iForest - Biogeosciences and Forestry

iForest - Biogeosciences and Forestry

Variation in soil carbon stock and nutrient content in sand dunes after afforestation by Prosopis juliflora in the Khuzestan province (Iran)

iForest - Biogeosciences and Forestry, Volume 10, Issue 3, Pages 585-589 (2017)
doi: https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor2137-010
Published: May 08, 2017 - Copyright © 2017 SISEF

Short Communications

Prosopis juliflora is one of the suitable tree species used as vegetation cover for sand dunes fixation. The objectives of this study were to determine the effect of P. juliflora afforestation and its canopy coverage classes on soil carbon (C) stock and nutrient status in sand dunes after 22 years since afforestation. We hypothesized that increasing the canopy coverage would result in higher soil C stocks and nutrient content. We selected two 10-ha afforested sand dunes with 25-50% and more than 75% canopy coverage, respectively, and a 10-ha non-afforested dune (control). At each site, 15 soil samples were taken at two depths (0-5 cm and 5-50 cm). The results indicated a strong increase in the topsoil C stock (from 0.54 to 4.49 tC ha-1 in control and afforested sites, respectively), while a lower change in subsoil C stock was detected (3.0 and 4.6 tC ha-1 in control and afforested sites, respectively). Although, different canopy classes resulted in no significant differences in soil C stock, significant differences were observed for all the soil physico-chemical properties that were studied.

Canopy Coverage, Carbon Stock, Soil Physico-chemical, C/N Ratio


Around 80 million hectares of Iran are occupied by arid and semi-arid lands, with five million hectares as active sand dunes ([2]). Therefore, large de-desertification programmes have become necessary. One method to fix sand dunes consists in afforestation ([21]). This action not only increased plant coverage and soil nitrogen (N), but also may sequester atmospheric carbon (C) dioxide ([14], [22]). Moreover, vegetation cover of sand dunes has been reported to increase soil moisture ([20]) and soil nutrients ([30]) and to restore plant diversity ([4]).

Despite the fact that sand dunes afforestation could result in high ecosystem C stock ([11]), not all plant species can survive in such a harsh environment ([19]). In fact, water shortage creates a serious limitation for successful plantations ([15]) even though other factors may also play an important role, e.g., plant species ([40]), stand age ([34]), and management ([17]). Prosopis juliflora is known as a species with good performance in arid and semi-arid areas for afforestation ([36]) and this species has been planted in several parts of Iran. However, the effects of sand dunes afforestation with P. juliflora on soil C and nutrients remain still poorly understood, though some preliminary information about the impacts on soil physico-chemical properties have been previously reported ([18]).

The objectives of this study were to determine the effect of P. juliflora sand dunes afforestation on soil C stocks and the nutrient status of afforested sand dunes. In addition, we determined the variation of soil C stock and soil physico-chemical properties under different canopy coverage classes. We hypothesized that increasing the canopy coverage could result in higher soil C stock and nutrient status of sand dunes.

  Material and methods 

Study site

The study site was located towards the south of Susa and north of Ahvaz at latitude 48° 17′ 16″ N and longitude 31° 37′ 60″ E in Khuzestan province of Iran. This site suffers from active sand dunes mostly covered by Cyperus rotundus, Pennisetum orientallis, Echinops kermanshahanicus and Artemisia vulgaris. The mean annual temperature and mean precipitation at the site are 23 °C and 251 mm, respectively (Fig. 1); soil can be classified as an Entisol; slopes are between 0 and 2% and altitude between 25 and 49 m a.s.l. The site studied was covered by petroleum mulch in 1991 and an afforestation program with Prosopis juliflora started in 1993.

Fig. 1 - Location of the study site and different canopy coverage classes (A: canopy coverage of 25-50%; B: More than 75% canopy coverage; C: control dunes).

  Enlarge/Shrink   Download   Full Width  Open in Viewer

Soil sampling, analysis and carbon stock

We selected two afforested sand dunes (10 ha each) with two levels of canopy cover (25-50% and >75%) and a nearby non-afforested sand dune (10 ha) as control. Canopy coverage was estimated using a dot grid on aerial photography ([7]). At each site fifty 20 × 20 m quadrat plots were randomly selected ([3]) and five soil samples from four corners and the centre of each plot were taken in April 2015 using a manual auger. The five soil sub-samples were pooled by depth (0-5 and 5-50 cm) and plot, and then transferred to the laboratory for the further analyses. The soil C stock (Cs, tC ha-1) was computed using the following equation ([38] - eqn. 1):

\begin{equation} Cs = Bd \cdot d \cdot C \end{equation}

where Bd is the soil bulk density (g cm-3), d is the depth of sampling (cm) and C is the soil organic C content (%).

Soil organic C and total N were respectively determined by the methods of Walkley & Black ([39]) and Bremner & Mulvaney ([5]). Soil potassium (K) and available phosphorus (P) were extracted using ammonium acetate ([27]) and Olsen et al. ([31]) method. The soil texture was defined using the hydrometric method ([13]). Soil pH and electrical conductivity (EC) in deionized water were measured using the method proposed by McLean ([25]).

Statistical analysis

The data were checked for normality and homogeneity of variance using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and the Levene’s test, respectively. Differences in soil C stock and soil physico-chemical properties between afforested sites and control were tested using a two-way ANOVA followed by LSD test. In addition, Pearson’s correlation analysis was used to detect relationships between soil C stock and physico-chemical properties. All analysis were performed using the software SPSS® ver. 15 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA) for Windows®.


Soil physico-chemical properties

Our result indicated that the interactions between soil depth and canopy classes are significant for soil C stock and physico-chemical properties. The soil texture at a depth of 0-5 cm in the afforestation and control site were respectively sandy-loam and sandy. The soil texture at 5-50 cm was sandy in both the afforestation and control sites. A significant increase of 44 % was observed in topsoil (0-5 cm) silt percentage in afforestation compared to control sites. No significant differences in silt percentage were observed between sites at 5-50 cm depth (Tab. 1). Soil EC was significantly affected by both canopy cover classes and soil depth. The lowest EC value belonged to control dunes, followed by 25-50 % canopy coverage and next 75 % canopy coverage (Tab. 1). Soil pH was significantly decreased in afforestation sites compared to the control dune (Tab. 1). In the afforestation sites, soil P was significantly higher at both soil depths compared to the control dune. The lowest soil K was observed in the control dunes for both depths as afforestation resulted in a significant increase in soil K (Tab. 1). Although the soil N values in studied sites were low, afforestation led to significant soil N increase in topsoil (0-5 cm) compared to the control dunes, with >75% canopy coverage sites having the highest N levels in topsoil. In deeper soil depth, no significant difference was observed between afforestation and control dunes (Tab. 1).

Tab. 1 - The ANOVA for soil physico-chemical properties in studied afforestation, control dunes and soil depth. Values followed by the same letters were not significantly different (p>0.05) within rows after LSD test. Values are means ± SE.

Canopy Cover 25-50% >75% Control F-value P-value
Soil depth 0-5 cm 5-50 cm 0-5 cm 5-50 cm 0-5 cm 5-50 cm
Silt (%) 10.00 ± 0.65 a 6.00 ± 0.30 bc 10.13 ± 0.66 a 5.07 ± 0.20 c 6.53 ± 0.29 b 5.73 ± 0.12 bc 27.25 0.001
Sand (%) 90.00 ± 0.65 c 94.00 ± 0.30 ab 89.87 ± 0.66 c 94.93 ± 0.20 a 93.47 ± 0.29 b 94.27 ± 0.12 ab 27.25 0.001
EC (d s m-1) 1.15 ± 0.07 a 0.81 ± 0.07 b 1.01 ± 0.06 a 0.66 ± 0.02 c 0.40 ± 0.01 d 0.25 ± 0.01 e 47.31 0.001
pH 7.39 ± 0.05 d 7.89 ± 0.09 b 7.63 ± 0.09 c 7.99 ± 0.10 ab 8.11 ± 0.08 ab 8.17 ± 0.04 a 12.34 0.001
P (ppm) 14.07 ± 2.20 a 2.79 ± 0.020 b 10.28 ± 1.70 c 3.82 ± 0.21 c 1.87 ± 0.04 c 1.37 ± 0.06 c 20.91 0.001
K (ppm) 216.33 ± 18.90 a 200.07 ± 10.48 ab 170.00 ± 14.44 b 130.67 ± 4.58 c 109.00 ± 6.46 c 124.60 ± 5.46 c 14.88 0.001
N % 0.04 ± 0.00 b 0.04 ± 0.01 b 0.06 ± 0.00 a 0.04 ± 0.01 b 0.02 ± 0.00 c 0.03 ± 0.00 bc 4.42 0.001

  Enlarge/Reduce  Open in Viewer

Soil C stock in afforested and control dunes

Topsoil C stock (SOC) showed an increasing trend from 0.54 to 4.50 tC ha-1 in control to afforestation dunes (Tab. 2). Despite the significantly higher carbon stock in afforested areas, no significant differences were observed between the two canopy classes (Tab. 2). The same SOC patterns related to afforestation were observed at the deeper soil depth and no significant difference was observed between the soil depths studied in afforested dunes (Tab. 2).

Tab. 2 - The ANOVA for carbon stock and C/N in afforestation, control sand dunes and soil depth. Values followed by the same letters were not significantly different (p>0.05) within rows after LSD test. Values are means ± SE.

Canopy Cover 25-50% >75% Control F-value P-value
Soil depth 0-5 cm 5-50 cm 0-5 cm 5-50 cm 0-5 cm 5-50 cm
SOC (tC ha-1) 4.15 ± 0.39 a 4.91 ± 0.30 a 4.50 ± 0.29 a 4.64 ± 0.31a 0.54 ± 0.04 c 3.03 ± 0.17 b 36.69 0.001
C/N 12.93 ± 0.65 a 2.48 ± 0.28 cd 10.66 ± 1.03 b 2.30 ± 0.39 cd 3.56 ± 0.45 c 1.42 ± 0.11 d 74.34 0.001

  Enlarge/Reduce  Open in Viewer

The lowest C/N ratio belonged to the subsoil (5-50 cm) in control dunes, and the highest value belonged to topsoil in the 25-50 % canopy class (Tab. 2). Furthermore, the C/N ratio decreased with soil depth in both afforestation and control sites (Tab. 2).

The soil pH and sand content in topsoil showed significant negative correlations with C stock, while positive correlations between soil C stock and all other studied parameters were observed. (Tab. 3).

Tab. 3 - Correlations between soil carbon stock, C/N and soil physico-chemical properties at 0-5 cm soil depth. (SOC): soil carbon stock (tC ha-1); (EC): electrical conductivity; (P): phosphorus; (K): potassium; (N): nitrogen; (**) p<0.01 (2-tailed).

Soil property SOC C/N Silt Sand EC pH P K N
SOC (tC ha-1) 1 - - - - - - - -
C/N 0.80** 1 - - - - - - -
Silt (%) 0.71** 0.54** 1 - - - - - -
Sand (%) -0.71** -0.54** -1.00** 1 - - - - -
EC (d s m-1) 0.77** 0.71** 0.59** -0.59** 1 - - - -
pH -0.72** -0.57** -0.54** 0.54** -0.65** 1 - - -
P (ppm) 0.70** 0.58** 0.52** -0.52** 0.73** -0.57** 1 - -
K (ppm) 0.69** 0.53** 0.45** -0.49** 0.70** -0.53** 0.74** 1 -
N (%) 0.73** 0.25 0.54** -0.54** 0.54** -0.52** 0.49** 0.53** 1

  Enlarge/Reduce  Open in Viewer

Considering the significant correlations between soil silt and the rest of soil parameters, C/N and silt were important in determining soil physico-chemical properties of sand dunes in topsoil (Tab. 3).

Unlike the topsoil, soil C stock in subsoil significantly correlated with only soil P, EC and C/N ratio. Additionally, C/N ratio was positively and significantly correlated with soil EC and silt and negatively with soil N and sand (Tab. 4).

Tab. 4 - Correlations between soil carbon stock, C/N and soil physico-chemical properties at 5-50 cm soil depth. (*): p<0.05 (2-tailed); (**): p<0.01 (2-tailed).

Soil property SOC C/N Silt Sand EC pH P K N
SOC (tC ha-1) 1 - - - - - - - -
C/N 0.35* 1 - - - - - - -
Silt (%) 0.03 0.31* 1 - - - - - -
Sand (%) -0.03 -0.31* -1.00** 1 - - - - -
EC (d s m-1) 0.38* 0.40** -0.30* 0.30* 1 - - - -
pH -0.27 -0.17 0.17 -0.17 -0.26 1 - - -
P (ppm) 0.38** 0.09 -0.54** 0.54** 0.72** -0.16 1 - -
K (ppm) 0.25 0.03 -0.03 0.03 0.24 -0.01 0.27 1 -
N (%) 0.24 -0.56** -0.37* 0.37* 0.01 -0.01 0.33* 0.30* 1

  Enlarge/Reduce  Open in Viewer


Afforestation with P. juliflora increased soil C content to a depth 50 cm compared to control dunes. This is consistent with predictions for nitrogen fixing trees like P. juliflora ([33]), and with the results of Hu et al. ([14]).

Although canopy coverage class did not have any significant effect on soil C stock, our results showed a slight increase in soil C stock with higher canopy coverage. This pattern is consistent with Schulp et al. ([35]) who stated the importance of overstory on soil carbon input. Overstory can change light penetration and moisture content ([6]), which can in turn affect soil C stock ([10]). Additionally, tree spacing and canopy closure influence temperature, moisture, litter, and consequently change decomposition rate and soil C stock ([32]).

As in Garcia-Franco et al. ([11]), afforestation in the current study resulted in a higher soil C/N ratio. Changes in soil N with change in land use from sand dunes to afforested area was also seen by Li et al. ([23]). Increased soil N in the sand dunes after afforestation is likely responsible for increasing soil carbon sequestration ([12]). Higher C/N ratio and also C stock at the topsoil in sand dunes indicated the importance of this thin soil layer in C sequestration of arid lands ([28]).

Canopy coverage is known as an important factor influencing topsoil nutrients ([16]). Significant effects of canopy coverage and litter input on soil N and C have been previously observed in topsoil ([8]). This may be due to the higher litter fall in higher canopy coverage class ([1]). Similar results were observed in EC and pH, indicating the significance of canopy coverage and afforestation on the parameters stated, which is consistent with the study of Naseri et al. ([29]). Likewise, decrease in EC with soil depth was seen by Li et al. ([21]).

Soil K and P were previously shown to be significantly affected by afforestation, with an increasing trend from bare to afforested dunes ([24]). This might be related to the soil pH reduction providing better conditions for these two nutrients availability in soil ([26]). Soil texture has been reported among the factors strongly affecting the soil carbon dynamic ([32]). In our study, the soil silt and sand respectively had positive and negative correlations with soil C stock, which could be due to longer residence time of soil organic carbon in silt ([9]). Improvement of soil physico-chemical properties and soil C stock after two decades of afforestation demonstrates the remarkable importance of P. juliflora in the parameters studied and long term fixation of sand dunes.

Soil fertility and organic carbon were important factors on C stock in arid lands, as soil C stock and physico-chemical properties highly correlated ([11]). However, afforestation resulted into soil pH decreasing from alkaline toward neutral. Soil pH negatively affected on the C stock. Considering these two, we could conclude that soil pH declines after afforestation and prevents carbon loss to the atmosphere ([37]).


P. juliflora afforestation in sand dunes resulted in higher soil C stock. Higher C stock in topsoil and high level of correlation between soil C stock and almost all soil physico-chemical properties studied, especially in topsoil, indicated the importance of soil features in soil C stock of arid lands. Furthermore, canopy coverage is considered a factor affecting soil N, which consequently resulted in higher soil C stocks in sand dunes of Iran.


We thank Behbahan Khatam, Alanbia University of Technology, Iran, for financial supporting this research work. Special thanks to Dr. David Showalter for his kind help in improving the English level of this work.


Arriaga L, Maya Y (2007). Spatial variability in decomposition rates in a desert scrub of Northwestern Mexico. Plant Ecology 189: 213-225.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Amiraslani F, Dragovich D (2011). Combating desertification in Iran over the last 50 years: an overview of changing approaches. Journal of Environmental Management 92: 1-13.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Baldeck CA, Harms KE, Yavitt JB, John R, Turner BL, Valencia R, Navarrete H, Davies SJ, Chuyong GB, Kenfack D, Thomas DW, Madawala S, Gunatilleke N, Gunatilleke S, Bunyavejchewin S, Kiratiprayoon S, Yaacob A, Supardi MNN, Dalling JW (2013). Soil resources and topography shape local tree community structure in tropical forests. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 280 (1766): 20130548-20130548.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Bremer LL, Farley KL (2010). Does plantation forestry restore biodiversity or create green deserts? A synthesis of the effects of land-use transitions on plant species richness Biodiversity and Conservation 19: 3893-3915.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Bremner JM, Mulvaney CS (1982). Nitrogen total. In: “Method of Soil Analysis - Part 2. Chemical and Microbiological Methods (2nd edn)” (Miller RH, Kieney DR eds), Agronomy Series no. 9, American Society for Agronomy and Soil Sciences, Madison, WI, USA, pp. 595-624.
Buck JR, St Clair SB (2012). Aspen increase soil moisture, nutrients, organic matter and respiration in Rocky Mountain forest communities. PLoS ONE 7 (12): e52369.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Carreiras JMB, Pereira JMC, Pereira JS (2006). Estimation of tree canopy cover in evergreen oak woodlands using remote sensing. Forest Ecology and Management 223: 45-53.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Conti G, Kowaljow E, Baptist F, Rumpel C, Cuchietti A, Pérez Harguindeguy N, Díaz S (2016). Altered soil carbon dynamics under different land-use regimes in subtropical seasonally-dry forests of central Argentina. Plant and Soil 403: 375-387.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Dobarco RM, Van Miegroet H (2014). Soil organic carbon storage and stability in the aspen-conifer ecotone in montane forests in Utah, USA. Forests 5 (4): 666-688.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Dorfer C, Kuhn P, Baumann F, He J-S, Scholten T (2013). Soil organic carbon pools and stocks in permafrost-affected soils on the Tibetan Plateau. PLoS ONE 8 (2): e57024.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Garcia-Franco N, Wiesmeier M, Goberna M, Martínez-Mena M, Albaladejo J (2014). Carbon dynamics after afforestation of semiarid shrublands: implications of site preparation techniques. Forest Ecology and Management 319: 107-115.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Grunzweig JM, Gelfand I, Fried Y, Yakir D (2007). Biogeochemical factors contributing to enhanced carbon storage following afforestation of a semi-arid shrubland. Biogeosciences 4: 891-904.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Houba VJG, Van Der Lee JJ, Novozamsky I (1995). Soil and plant analysis - a series of syllabi. Part 5b: Soil analysis procedures, other procedures. Department of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, Wageningen Agricultural University, Wageningen, Netherlands, pp. 262.
Hu FL, Shou WK, Liu B, Liu ZM, Busso CA (2015). Species composition and diversity, and carbon stock in a dune ecosystem in the Horqin Sandy Land of northern China. Journal of Arid Land 7 (1): 82-93.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Jackson RB, Jobbágy EG, Avissar R, Roy SB, Barrett DJ, Cook CW, Farley KA, Maitre DC, McCarl BA, Murray BC (2005). Trading water for carbon with biological carbon sequestration. Science 310: 1944-7.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Johnson BG, Verburg PSJ, Arnone JA (2016). Plant species effects on soil nutrients and chemistry in arid ecological zones. Oecologia 182: 299-317.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Jones MB, Donnelly A (2004). Carbon sequestration in temperate grassland ecosystems and the influence of management, climate and elevated CO2. New Phytologist 164: 423-439.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Kahi CH, Ngugi RK, Mureithi SM, Ngethe JC (2009). The canopy effects of Prosopis juliflora (DC.) and Acacia tortilis (Hayne) trees on herbaceous plants species and soil physicochemical properties in Njemps flats, Kenya. Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 10: 441-449.
Online | Gscholar
Lal R (2004). Carbon sequestration in dryland ecosystems. Environmental Management 33: 528-544.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Li CH, Li Y, Xie JX, Tang LS (2007). Comparative on microbial community composition and microbial activities in desert and oasis soils. Acta Ecologica Sinica 27 (8): 3391-3399.
Li C, Li Y, Tang L (2010). Soil organic carbon stock and carbon efflux in deep soils of desert and oasis. Environmental Earth Sciences 60: 549-557.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Li Y, Brandle J, Awada T, Chen Y, Hana J, Zhang F, Luo Y (2013). Accumulation of carbon and nitrogen in the plant-soil system after afforestation of active sand dunes in China’s Horqin Sandy Land. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 177: 75-84.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Li C, Zhao L, Sun P, Zhao F, Kang D, Yang G, Han X, Feng Y, Ren G (2016a). Deep Soil C, N, and P stocks and stoichiometry in response to land use patterns in the Loess Hilly Region of China. PLoS ONE 11 (7): e015907.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Li XJ, Li XR, Wang XP, Yang HT (2016b). Changes in soil organic carbon fractions after afforestation with xerophytic shrubs in the Tengger Desert, northern China. European Journal of Soil Science 67: 184-195.
CrossRef | Gscholar
McLean EO (1982). Soil pH and lime requirement. In: “Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2. Chemical and Microbiological Properties” (Page AL, Miller RH, Keeney DR eds). American Society of Agronomy, SSSA, Madison, WI, USA, pp. 199-224.
Moradi M, Shirvany A, Matinizadeh M, Etemad V, Naji HR, Abdul-Hamid H, Sayah S (2015). Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal symbiosis with Sorbus torminalis does not vary with soil nutrients and enzyme activities across different sites. iForest 8: 308-313.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Morwin HD, Peach PM (1951). Exchangeability of soil potassium in and, silt and clay fractions as influenced by the nature of complementary exchangeable cations. Soil Science Society of America Journal 15: 125-128.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Nadal-Romero E, Cammeraat E, Pérez-Cardiel E, Lasanta T (2016). Effects of secondary succession and afforestation practices on soil properties after cropland abandonment in humid Mediterranean mountain areas. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 228: 91-100.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Naseri S, Ali Adibi MA, Javadi SA, Jafari M, Zadbar M (2012). Investigation of the effect of biological stabilization practice on some soil parameters (North East of Iran). Journal of Rangeland Science 2 (4): 643-653.
Niu X, Gao P, Li Y, Li X (2015). Impact of different afforestation systems on soil organic carbon distribution characteristics of limestone mountains. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies 24 (6): 2543-2552.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Olsen SR, Cole CV, Watanabe FS, Dean LA (1954). Estimation of available phosphorus in soils by extraction with sodium bicarbonate. USDA Circular 939: 1-19.
Online | Gscholar
Paul KI, Polglase PJ, Nyakuengama JG, Khanna PK (2002). Change in soil carbon following afforestation. Forest Ecology and Management 168: 241-257.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Resh SC, Binkley D, Parrotta JA (2002). Greater soil carbon sequestration under nitrogen-fixing trees compared with Eucalyptus species. Ecosystems 5: 217-31.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Sariyildiz T, Savaci G, Kravkaz IS (2015). Effects of tree species, stand age and land use change on soil carbon and nitrogen stock rates in northwestern Turkey. iForest 9: 165-170.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Schulp CJE, Nabuurs GJ, Verburg PH, De Waal RW (2008). Effect of tree species on carbon stocks in forest floor and mineral soil and implications for soil carbon inventories. Forest Ecology and Management 256: 482-490.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Shackleton RT, Le Maitre DC, Pasiecznik NM, Richardson DM (2014). Prosopis: a global assessment of the biogeography, benefits, impacts and management of one of the world’s worst woody invasive plant taxa. AoB PLANTS 6: plu027.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Shi Z, Krom MD, Jickells TD, Bonneville S, Carslaw KS, Mihalopoulos N, Baker AR, Benning LG (2012). Impacts on iron solubility in the mineral dust by processes in the source region and the atmosphere: a review. Aeolian Research 5: 21-42.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Stringer CE, Trettin CC, Zarnoch SJ, Tang W (2015). Carbon stocks of mangroves within the Zambezi River Delta, Mozambique. Forest Ecology and Management 354: 139-148.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Walkley A, Black IA (1934). An examination of Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science 37: 29-37.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Zhang YQ, Liu JB, Jia X, Qin SG (2013). Soil organic carbon accumulation in arid and semiarid areas after afforestation: a meta-analysis. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies 22 (2): 611-620.
Online | Gscholar

Authors’ Affiliation

Mostafa Moradi
Fatemeh Imani
Sareh Moradi Behbahani
Mohammad Taghi Ahmadi
Department of forestry, Faculty of Natural Resources and Environment, Behbahan Khatam Al-Anbia University of Technology (Iran)
Hamid Reza Naji
Department of Forest Sciences, University of Ilam, Ilam (Iran)

Corresponding author

Mostafa Moradi


Moradi M, Imani F, Naji HR, Moradi Behbahani S, Ahmadi MT (2017). Variation in soil carbon stock and nutrient content in sand dunes after afforestation by Prosopis juliflora in the Khuzestan province (Iran). iForest 10: 585-589. - doi: 10.3832/ifor2137-010

Academic Editor

Giorgio Alberti

Paper history

Received: Jun 15, 2016
Accepted: Feb 13, 2017

First online: May 08, 2017
Publication Date: Jun 30, 2017
Publication Time: 2.80 months

© SISEF - The Italian Society of Silviculture and Forest Ecology 2017

  Open Access

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 International (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided 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.

Creative Commons Licence

Breakdown by View Type

(Waiting for server response...)

Article Usage

Total Article Views: 19014
(from publication date up to now)

Breakdown by View Type
HTML Page Views: 13530
Abstract Page Views: 925
PDF Downloads: 3481
Citation/Reference Downloads: 35
XML Downloads: 1043

Web Metrics
Days since publication: 2634
Overall contacts: 19014
Avg. contacts per week: 50.53

Article citations are based on data periodically collected from the Clarivate Web of Science web site
(last update: Nov 2020)

Total number of cites (since 2017): 6
Average cites per year: 1.50


Publication Metrics

by Dimensions ©

List of the papers citing this article based on CrossRef Cited-by.


iForest Similar Articles


This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. More info