Native versus non-native Prosopis woody species: Which fertilize the soil better?
This study assessed differences in the physical, chemical, and microbial properties of soils under trees of the native species Prosopis cineraria and the invasive species Prosopis juliflora trees, focusing on implications for ecosystem management and restoration. At the start of the growing season,...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Sciendo
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | Folia Oecologica |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.2478/foecol-2025-0008 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1823860539134050304 |
|---|---|
| author | Moslehi Maryam Ahmadi Farzad Matinizadeh Mohammad Sadeghi Seyed Mousa Izadi Masoumeh Faunae Nafiseh Alizadeh Tahereh Shackleton Ross T. |
| author_facet | Moslehi Maryam Ahmadi Farzad Matinizadeh Mohammad Sadeghi Seyed Mousa Izadi Masoumeh Faunae Nafiseh Alizadeh Tahereh Shackleton Ross T. |
| author_sort | Moslehi Maryam |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | This study assessed differences in the physical, chemical, and microbial properties of soils under trees of the native species Prosopis cineraria and the invasive species Prosopis juliflora trees, focusing on implications for ecosystem management and restoration. At the start of the growing season, 30 trees of each species with a trunk diameter of 15–30 cm were randomly selected. Soil samples were taken from the top 20 cm of soil profiles east of each tree, under the tree crowns and from control plots in open areas. Three soil samples per site were pooled for chemical and microbial analysis. Soil moisture was highest under P. cineraria (14.64 ± 0.3) and lowest in control plots (9.04 ± 0.65). Soil pH was highest in control soils (7.91 ± 0.09), slightly lower under P. cineraria (7.77 ± 0.06), and lowest under P. juliflora (7.49 ± 0.0). Electrical conductivity, soil salinity was highest under P. juliflora (2.25 ± 0.12). Microbial activity indicators (basal respiration and microbial biomass carbon) were greater under P. cineraria than under P. juliflora trees. Native P. cineraria trees enhance soil conditions, benefiting ecosystem management. In contrast, invasive P. juliflora trees raise soil salinity, threatening soil quality, biodiversity, and ecosystem services in the Sahara-Sahel region. Managing the spread of P. juliflora is crucial to maintaining ecosystem functions. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-e64a0d041b2e4f39a3462f13ab891eaf |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1338-7014 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-01-01 |
| publisher | Sciendo |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Folia Oecologica |
| spelling | doaj-art-e64a0d041b2e4f39a3462f13ab891eaf2025-02-10T13:25:45ZengSciendoFolia Oecologica1338-70142025-01-01521708110.2478/foecol-2025-0008Native versus non-native Prosopis woody species: Which fertilize the soil better?Moslehi Maryam0Ahmadi Farzad1Matinizadeh Mohammad2Sadeghi Seyed Mousa3Izadi Masoumeh4Faunae Nafiseh5Alizadeh Tahereh6Shackleton Ross T.7Research Division of Natural Resources, Hormozgan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Bandarabbas, IranResearch Division of Natural Resources, Hormozgan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Bandarabbas, IranResearch Institute of Forests and Rangelands, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran, IranResearch Institute of Forests and Rangelands, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran, IranPh.D. of Forest Soil Biology, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Gorgan, IranDepartment of Forestry and Forest Economy, Faculty of Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, IranResearch Institute of Forests and Rangelands, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran, IranSwiss Federal Institute for Forest Snow and Landscape Research WSL, Birmensdorf (ZH), SwitzerlandThis study assessed differences in the physical, chemical, and microbial properties of soils under trees of the native species Prosopis cineraria and the invasive species Prosopis juliflora trees, focusing on implications for ecosystem management and restoration. At the start of the growing season, 30 trees of each species with a trunk diameter of 15–30 cm were randomly selected. Soil samples were taken from the top 20 cm of soil profiles east of each tree, under the tree crowns and from control plots in open areas. Three soil samples per site were pooled for chemical and microbial analysis. Soil moisture was highest under P. cineraria (14.64 ± 0.3) and lowest in control plots (9.04 ± 0.65). Soil pH was highest in control soils (7.91 ± 0.09), slightly lower under P. cineraria (7.77 ± 0.06), and lowest under P. juliflora (7.49 ± 0.0). Electrical conductivity, soil salinity was highest under P. juliflora (2.25 ± 0.12). Microbial activity indicators (basal respiration and microbial biomass carbon) were greater under P. cineraria than under P. juliflora trees. Native P. cineraria trees enhance soil conditions, benefiting ecosystem management. In contrast, invasive P. juliflora trees raise soil salinity, threatening soil quality, biodiversity, and ecosystem services in the Sahara-Sahel region. Managing the spread of P. juliflora is crucial to maintaining ecosystem functions.https://doi.org/10.2478/foecol-2025-0008arid landsbiological invasionsdegraded landsmicrobial communitiesnon-native species impacts |
| spellingShingle | Moslehi Maryam Ahmadi Farzad Matinizadeh Mohammad Sadeghi Seyed Mousa Izadi Masoumeh Faunae Nafiseh Alizadeh Tahereh Shackleton Ross T. Native versus non-native Prosopis woody species: Which fertilize the soil better? Folia Oecologica arid lands biological invasions degraded lands microbial communities non-native species impacts |
| title | Native versus non-native Prosopis woody species: Which fertilize the soil better? |
| title_full | Native versus non-native Prosopis woody species: Which fertilize the soil better? |
| title_fullStr | Native versus non-native Prosopis woody species: Which fertilize the soil better? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Native versus non-native Prosopis woody species: Which fertilize the soil better? |
| title_short | Native versus non-native Prosopis woody species: Which fertilize the soil better? |
| title_sort | native versus non native prosopis woody species which fertilize the soil better |
| topic | arid lands biological invasions degraded lands microbial communities non-native species impacts |
| url | https://doi.org/10.2478/foecol-2025-0008 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT moslehimaryam nativeversusnonnativeprosopiswoodyspecieswhichfertilizethesoilbetter AT ahmadifarzad nativeversusnonnativeprosopiswoodyspecieswhichfertilizethesoilbetter AT matinizadehmohammad nativeversusnonnativeprosopiswoodyspecieswhichfertilizethesoilbetter AT sadeghiseyedmousa nativeversusnonnativeprosopiswoodyspecieswhichfertilizethesoilbetter AT izadimasoumeh nativeversusnonnativeprosopiswoodyspecieswhichfertilizethesoilbetter AT faunaenafiseh nativeversusnonnativeprosopiswoodyspecieswhichfertilizethesoilbetter AT alizadehtahereh nativeversusnonnativeprosopiswoodyspecieswhichfertilizethesoilbetter AT shackletonrosst nativeversusnonnativeprosopiswoodyspecieswhichfertilizethesoilbetter |