methods were used to assess the activities of urease, phosphatase, arylsulfatase, and invertase enzymes. Earthworms were manually separated from the soil, washed in water, and preserved in alcohol-containing containers. They were identified based on morphological characteristics such as size, body length, color, clitellum position and shape, and the location and type of reproductive organs. Soil mites and collembolans were counted using the Berlese funnel method, soil nematodes were extracted using the Baermann funnel and centrifugation technique, and soil protozoa were quantified under a microscope at 50x magnification. Bacterial and fungal populations were recorded using culture-based methods.
Results :The results indicate that the highest nitrogen content in the organic layer (1.96%) was observed in the beech forest, while the lowest (1.03%) was found in the wheatgrass grassland. Similarly, the highest values for aggregate stability (72%), clay content (42%), coarse aggregates (52%), and fine aggregates (35%) were recorded in the beech forest. In contrast, the lowest values for these properties were 56%, 28%, 30%, and 19%, respectively, in the wheatgrass grassland. The highest pH (7.11) and soil fertility parameters were also associated with the beech forest, while the lowest values were observed in the wheatgrass grassland. Furthermore, the beech forest exhibited the highest abundance (4.1 individuals/m²) and biomass (42.48 mg/m²) of epigeic earthworms, abundance (1.2 individuals/m²) and biomass (4.66 mg/m²) of anecic earthworms, total earthworm abundance (9.5 individuals/m²), soil mite abundance (67,343.3 individuals/m²), soil nematode abundance (811 individuals/100 g soil), and soil protozoan abundance (613 individuals/100 g soil). Additionally, the highest populations of bacteria (4.47 × 10⁷/g soil) and fungi (1.72 × 10⁷/g soil), basal respiration (0.46 mg CO₂/g/day), microbial biomass carbon (362.8 mg/kg), microbial biomass nitrogen (58.28 mg/kg), and the microbial biomass nitrogen-to-phosphorus ratio (2.2) were observed in the beech forest.
Conclusion :Overall, the findings of this study demonstrate that the conversion of herbaceous vegetation to woody (tree and shrub) vegetation in the mountainous Gil-Kala region of Nowshahr, Mazandaran Province, significantly alters the properties of both organic and mineral soil layers. Notable changes include variations in organic layer nitrogen content, aggregate stability, clay percentage, and the proportions of coarse and fine aggregates, all of which showed significant differences among vegetation types. Other parameters, such as ammonium, nitrate, geometric mean of enzyme activities, soil pH, electrical conductivity, total carbon, carbon in fine aggregates, organic matter, total nitrogen, fixed nitrogen, nitrogen in fine aggregates, dissolved organic nitrogen, nutrient elements (phosphorus, potassium, calcium, and magnesium), fine root biomass, and the activities of enzymes such as urease, acid phosphatase, arylsulfatase, and invertase, also exhibited significant changes. Furthermore, attributes such as the abundance and biomass of epigeic, anecic, and endogeic earthworms, as well as the populations of total earthworms, soil mites, nematodes, and protozoa, displayed marked differences across the land cover types. These findings suggest that tree and shrub covers, due to their longer persistence, ability to provide shade, reduce evaporation, and increase soil moisture, play a significant role in improving soil structure and supporting the growth of earthworm and microbial populations. These organisms are crucial for organic matter decomposition, nutrient cycling, and the enhancement of soil’s physical, chemical, and biological properties, ultimately leading to improved soil fertility and productivity. Consequently, the results indicate that expanding woody vegetation cover can create more favorable conditions for optimal soil functioning and serve as an effective strategy for restoring degraded lands. Therefore, in regions with similar semi-arid and mountainous climates facing land degradation and land-use changes, the development of woody vegetation, particularly beech, is recommended.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

1.Delgado-Baquerizo, M., Reich, P. B., Trivedi, C., Eldridge, D. J., Abades, S., Alfaro, F. D., Bastida, F., Berhe, A. A., Cutler, N. A., Gallardo, A., & García-Velázquez, L. (2020). Multiple elements of soil biodiversity drive ecosystem functions across biomes. Nature ecology & evolution, 4(2), 210-220 https://doi. org/10.1038/s41559-019-1084-y.
2.Verrecchia, E. P., & Trombino, L. (2021). A visual atlas for soil micromorphologists. Springer Nature.‏ https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6548.003.0006.
3.Kooch, Y., Tavakoli Feizabadi, M., & Haghverdi, K. (2023). The Effect of Plantation Stands with Different Ages and Rangeland Cover on the Properties of Organic and Surface Soil Layer. Water and Soil, 37(5), 701-720. https://doi.org/ 10.22067/jsw.2023.82251.1280.
4.Wang, H., Gao, J., & Hou, W. (2019). Quantitative attribution analysis of soil erosion in different geomorphological types in karst areas: Based on the geodetector method. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 29, 271-286. https:// doi.org/ 10.1007/ s11442-019-1596-z.
5.Babur, E., Uslu, Ö., Battaglia, M., Diatta, A., Fahad, S., Datta, R., Zafar-Ul-Hye, M., Hussain, G., & Danish, S. (2021). Studying soil erosion by evaluating changes in physico-chemical properties of soils under different land-use types. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences. https://doi.org/10. 1016/J.JSSAS.2021.01.005.
6.Lal, R. (2020). Soil organic matter content and crop yield. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 75(2), 27-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.2489/jswc.75.2.27A.
7.Patiño, S., Hernández, Y., Plata, C., Dominguez, I., Daza, M., Oviedo-Ocaña, R., Buytaert, W., & Ochoa‐Tocachi, B. (2021). Influence of land use on hydro-physical soil properties of Andean páramos and its effect on streamflow buffering. Catena, 202, 105227. https:// doi.org/10.1016/J.CATENA.2021.105227.
8.Chen, H., Zhang, X., Abla, M., Lü, D., Yan, R., Ren, Q., Ren, Z., Yang, Y., Zhao, W., Lin, P., Liu, B., & Yang, X. (2018). Effects of vegetation and rainfall types on surface runoff and soil erosion on steep slopes on the Loess Plateau, China. Catena, 170, 141-149. https://doi. org/10.1016/J.CATENA.2018.06.006.
9.Yuan, Z., & Chen, H. (2015). Decoupling of nitrogen and phosphorus in terrestrial plants associated with global changes. Nature Climate Change, 5, 465-469. https://doi.org/10.1038/NCLIMATE2549.
10.Solomon, D., Lehmann, J., & Zech, W. (2000). Land use effects on soil organic matter properties of chromic luvisols in semi-arid northern Tanzania: carbon, nitrogen, lignin and carbohydrates. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 78(3), 203-213. https:// doi.org/ 10. 1016/S0167-8809(99)00126-7.
11.Grünzweig, J. M., Sparrow, S. D., & Chapin, F. S. (2003). Impact of forest conversion to agriculture on carbon and nitrogen mineralization in subarctic Alaska. Biogeochemistry, 64(2), 271-296. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024976713243.
12.Raiesi, F. (2007). The conversion of overgrazed pastures to almond orchards and alfalfa cropping systems may favor microbial indicators of soil quality in Central Iran. Agriculture, ecosystems & environment, 121(4), 309-318. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2006.11.002.
13.Sousa, F. P., Ferreira, T. O., Mendonça, E. S., Romero, R. E., & Oliveira, J. G. B. (2012). Carbon and nitrogen in degraded Brazilian semi-arid soils undergoing desertification. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 148, 11-21. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2011.11.009.
14.Kabiri, V., Raiesi, F., & Ghazavi, M. A. (2016). Tillage effects on soil microbial biomass, SOM mineralization and enzyme activity in a semi-arid Calcixerepts. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 232, 73-84. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.agee.2016.07.022.
15.Lacerda-Júnior, G. V., Noronha, M. F., Cabral, L., Delforno, T. P., De Sousa, S. T. P., Fernandes-Júnior, P. I., Melo,
I. S., & Oliveira, V. M. (2019). Land use and seasonal effects on the soil microbiome of a Brazilian dry forest. Frontiers in microbiology, 10, 648. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2019.00648.
16.Nielsen, U. N., & Ball, B. A. (2015). Impacts of altered precipitation regimes on soil communities and biogeochemistry in arid and semi‐arid ecosystems. Global change biology, 21(4), 1407-1421. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12789.
17.Goenster, S., Gründler, C., Buerkert, A., & Joergensen, R. G. (2017). Soil microbial indicators across land use types in the river oasis Bulgan sum center, Western Mongolia. Ecological Indicators, 76, 111-118. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.01.002.
18.Thapa, V. R., Ghimire, R., Mikha, M. M., Idowu, O. J., & Marsalis, M. A. (2018). Land use effects on soil health in semiarid drylands. Agricultural & Environmental Letters, 3(1), 180022. https://doi.org/10.2134/ael2018.05.0022.
19.Trasar-Cepeda, C., Leirós, M. C., & Gil-Sotres, F. (2008). Hydrolytic enzyme activities in agricultural and forest soils. Some implications for their use as indicators of soil quality. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 40(9), 2146-2155. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2008. 03.015.
20.Griffiths, B., Bonkowski, M., Roy, J., & Ritz, K. (2001). Functional stability, substrate utilization and biological indicators of soils following environmental impacts. Applied Soil Ecology, 16, 49-61. https://doi.org/10. 1016/S0929-1393(00)00081-0.
21.Rogers, B. F., & Tate Iii, R. L. (2001). Temporal analysis of the soil microbial community along a toposequence in Pineland soils. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 33(10), 1389-1401. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717(01) 00044-X.
22.Román-Sánchez, A., Vanwalleghem, T., Peña, A., Laguna, A., & Giráldez, J. V. (2018). Controls on soil carbon storage from topography and vegetation in a rocky, semi-arid landscapes. Geoderma, 311, 159-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.geoderma.2016.10.013.
23.Tamfuh, P. A., Temgoua, E., Wotchoko, P., Boukong, A., & Bitom, D. (2018). Soil properties and land capability evaluation in a mountainous ecosystem of North-West Cameroon. Journal of Geoscience and Environment Protection, 6(7), 15-33. https://doi.org/10.4236/ gep.2018.67002.
24.Kooch, Y., & Noghre, N. (2020). Nutrient cycling and soil-related processes under different land covers of semi-arid rangeland ecosystems in northern Iran. Catena, 193, 104621. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2020. 104621.
25.Sadeghi, S. H., & Kheirparast, M. (2024). A Biological Management Model for Controlling Soil Erosion in Rangelands of the Kojour Watershed, Mazandaran Province, Iran. Rangeland, 18(1), 23-41. http://rangelandsrm.ir/ article-1-1203-fa.html.
26.Kooch, Y., & Noghre, N. (2020). Nutrient cycling and soil-related processes under different land covers of semi-arid rangeland ecosystems in northern Iran. Catena, 193, 104621. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2020. 104621.
27.Nilsson, M. C., Wardle, D. A., & Dahlberg, A. (1999). Effects of plant litter species composition and diversity on the boreal forest plant-soilsystem. Oikos, 16-26. https://doi.org/10.2307/ 3546566.
28.Bremner, J. M., & Mulvaney, C. S. (1982). Nitrogen-total (In: Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2, Eds: RH Miller, RR Keeney).
29.Tavakoli, M., Kooch, Y., & Akbarinia, M. (2018). Frequency and diversity of worms in topsoil of degraded and reclaimed forest habitats of the Caspian region. Iranian Journal of Forest,
10 (3), 293-306. [In Persian]
30.Zancan, S., Trevisan, R., & Paoletti, M. G. (2006). Soil algae composition under different agro-ecosystems in North-Eastern Italy. Agric Ecosyst Environ, 112(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.agee.2005.06.018.
31.Blake, G. R., & Hartge, K. H. (1986). Particle density. In: Klute, A. (Ed.), Methods of soil analysis. Part 1. Physical and mineralogical methods, 2nd ed. SSSA Book Ser. 5. ASA and SSSA, Madison, WI, 377-382. https:// doi.org/10.2136/sssabookser5.1.2ed.c14.
32.Kemper, W. D., & Rosenau, R. C. (1986). Aggregate stability and size distribution. Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 1 Physical and Mineralogical Methods, 5, 425-442. https://doi.org/ 10.2136/sssabookser5.1.2ed.c17.
33.Six, J., Callewaert, P., Lenders, S., De Gryze, S., Morris, S. J., Gregorich, E. G., Paul, E. A., & Paustian, K. (2002). Measuring and understanding carbon storage in afforested soils by physical fractionation. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 66(6), 1981-1987. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2002.1981.
34.Allison, L. E. (1975). Organic carbon. In: Black CA. Methods of soil analysis. American Society of Agronomy, Part, 2.
35.Bremner, J. M., & Mulvaney, C. S. (1982). Nitrogen-total total. In ‘Methods of Soil Analyses. Part 2: Chemical and Microbiological Properties. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, 595-624. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronmonogr9. 2.2ed.c31.
36.Wang, Q., & Wang, S. (2006). Microbial biomass in subtropical forest soils: effect of conversion of natural secondary broad-leaved forest to Cunninghamia lanceolata plantation. Journal of Forestry Research, 17(3), 197-200. https:// doi.org/ 10.1007/ s11676-006-0046-9.
37.Chapman, H. D., & Pratt, P. F. (1962). Methods of analysis for soils, plants and waters. Soil Science, 93(1), 68. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1963.03615995002700010004x.
38.Bower, C. A., Reitemeier, R. F., & Fireman, M. (1952). Exchangeable cation analysis of saline and alkali soils. Soil Science, 73, 251-261. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1097/00010694-195204000-00001.
39.Nelson, D. W. A., & Sommers, L. (1983). Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 2 Chemical and Microbiological Properties, 9, 539-579. https:// doi.org/10.2134/agronmonogr 9.2.2ed.c29.
40.Elliott, E. T., & Cambardella, C. A. (1991). Physical separation of soil organic matter. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 34(1-4), 407-419. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-8809(91) 90124-G.
41.Page, A. L., Miller, R. H., & Jeeney, D. R. (1750). Methods of soil analysis, Part 1. Physical properties. SSSA Publication, Madison.
42.Neatrour, M. A., Jones, R. H., & Golladay, S. W. (2005). Correlations between soil nutrient availability and fine-root biomass at two spatial scales in forested wetlands with contrasting hydrological regimes. Canadian Journal of ForestResearch, 35(12), 2934-2941. https://doi.org/10.1139/x05-217.
43.Alef, K., & Nannipieri, P. (1995). Methods in applied soil microbiology and biochemistry (Issue 631.46 M592 ma). Academic Press. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/B978-0-12-513840-6.X5014-9.
44.Bayranvand, M., & Kooch, Y. (2016). The effect of broad-leaved tree species on abundance and diversity of earthworms in the flat forest ecosystem. Journal of Soil Biology, 4(1), 15-26.‏ https://doi.org/10.22092/sbj.2016.106755.
45.Kooch, Y., Samadzadeh, B., & Hosseini, S. M. (2017). The effects of broad-leaved tree species on litter quality and soil properties in a plain forest stand. Catena, 150 (3), 223-229. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.catena.2016.11.023.
46.Adl, S. M., Acosta-Mercado, D., Anderson, T. R., & Lynn, D. H. (2006). Protozoa, supplementary material. Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis, 2 (1), 455-470.
47.Wollum, A. G. (1982). Cultural methods for soil microorganisms. Methods of soil analysis: part 2 chemical and microbiological properties, 9, 781-802. https:// doi.org/10.2134/agronmonogr 9.2.2ed.c37.
48.Anderson, T. H., & Domsch, K. H. (1990). Application of eco-physiological quotients (qCO2 and qD) on microbial biomasses from soils of different cropping histories. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 22(2), 251-255. https:// doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(90)90094-G.
49.Brookes, P. C., Landman, A., Pruden, G., & Jenkinson, D. S. (1985). Chloroform fumigation and the release of soil nitrogen: a rapid direct extraction method to measure microbial biomass nitrogen in soil. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 17(6), 837-842. https://doi. org/10.1016/0038-0717(85)90144-0.
50.Robertson, G. P., Coleman, D. C., Sollins, P., & Bledsoe, C. S. (1999). Standard soil methods for long-term ecological research (Vol. 2). Oxford University Press on Demand. https://doi. org/10.1093/oso/9780195120837.001.0001.
51.Perfect, E., Kay, B. D., Van Loon, W. K. P., Sheard, R. W., & Pojasok, T. (1990). Factors influencing soil structural stability within a growing season. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 54(1), 173-179.‏ https://doi.org/10.2136/ sssaj1990.03615995005400010027x.
52.Tamfuh, P. A., Temgoua, E., Wotchoko, P., Boukong, A., & Bitom, D. (2018). Soil properties and land capability evaluation in a mountainous ecosystem of North-West Cameroon. Journal of Geoscience and Environment Protection, 6(7), 15-33. https://doi.org/10.4236/ gep.2018.67002.
53.Jafari Haghighi, M. (2003). Methods of soil analysis sampling and important physical. 2nd ed., Sari: Neday Zohi, 236p. [In Persian]
54.Wood, M. (1995). Environmental soil biology, 2nd ed., Blackie Academic and Professional, Glasgow, 150. https:// link.springer.com/ book/ 10.1007/978-94-011-0625-2.
55.Lieskovský, J., Kenderessy, P., Petlušová, V., & Petluš, P. (2024). Effect of grass cover and abandonment on soil surface changes and soil properties in traditional vineyards in Vráble viticultural region in southwestern Slovakia. Catena, 235, 107702. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2023.107702.
56.Gan, F., Shi, H., Gou, J., Zhang, L., Dai, Q., & Yan, Y. (2024). Responses of soil aggregate stability and soil erosion resistance to different bedrock strata dip and land use types in the karst trough valley of Southwest China. International Soil and Water Conservation Research, 12(3), 684-696. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.iswcr.2023.09.002.
57.Camarero, J. J., Colangelo, M., Gazol, A., Pizarro, M., Valeriano, C., & Igual, J. M. (2021). Effects of windthrows on forest cover, tree growth and soil characteristics in drought-prone pine plantations. Forests, 12(7), 817. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12070817.
58.Ding, J., Delgado‐Baquerizo, M., Wang, J. T., & Eldridge, D. J. (2021). Ecosystem functions are related to tree diversity in forests but soil biodiversity in open woodlands and shrublands. Journal of Ecology, 109(12), 4158-4170. https://doi.org/10.1111/13652745.13788.
59.Soto, L., Galleguillos, M., Seguel, O., Sotomayor, B., & Lara, A. (2019). Assessment of soil physical properties' statuses under different land covers within a landscape dominated by exotic industrial tree plantations in south-central Chile. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 74(1), 12-23. https://doi. org/10.2489/jswc.74.1.12.
60.Cao, S., Lu, C., & Yue, H. (2017). Optimal tree canopy cover during ecological restoration: a case study of possible ecological thresholds in Changting, China. BioScience, 67(3), 221-232. https://doi.org/10.1093/ biosci/biw157.
61.Venuste, N. (2020). Effects of Tree Forest Plantations on Soil Physicochemical Properties in the Arboretumof Ruhande, Southern Province of Rwanda. Rwanda Journal of Engineering, Science, Technology and Environment, 3(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/ 10.4314/rjeste.v3i1.6.
62.Tong, R., Ji, B., Wang, G. G., Lou, C., Ma, C., Zhu, N., ... & Wu, T. (2024). Canopy gap impacts on soil organic carbon and nutrient dynamic: a meta-analysis. Annals of Forest Science, 81(1), 12.‏ https://doi.org/10.3390/ f15081293.
63.Li, C., Ji, Y., Ma, N., Zhang, J., Zhang, H., Ji, C., ... & Li, Y. (2024). Positive effects of vegetation restoration on the soil properties of post-mining land. Plant and Soil, 497(1), 93-103.‏ https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11104-022-05864-w.
64.Tsogbadrakh, O., Sukhbaatar, G., Ganbaatar, B., Batchuluun, B., Altanjin, D., Kim, K. W., & Oyuntsetseg, B. (2024). Tree canopy area-dependent changes in soil properties: a comparative study in the southern limit of boreal forest distribution. Forest Science and Technology, 20(1), 58-66. https://doi. org/10.1080/21580103.2023.2295450.
65.Matkala, L., Salemaa, M., & Bäck, J. (2020). Soil total phosphorus and nitrogen explain vegetation community composition in a northern forest ecosystem near a phosphate massif. Biogeosciences, 17(6), 1535-1556. https:// doi.org/ 10.5194/ bg-17-1535-2020.
66.Chen, Y., Zhang, S., Li, H., & Wang, Y. (2022). Drivers of nutrient content
and spatial variability of soil multifunctionality in the topsoil of Kyrgyzstan. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10, 1001984. https://doi.org/ 10.3389/fenvs.2022.1001984.
67.Malvestiti, J. A., Casagrande, J. C., & Soares, M. R. (2017). Potencial de extratos vegetais de cana-de-açúcar na neutralização da acidez do solo por método laboratorial. Revista de Ciências Agrárias Amazonian Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, 60(4), 297-301. http://dx.doi.org/10. 4322/rca.2242.
68.Huang, D., Gong, Z., Wang, Y., Chen, X., Tan, R., Wang, H., & Mao, Y. (2021). Effects of EGCG on the Mobilization of Mineral Elements from Tea Plantation Soil. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 52(16), 1853-1863. https://doi.org/10. 1080/00103624.2021.1900223.
69.Kohout, P., Sudová, R., Brabcová, V., Vosolsobě, S., Baldrian, P., & Albrechtová, J. (2021). Forest Microhabitat Affects Succession of Fungal Communities on Decomposing Fine Tree Roots. Frontiers in microbiology, 12, 541583. https:// doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.541583.
70.Massi, K. G., Eugênio, C. U. O., Franco, A. C., & Hoffmann, W. A. (2021). The effects of tree cover and soil nutrient addition on native herbaceous richness in a neotropical savanna. Biotropica, 53(3), 888-895. https://doi.org/10.1111/ btp.12940.
71.Li, Y., Han, C., Sun, S., & Zhao, C. (2021). Effects of tree species and soil enzyme activities on soil nutrients in dryland plantations. Forests, 12(9), 1153. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12091153.
72.Liu, K. L., Chen, B. Y., Zhang, B., Wang, R. H., & Wang, C. S. (2023). Understory vegetation diversity, soil properties and microbial community response to different thinning intensities in Cryptomeria japonica var. sinensis plantations. Frontiers in Microbiology, 14, 1117384. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fmicb.2023.1117384.
Journal of Water and Soil Conservation
Volume 32, Issue 4
January 2026
Pages 81-104

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics