Slow restoration of soil microbial functions in an Acacia plantation established on degraded land in Thailand

Original Paper

Abstract

Deforestation diminishes the ecological services that a forest provides (e.g., flood prevention). To restore such services, reforestation is often utilized. The full restoration of the original forest ecosystem, however, can take several decades. The present study was conducted to identify the missing key components for rehabilitation of a degraded plot of land in Thailand on which Acacia trees were planted 18 or 19 years ago. Canopy spectral and soil physicochemical profiles of the Acacia plantation plot showed more advanced rehabilitation than in the soil microbial functions, as represented by soil dehydrogenase activity and community-level physiological profiles, when compared with those of a natural evergreen forest. The slower restoration of the soil microbial functions was thought to: (1) be attributed to the loss of certain microbes that played important roles in the evergreen forest soil, and (2) restrict the restoration of the entire forest ecosystem which was found to be still progressing towards a full restoration of the land’s original conditions. Finally, possible measures for further rehabilitation of the ecosystem were discussed.

Keywords

Acacia auriculiformis Components for ecological restoration Land degradation and rehabilitation Multivariate analysis 

References

  1. Anonymous (2011) The Eleventh National Economic and Social Development Plan (2012–2016). National Economic and Social Development Board of Thailand, Office of the Prime Minister, Bangkok, ThailandGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashton M, Gunatilleke C, Singhakumara B, Gunatilleke I (2001) Restoration pathways for rain forest in southwest Sri Lanka: a review of concepts and models. For Ecol Manage 154(3):409–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Badejo MA (1998) Agroecological restoration of savanna ecosystems. Ecol Eng 10(2):209–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baek S, Cui Y, Kim S, Cui C, Yin C, Lee S, Im W (2011) Tumebacillus ginsengisoli sp nov., isolated from soil of a ginseng field. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 61(7):1715–1719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernhard-Reversat F (1999) The leaching of eucalyptus hybrids and Acacia auriculiformis leaf litter: Laboratory experiments on early decomposition and ecological implications in Congolese tree plantations. Appl Soil Ecol 12(3):251–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bradshaw CJA, Sodhi NS, Peh KS-H, Brook BW (2007) Global evidence that deforestation amplifies flood risk and severity in the developing world. Global Change Biol 13(11):2379–2395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Casida LE Jr, Klein DA, Santoro T (1964) Soil dehydrogenase activity. Soil Sci 98(6):371–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chanway CP (1997) Inoculation of tree roots with plant growth promoting soil bacteria: an emerging technology for reforestation. For Sci 43(1):99–112Google Scholar
  9. Chazdon R (2003) Tropical forest recovery: Legacies of human impact and natural disturbances. Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst 6(1–2):51–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chen X, Su Y, He X, Wei Y, Wei W, Wu J (2012) Soil bacterial community composition and diversity respond to cultivation in Karst ecosystems. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 28(1):205–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Doi R (2012) Simple luminosity normalization of greenness, yellowness and redness/greenness for comparison of leaf spectral profiles in multi-temporally acquired remote sensing images. J Biosci 37(4):723–730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Doi R, Ranamukhaarachchi SL (2007) Soil colour designation using Adobe Photoshop (TM) in estimating soil fertility restoration by Acacia auriculiformis plantation on degraded land. Curr Sci 92(11):1604–1609Google Scholar
  13. Doi R, Ranamukhaarachchi SL (2009a) Community-level physiological profiling in monitoring rehabilitative effects of Acacia auriculiformis plantation on degraded land in Sakaerat. Thailand. Silva Fenn 43(5):739–754Google Scholar
  14. Doi R, Ranamukhaarachchi SL (2009b) Correlations between soil microbial and physicochemical variations in a rice paddy: implications for assessing soil health. J Biosci 34(6):969–976CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Doi R, Ranamukhaarachchi SL (2010) Discriminating between canopies of natural forest and Acacia plantation plots in a Google Earth image to evaluate forest land rehabilitation by Acacia species. Int J Agric Biol 12(6):921–925Google Scholar
  16. Doi R, Sakurai K (2004) Principal components derived from soil physico-chemical data explained a land degradation gradient, and suggested the applicability of new indexes for estimation of soil productivity in the Sakaerat environmental research station, Thailand. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol 11(3):298–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Doi R, Wachrinrat C, Teejuntuk S, Sakurai K, Sahunalu P (2010) Semiquantitative color profiling of soils over a land degradation gradient in Sakaerat, Thailand. Environ Monit Assess 170(1–4):301–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eden MJ, Parry JT (1996) Land degradation in the tropics: environmental and policy issues. Global Development & the Environment Series, Pinter, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. FAO/UNESCO 1979. Soil map of the world. IX, Southeast Asia. UNESCO, ParisGoogle Scholar
  20. Fisher R, Hirsch P (2008) Poverty and agrarian-forest interactions in Thailand. Geogr Res 46(1):74–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fujii K, Hayakawa C, Van Hees PAW, Funakawa S, Kosaki T (2010) Biodegradation of low molecular weight organic compounds and their contribution to heterotrophic soil respiration in three Japanese forest soils. Plant Soil 334(1–2):475–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gamo M, Shoji T (1999) A method of profiling microbial communities based on a most-probable-number assay that uses BIOLOG plates and multiple sole carbon sources. Appl Environ Microbiol 65(10):4419–4424Google Scholar
  23. Garland JL (1996) Patterns of potential C source utilization by rhizosphere communities. Soil Biol Biochem 28(2):223–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hackett CA, Griffiths BS (1997) Statistical analysis of the time-course of Biolog substrate utilization. J Microbiol Methods 30(1):63–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hobbs RJ, Norton DA (1996) Towards a conceptual framework for restoration ecology. Restor Ecol 4(2):93–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jangid K, Williams MA, Franzluebbers AJ, Sanderlin JS, Reeves JH, Jenkins MB, Endale DM, Coleman DC, Whitman WB (2008) Relative impacts of land-use, management intensity and fertilization upon soil microbial community structure in agricultural systems. Soil Biol Biochem 40(11):2843–2853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kaeoniam P, Khoorat P, Sunthornsan W, Issareeya M, Cherdchun C, Buachum W (1976) A study of illegal deforestation in the reserved forest area at the Sakaerat Environmental Research Station. Environmental and Ecological Research Department, Applied Scientific Research Corporation of Thailand, BangkokGoogle Scholar
  28. Kamo K, Vacharangkura T, Tiyanon S, Viriyabuncha C, Nimpila S, Doangsrisen B (2002) Plant species diversity in tropical planted forests and implication for restoration of forest ecosystems in Sakaerat, northeastern Thailand. JARQ 36(2):111–118Google Scholar
  29. Kang BT (1993) Sustainable agroforestry systems for the tropics: concepts and examples. IITA Research Guide 26. IITA, IbadanGoogle Scholar
  30. Kanzaki M, Yoda K, Dhanmanonda K (1995) Mosaic structure and tree growth pattern in a monodomoinant tropical seasonal evergreen forest in Thailand. In: Box EO, Peet RK, Masuzawa T, Yamada I, Fujiwara K, Maycosk PF (eds) Vegetation science in forestry. Kluwer Publishers, Netherlands, pp 495–513Google Scholar
  31. Kardol P, Wardle DA (2010) How understanding aboveground-belowground linkages can assist restoration ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 25(11):670–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Köppen W (1931) Grundriss der Klimakunde. Walter de Gruyter, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  33. Krairapanond N, Atkinson A (1998) Watershed management in Thailand: concepts, problems and implementation. Regul Rivers Ress Manage. 14(6):485–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kuramae E, Gamper H, van Veen J, Kowalchuk G (2011) Soil and plant factors driving the com munity of soil-borne microorganisms across chronosequences of secondary succession of chalk grasslands with a neutral pH. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 77(2):285–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lin Y, Jangid K, Whitman WB, Coleman DC, Chiu C (2011) Change in bacterial community structure in response to disturbance of natural hardwood and secondary coniferous forest soils in central Taiwan. Microb Ecol 61(2):429–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lindstrom JE, Barry RP, Braddock JF (1998) Microbial community analysis: a kinetic approach to constructing potential C source utilization patterns. Soil Biol Biochem 30(2):231–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lugo AE (1997) The apparent paradox of reestablishing species richness on degraded lands with tree monocultures. For Ecol Manage 99(1–2):9–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mataji A, Moarefvand P, Kafaki SB, Kermanshahi MM (2010) Understory vegetation as environmental factors indicator in forest ecosystems. Int J Environ Sci Technol 7(4):629–638Google Scholar
  39. Mboukou-Kimbatsa IMC, Bernhard-Reversat F, Loumeto JJ (1998) Change in soil macrofauna and vegetation when fast-growing trees are planted on savanna soils. For Ecol Manage 110(1–3):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mitchell RJ, Auld MHD, Le Duc MG, Marrs RH (2000) Ecosystem stability and resilience: a review of their relevance for the conservation management of lowland heaths. Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst 3(2):142–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Okot-Uma RW, Endeley RM (2004) Biodiversity and gender for sustainable development: perspectives. Commonwealth Secretariat and SFI Publishing, LondonGoogle Scholar
  42. Ponnusamy K, Choi JN, Kim J, Lee S-Y, Lee CH (2011) Microbial community and metabolomic comparison of irritable bowel syndrome faeces. J Med Microbiol 60(6):817–827CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Preston-Mafham J, Boddy L, Randerson P (2002) Analysis of microbial community functional diversity using sole-carbon-source utilisation profiles—a critique. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 42(1):1–14Google Scholar
  44. Ramsey PW, Rillig MC, Feris KP, Holben WE, Gannon JE (2006) Choice of methods for soil microbial community analysis: PLFA maximizes power compared to CLPP and PCR-based approaches. Pedobiologia 50(3):275–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ren H, Li ZA, Shen WJ, Yu ZY, Peng SL, Liao CH, Ding MM, Wu JG (2007) Changes in biodiversity and ecosystem function during the restoration of a tropical forest in south China. Sci China Ser C Life Sci 50(2):277–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sharp A, Nakagoshi N (2006) Rehabilitation of degraded forests in Thailand: policy and practice. Landsc Ecol Eng 2(2):139–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sprent JI, Parsons R (2000) Nitrogen fixation in legume and non-legume trees. Field Crops Res 65(2–3):183–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Strobel BW, Bernhoft I, Borggaard OK (1999) Low-molecular-weight aliphatic carboxylic acids in soil solutions under different vegetations determined by capillary zone electrophoresis. Plant Soil 212(2):115–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Trevors J (1996) DNA in soil: adsorption, genetic transformation, molecular evolution and genetic microchip. Antonie Leeuwenhoek 70(1):1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tscherko D, Hammesfahr U, Marx MC, Kandeler E (2004) Shifts in rhizosphere microbial communities and enzyme activity of Poa alpina across an alpine chronosequence. Soil Biol Biochem 36(10):1685–1698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Vonmersi W, Schinner F (1991) An improved and accurate method for determining the dehydrogenase-activity of soils with iodonitrotetrazolium chloride. Biol Fertility Soils 11(3):216–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Werdin-Pfisterer NR, Kielland K, Boone RD (2009) Soil amino acid composition across a boreal forest successional sequence. Soil Biol Biochem 41(6):1210–1220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Yemefack M, Rossiter D, Njomgang R (2005) Multi-scale characterization of soil variability within an agricultural landscape mosaic system in southern Cameroon. Geoderma 125(1–2):117–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zar JH (1999) Biostatistical analysis. Prentice-Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Islamic Azad University (IAU) 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of Agricultural and Life SciencesThe University of TokyoTokyoJapan
  2. 2.School of Environment, Resources and DevelopmentAsian Institute of TechnologyPathumthaniThailand

Personalised recommendations