Environmental Monitoring and Assessment

, Volume 185, Issue 8, pp 6921–6932 | Cite as

Assessment of Robinia pseudoacacia cultivations as a restoration strategy for reclaimed mine spoil heaps

  • Kostas Vlachodimos
  • Efimia M. Papatheodorou
  • John Diamantopoulos
  • Nikolaos Monokrousos


Reforestation with black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) is considered a successful technique that is often used for the reclamation of open-cast mine areas. An alternative reclamation technique could be the natural regeneration of vegetation with spontaneous grass species. In this study, we compared the concentrations of chemical and biochemical variables in soil samples taken under black locust canopy to those from sites covered by spontaneous grass vegetation (control samples) in a time sequence of spoil deposition (0–10 years), in order to assess which of the two reclamation techniques yields higher soil quality. Soil quality refers here to the ability of soils to function ecologically. This has a special interest since the main question for the restored soils is their capacity to perform a range of ecological functions under stress or disturbance. Furthermore, we aimed at identifying the effect of vegetation type on soil ecological succession. The effect of vegetation type on primary succession becomes apparent after 2 years of reclamation. R. pseudoacacia as a nitrogen-fixing plant enriched soil with organic and inorganic nitrogen and organic matter to a greater extent than the natural grasses. It also increased the amount of soil microbial biomass and the activity of alkaline phosphatase. However, the fact that black locust failed to enhance dehydrogenase activity and actually decreased the activity of urease, activities that represent specialized niche functions and therefore, are more vulnerable to stress or disturbance, suggests that the development of an indigenous grass community in combination with organic supplements might often be more appropriate for the reclamation of similar kinds of mine areas.


Microbial activity Primary succession Soil enzyme activities Soil properties 



We are especially grateful to J.M. Halley and M.D. Argyropoulou for their contribution to the linguistic correction of the text. Public Power Corporation S.A. is acknowledged for the research permit.


  1. Allen, S. E. (1974). Chemical analysis of ecological materials. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  2. AlNiemi, T. S., Kahn, M. L., & McDermott, T. R. (1997). P metabolism in the bean Rhizobium tropici symbiosis. Plant Physiology, 113, 1233–1242.Google Scholar
  3. Baer, S. G., Kitchen, D. J., Blair, J. M., & Rice, C. W. (2002). Changes in ecosystem structure and function along a chronosequence of restored grasslands. Ecological Applications, 12, 1688–1701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baldrian, P., Trogl, J., Frouz, J., Snajdr, J., Valaskova, V., Merhautova, V., Cajthaml, T., & Herinkova, J. (2008). Enzyme activities and microbial biomass in topsoil layer during spontaneous succession in spoil heaps after brown coal mining. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 40, 2107–2115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barnhisel, R. I., & Hower, J. M. (1997). Coal surface mine reclamation in the eastern United States: the revegetation of disturbed lands to hayland/pasture or cropland. Advances in Agronomy, 61, 233–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bauhus, J., Pare, D., & Cote, L. (1998). Effects of tree species, stand age and soil type on soil microbial biomass and its activity in a southern boreal forest. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 30, 1077–1089.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bekku, Y. S., Nakatsubo, T., Kume, A., & Koizumi, H. (2004). Soil microbial biomass, respiration rate, and temperature dependence on a successional glacier foreland in Ny-Alesund, Svalbard. Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine Research, 36, 395–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Binkley, D., Kimmins, J. P., & Feller, M. C. (1982). Water chemistry profiles in an early- and mid-successional forest in coastal British Columbia. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 12, 240–248.Google Scholar
  9. Bradshaw, A. (1997). Restoration of mined lands—using natural processes. Ecological Engineering, 8, 255–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Breiman, L., Freidman, J. H., Olshen, R. A., & Stone, C. J. (1984). Classification and regression trees. Boca Raton: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
  11. Caldwell, B. A. (2005). Enzyme activities as a component of soil biodiversity: a review. Pedobiologia, 49, 637–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cao, C. Y., Jiang, D. M., Teng, X. H., Jiang, Y., Liang, W. J., & Cui, Z. B. (2008). Soil chemical and microbiological properties along a chronosequence of Caragana microphylla Lam. plantations in the Horqin sandy land of Northeast China. Applied Soil Ecology, 40, 78–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cavigelli, M. A., Lengnick, L. L., Buyer, J. S., Fravel, D., Handoo, Z., McCarty, G., Millner, P., Sikora, L., Wright, S., Vinyard, B., & Rabenhorst, M. (2005). Landscape level variation in soil resources and microbial properties in a no-till corn field. Applied Soil Ecology, 29, 99–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chaer, G., Fernandes, M., Myearold, D., & Bottomley, P. (2009). Comparative resistance and resilience of soil microbial communities and enzyme activities in adjacent native forest and agricultural soils. Microbial Ecology, 58, 414–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cherfas, J. (1992). Trees help nature reclaim the Slag Heaps. New Scientist (1971), 135, 14–15.Google Scholar
  16. Chodak, M., & Niklinska, M. (2010). The effect of different tree species on the chemical and microbial properties of reclaimed mine soils. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 46, 555–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Clark, L. A., & Pregibon, D. (1992). In J. M. Chambers & T. J. Hastie (Eds.), Tree-based models. Statistical models in S (pp. 377–419). New York: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
  18. de Mora, A. P., Ortega-Calvo, J. J., Cabrera, F., & Madejon, E. (2005). Changes in enzyme activities and microbial biomass after "in situ" remediation of a heavy metal-contaminated soil. Applied Soil Ecology, 28, 125–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Doran, J. W., & Parkin, T. B. (1996). Quantitative indicators of soil quality: a minimum data set. In J. W. Doran & A. J. Jones (Eds.), Methods for assessing soil quality (pp. 25–37). Madison: Soil Science Society of America, special publication no. 49.Google Scholar
  20. Elhottova, D., Kristufek, V., Frouz, J., Novakova, A., & Chronakova, A. (2006). Screening for microbial markers in Miocene sediment exposed during open-cast brown coal mining. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek International Journal of General and Molecular Microbiology, 89, 459–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Evans, R. D., Rimer, R., Sperry, L., & Belnap, J. (2001). Exotic plant invasion alters nitrogen dynamics in an arid grassland. Ecological Applications, 11, 1301–1310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Friedl, M. A., & Brodley, C. E. (1997). Decision tree classification of land cover from remotely sensed data. Remote Sensing of Environment, 61, 399–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Frouz, J., & Novakova, A. (2005). Development of soil microbial properties in topsoil layer during spontaneous succession in heaps after brown coal mining in relation to humus microstructure development. Geoderma, 129, 54–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gil-Sotres, F., Trasar-Cepeda, C., Leirós, M. C., & Seoane, S. (2005). Different approaches to evaluating soil quality using biochemical properties. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 37, 877–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Haussling, M., & Marschner, H. (1989). Organic and inorganic soil phosphates and acid-phosphatase activity in the rhizosphere of 80 year old Norway Spruce [Picea-Abies (L) Karst] Trees. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 8, 128–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Helingerova, M., Frouz, J., & Santruckova, H. (2010). Microbial activity in reclaimed and unreclaimed post-mining sites near Sokolov (Czech Republic). Ecological Engineering, 36, 768–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Herrick, J. E. (2000). Soil quality: an indicator of suitable land management? Applied Soil Ecology, 15, 75–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Izquierdo, I., Caravaca, F., Alguacil, M. M., Hernandez, G., & Roldan, A. (2005). Use of microbiological indicators for evaluating success in soil restoration after revegetation of a mining area under subtropical conditions. Applied Soil Ecology, 30, 3–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jenkinson, D. S., & Powlson, D. S. (1976). Effects of Biocidal Treatments on metabolism in soil: method for measuring soil biomass. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 8, 209–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Johnson, D. W., & Curtis, P. S. (2001). Effects of forest management on soil C and N storage: meta analysis. Forest Ecology and Management, 140, 227–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Keskin, T., & Makineci, E. (2009). Some soil properties on coal mine spoils reclaimed with black locust (Robinia pceudoacacia L.) and umbrella pine (Pinus pinea L.) in Agacli-Istanbul. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 159, 407–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kribek, B., Strnad, M., Bohacek, Z., Sykorova, I., Cejka, J., & Sobalik, Z. (1998). Geochemistry of Miocene lacustrine sediments from the Sokolov Coal Basin (Czech Republic). International Journal of Coal Geology, 37, 207–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Marschner, H. (1995). Mineral nutrition of higher plants (2nd ed.). London: Academic.Google Scholar
  34. Martens, D. A., Johanson, J. B., & Frankenberger, W. T. (1992). Production and persistence of soil enzymes with repeated addition of organic residues. Soil Science, 153, 53–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Matus, G., Tothmeresz, B., & Papp, M. (2003). Restoration prospects of abandoned species-rich sandy grassland in Hungary. Applied Vegetation Science, 6, 169–178.Google Scholar
  36. McLean, E. O. (1982). Soil pH and lime requirement. In A. L. Page, R. H. Miller, & D. R. Kenney (Eds.), Methods of soil analysis, Part 2 (pp. 199–224). Madison: America Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
  37. Mills, C. (2010). Hortus Camdenensis: an illustrated catalogue of plants grown by Sir William MacArthur and Camden Park, N.S.W., Australia between c. 1820-1861.Google Scholar
  38. Monokrousos, N., Papatheodorou, E. M., Diamantopoulos, J. D., & Stamou, G. P. (2006). Soil quality variables in organically and conventionally cultivated field sites. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 38, 1282–1289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ohtonen, R., Fritze, H., Pennanen, T., Jumpponen, A., & Trappe, J. (1999). Ecosystem properties and microbial community changes in primary succession on a glacier forefront. Oecologia, 119, 239–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Olesniewicz, K. S., & Thomas, R. B. (1999). Effects of mycorrhizal colonization on biomass production and nitrogen fixation of black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) seedlings grown under elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide. New Phytologist, 142, 133–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Panagopoulos, T., & Hatzistathis, A. (1995). Early growth of Pinus-Nigra and Robina-Pseudoacacia stands—contributions to soil genesis and landscape improvement on lignite spoils in Ptolemaida. Landscape Urban Planning, 32, 19–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pascual, J. A., Garcia, C., Hernandez, T., Moreno, J. L., & Ros, M. (2000). Soil microbial activity as a biomarker of degradation and remediation processes. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 32, 1877–1883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Peloquin, R. L., & Hiebert, R. D. (1999). The effects of black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia L.) on species diversity and composition of black oak savanna/woodland communities. Natural Areas Journal, 19, 121–131.Google Scholar
  44. Piotrowska, A., & Mazurek, R. (2009). Assessment of black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia L.) shelterbelt influence on enzymatic activity and some chemical parameters of eutric cambisol. Polish Journal of Soil Science, 42, 31–41.Google Scholar
  45. Priha, O., Grayston, S. J., Hiukka, R., Pennanen, T., & Smolander, A. (2001). Microbial community structure and characteristics of the organic matter in soils under Pinus sylvestris, Picea abies and Betula pendula at two forest sites. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 33, 17–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Qiu, L. P., Zhang, X. C., Cheng, J. M., & Yin, X. Q. (2010). Effects of black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) on soil properties in the loessial gully region of the Loess Plateau, China. Plant and Soil, 332, 207–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Resh, S. C., Binkley, D., & Parrotta, J. A. (2002). Greater soil carbon sequestration under nitrogen-fixing trees compared with Eucalyptus species. Ecosystems, 5, 217–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rice, S. K., Westerman, B., & Federici, R. (2004). Impacts of the exotic, nitrogen-fixing black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) on nitrogen-cycling in a pine-oak ecosystem. Plant Ecology, 174, 97–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ross, D. J. (1990). Measurements of microbial biomass C and N in grassland soils by fumigation incubation procedures—influence of inoculum size and the control. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 22, 289–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sourkova, M., Frouz, J., & Santruckova, H. (2005). Accumulation of carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus during soil formation on alder spoil heaps after brown-coal mining, near Sokolov (Czech Republic). Geoderma, 124, 203–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tabatabai, M. A. (1994). Soil enzymes. In R. W. Weaver, J. S. Angles, & P. S. Bottomley (Eds.), Methods of soil analysis. Part 2. Microbiological and biochemical properties (pp. 775–833). Madison: Soil Science Society of American Journal.Google Scholar
  52. Tan, X., Chang, S. X., & Kabzems, R. (2008). Soil compaction and forest floor removal reduced microbial biomass and enzyme activities in a boreal aspen forest soil. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 44, 471–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tilman, D., & Lehman, C. (2001). Human-caused environmental change: Impacts on plant diversity and evolution. Proceedings National Academic Science USA, 98, 5433–5440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ussiri, D. A. N., Lal, R., & Jacinthe, P. A. (2006). Soil properties and carbon sequestration of afforested pastures in reclaimed minesoils of Ohio. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 70, 1797–1806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Vanlauwe, B., Diels, J., Sanginga, N., Carsky, R. J., Deckers, J., & Merckx, R. (2000). Utilization of rock phosphate by crops on a representative toposequence in the Northern Guinea savanna zone of Nigeria: response by maize to previous herbaceous legume cropping and rock phosphate treatments. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 32, 2079–2090.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Van Miegroet, H., & Cole, D. W. (1984). The impact of nitrification on soil acidification and cation leaching in a red alder ecosystem. Journal of Environmental Quality, 13, 586–590.Google Scholar
  57. Watson, J. W. (1994). Temperate taungya: woodland establishment by direct seeding of trees under an arable crop. Quarterly Journal of Forestry, 88, 199–204.Google Scholar
  58. Yuksek, T., & Yuksek, F. (2011). The effects of restoration on soil properties in degraded land in the semi-arid region of Turkey. Catena, 84, 47–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Yunusa, I. A. M., Eamus, D., DeSilva, D. L., Murray, B. R., Burchett, M. D., Skilbeck, G. C., & Heidrich, C. (2006). Fly-ash: an exploitable resource for management of Australian agricultural soils. Fuel, 85, 2337–2344.Google Scholar
  60. Zhang, Z., Yu, X., & Qian, S. (2010). Spatial variability of soil nitrogen and phosphorus of a mixed forest ecosystem in Beijing, China. Environmental Earth Sciences, 60, 1783–1792.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kostas Vlachodimos
    • 1
  • Efimia M. Papatheodorou
    • 1
  • John Diamantopoulos
    • 1
  • Nikolaos Monokrousos
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Ecology, School of BiologyAristotle UniversityThessalonikiGreece

Personalised recommendations