Urban Main Roadside Plantation Enhances Species Richness, Diversity and Carbon Storage than Sub roadside Plantation: An Empirical Study in Dhaka City

Urban Main Roadside Plantation Enhances Species Richness, Diversity and Carbon Storage than Sub roadside Plantation: An Empirical Study in Dhaka City | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Urban Main Roadside Plantation Enhances Species Richness, Diversity and Carbon Storage than Sub roadside Plantation: An Empirical Study in Dhaka City Sumaiya Akter, Kazi Md Abu Sayeed, Naznin Parvin, Mahbuba Jamil, and 9 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6657761/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 24 Oct, 2025 Read the published version in Urban Ecosystems → Version 1 posted 9 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract While the ecological role of urban main roadside (MR) plantation is well-documented, the contribution of sub roadside (SR) plantation remains unclear. Using both purposive and random sampling methods, we investigated species richness, diversity and above-below ground biomass carbon (AGC and BGC) storage of the MR and SR plantations in northern and southern parts of Dhaka urban city. We found that species richness is comparatively lower in SR than MR in Dhaka north (MR: 4.70 ± 0.24, SR: 3.51 ± 0.14), Dhaka south (MR: 4.45 ± 0.24, SR: 4.20 ± 0.32) and north + south (MR: 4.55 ± 0.17, SR: 3.85 ± 0.18) sites respectively. We also found that MR of the Dhaka north city showed higher mean AGC storage than SR (MR: 63.78 ± 11.33 Mg ha − 1 , SR: 40.16 ± 5.03 Mg ha − 1 ), however the result is opposite in case of Dhaka south (MR: 80.99 ± 7.50 Mg ha − 1 , SR: 103.58 ± 7.65 Mg ha − 1 ). When combined north + south roadside together, maximum AGC was found in MR (73.62 ± 7.99, Mg ha − 1 ) than SR (71.87 ± 8.39 Mg ha − 1 ). Similar trend was observed in term of BGC and total biomass carbon (TC) where SR showed less carbon storage potentiality than MR. Significant positive (all, P < 0.05) relationships were observed among AGC, BGC and TC storage in response to species richness both MR and SR across sites with few exceptions in case of species diversity. Our study suggested that SR are contributing fewer ecosystem functions than MR of Dhaka urban mega city thus enhancement of SR plantation along with MR is strongly suggested to maintain sustainable urban ecosystem function. Carbon storage species richness species diversity urban roadside plantation Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Introduction Greenhouse effect and biodiversity loss are the two main topics of contention among scientists and legislators worldwide at the moment which brought on by the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation (Van Der Werf et al. 2009 ; Zhang et al. 2011 ). In the past century, there has been 0.74°C increase in global temperature and 379 ppm increase in atmospheric CO 2 concentration and it is predicted that the temperature might climb by 2–4°C if this pace of increase in CO 2 emissions persists until 2050 (IPCC 2013 ). Reducing these changes is crucial to prevent future climate-related disasters thus forest rejuvenation in conjunction with different reforestation and afforestation initiatives can be extremely important to reduce greenhouse gasses, store and capture of atmospheric carbon and mitigate global climate change (Kumar 2011 ; Jaman et al. 2022 ; Nero et al. 2024 ). Urbanization is a key component of global change that dramatically influences biological and environmental patterns, affecting human well-being at all spatial scales (Haase et al. 2018 ). Reduced vegetation cover is a hallmark of urbanization, and urban areas are on the cusp of having greater impervious surface than tree cover worldwide (Nowak and Greenfield 2020 ). Therefore, increasing the number of vegetation or plantation sites in urban areas is one of the most crucial ways to store and capture CO 2 in the plant biomass and soil under various land use systems in urban ecosystem (Lavelle 2014 ). Because roadside plantations have a variety of plant species composition, they are one of the unique land use systems that can store substantial amount of carbon (Ament et al. 2014 ). By adding aesthetic value, roadside plantations particularly in urban areas provide numerous ecological services that benefit the urban community, like lowering temperatures (Fan et al. 2015 ) and storing carbon and other pollutants (Zhao and Sander 2015 ). For instance, trees beside roadways collect more large-size particulate matter than trees farther away from the road (Beckett et al. 2000 ). An urban roadside plantation can cut carbon emissions by up to 18 kg CO 2 year − 1 tree − 1 and it is the same as what three to five forest trees of a similar size and condition would provide (Ferrini and Fini 2011 ). Therefore, importance of urban roadside planation for carbon storage and biodiversity conservation is increasingly important. Roadsides plantation constitute the potential green space that is more or less different from the other surrounding vegetation in terms of its species composition, richness and diversity. These has been frequently studied to interpret and fulfill various aims, for example, to assessing the roadside contribution to species composition, abundance of certain species groups, impact on surrounding habitats and analyses the effects on environmental factors. Suaréz-Esteban et al. (2016) investigated that roadside plantations, power line corridors, and railroad tracks contribute nearly 70% plant diversity than other adjacent surrounding habitats, which contribute significant biomass production and biodiversity conservation. Increased plant diversity and richness in urban roadside introducing new conditions and microhabitats in the urban landscape which creates new niches for other species including different alien or exotic. For example, in a French oak forest, the roads contributed almost 82% to the plant diversity through introducing native species (Baltzinger et al. 2011 ). Roadsides in Australia are contributing most to the diversity of exotic species, which important component of floristic diversity (Schultz et al. 2014 ). Although these studies explored important findings regarding contributions of roadside on species diversity and richness, however, contribution of sub roadside is still ignored. Afforestation and management of urban roadside is considered as important practices to increase ecosystem biomass carbon storage (Mo et al. 2023 ). The potential for carbon storage and climate change mitigation for the urban areas have been studied in various jurisdictions, notably, as part of nature based solutions (Drever et al. 2021 ; Ménard et al. 2022 ). Main highway roadside, island and corridor plantation are examples of utilized areas that could significantly contribute to increase carbon storage potentiality (Rahman et al. 2015 ; Fu et al. 2019 ). Earlier studies have shown that urban roadside plantations linking with high species diversity and richness increase above and below ground carbon storage capacity through higher biomass and root production. For instance, tree plantation along highway borders in China sequestered 4.68 Mg C between the 1980s and 2005 (Cheng et al. 2016 ). Similarly, tree plantation along 485,255 km of roadside of the United States had the potential to sequester 8 Mg C per year. In Brazil, highway afforestation sites could sequester up to 655 Mg CO 2 (179 Mg C) per kilometer over ten years (Silva et al. 2010 ). Bangladesh is no exception where average carbon content of roadside plantations is 192.80 Mg ha − 1 , with 86% of carbon stored aboveground and 14% belowground (Rahman et al. 2015 ). Previous research has been demonstrated that urban forests with a greater variety of plant species have the capacity to store more above and belowground carbon (Jaman et al. 2020 ) and lower urban air temperatures (Kumar et al. 2019 ). In contrast, a decline in plant diversity as a result of widespread deforestation, harvesting of biomass and habitat construction in urban area has a direct impact on carbon storage (Nowak and Crane 2002 ). Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh, is the seventh most densely populated city in the world and is losing green space at a rapid rate. Nevertheless, land degradation and deforestation are reducing the Dhaka city's carbon sequestration and storage potentiality (Dewan and Yamaguchi 2009 ), however, the ability of urban roadside plantations in Bangladesh to trap carbon has not garnered much scientific attention and need extensive research (Rahman et al. 2015 ). Moreover, research regarding sub roadside plantation contribution has substantially under the shadow. Thus, understanding the ecological relationship (species richness, diversity) of roadside plantations (both main and sub road) and their significance in carbon storage in the a megacity like Dhaka is necessary to reach a recommended level of green space and for the management of roadsides (Deb et al. 2013 ). Therefore, we have conducted an experiment for better understand the effect of roadside plantation (main road and sub road) on species richness, diversity and carbon storage potentiality. We hypothesized that (1) urban roadside (MR and SR) plantation has a significant effect on species diversity, species richness and above-belowground carbon storage, (2) species richness, species diversity is positively related to carbon storage both MR and SR plantation, and (3) MR have strong impact on species diversity, richness and carbon storage than SR plantation. Materials and methods 2.1 Study area The study was conducted in Dhaka, the capital and largest city of Bangladesh, which is located on the eastern banks of the Buriganga River, a channel of the Ganges River delta surrounded by the Turag River to the west, Tongi Khal to the north, and the Balu River to the east. Dhaka is geographically situated between 23°42' and 23°54' north latitudes and 90°20' and 90°28' east longitudes, covering an area of 360 square kilometers. As a megacity with a population exceeding 22.4 million residents in 2024, Dhaka is considered the most densely populated urban area in the world. Despite its water confinement, the city is elevated between 2 to 13 meters above mean sea level, with most urbanized areas lying at 6 to 8 meters above mean sea level (Tawhid 2004 ), making it prone to flooding during the monsoon season due to heavy rainfall. Moreover, the city has 61.45 km of main primary and 108.2 km of secondary sub roads contributing major roadside vegetation throughout the whole city. In our research we used the primary roadside of the northern and southern part of Dhaka city for vegetation sampling. The research utilized the MR and SR plantations of both Dhaka South and Dhaka North city areas focusing on areas where urbanization and vegetation remain relatively constant and the soil primarily categorized as medium-high land with silt loam and a pH of 5.6, supports tropical vegetation in a hot, wet, and humid climate. 2.2 Sampling and data sources We employed a two-stage sampling method (both purposive and random) where sample size was based on area and vegetation composition to ensure overall accuracy of the sampling and minimize the bias (Lei et al. 2009 ). Briefly, both MR and SR are selected purposively and sampled plots from the selected roads are taken randomly. A total of 140 plots of equal in size are selected from both Dhaka north (70) and south part (70) of the city for data collection. Plots were selected in a zigzag manner on both sides of the road to capture a representative mixture of variation, diversity, and composition of tree species. A 100 m 2 (20m (L) × 5m (W)) rectangular shape plots were demarcated for sampling and each successive plot was 100m apart from one another according to the model given by Rahman et al., ( 2015 ). Finally, 35 plots of MR and 35 plots of SR in Dhaka south city corporation, while 35 plots of MR and 35 plots of SR from Dhaka North city were selected. The floristic characteristics, stand vegetation, species richness, species diversity and biomass carbon were assessed later based on collected data from 140 plots. 2.3 Plant diversity indices We quantified species richness by counting available and individual species in each sampled plot in MR and SR. We further calculated species diversity using Shannon– Wiener diversity index within the fixed boundaries of the sampled areas. Species diversity was assessed acquiring common names or local names that were subsequently was translated into botanical names. Due to suitability for evaluating diversity in carbon sequestration projects the Shannon–Wiener index (SWI) is chosen by us for this study (Ponce-Hernandez et al. 2004 ). Shannon– Wiener diversity characterized by the proportion of species abundance in the population being at maximum when all species are equally abundant and it was to be known as the lowest when the sample contained one species. $$\:SWI=-\sum\:_{n=1}^{m}Pi\times\:\text{ln}Pi$$ where, SWI = Shannon– Wiener Index, n = number of species, Pi = proportion of individuals belonging to i th species relative to the total number of species Estimation of carbon storage of stand vegetation per plot, while ln = natural logarithm. 2.4 Estimation of carbon storage of stand vegetation 2.4.1 Measurement of DBH A non-destructive method was followed to compute aboveground biomass of all woody plants provided by the International Centre for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF). Woody plants with DBH ≥ 3 cm, were estimated from all sample plots of the roadside plantations. The diameter of all identified plants were measured at breast height (1.3 m height from the ground level) using a diameter tape (Brand: Forestry Suppliers, Materials: Fabrics Lngth: 160 cm) and the basal area (1.3 m at breast height) of the trees was calculated from the recorded tree diameter (Hairiah et al. 2001 ). The height of all sampled trees was measured using a laser distance meter (Sndway SW-1500A). 2.4.2 Above-ground biomass and carbon Above-ground biomass of all individual trees ( DBH ≥ 3 cm at 1.3 m breast height) was estimated by using appropriate allometric equations given by Chave et al., ( 2005 ) based on tree DBH (cm), height (m) and species’ wood density. Specific wood densities for all sampled species (varying from 0.26 to 1.06 g cm − 3 ) were collected from the FAO global wood density database and tropical wood density data (Ali et al. 2017 ). The stated equation is given below: Y = exp(-2.1877 + 0.917 * ln (D 2 * H *S ) Y represents the above-ground biomass density (Mg ha − 1 ), D is the diameter (cm), H is height (m), and S is the species specific wood density which derived from FAO global wood density database (S = − 1.39, 1.98 …… … 0.207) g cm − 3 . 2.4.3 Estimation of carbon storage The total AGB per plot was the sum of the AGB of trees and AGB of shrubs. Subsequently, we converted AGB to aboveground C storage (Mg ha − 1 ) by multiplying AGB with a conversion factor of 0.5, assuming that 50% of the total tree biomass is C (Potter et al. 2008 ). Carbon Storage = Biomass x 50% or Carbon Storage = Biomass/2 The relative proportion of carbon storage in biomass is generally persistant in various tree species and tree parts (Chave et al. 2005 ). 2.5 Data analysis All analyses were carried out using R version 4.1.2 (R Core Team 2021 ) and figures were created using the packages namely ggplot2, tibble, and plyr (Wickham 2016 ). Some other R packages e.g., ggpubr (Kassambara 2018 ), ggpmisc (Aphalo 2017 ), gridextra (Auguie and Antonov 2017 ), nlme (Pinheiro et al. 2018 ) were used during plotting the graphs. Before beginning data analysis, Shapiro–Wilk tests were employed to test the normality of our data. Due to the normal distribution of our data, basic or original data was used for the final analysis without any log transformation. First, we used one way-ANOVA to examine the impacts of main road and sub-road plantation on species richness, diversity, DBH, basal areas, above-belowground biomass carbon and total carbon; average values were partitioned with Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test, and the differences were predicted at P < 0.05 significant level. Later, linear fit (R 2 ) regressions analysis were conducted with the ‘lm’ function to see the bivariate relation among plant richness, diversity, DBH, crown areas with above-belowground biomass carbon and total carbon across plots level and significance were indicated at P < 0.05, P < 0.01 and P < 0.001 level. We used F-statistics to determine whether the variance between two standard variables is similar. Results 3.1.1 Species richness and species diversity in MR and SR Species richness of the MR was significantly higher (mean ± se: 4.70 ± 0.24, P < 0.001) in Dhaka north, and north + south city (mean ± se: 3.85 ± 0.1, P = 0.01) than SR (north: mean ± se: 3.51 ± 0.15; north + south: 3.85 ± 0.1) respectively (Fig. 3 a-c). However, species diversity differed non-significantly ( P > 0.05) between in MR and SR in all studied roadsides in Dhaka north (MR: 0.82 ± 0.05, SR: 0.85 ± 0.75), north + south (MR: 0.91 ± 0.41, SR:0.85 ± 0.04) and Dhaka south (MR:0.85 ± 0.05, SR: 0.91 ± 0.06) respectively (Fig. 3 d-f). 3.1.2 DBH (cm) in MR and sub SR, and distribution of trees based on DBH categories MR has significantly higher DBH (mean ± se:123.22 ± 10.97, P = 0.011) than SR (mean ± se: 93.47 ± 4.85) in Dhaka North (Fig. 4 a) and non signifiacnt ( P > 0.05) in Dhaka south (mean ± se: MR:128.17 ± 7.91, SR: 136.17 ± 10.41) and north + south (mean ± se: MR:126.05 ± 6.48, SR:114.82 ± 6.25) respectively (Fig. 4 b-c). Highest number of trees was found in between 20.1–40 (cm) DBH range in MR, SR, MR + SR (Fig. 4 d-f) however, lowest number of trees was seen between 80.1–100 (cm) DBH range in across all road sides both in north and south city respectively. 3.1.3 Basal area and Crown area in MR and SR Tree basal area in MR was significantly higher (mean ± se: 179.11 ± 30.21, P = 0.003) in Dhaka north and SR in south city (mean ± se: 230.21 ± 0.22, P = 0.037) however, non-significant ( P > 0.049) for north + south respectively (Fig. 5 a-c). In case of crown area, only SR showed significantly higher (mean ± se: 51.73 ± 4.17, P = 0.007) than MR (mean ± se: 41.19 ± 3.28) in Dhaka South (Fig. 5 e) but non-significant ( P > 0.05) for rest of the sites of Dhaka north (mean ± se: MR: 40.35 ± 3.17, mean ± se: SR: : 39.62 ± 2.82 ) and north + south (mean ± se: MR: 40.83 ± 2.30, mean ± se: SR: 45.67 ± 2.60) respectively (Fig. 5 d, f). 3.1.4 Carbon storage in MR and SR Above-belowground and total carbon storage of MR (63.78 ± 11.33, P = 0.005), (43.95 ± 7.44, P = 0.011 ), (107.74 ± 18.48, P = 0.039) was significantly higher than SR (40.16 ± 5.03), (25.88 ± 2.68 ), (66.05 ± 7.49 ) in Dhaka North city (Fig. 6 a, d, g). In contrast, SR of Dhaka south has significantly higher above-below and total carbon storage (93.62 ± 7.99, P = 0.042), (57.89 ± 7.60, P = 0.045 ), (161.48 ± 21.41, P = 0.011) than MR (71.87 ± 8.39), (45.20 ± 5.25) and (126.20 ± 15.45) respectively (Fig. 6 b, e, h). Above ground carbon storage represented no significant variation ( P > 0.05) across MR and SR in north + south city (MR: 73.62 ± 7.99, SR: 71.87 ± 8.39) respectively (Fig. 6 c, f, i). Moreover, when combine Dhaka north + south togather, similar results was obtained and found no sognificant differences ( P > 0.05) between MR and SR incase of total carbon storage (MR : 118.29 ± 11.82, SR: 113.76 ± 12.63) across all sites. 3.1.5 DBH with carbon storage relationship To find out relationships between DBH with carbon storage, regression analysis was carried out. Our findings revealed that plot-level tree DBH of both MR and SR in Dhaka south (MR: R 2 = 0.65, P = 0.017, SR: R 2 = 0.71, P < 0.001), North + South ( MR: R 2 = 0.69, P = 0.01, SR: R 2 = 0.75, P < 0.001), showed a significant positive relationship with above ground carbon storage while Dhaka north showed significant relationship only in MR ( R 2 = 0.56, P = 0.033) (Fig. 7 a-c). In case of belowground carbon storage, Dhaka south (MR: R 2 = 0.81, P < 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.82, P < 0.001) and north + south (MR: R 2 = 0.87, P < 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.76, P < 0.001) showed significant positive relationship with DBH and significant in Dhaka north only in MR ( R 2 = 0.63, P = 0.008) (Fig. 6 d-f). Similar trend was observed in case of total carbon storage with DBH and found significant relationship in Dhaka south (MR: R 2 = 0.80, P < 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.68, P = 0.004), north + south (MR: R 2 = 0.82, P < 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.76, P < 0.001) both in MR and SR, however, only significant in MR (MR: R 2 = 0.77, P < 0.001) for Dhaka north (Fig. 7 g-i). These findings indicate that increase tree DBH, increase above-below and total carbon in MR of both Dhaka south and north + south with a few exception (AGC: SR: R 2 = 0.01, P = 0.96, BGC: SR: R 2 = − 0.04, P = 0.85 and TC:SR: R 2 = − 0.02, P = 0.89) in case of SR in Dhaka north roadside planation respectively. 3.1.6 Basal area with carbon storage relationship The findings of this study showed that plot-level tree basal area of both MR and SR in Dhaka north (MR: R 2 = 0.70, P = 0.01, SR: R 2 = 0.84, P < 0.001), Dhaka south (MR: R 2 = 0.74, P < 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.94, P < 0.001), north + south ( MR: R 2 = 0.66, P = 0.02, SR: R 2 = 0.85, P < 0.001) showed significant positive relationship with above ground carbon storage (Fig. 8 a-c). In case of below ground carbon storage of Dhaka north (MR: R 2 = 0.98, P < 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.97, P < 0.001), Dhaka south (MR: R 2 = 0.89, P < 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.87, P < 0.001) and north + south (MR: R 2 = 0.89, P < 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.92, P < 0.001) also showed significant positive relationship with basal area (Fig. 8 d-f). Similar trend was observed in case of total carbon storage with basal area which were found significant in Dhaka north (MR: R 2 = 0.73, P < 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.83, P < 0.001), Dhaka south (MR: R 2 = 0.87, P < 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.97, P < 0.004), north + south (MR: R 2 = 0.69, P = 0.013, SR: R 2 = 0.83, P < 0.001) both in MR and SR (Fig. 8 g-i). These findings indicate that increased basal area, increase above, below and total carbon storage in both MR and SR of Dhaka north, Dhaka south and north + south respectively. 3.1.7 Crown area and carbon storage relationship The findings of our study showed that plot-level tree crown area of both MR and SR in Dhaka south (MR: R 2 = 0.65, P = 0.013, SR: R 2 = 0.66, P = 0.017), north + south ( MR: R 2 = 0.56, P = 0.003, SR: R 2 = 0.5, P = 0.031), showed a significant positive relationship with above ground carbon storage while Dhaka north showed non-significant relationship both in MR ( R 2 = 0.34, P = 0.066) and SR ( R 2 = 0.06, P = 0.73) respectively (Fig. 9 a-c). In case of belowground carbon storage, Dhaka south (MR: R 2 = 0.66, P < 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.59, P < 0.001) and north + south (MR: R 2 = 0.58, P = 0.007, SR: R 2 = 0.52, P = 0.014) showed significant positive relationship with crown area (Fig. 9 d-f). Similar trend was observed in case of total carbon storage with crown area which were found significant in Dhaka south (MR: R 2 = 0.70, P < 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.65, P < 0.001), north + south (MR: R 2 = 0.60, P = 0.005, SR: R 2 = 0.57, P = 0.018) both in MR and SR but non significant in MR road and SR (MR: R 2 = 0.22, P = 0.24; SR: R 2 = 0.05, P = 0.79) for Dhaka north respectively (Fig. 9 g-i). These findings showed that increased crown area, increase above-below and total carbon in MR and SR of both Dhaka south and north + south, although most of the cases Dhaka north showed non-significant relationship except belowground carbon storage ( R 2 = 0.44, P = 0.02) in Dhaka North road side. 3.1.8 Plant species richness effects on carbon storage Species richness of both MR and SR in Dhaka north (MR: R 2 = 0.75, P < 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.61, P = 0.014), Dhaka south (MR: R 2 = 0.71, P < 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.78, P < 0.001) and north + south ( MR: R 2 = 0.71, P < 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.78, P < 0.001) significantly and positively influence above ground carbon storage (Fig. 10 a-c). Similarly, below ground carbon storage, Dhaka north (MR: R 2 = 0.64, P < 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.35, P = 0.031), Dhaka south (MR: R 2 = 0.47, P = 0.022, SR: R 2 = 0.63, P = 0.007) and north + south (MR: R 2 = 0.49, P < 0.004, SR: R 2 = 0.54, P = 0.002) showed significant positive relationship with species richness (Fig. 10 d-f). Likely, above and belowground, total carbon storage were found significant in Dhaka north (MR: R 2 = 0.73, P = 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.42, P = 0.042), Dhaka south (MR: R 2 = 0.67, P < 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.75, P < 0.001), north + south (MR: R 2 = 0.69, P < 0.001, SR: R 2 = 0.73, P < 0.001) both in MR and SR (Fig. 10 g-i). ). Species richness highly and increased above, below and total carbon storage in both MR and SR of Dhaka North, Dhaka south and north + south respectively. 3.1.9 Plant species diversity effects on carbon storage The findings of our study revealed that species diversity of both MR and SR in Dhaka south (MR: R 2 = 0.34, P = 0.03, SR: R 2 = 0.55, P < 0.001), north + south (MR: R 2 = 0.26, P = 0.03, SR: R 2 = 0.44, P < 0.001), significantly drive above ground carbon storage while Dhaka north showed non-significant relationship both in MR (MR: R 2 = 0.16, P = 0.34) and SR ( R 2 = 0.12, P = 0.51) respectively (Fig. 11 a-c). In case of belowground carbon storage Dhaka south SR (SR: R 2 = 0.49, P = 0.003) and north + south SR (SR: R 2 = 0.38, P < 0.001) showed increase belowground carbon with species diversity however no significant effects were observed in MR of Dhaka north (MR: R 2 = 0.18, P = 0.34), Dhaka south (MR: R 2 = 0.18, P = 0.27), and north + south (MR: R 2 = 0.18, P = 0.14) respectively (Fig. 11 d-f). Similarly, species diversity significantly increased total carbon storage in SR of Dhaka south (SR: R 2 = 0.54, P < 0.001), north + south (MR: R 2 = 0.30, P = 0.05; SR: R 2 = 0.43, P < 0.001) but no effect in MR of Dhaka north (MR: R 2 = 0.17, P = 0.36; SR: R 2 = 0.08, P = 0.66) roadside plantation respectively (Fig. 11 g-i). Discussion 3.2.1 Roadside (main road and sub road) plantation has a significant effect on species diversity, richness and carbon storage Our first hypothesized is that roadside (MR and SR) plantation has significant effect on species diversity and richness and we observed that both MR of Dhaka north and north + south city showed higher species richness than SR plantation (Fig. 3 a-c). We assume that street trees of MR and SR of our study received different environmental, anthropogenic pressures, and plantation management practices which contribute to the variations in species composition. Yet, tree abundance and richness were greater in MR, particularly in north side of Dhaka city represented well urban vegetation coverage, greater species richness and species diversity than SR. Our findings in line with the previous study reported that urban roadside as well as interconnected divisional highway plantation had a significant effect on species richness (Rahman et al. 2015 ; Jaman et al. 2020 ). Our results also revealed that species diversity of both MR and SR showed no significant variation across all study sites in Dhaka city (Figure: 3 d-f). Although SR of the current study are typically experienced lower vehicular pressure and emissions, less soil compaction, and less anthropogenic disturbance, interestingly, however, do not support higher species diversity compared to MR. Similarly, MR in most of the cases subjected to higher traffic pressure associated with frequent air pollution, exhibited lower species diversity and showed no significant variation with SR (Lee et al. 2018 ). These results align with a very recent observation suggesting that lower pollution levels and reduced disturbance contribute to increased plant establishment and survival (Darabi et al. 2023 ). The floristic structures e.g., DBH, basal areas, crown areas etc. of roadside vegetations also play a crucial role in shaping urban roadside species diversity and richness. Higher crown coverage, DBH and basal areas together indicate denser vegetation and larger trees size. These along with understory vegetation characteristics, soil types and quality influence species richness, diversity and promoting habitat availability for various taxa (Williams et al. 2015 ). Among our study sites, except Dhaka north, no significant variation was observed in case of DBH in both MR and SR and most of the species are found in between 20.1–40 cm DBH class. Although, we found higher basal areas in the MR of Dhaka north, SR also represented higher basal area and crown areas in Dhaka south site. We did not find the actual reason, however, we assume and agree with Jaman et al., ( 2020 ) that higher DBH significantly contribute to higher basal area hereafter, MR of Dhaka north in our study. It is expected that native plant species tend to thrive in less disturbed roadside areas, whereas non-native or pollution-tolerant species dominate heavily trafficked or disturbed sites (Srour et al. 2024 ). Thus, incorporating more native plant species, lowering pollution exposure, and maintaining diverse greenery structures can significantly improve ecological resilience via increase richness and diversity in urban road site (Anderson et al. 2021 ). Urban roadside plantations including MR and SR has significant effect in carbon storage, both above ground biomass and below ground root biomass. The differences in carbon storage between these two plantation types (MR and SR) can be explained by differences in species identity, tree density, diversity, microclimatic conditions, and soil characteristics (Khan et al. 2020 ). Our findings revealed that both MR and SR contribute substantially to carbon storage both above and belowground across the study sites. Aboveground carbon storage is mostly driven by tree biomass, which further depends on species composition, growth rate, age, and canopy volume. Earlier study investigated that MR plantations often contain larger and aged trees due to larger and wider planting spaces frequent maintenance which leads to higher aboveground biomass accumulation and carbon stock (Chave et al. 2014 ). In contrast, SR vegetation tends to have smaller and comparatively younger, lower DBH, mostly dominated by ornamental species due to limited space may store less carbon in aboveground biomass. Additionally, tree size, shapes, wood density, and development dynamics remarkably impact on carbon storage in urban vegetation (Nowak et al. 2014 ). In our study, we highlighted two contrasting findings: firstly, MR showed higher above-below and total carbon storage in Dhaka north, however, SR showed the opposite results in Dhaka south. Secondly, when we combine north + south together, we found no significant variation between MR and SR. This is because MR road of Dhaka south represented larger and older tree species with higher DBH categories. Moreover, presences of understory shrubs vegetation contribute to aboveground carbon storage, though to a lesser extent. Availability of mixed vegetation in SR plantations may less increase in carbon storage for short-term, however long-term and higher carbon storage observed in MR plantations dominated by large trees (Forrester and Bauhus 2016 ). We also observed opposite results in Dhaka south and our explanation is that less urban construction and comparatively low disturbed streets of south ensure satisfactory vegetation coverage in the SR results higher above-below and total carbon storage than MR. It is widely recognized that belowground carbon storage is mainly influenced by root biomass and soil organic carbon. Roots of trees, shrubs and herbs contribute directly to belowground biomass, with massive trees generally having more extensive rooting systems that enhance carbon storage in soil (Zhang et al. 2018 ; Poorter et al. 2019 ). Across the study sites, Dhaka north showed higher belowground carbon storage in MR and SR in Dhaka south. Although MR plantations have deeper and established root systems which facilitating more carbon accumulation through root exudation and decomposition, enhancing soil carbon content over time (Lal 2004 ), our results do not support this finding observed for Dhaka south roadside plantation. The variations in carbon storage between MR and SR plantations highlight that MR usually offer greater carbon storage and sequestration potential due to the presence of large trees with high productivity of biomass, crown coverage and high root elongation (Chen et al. 2020 ). On the other hand, SR plantations, although contributing to carbon storage, may require strategic management interventions such as improved soil conditions, species selection, and reduced anthropogenic disturbances to enhance their sequestration potential. 3.2.2 Species richness and species diversity are positively related to carbon storage both main roadside and sub roadside plantation Understanding of the relationships between plant species richness and diversity with carbon storage is crucial for sustainable management of urban roadside plantation. Therefore, we assessed how these relationships differ across Dhaka north and Dhaka south MR and SR. Although earlier studies have focused on the impacts of MR on species richness and composition (Jaman et al. 2020 ), the contribution of SR on species richness, diversity and carbon storage are scarcely investigated. We hypothesized that MR and SR of Dhaka city has positive relationship with species richness, diversity and carbon storage. Consistent with our second hypothesis and earlier investigation (Jaman et al. 2020 ), we found that species richness positively influences carbon content on both MR and SR across the study sites both in Dhaka north and south respectively (Fig. 10 ). Our results thereby, support the previous studies indicate that high plant richness likely enhance carbon storage potential and overall production (Alavalapati et al. 2002 ). Two important and closely related urban sites are managed to preserve biodiversity which positively influence carbon storage (Bunker et al. 2005 ). Biomass productivity in urban roadside often showed high biodiversity and greater sequestration of carbon dioxide. This is because protection of biodiversity tends to improve carbon storage and carbon sequestration potential (Alavalapati et al. 2002 ). In our study, we found a strong positive relationship between aboveground, belowground, and total biomass carbon with species diversity in both MR and SR in Dhaka south and Dhaka north + south in most of the cases, however, both MR and SR of Dhaka north showed no effect (Fig. 11 ). Previous research have suggested that the location of streets in different parts of the city has influenced density, distribution and species composition (Escobedo et al. 2006 ). In Bangalore, India, the wider streets are most likely to be planted on both sides, and sometimes in the central median as well, and are dominated by large, shade providing ornamental trees. Small roads, on the other hand, are located in residential neighborhoods, and require smaller, shorter trees, which are less likely to become unstable during the monsoon, less hazardous for pedestrians, and less likely to interfere with overhead cables and electricity wires. In addition, due to narrow width of streets and crowded sidewalks on either side, often only one side of the street is planted with trees (Nagendra and Gopal 2011 ; Bai and Zhang 2025 ) which in turn reduces species richness and biomass carbon storage. Consistent with our results, some other studies in roadside of New Brunswick of Canada, roadside of Bangladesh and India showed that species richness and diversity positively drive biomass carbon storage (Martinez-Sanchez and Cabrales 2012 ; Rahman et al. 2015 ; Jaman et al. 2020 ). The complementary effect narrated that ecosystem functions like productivity and thereby carbon storage capacity are controlled by species richness and diversity (Tilman et al. 1996 ; Hooper et al. 2012 ; Jaman et al. 2020 ). In our study, floristics structures such as DBH and basal areas had a positive and significant relationship in response to above-below ground carbon and total carbon in Dhaka south, and Dhaka north + south, although, DBH and crown area of SR in Dhaka north showed non-significant effects (Figs. 7 and 8 ). The floristic characteristics, such as DBH, basal area, density, diversity, and related characteristics are important in order to identify the nature of the community and distribution patterns (Das et al. 2018 ). While the floristic characteristics and carbon storage relationship depend on site characteristics, vegetation structure and evenness, we have identified some additional specific reasons e.g., the size of roadside plant, growing habit and age of individual plant species responsible for higher biomass production and carbon storage. 3.2.3 Main Roadside plantation has strong impact on species diversity and carbon storage than sub roadside plantation Current study showed that MR plantations have a stronger effect on plant diversity and biomass carbon storage compared to SR plantations. Our findings enlighten the critical role of MR plantations in driving urban biodiversity and carbon sequestration. Particularly, we hypothesized that MR have stronger and positive impact on species diversity and carbon storage than SR plantation and pointed out that species richness is higher in MR than SR in Dhaka north and Dhaka north + south (Fig. 3 a-c). The higher the species richness in MR plantations may be attributed to better intensive management, higher levels of ecological interventions, and a more diverse mix of planted species (Mendes et al. 2024 ). Earlier studies have emphasized the significance of roadside vegetation in improving urban species diversity and ecosystem functions. For instance, Meunier & Lavoie ( 2012 ) and Jaman et al. ( 2017 ) reported that managed roadside plantation is serve as ecological hub, facilitating species establishment and migration, thus enhancing habitat connectivity. Similarly, (Zhao et al. 2020 ) found that biomass carbon storage potentiality is higher in densely vegetated major roadside areas compared to small fragmented green spaces which are consistent with our third hypothesis. The observed differences between MR and SR vegetation explained by variations in tree species composition, crown area, canopy cover, and other environmental factors. According to Lee et al. ( 2018 ), main highway roadside plantations with multiple species assemblages exhibited greater biomass production and carbon storage efficiency, which aligning with our current findings that is MR plantations contribute more to carbon storage than SR vegetation. The enhanced species diversity in MR could be due to higher intensive monitoring and soil management, improved irrigation practices compared to SR areas. Increased crown density and tree ages in MR may also provide microclimatic stability, lowering temperature fluctuations and qualitative habitat conditions for diverse flora and fauna (Kumar and Sharma 2015 ). Additionally, the higher carbon storage potentiality of MR plantations suggests that expanding and maintaining such green spaces could be a valuable strategy for urban carbon management (Tartaglia and Aronson 2024 ). These results emphasize the need for policy implication to prioritize roadside afforestation and reforestation in high-traffic urban cities both in MR, SR and corridors plantation. While our findings provide valuable information, limitations still should be considered for future research. Abiotic factors such as soil texture, structure, air pollution levels, and species-specific growth rates are not extensively studied here, which could further explain differences in biodiversity and carbon storage. Upcoming studies should incorporate longitudinal data to assess how roadside plantations evolve over time and their long-term ecological contributions. Moreover, investigating the impact of road width, pollution exposure and human disturbances on plantation success would provide a more comprehensive understanding. Conclusions The findings revealed that MR plantation have a significant impact than SR plantation on the urban ecosystem’s function particularly carbon storage, species richness and species diversity in Dhaka urban megacity. We obtained three main results from our study: Firstly , species richness of MR plantation was higher than SR plantation in both Dhaka north and south city although species diversity non significantly varied (P > 0.05) between MR and SR across all studied sites. Secondly , above ground, below ground and total carbon storage were higher in MR than SR in Dhaka north, and north + south city respectively. Finally , floristics characteristics such as species richness, species diversity, basal area, crown area and DBH are significantly and positively influence above-below ground and total carbon storage in both MR and SR plantation in most of the study sites with very few exceptions in case of SR in Dhaka north city. Overall, our study highlighted that SR plantation is contributing less for urban ecosystem functions than MR plantation. Thus, enhancement of SR plantation is strongly encouraged in Dhaka to enhance ecosystem functions and recommended to further studies in the other urban cities of Bangladesh as well as other mega urban city in tropical and subtropical countries. Declarations Declaration of competing interest Authors declaer no competing interest in research and funding Author Contribution Sumaiya Akter developed methods, conceived the study and wrote the first and final draft. Md. Shahariar Jaman, Mahbuba Jamil: Project administration, supervision, method validation, analysis of the data, and editing of the first and final draft. Kazi Md Abu Sayeed, Naznin Parvin and Sumaiya Akter: Field experiment and data collection. Hossain Md Dalim, Minhazul Kashem Chowdhury: Editing the first and final draft. Shuvramoy Mahato, Sanjida Abedin Prokriti, Sagoti Islam, Xiang Zhang and Pongpet Pongsivapai: Method validation, review, and editing. Acknowledgments This research was funded by the Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University Research System (SAURES) grant no. SAU/SAURES/2022/110(20) and Ministry of Science and Technology, Bangladesh, through a special research allocation grant (Grant No: SRG-221311(BS)/2022-23). References Alavalapati JRR, Stainback GA, Carter DR (2002) Restoration of the longleaf pine ecosystem on private lands in the US South: an ecological economic analysis. Ecol Econ 40:411–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00012-5 Ali A, Yan E-R, Chen HYH et al (2017) Data from: Stand structural diversity rather than species diversity enhances aboveground carbon storage in secondary subtropical forests in Eastern China. 36772 bytes Ament R, Powell S, Stoy P, Begley J (2014) Roadside Vegetation and Soils on Federal Lands – Evaluation of the Potential for Increasing Carbon Capture and Storage and Decreasing Carbon Emissions. Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver Anderson EC, Avolio ML, Sonti NF, LaDeau SL (2021) More than green: Tree structure and biodiversity patterns differ across canopy change regimes in Baltimore’s urban forest. Urban Forestry Urban Green 65:127365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127365 Aphalo PJ (2017) ggpmisc: Miscellaneous extensions to ‘ggplot2’ of R package Auguie B, Antonov A (2017) Miscellaneous Functions for Grid Graphics Bai H, Zhang X (2025) Effect of physiological traits and soil properties on carbon sequestration capacity of roadside vegetation along motorways. Urban Ecosyst 28:100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-025-01713-7 Baltzinger M, Archaux F, Gosselin M, Chevalier R (2011) Contribution of forest management artefacts to plant diversity at a forest scale. Ann For Sci 68:395–406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-011-0026-x Beckett KP, Freer-Smith P, Taylor G, Arboriculture (2000) Urban Forestry (AUF) 26:12–19. https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.2000.002 Bunker DE, DeClerck F, Bradford JC et al (2005) Species Loss and Aboveground Carbon Storage in a Tropical Forest. Science 310:1029–1031. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1117682 Chave J, Andalo C, Brown S et al (2005) Tree allometry and improved estimation of carbon stocks and balance in tropical forests. Oecologia 145:87–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-005-0100-x Chave J, Réjou-Méchain M, Búrquez A et al (2014) Improved allometric models to estimate the aboveground biomass of tropical trees. Glob Change Biol 20:3177–3190. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12629 Chen S, Wang Y, Ni Z et al (2020) Benefits of the ecosystem services provided by urban green infrastructures: Differences between perception and measurements. Urban Forestry Urban Green 54:126774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126774 Cheng D, Liu B, Chen J (2016) Analysis On The Method Of Highway Carbon Sink Forest. In: Proceedings of the 2016 5th International Conference on Civil, Architectural and Hydraulic Engineering (ICCAHE 2016). Atlantis Press, Zhuhai, China Darabi H, Moarrab Y, Balist J, Naroei B (2023) Resilient plant species selection for urban green infrastructure development in arid regions: a case of Qom, Iran. Urban Ecosyst 26:1753–1768. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-023-01410-3 Das SC, Alam MS, Hossain MA (2018) Diversity and structural composition of species in dipterocarp forests: a study from Fasiakhali Wildlife Sanctuary, Bangladesh. J Res 29:1241–1249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-017-0548-7 Deb JC, Halim MA, Rahman HMT, Al-Ahmed R (2013) Density, diversity, composition and distribution of street trees in Sylhet Metropolitan City of Bangladesh. Arboricultural J 35:36–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/03071375.2013.770656 Dewan AM, Yamaguchi Y (2009) Land use and land cover change in Greater Dhaka, Bangladesh: Using remote sensing to promote sustainable urbanization. Appl Geogr 29:390–401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2008.12.005 Drever CR, Cook-Patton SC, Akhter F et al (2021) Natural climate solutions for Canada. Sci Adv 7:eabd6034. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abd6034 Escobedo FJ, Nowak DJ, Wagner JE et al (2006) The socioeconomics and management of Santiago de Chile’s public urban forests. Urban Forestry Urban Green 4:105–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2005.12.002 Fan C, Myint SW, Zheng B (2015) Measuring the spatial arrangement of urban vegetation and its impacts on seasonal surface temperatures. Prog Phys Geogr 39:199–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309133314567583 Ferrini F, Fini A (2011) Sustainable Management Techniques For Trees In The Urban Areas. 1:1–19 Forrester DI, Bauhus J (2016) A Review of Processes Behind Diversity—Productivity Relationships in Forests. Curr Forestry Rep 2:45–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40725-016-0031-2 Fu D, Bu B, Wu J, Singh RP (2019) Investigation on the carbon sequestration capacity of vegetation along a heavy traffic load expressway. J Environ Manage 241:549–557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.09.098 Haase D, Güneralp B, Dahiya B et al (2018) Global Urbanization: Perspectives and Trends. In: Elmqvist T, Bai X, Frantzeskaki N et al (eds) Urban Planet, 1st edn. Cambridge University Press, pp 19–44 Hairiah K, Sitompul S, van Noordwijk M, Palm C (2001) Methods for sampling carbon stocks above and below ground. International Centre for Research in Agroforestry, Bogor Hooper DU, Adair EC, Cardinale BJ et al (2012) A global synthesis reveals biodiversity loss as a major driver of ecosystem change. Nature 486:105–108. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11118 IPCC (2013) The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (pp. 3–29). Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA, pp 3–29 Jaman M, Jahan I, Jamil M, Hossain M (2017) Structure and Composition of Plant across Different Urban Land Vegetation in Dhaka South City. Bangladesh JAERI 13:1–14. https://doi.org/10.9734/JAERI/2017/38562 Jaman MS, Wu H, Yu Q et al (2022) Contrasting responses of plant above and belowground biomass carbon pools to extreme drought in six grasslands spanning an aridity gradient. Plant Soil 473:167–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-021-05258-4 Jaman S, Zhang X, Islam F (2020) Carbon storage and tree diversity in the urban vegetation of Dhaka city, Bangladesh: a study based on intensive field investigation. Arboricultural J 42:76–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/03071375.2020.1755186 Kassambara A (2018) Ggpubr: ggplot2 based publication ready plots. R package version 0:2 Khan MNI, Islam MR, Rahman A et al (2020) Allometric relationships of stand level carbon stocks to basal area, tree height and wood density of nine tree species in Bangladesh. Global Ecol Conserv 22:e01025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e01025 Kumar A, Sharma MP (2015) Estimation of carbon stocks of Balganga Reserved Forest, Uttarakhand, India. For Sci Technol 11:177–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/21580103.2014.990060 Kumar BM, Agriculture (2011) Ecosyst Environ 140:430–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2011.01.006 Kumar V, Jolli V, Babu CR (2019) Avenue plantations in Delhi and their efficacy in mitigating air pollution. Arboricultural J 41:35–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/03071375.2019.1562800 Lal R (2004) Soil Carbon Sequestration Impacts on Global Climate Change and Food Security. Science 304:1623–1627. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1097396 Lavelle M (2014) Your next roadside attraction: carbon storage. The DailyClimate Lee CS, Chang K-H, Kim H (2018) Long-term (2005–2015) trend analysis of PM2.5 precursor gas NO2 and SO2 concentrations in Taiwan. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:22136–22152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2273-y Lei XD, Tang MP, Lu YC et al (2009) Forest inventory in China: status and challenges. Int Forestry Rev 11:52–63. https://doi.org/10.1505/ifor.11.1.52 Martinez-Sanchez JL, Cabrales LC (2012) Is there a relationship between floristic diversity and carbon stocks in tropical vegetation in Mexico? Afr J Agric Res 7. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR11.599 Ménard I, Thiffault E, Kurz WA, Boucher J-F (2022) Carbon sequestration and emission mitigation potential of afforestation and reforestation of unproductive territories. New Forest 54:1013–1035. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-022-09955-5 Mendes P, Bourgeois B, Pellerin S et al (2024) Linkages between plant functional diversity and soil-based ecosystem services in urban and peri-urban vacant lots. Urban Ecosyst 27:1011–1026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-023-01470-5 Meunier G, Lavoie C (2012) Roads as Corridors for Invasive Plant Species: New Evidence from Smooth Bedstraw ( Galium mollugo ). Invasive plant sci manag 5:92–100. https://doi.org/10.1614/IPSM-D-11-00049.1 Mo L, Zohner CM, Reich PB et al (2023) Integrated global assessment of the natural forest carbon potential. Nature 624:92–101. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06723-z Nagendra H, Gopal D (2011) Tree diversity, distribution, history and change in urban parks: studies in Bangalore, India. Urban Ecosyst 14:211–223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-010-0148-1 Nero BF, Kuusaana ED, Ahmed A, Campion BB (2024) Carbon storage and tree species diversity of urban parks in Kumasi, Ghana. City Environ Interact 24:100156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cacint.2024.100156 Nowak DJ, Crane DE (2002) Carbon storage and sequestration by urban trees in the USA. Environ Pollut 116:381–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0269-7491(01)00214-7 Nowak DJ, Greenfield EJ (2020) The increase of impervious cover and decrease of tree cover within urban areas globally (2012–2017). Urban Forestry Urban Green 49:126638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126638 Nowak DJ, Hirabayashi S, Bodine A, Greenfield E (2014) Tree and forest effects on air quality and human health in the United States. Environ Pollut 193:119–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2014.05.028 Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S et al (2018) nlme: Linear and Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models Ponce-Hernandez R, Koohafkan P, Antoine J (2004) Assessing Carbon Stocks and Modelling Win-win Scenarios of Carbon Sequestration Through Land-use Changes. Food & Agriculture Org Poorter H, Niinemets Ü, Ntagkas N et al (2019) A meta-analysis of plant responses to light intensity for 70 traits ranging from molecules to whole plant performance. New Phytol 223:1073–1105. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.15754 Potter C, Gross P, Klooster S et al (2008) Storage of carbon in U.S. forests predicted from satellite data, ecosystem modeling, and inventory summaries. Clim Change 90:269–282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-008-9462-5 R Core Team (2021) R: A language and environment for statistical computing Rahman MM, Kabir ME, Akon JU, Ando ASM K (2015) High carbon stocks in roadside plantations under participatory management in Bangladesh. Global Ecol Conserv 3:412–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2015.01.011 Schultz NL, Reid N, Lodge G, Hunter JT (2014) Broad-scale patterns in plant diversity vary between land uses in a variegated temperate Australian agricultural landscape. Austral Ecol 39:855–863. https://doi.org/10.1111/aec.12154 Silva AD, Braga Alves C, Alves S (2010) Roadside vegetation: estimation and potential for carbon sequestration. iForest 3:124–129. https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor0550-003 Srour N, Thiffault E, Boucher J-F (2024) Exploring the Potential of Roadside Plantation for Carbon Sequestration Using Simulation in Southern Quebec. Can Forests 15:264. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15020264 Suárez-Esteban A, Fahrig L, Delibes M, Fedriani JM (2016) Can anthropogenic linear gaps increase plant abundance and diversity? Landsc Ecol 31:721–729. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-015-0329-7 Tartaglia ES, Aronson MFJ (2024) Plant native: comparing biodiversity benefits, ecosystem services provisioning, and plant performance of native and non-native plants in urban horticulture. Urban Ecosyst 27:2587–2611. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-024-01610-5 Tawhid KG (2004) Causes and Effects of Water Logging in Dhaka City, Bangladesh Tilman D, Wedin D, Knops J (1996) Productivity and sustainability influenced by biodiversity in grassland ecosystems. Nature 379:718–720. https://doi.org/10.1038/379718a0 Van Der Werf GR, Morton DC, DeFries RS et al (2009) CO2 emissions from forest loss. Nat Geosci 2:737–738. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo671 Wickham H (2016) ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer-, New York Williams NSG, Hahs AK, Vesk PA (2015) Urbanisation, plant traits and the composition of urban floras. Perspectives in Plant Ecology. Evol Syst 17:78–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppees.2014.10.002 Zhang J, Wang W, Du H et al (2018) Differences in community characteristics, species diversity, and their coupling associations among three forest types in the Huzhong area, Daxinganling mountains. Acta Ecol Sin 38. https://doi.org/10.5846/stxb201706261149 Zhang Y, Duan B, Xian J et al (2011) Links between plant diversity, carbon stocks and environmental factors along a successional gradient in a subalpine coniferous forest in Southwest China. For Ecol Manag 262:361–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2011.03.042 Zhao C, Sander HA (2015) Quantifying and Mapping the Supply of and Demand for Carbon Storage and Sequestration Service from Urban Trees. PLoS ONE 10:e0136392. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0136392 Zhao X, Li Y, Song H et al (2020) Agents Affecting the Productivity of Pine Plantations on the Loess Plateau in China: A Study Based on Structural Equation Modeling. Forests 11:1328. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11121328 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 24 Oct, 2025 Read the published version in Urban Ecosystems → Version 1 posted Reviewers agreed at journal 20 May, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 19 May, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 17 May, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 17 May, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 15 May, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 15 May, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 14 May, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 14 May, 2025 First submitted to journal 13 May, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6657761","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":457976639,"identity":"f2ab6ec4-a7c2-48ab-bd52-177eb9efb170","order_by":0,"name":"Sumaiya Akter","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sher-e- Bangla Agricultural University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Sumaiya","middleName":"","lastName":"Akter","suffix":""},{"id":457976640,"identity":"fc3955cf-bac8-4f0b-b195-7a8bd4589210","order_by":1,"name":"Kazi Md Abu Sayeed","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Kazi","middleName":"Md Abu","lastName":"Say","suffix":"Md"},{"id":457976641,"identity":"b4b3cbc2-8aee-4e8b-97fe-1d42c552d3ab","order_by":2,"name":"Naznin Parvin","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sher-e- Bangla Agricultural University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Naznin","middleName":"","lastName":"Parvin","suffix":""},{"id":457976642,"identity":"98a53b01-3426-436a-a401-38a9186a3539","order_by":3,"name":"Mahbuba Jamil","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Ministry of Agriculture","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mahbuba","middleName":"","lastName":"Jamil","suffix":""},{"id":457976643,"identity":"5fc53cb5-c1fc-478f-a37c-2fafb50dd787","order_by":4,"name":"Hossain Md Dalim","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sher-e- Bangla Agricultural University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hossain","middleName":"Md","lastName":"Da","suffix":"Md"},{"id":457976644,"identity":"368de5fb-31af-46c4-a9e7-d33f6dca8e8f","order_by":5,"name":"Minhazul Kashem Chowdhury","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sher-e- Bangla Agricultural University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Minhazul","middleName":"Kashem","lastName":"Chowdhury","suffix":""},{"id":457976645,"identity":"6f375381-0144-4c94-bfc8-f82b0ed0afa7","order_by":6,"name":"Md. Ismail Hossain","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sher-e- Bangla Agricultural University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Md.","middleName":"Ismail","lastName":"Hossain","suffix":""},{"id":457976646,"identity":"b2135729-96fd-45cb-8a10-d4ce902cf20f","order_by":7,"name":"Shuvramoy Mahato","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sher-e- Bangla Agricultural University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Shuvramoy","middleName":"","lastName":"Mahato","suffix":""},{"id":457976647,"identity":"b19a7ffc-eba3-4448-ab66-42e10050eeaf","order_by":8,"name":"Sanjida Abedin Prokriti","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sher-e- Bangla Agricultural University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Sanjida","middleName":"Abedin","lastName":"Prokriti","suffix":""},{"id":457976648,"identity":"91a541ab-f306-4d49-9b9b-28b6fe51d604","order_by":9,"name":"Sagoti Islam","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sher-e- Bangla Agricultural University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Sagoti","middleName":"","lastName":"Islam","suffix":""},{"id":457976649,"identity":"64f98877-3874-40c8-b6a9-a42a533a7565","order_by":10,"name":"Xiang Zhang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Inner Mongolia Normal University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Xiang","middleName":"","lastName":"Zhang","suffix":""},{"id":457976650,"identity":"5fbc3489-0979-4e6a-94c4-5ead9a41b91b","order_by":11,"name":"Pongpet Pongsivapai","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Kasetsart University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Pongpet","middleName":"","lastName":"Pongsivapai","suffix":""},{"id":457976651,"identity":"597843a5-e51c-4072-a43e-22a2b27c4693","order_by":12,"name":"Md. Shahariar Jaman","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sher-e- Bangla Agricultural University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Md.","middleName":"Shahariar","lastName":"Jaman","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-05-13 17:23:13","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6657761/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6657761/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-025-01816-1","type":"published","date":"2025-10-24T16:16:20+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":83127196,"identity":"0ce46b66-4483-44ba-9391-d55157e330e3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-20 09:51:53","extension":"jpg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":229772,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eMaps showing Bangladesh (encircled by the red outline). Sampling sites are indicated by four different colors showed in the legend. Red and yellow color represents Dhaka north MR and SR roadsides whereas light green and dark green color indicates Dhaka south MR and SR roadsides respectively.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6657761/v1/acd627fb0b562167bb338e96.jpg"},{"id":83127193,"identity":"ef2c500a-3fd9-45f1-bf07-4ce593c61e47","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-20 09:51:53","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":7777,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSchematic diagram of the plot layout in zigzag manner\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6657761/v1/ed8a520a0b961fc9c00a664c.png"},{"id":83128956,"identity":"b81f60f2-8c57-47f1-aaff-bd595ae2b0b1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-20 09:59:54","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":106106,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSpecies richness and species diversity in Dhaka north (a, d), Dhaka south (b, e), and both Dhaka North + Dhaka South (c, f) in MR and SR. Error bars represent ±1 standard error of the mean. The asterisks are intended to flag the levels of significance (\u003cem\u003eP \u003c/em\u003e\u0026lt; 0.05, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.01 and \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001 level).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6657761/v1/18bbe777814a136e4da71379.png"},{"id":83128950,"identity":"a2f82902-df49-4dfd-aa4a-3d8cf70d2e0b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-20 09:59:53","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":129703,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eDBH (cm) and number of trees in Dhaka north (a, d), Dhaka south (b, e), both in Dhaka North + Dhaka South (c, f) MR and SR.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6657761/v1/6432660df8af80237a1e9484.png"},{"id":83129400,"identity":"a9671b87-9a73-488d-b3f3-df8fbb92fc84","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-20 10:07:54","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":118048,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eBasal area (ha\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) and Crown area (m) in (a, d) Dhaka north, (b, e) Dhaka south, (c, f) both in Dhaka north + Dhaka south MR and SR\u003cstrong\u003e. \u003c/strong\u003eError bars represent ±1 standard error of the mean. The stars are intended to flag levels of significance (\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.05, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.01 and \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001 level).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6657761/v1/1b8992a432f7cf1eb52e70b5.png"},{"id":83128951,"identity":"073e79e4-d5e7-4c52-988f-6ed0a4332123","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-20 09:59:53","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":73219,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eDistribution of\u003cstrong\u003e \u003c/strong\u003ecarbon\u003cstrong\u003e \u003c/strong\u003estorage\u003cstrong\u003e \u003c/strong\u003ebetween above ground (a-c) and below ground (d-f) and total carbon stoarge (g-i) in MR and SR of Dhaka north + Dhaka south. Error bars represent ±1 standard error of the mean. The stars are intended to flag levels of significance (\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.05, \u003cem\u003eP \u003c/em\u003e\u0026lt; 0.01 and \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001 level).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6657761/v1/c43d6d7996683cf0d37ad5f1.png"},{"id":83128953,"identity":"2537ead0-de5c-4f6d-8f92-a4a769acd7b7","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-20 09:59:53","extension":"png","order_by":7,"title":"Figure 7","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":272500,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe relationship between above-ground, below ground and total carbon in response to DBH.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"7.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6657761/v1/66f821af21789fb3333f0650.png"},{"id":83127215,"identity":"4116676b-93a1-41dc-9056-0834da801a22","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-20 09:51:53","extension":"png","order_by":8,"title":"Figure 8","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":248997,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe relationship between above-ground , below ground and total carbon in response to basal area.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"8.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6657761/v1/a353d82cb233298c9ce1984f.png"},{"id":83128955,"identity":"daa50667-1ba9-4585-9d0e-386a87856e16","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-20 09:59:54","extension":"png","order_by":9,"title":"Figure 9","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":309855,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe relationship between above-ground , below ground and total carbon in response to crown area.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"9.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6657761/v1/513a394cdeaadeaad2da6686.png"},{"id":83127261,"identity":"fb8c12ef-469f-400e-935c-18f20f02bb51","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-20 09:51:54","extension":"png","order_by":10,"title":"Figure 10","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":269228,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe relationship between above-ground, below ground and total carbon in response to species richness.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"10.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6657761/v1/66bd12007e6b7ef22ec80a30.png"},{"id":83127282,"identity":"c5cc0f3f-b7cd-4e38-a0a6-7e8af0681bdc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-20 09:51:54","extension":"png","order_by":11,"title":"Figure 11","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":291082,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe relationship between above-ground, below ground and total carbon in response to species diversity.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"11.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6657761/v1/d675b7ff6fb8f7edf416179b.png"},{"id":94490531,"identity":"6c3d8149-620a-4782-b55d-fe561722fe6c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-27 17:11:39","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":3211698,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6657761/v1/e850bb88-2e25-492f-9fd9-e878842b17e2.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Urban Main Roadside Plantation Enhances Species Richness, Diversity and Carbon Storage than Sub roadside Plantation: An Empirical Study in Dhaka City","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eGreenhouse effect and biodiversity loss are the two main topics of contention among scientists and legislators worldwide at the moment which brought on by the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation (Van Der Werf et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; Zhang et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). In the past century, there has been 0.74\u0026deg;C increase in global temperature and 379 ppm increase in atmospheric CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e concentration and it is predicted that the temperature might climb by 2\u0026ndash;4\u0026deg;C if this pace of increase in CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e emissions persists until 2050 (IPCC \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Reducing these changes is crucial to prevent future climate-related disasters thus forest rejuvenation in conjunction with different reforestation and afforestation initiatives can be extremely important to reduce greenhouse gasses, store and capture of atmospheric carbon and mitigate global climate change (Kumar \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Jaman et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Nero et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Urbanization is a key component of global change that dramatically influences biological and environmental patterns, affecting human well-being at all spatial scales (Haase et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Reduced vegetation cover is a hallmark of urbanization, and urban areas are on the cusp of having greater impervious surface than tree cover worldwide (Nowak and Greenfield \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, increasing the number of vegetation or plantation sites in urban areas is one of the most crucial ways to store and capture CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e in the plant biomass and soil under various land use systems in urban ecosystem (Lavelle \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Because roadside plantations have a variety of plant species composition, they are one of the unique land use systems that can store substantial amount of carbon (Ament et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). By adding aesthetic value, roadside plantations particularly in urban areas provide numerous ecological services that benefit the urban community, like lowering temperatures (Fan et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) and storing carbon and other pollutants (Zhao and Sander \u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). For instance, trees beside roadways collect more large-size particulate matter than trees farther away from the road (Beckett et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e). An urban roadside plantation can cut carbon emissions by up to 18 kg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e year\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e tree\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e and it is the same as what three to five forest trees of a similar size and condition would provide (Ferrini and Fini \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, importance of urban roadside planation for carbon storage and biodiversity conservation is increasingly important.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRoadsides plantation constitute the potential green space that is more or less different from the other surrounding vegetation in terms of its species composition, richness and diversity. These has been frequently studied to interpret and fulfill various aims, for example, to assessing the roadside contribution to species composition, abundance of certain species groups, impact on surrounding habitats and analyses the effects on environmental factors. Suar\u0026eacute;z-Esteban et al. (2016) investigated that roadside plantations, power line corridors, and railroad tracks contribute nearly 70% plant diversity than other adjacent surrounding habitats, which contribute significant biomass production and biodiversity conservation. Increased plant diversity and richness in urban roadside introducing new conditions and microhabitats in the urban landscape which creates new niches for other species including different alien or exotic. For example, in a French oak forest, the roads contributed almost 82% to the plant diversity through introducing native species (Baltzinger et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Roadsides in Australia are contributing most to the diversity of exotic species, which important component of floristic diversity (Schultz et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Although these studies explored important findings regarding contributions of roadside on species diversity and richness, however, contribution of sub roadside is still ignored.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfforestation and management of urban roadside is considered as important practices to increase ecosystem biomass carbon storage (Mo et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). The potential for carbon storage and climate change mitigation for the urban areas have been studied in various jurisdictions, notably, as part of nature based solutions (Drever et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; M\u0026eacute;nard et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Main highway roadside, island and corridor plantation are examples of utilized areas that could significantly contribute to increase carbon storage potentiality (Rahman et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Fu et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Earlier studies have shown that urban roadside plantations linking with high species diversity and richness increase above and below ground carbon storage capacity through higher biomass and root production. For instance, tree plantation along highway borders in China sequestered 4.68 Mg C between the 1980s and 2005 (Cheng et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Similarly, tree plantation along 485,255 km of roadside of the United States had the potential to sequester 8 Mg C per year. In Brazil, highway afforestation sites could sequester up to 655 Mg CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e (179 Mg C) per kilometer over ten years (Silva et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Bangladesh is no exception where average carbon content of roadside plantations is 192.80 Mg ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e, with 86% of carbon stored aboveground and 14% belowground (Rahman et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrevious research has been demonstrated that urban forests with a greater variety of plant species have the capacity to store more above and belowground carbon (Jaman et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) and lower urban air temperatures (Kumar et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). In contrast, a decline in plant diversity as a result of widespread deforestation, harvesting of biomass and habitat construction in urban area has a direct impact on carbon storage (Nowak and Crane \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e). Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh, is the seventh most densely populated city in the world and is losing green space at a rapid rate. Nevertheless, land degradation and deforestation are reducing the Dhaka city's carbon sequestration and storage potentiality (Dewan and Yamaguchi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e), however, the ability of urban roadside plantations in Bangladesh to trap carbon has not garnered much scientific attention and need extensive research (Rahman et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, research regarding sub roadside plantation contribution has substantially under the shadow. Thus, understanding the ecological relationship (species richness, diversity) of roadside plantations (both main and sub road) and their significance in carbon storage in the a megacity like Dhaka is necessary to reach a recommended level of green space and for the management of roadsides (Deb et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, we have conducted an experiment for better understand the effect of roadside plantation (main road and sub road) on species richness, diversity and carbon storage potentiality. We hypothesized that (1) urban roadside (MR and SR) plantation has a significant effect on species diversity, species richness and above-belowground carbon storage, (2) species richness, species diversity is positively related to carbon storage both MR and SR plantation, and (3) MR have strong impact on species diversity, richness and carbon storage than SR plantation.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Materials and methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1 Study area\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study was conducted in Dhaka, the capital and largest city of Bangladesh, which is located on the eastern banks of the Buriganga River, a channel of the Ganges River delta surrounded by the Turag River to the west, Tongi Khal to the north, and the Balu River to the east. Dhaka is geographically situated between 23\u0026deg;42' and 23\u0026deg;54' north latitudes and 90\u0026deg;20' and 90\u0026deg;28' east longitudes, covering an area of 360 square kilometers. As a megacity with a population exceeding 22.4\u0026nbsp;million residents in 2024, Dhaka is considered the most densely populated urban area in the world. Despite its water confinement, the city is elevated between 2 to 13 meters above mean sea level, with most urbanized areas lying at 6 to 8 meters above mean sea level (Tawhid \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e), making it prone to flooding during the monsoon season due to heavy rainfall. Moreover, the city has 61.45 km of main primary and 108.2 km of secondary sub roads contributing major roadside vegetation throughout the whole city. In our research we used the primary roadside of the northern and southern part of Dhaka city for vegetation sampling. The research utilized the MR and SR plantations of both Dhaka South and Dhaka North city areas focusing on areas where urbanization and vegetation remain relatively constant and the soil primarily categorized as medium-high land with silt loam and a pH of 5.6, supports tropical vegetation in a hot, wet, and humid climate.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2 Sampling and data sources\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe employed a two-stage sampling method (both purposive and random) where sample size was based on area and vegetation composition to ensure overall accuracy of the sampling and minimize the bias (Lei et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). Briefly, both MR and SR are selected purposively and sampled plots from the selected roads are taken randomly. A total of 140 plots of equal in size are selected from both Dhaka north (70) and south part (70) of the city for data collection. Plots were selected in a zigzag manner on both sides of the road to capture a representative mixture of variation, diversity, and composition of tree species. A 100 m\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e (20m (L) \u0026times; 5m (W)) rectangular shape plots were demarcated for sampling and each successive plot was 100m apart from one another according to the model given by Rahman et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Finally, 35 plots of MR and 35 plots of SR in Dhaka south city corporation, while 35 plots of MR and 35 plots of SR from Dhaka North city were selected. The floristic characteristics, stand vegetation, species richness, species diversity and biomass carbon were assessed later based on collected data from 140 plots.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3 Plant diversity indices\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe quantified species richness by counting available and individual species in each sampled plot in MR and SR. We further calculated species diversity using Shannon\u0026ndash; Wiener diversity index within the fixed boundaries of the sampled areas. Species diversity was assessed acquiring common names or local names that were subsequently was translated into botanical names. Due to suitability for evaluating diversity in carbon sequestration projects the Shannon\u0026ndash;Wiener index (SWI) is chosen by us for this study (Ponce-Hernandez et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). Shannon\u0026ndash; Wiener diversity characterized by the proportion of species abundance in the population being at maximum when all species are equally abundant and it was to be known as the lowest when the sample contained one species.\u003cdiv id=\"Equa\" class=\"Equation\"\u003e\u003cdiv format=\"TEX\" class=\"mathdisplay\" id=\"FileID_Equa\" name=\"EquationSource\"\u003e\n$$\\:SWI=-\\sum\\:_{n=1}^{m}Pi\\times\\:\\text{ln}Pi$$\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ewhere, SWI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Shannon\u0026ndash; Wiener Index, n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;number of species, Pi\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;proportion of individuals belonging to \u003csup\u003ei\u003c/sup\u003eth species relative to the total number of species Estimation of carbon storage of stand vegetation per plot, while ln\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;natural logarithm.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4 Estimation of carbon storage of stand vegetation\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4.1 Measurement of DBH\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA non-destructive method was followed to compute aboveground biomass of all woody plants provided by the International Centre for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF). Woody plants with DBH\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;3 cm, were estimated from all sample plots of the roadside plantations. The diameter of all identified plants were measured at breast height (1.3 m height from the ground level) using a diameter tape (Brand: Forestry Suppliers, Materials: Fabrics Lngth: 160 cm) and the basal area (1.3 m at breast height) of the trees was calculated from the recorded tree diameter (Hairiah et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e). The height of all sampled trees was measured using a laser distance meter (Sndway SW-1500A).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4.2 Above-ground biomass and carbon\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAbove-ground biomass of all individual trees ( DBH\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;3 cm at 1.3 m breast height) was estimated by using appropriate allometric equations given by Chave et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e) based on tree DBH (cm), height (m) and species\u0026rsquo; wood density. Specific wood densities for all sampled species (varying from 0.26 to 1.06 g cm\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;3\u003c/sup\u003e) were collected from the FAO global wood density database and tropical wood density data (Ali et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). The stated equation is given below:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eY\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;exp(-2.1877\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;0.917 * ln (D\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e * H *S )\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eY represents the above-ground biomass density (Mg ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e), D is the diameter (cm), H is height (m), and S is the species specific wood density which derived from FAO global wood density database (S\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1.39, 1.98 \u0026hellip;\u0026hellip; \u0026hellip; 0.207) g cm\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;3\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4.3 Estimation of carbon storage\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe total AGB per plot was the sum of the AGB of trees and AGB of shrubs. Subsequently, we converted AGB to aboveground C storage (Mg ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e) by multiplying AGB with a conversion factor of 0.5, assuming that 50% of the total tree biomass is C (Potter et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCarbon Storage\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Biomass x 50% or Carbon Storage\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Biomass/2\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe relative proportion of carbon storage in biomass is generally persistant in various tree species and tree parts (Chave et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.5 Data analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAll analyses were carried out using R version 4.1.2 (R Core Team \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) and figures were created using the packages namely ggplot2, tibble, and plyr (Wickham \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Some other R packages e.g., ggpubr (Kassambara \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), ggpmisc (Aphalo \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e), gridextra (Auguie and Antonov \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e), nlme (Pinheiro et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) were used during plotting the graphs. Before beginning data analysis, Shapiro\u0026ndash;Wilk tests were employed to test the normality of our data. Due to the normal distribution of our data, basic or original data was used for the final analysis without any log transformation. First, we used one way-ANOVA to examine the impacts of main road and sub-road plantation on species richness, diversity, DBH, basal areas, above-belowground biomass carbon and total carbon; average values were partitioned with Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test, and the differences were predicted at \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05 significant level. Later, linear fit (R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e) regressions analysis were conducted with the \u0026lsquo;lm\u0026rsquo; function to see the bivariate relation among plant richness, diversity, DBH, crown areas with above-belowground biomass carbon and total carbon across plots level and significance were indicated at \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01 and \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001 level. We used F-statistics to determine whether the variance between two standard variables is similar.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e "},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1.1 Species richness and species diversity in MR and SR\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e Species richness of the MR was significantly higher (mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;se: 4.70\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.24, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) in Dhaka north, and north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south city (mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;se: 3.85\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.01) than SR (north: mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;se: 3.51\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.15; north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south: 3.85\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1) respectively (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003ea-c). However, species diversity differed non-significantly (\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) between in MR and SR in all studied roadsides in Dhaka north (MR: 0.82\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.05, SR: 0.85\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.75), north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south (MR: 0.91\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.41, SR:0.85\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.04) and Dhaka south (MR:0.85\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.05, SR: 0.91\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.06) respectively (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003ed-f).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1.2 DBH (cm) in MR and sub SR, and distribution of trees based on DBH categories\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eMR has significantly higher DBH (mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;se:123.22\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;10.97, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.011) than SR (mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;se: 93.47\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.85) in Dhaka North (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ea) and non signifiacnt (\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) in Dhaka south (mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;se: MR:128.17\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.91, SR: 136.17\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;10.41) and north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south (mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;se: MR:126.05\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;6.48, SR:114.82\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;6.25) respectively (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003eb-c). Highest number of trees was found in between 20.1\u0026ndash;40 (cm) DBH range in MR, SR, MR\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;SR (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ed-f) however, lowest number of trees was seen between 80.1\u0026ndash;100 (cm) DBH range in across all road sides both in north and south city respectively.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1.3 Basal area and Crown area in MR and SR\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTree basal area in MR was significantly higher (mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;se: 179.11\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;30.21, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.003) in Dhaka north and SR in south city (mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;se: 230.21\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.22, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.037) however, non-significant (\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.049) for north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south respectively (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003ea-c). In case of crown area, only SR showed significantly higher (mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;se: 51.73\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.17, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.007) than MR (mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;se: 41.19\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.28) in Dhaka South (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003ee) but non-significant (\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) for rest of the sites of Dhaka north (mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;se: MR: 40.35\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.17, mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;se: SR: : 39.62\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.82 ) and north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south (mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;se: MR: 40.83\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.30, mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;se: SR: 45.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.60) respectively (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003ed, f).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1.4 Carbon storage in MR and SR\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAbove-belowground and total carbon storage of MR (63.78\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;11.33, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.005), (43.95\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.44, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.011 ), (107.74\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;18.48, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.039) was significantly higher than SR (40.16\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.03), (25.88\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.68 ), (66.05\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.49 ) in Dhaka North city (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003ea, d, g). In contrast, SR of Dhaka south has significantly higher above-below and total carbon storage (93.62\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.99, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.042), (57.89\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.60, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.045 ), (161.48\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;21.41, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.011) than MR (71.87\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8.39), (45.20\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.25) and (126.20\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;15.45) respectively (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003eb, e, h). Above ground carbon storage represented no significant variation (\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) across MR and SR in north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south city (MR: 73.62\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.99, SR: 71.87\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8.39) respectively (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003ec, f, i). Moreover, when combine Dhaka north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south togather, similar results was obtained and found no sognificant differences (\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) between MR and SR incase of total carbon storage (MR : 118.29\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;11.82, SR: 113.76\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;12.63) across all sites.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1.5 DBH with carbon storage relationship\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo find out relationships between DBH with carbon storage, regression analysis was carried out. Our findings revealed that plot-level tree DBH of both MR and SR in Dhaka south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.65, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.017, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.71, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), North\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;South ( MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.69, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.01, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.75, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), showed a significant positive relationship with above ground carbon storage while Dhaka north showed significant relationship only in MR (\u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.56, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.033) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003ea-c). In case of belowground carbon storage, Dhaka south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.81, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.82, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) and north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.87, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.76, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) showed significant positive relationship with DBH and significant in Dhaka north only in MR (\u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.63, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.008) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003ed-f). Similar trend was observed in case of total carbon storage with DBH and found significant relationship in Dhaka south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.80, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.68, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.004), north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.82, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.76, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) both in MR and SR, however, only significant in MR (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.77, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) for Dhaka north (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003eg-i). These findings indicate that increase tree DBH, increase above-below and total carbon in MR of both Dhaka south and north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south with a few exception (AGC: SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.01, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.96, BGC: SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.04, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.85 and TC:SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.02, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.89) in case of SR in Dhaka north roadside planation respectively.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1.6 Basal area with carbon storage relationship\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study showed that plot-level tree basal area of both MR and SR in Dhaka north (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.70, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.01, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.84, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), Dhaka south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.74, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.94, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south ( MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.66, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.02, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.85, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) showed significant positive relationship with above ground carbon storage (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003ea-c). In case of below ground carbon storage of Dhaka north (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.98, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.97, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), Dhaka south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.89, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.87, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) and north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.89, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.92, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) also showed significant positive relationship with basal area (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003ed-f). Similar trend was observed in case of total carbon storage with basal area which were found significant in Dhaka north (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.73, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.83, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), Dhaka south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.87, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.97, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.004), north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.69, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.013, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.83, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) both in MR and SR (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003eg-i). These findings indicate that increased basal area, increase above, below and total carbon storage in both MR and SR of Dhaka north, Dhaka south and north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south respectively.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1.7 Crown area and carbon storage relationship\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings of our study showed that plot-level tree crown area of both MR and SR in Dhaka south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.65, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.013, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.66, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.017), north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south ( MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.56, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.003, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.5, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.031), showed a significant positive relationship with above ground carbon storage while Dhaka north showed non-significant relationship both in MR (\u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.34, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.066) and SR (\u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.06, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.73) respectively (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003ea-c). In case of belowground carbon storage, Dhaka south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.66, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.59, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) and north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.58, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.007, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.52, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.014) showed significant positive relationship with crown area (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003ed-f). Similar trend was observed in case of total carbon storage with crown area which were found significant in Dhaka south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.70, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.65, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.60, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.005, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.57, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.018) both in MR and SR but non significant in MR road and SR (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.22, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.24; SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.05, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.79) for Dhaka north respectively (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003eg-i). These findings showed that increased crown area, increase above-below and total carbon in MR and SR of both Dhaka south and north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south, although most of the cases Dhaka north showed non-significant relationship except belowground carbon storage (\u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.44, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.02) in Dhaka North road side.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1.8 Plant species richness effects on carbon storage\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSpecies richness of both MR and SR in Dhaka north (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.75, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.61, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.014), Dhaka south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.71, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.78, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) and north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south ( MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.71, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.78, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) significantly and positively influence above ground carbon storage (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig10\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003ea-c). Similarly, below ground carbon storage, Dhaka north (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.64, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.35, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.031), Dhaka south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.47, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.022, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.63, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.007) and north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.49, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.004, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.54, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.002) showed significant positive relationship with species richness (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig10\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003ed-f). Likely, above and belowground, total carbon storage were found significant in Dhaka north (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.73, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.42, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.042), Dhaka south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.67, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.75, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.69, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.73, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) both in MR and SR (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig10\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003eg-i). ). Species richness highly and increased above, below and total carbon storage in both MR and SR of Dhaka North, Dhaka south and north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south respectively.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1.9 Plant species diversity effects on carbon storage\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings of our study revealed that species diversity of both MR and SR in Dhaka south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.34, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.03, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.55, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.26, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.03, SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.44, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), significantly drive above ground carbon storage while Dhaka north showed non-significant relationship both in MR (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.16, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.34) and SR (\u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.12, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.51) respectively (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig11\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003ea-c). In case of belowground carbon storage Dhaka south SR (SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.49, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.003) and north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south SR (SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.38, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) showed increase belowground carbon with species diversity however no significant effects were observed in MR of Dhaka north (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.18, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.34), Dhaka south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.18, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.27), and north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.18, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.14) respectively (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig11\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003ed-f). Similarly, species diversity significantly increased total carbon storage in SR of Dhaka south (SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.54, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.30, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.05; SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.43, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) but no effect in MR of Dhaka north (MR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.17, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.36; SR: \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.08, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.66) roadside plantation respectively (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig11\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003eg-i).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e "},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003e3.2.1 Roadside (main road and sub road) plantation has a significant effect on species diversity, richness and carbon storage\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur first hypothesized is that roadside (MR and SR) plantation has significant effect on species diversity and richness and we observed that both MR of Dhaka north and north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south city showed higher species richness than SR plantation (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003ea-c). We assume that street trees of MR and SR of our study received different environmental, anthropogenic pressures, and plantation management practices which contribute to the variations in species composition. Yet, tree abundance and richness were greater in MR, particularly in north side of Dhaka city represented well urban vegetation coverage, greater species richness and species diversity than SR. Our findings in line with the previous study reported that urban roadside as well as interconnected divisional highway plantation had a significant effect on species richness (Rahman et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Jaman et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Our results also revealed that species diversity of both MR and SR showed no significant variation across all study sites in Dhaka city (Figure: 3 d-f). Although SR of the current study are typically experienced lower vehicular pressure and emissions, less soil compaction, and less anthropogenic disturbance, interestingly, however, do not support higher species diversity compared to MR. Similarly, MR in most of the cases subjected to higher traffic pressure associated with frequent air pollution, exhibited lower species diversity and showed no significant variation with SR (Lee et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). These results align with a very recent observation suggesting that lower pollution levels and reduced disturbance contribute to increased plant establishment and survival (Darabi et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). The floristic structures e.g., DBH, basal areas, crown areas etc. of roadside vegetations also play a crucial role in shaping urban roadside species diversity and richness. Higher crown coverage, DBH and basal areas together indicate denser vegetation and larger trees size. These along with understory vegetation characteristics, soil types and quality influence species richness, diversity and promoting habitat availability for various taxa (Williams et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Among our study sites, except Dhaka north, no significant variation was observed in case of DBH in both MR and SR and most of the species are found in between 20.1\u0026ndash;40 cm DBH class. Although, we found higher basal areas in the MR of Dhaka north, SR also represented higher basal area and crown areas in Dhaka south site. We did not find the actual reason, however, we assume and agree with Jaman et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) that higher DBH significantly contribute to higher basal area hereafter, MR of Dhaka north in our study. It is expected that native plant species tend to thrive in less disturbed roadside areas, whereas non-native or pollution-tolerant species dominate heavily trafficked or disturbed sites (Srour et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Thus, incorporating more native plant species, lowering pollution exposure, and maintaining diverse greenery structures can significantly improve ecological resilience via increase richness and diversity in urban road site (Anderson et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUrban roadside plantations including MR and SR has significant effect in carbon storage, both above ground biomass and below ground root biomass. The differences in carbon storage between these two plantation types (MR and SR) can be explained by differences in species identity, tree density, diversity, microclimatic conditions, and soil characteristics (Khan et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Our findings revealed that both MR and SR contribute substantially to carbon storage both above and belowground across the study sites. Aboveground carbon storage is mostly driven by tree biomass, which further depends on species composition, growth rate, age, and canopy volume. Earlier study investigated that MR plantations often contain larger and aged trees due to larger and wider planting spaces frequent maintenance which leads to higher aboveground biomass accumulation and carbon stock (Chave et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). In contrast, SR vegetation tends to have smaller and comparatively younger, lower DBH, mostly dominated by ornamental species due to limited space may store less carbon in aboveground biomass. Additionally, tree size, shapes, wood density, and development dynamics remarkably impact on carbon storage in urban vegetation (Nowak et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). In our study, we highlighted two contrasting findings: firstly, MR showed higher above-below and total carbon storage in Dhaka north, however, SR showed the opposite results in Dhaka south. Secondly, when we combine north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south together, we found no significant variation between MR and SR. This is because MR road of Dhaka south represented larger and older tree species with higher DBH categories. Moreover, presences of understory shrubs vegetation contribute to aboveground carbon storage, though to a lesser extent. Availability of mixed vegetation in SR plantations may less increase in carbon storage for short-term, however long-term and higher carbon storage observed in MR plantations dominated by large trees (Forrester and Bauhus \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). We also observed opposite results in Dhaka south and our explanation is that less urban construction and comparatively low disturbed streets of south ensure satisfactory vegetation coverage in the SR results higher above-below and total carbon storage than MR.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt is widely recognized that belowground carbon storage is mainly influenced by root biomass and soil organic carbon. Roots of trees, shrubs and herbs contribute directly to belowground biomass, with massive trees generally having more extensive rooting systems that enhance carbon storage in soil (Zhang et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Poorter et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Across the study sites, Dhaka north showed higher belowground carbon storage in MR and SR in Dhaka south. Although MR plantations have deeper and established root systems which facilitating more carbon accumulation through root exudation and decomposition, enhancing soil carbon content over time (Lal \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e), our results do not support this finding observed for Dhaka south roadside plantation. The variations in carbon storage between MR and SR plantations highlight that MR usually offer greater carbon storage and sequestration potential due to the presence of large trees with high productivity of biomass, crown coverage and high root elongation (Chen et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). On the other hand, SR plantations, although contributing to carbon storage, may require strategic management interventions such as improved soil conditions, species selection, and reduced anthropogenic disturbances to enhance their sequestration potential.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003e3.2.2 Species richness and species diversity are positively related to carbon storage both main roadside and sub roadside plantation\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnderstanding of the relationships between plant species richness and diversity with carbon storage is crucial for sustainable management of urban roadside plantation. Therefore, we assessed how these relationships differ across Dhaka north and Dhaka south MR and SR. Although earlier studies have focused on the impacts of MR on species richness and composition (Jaman et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), the contribution of SR on species richness, diversity and carbon storage are scarcely investigated. We hypothesized that MR and SR of Dhaka city has positive relationship with species richness, diversity and carbon storage. Consistent with our second hypothesis and earlier investigation (Jaman et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), we found that species richness positively influences carbon content on both MR and SR across the study sites both in Dhaka north and south respectively (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig10\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e). Our results thereby, support the previous studies indicate that high plant richness likely enhance carbon storage potential and overall production (Alavalapati et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e). Two important and closely related urban sites are managed to preserve biodiversity which positively influence carbon storage (Bunker et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e). Biomass productivity in urban roadside often showed high biodiversity and greater sequestration of carbon dioxide. This is because protection of biodiversity tends to improve carbon storage and carbon sequestration potential (Alavalapati et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn our study, we found a strong positive relationship between aboveground, belowground, and total biomass carbon with species diversity in both MR and SR in Dhaka south and Dhaka north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south in most of the cases, however, both MR and SR of Dhaka north showed no effect (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig11\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e). Previous research have suggested that the location of streets in different parts of the city has influenced density, distribution and species composition (Escobedo et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). In Bangalore, India, the wider streets are most likely to be planted on both sides, and sometimes in the central median as well, and are dominated by large, shade providing ornamental trees. Small roads, on the other hand, are located in residential neighborhoods, and require smaller, shorter trees, which are less likely to become unstable during the monsoon, less hazardous for pedestrians, and less likely to interfere with overhead cables and electricity wires. In addition, due to narrow width of streets and crowded sidewalks on either side, often only one side of the street is planted with trees (Nagendra and Gopal \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Bai and Zhang \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e) which in turn reduces species richness and biomass carbon storage. Consistent with our results, some other studies in roadside of New Brunswick of Canada, roadside of Bangladesh and India showed that species richness and diversity positively drive biomass carbon storage (Martinez-Sanchez and Cabrales \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Rahman et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Jaman et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). The complementary effect narrated that ecosystem functions like productivity and thereby carbon storage capacity are controlled by species richness and diversity (Tilman et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1996\u003c/span\u003e; Hooper et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Jaman et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn our study, floristics structures such as DBH and basal areas had a positive and significant relationship in response to above-below ground carbon and total carbon in Dhaka south, and Dhaka north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south, although, DBH and crown area of SR in Dhaka north showed non-significant effects (Figs.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan refid=\"Fig8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e). The floristic characteristics, such as DBH, basal area, density, diversity, and related characteristics are important in order to identify the nature of the community and distribution patterns (Das et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). While the floristic characteristics and carbon storage relationship depend on site characteristics, vegetation structure and evenness, we have identified some additional specific reasons e.g., the size of roadside plant, growing habit and age of individual plant species responsible for higher biomass production and carbon storage.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003e3.2.3 Main Roadside plantation has strong impact on species diversity and carbon storage than sub roadside plantation\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCurrent study showed that MR plantations have a stronger effect on plant diversity and biomass carbon storage compared to SR plantations. Our findings enlighten the critical role of MR plantations in driving urban biodiversity and carbon sequestration. Particularly, we hypothesized that MR have stronger and positive impact on species diversity and carbon storage than SR plantation and pointed out that species richness is higher in MR than SR in Dhaka north and Dhaka north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003ea-c). The higher the species richness in MR plantations may be attributed to better intensive management, higher levels of ecological interventions, and a more diverse mix of planted species (Mendes et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Earlier studies have emphasized the significance of roadside vegetation in improving urban species diversity and ecosystem functions. For instance, Meunier \u0026amp; Lavoie (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e) and Jaman et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) reported that managed roadside plantation is serve as ecological hub, facilitating species establishment and migration, thus enhancing habitat connectivity. Similarly, (Zhao et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR70\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) found that biomass carbon storage potentiality is higher in densely vegetated major roadside areas compared to small fragmented green spaces which are consistent with our third hypothesis. The observed differences between MR and SR vegetation explained by variations in tree species composition, crown area, canopy cover, and other environmental factors. According to Lee et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), main highway roadside plantations with multiple species assemblages exhibited greater biomass production and carbon storage efficiency, which aligning with our current findings that is MR plantations contribute more to carbon storage than SR vegetation. The enhanced species diversity in MR could be due to higher intensive monitoring and soil management, improved irrigation practices compared to SR areas. Increased crown density and tree ages in MR may also provide microclimatic stability, lowering temperature fluctuations and qualitative habitat conditions for diverse flora and fauna (Kumar and Sharma \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, the higher carbon storage potentiality of MR plantations suggests that expanding and maintaining such green spaces could be a valuable strategy for urban carbon management (Tartaglia and Aronson \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). These results emphasize the need for policy implication to prioritize roadside afforestation and reforestation in high-traffic urban cities both in MR, SR and corridors plantation. While our findings provide valuable information, limitations still should be considered for future research. Abiotic factors such as soil texture, structure, air pollution levels, and species-specific growth rates are not extensively studied here, which could further explain differences in biodiversity and carbon storage. Upcoming studies should incorporate longitudinal data to assess how roadside plantations evolve over time and their long-term ecological contributions. Moreover, investigating the impact of road width, pollution exposure and human disturbances on plantation success would provide a more comprehensive understanding.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe findings revealed that MR plantation have a significant impact than SR plantation on the urban ecosystem\u0026rsquo;s function particularly carbon storage, species richness and species diversity in Dhaka urban megacity. We obtained three main results from our study: \u003cb\u003eFirstly\u003c/b\u003e, species richness of MR plantation was higher than SR plantation in both Dhaka north and south city although species diversity non significantly varied (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) between MR and SR across all studied sites. \u003cb\u003eSecondly\u003c/b\u003e, above ground, below ground and total carbon storage were higher in MR than SR in Dhaka north, and north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south city respectively. \u003cb\u003eFinally\u003c/b\u003e, floristics characteristics such as species richness, species diversity, basal area, crown area and DBH are significantly and positively influence above-below ground and total carbon storage in both MR and SR plantation in most of the study sites with very few exceptions in case of SR in Dhaka north city.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOverall, our study highlighted that SR plantation is contributing less for urban ecosystem functions than MR plantation. Thus, enhancement of SR plantation is strongly encouraged in Dhaka to enhance ecosystem functions and recommended to further studies in the other urban cities of Bangladesh as well as other mega urban city in tropical and subtropical countries.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003ch2\u003eDeclaration of competing interest\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAuthors declaer no competing interest in research and funding\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eSumaiya Akter developed methods, conceived the study and wrote the first and final draft. Md. Shahariar Jaman, Mahbuba Jamil: Project administration, supervision, method validation, analysis of the data, and editing of the first and final draft. Kazi Md Abu Sayeed, Naznin Parvin and Sumaiya Akter: Field experiment and data collection. Hossain Md Dalim, Minhazul Kashem Chowdhury: Editing the first and final draft. Shuvramoy Mahato, Sanjida Abedin Prokriti, Sagoti Islam, Xiang Zhang and Pongpet Pongsivapai: Method validation, review, and editing.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgments\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis research was funded by the Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University Research System (SAURES) grant no. SAU/SAURES/2022/110(20) and Ministry of Science and Technology, Bangladesh, through a special research allocation grant (Grant No: SRG-221311(BS)/2022-23).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlavalapati JRR, Stainback GA, Carter DR (2002) Restoration of the longleaf pine ecosystem on private lands in the US South: an ecological economic analysis. Ecol Econ 40:411\u0026ndash;419. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00012-5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00012-5\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAli A, Yan E-R, Chen HYH et al (2017) Data from: Stand structural diversity rather than species diversity enhances aboveground carbon storage in secondary subtropical forests in Eastern China. 36772 bytes\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAment R, Powell S, Stoy P, Begley J (2014) Roadside Vegetation and Soils on Federal Lands \u0026ndash; Evaluation of the Potential for Increasing Carbon Capture and Storage and Decreasing Carbon Emissions. Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAnderson EC, Avolio ML, Sonti NF, LaDeau SL (2021) More than green: Tree structure and biodiversity patterns differ across canopy change regimes in Baltimore\u0026rsquo;s urban forest. Urban Forestry Urban Green 65:127365. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127365\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127365\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAphalo PJ (2017) ggpmisc: Miscellaneous extensions to \u0026lsquo;ggplot2\u0026rsquo; of R package\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAuguie B, Antonov A (2017) Miscellaneous Functions for Grid Graphics\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBai H, Zhang X (2025) Effect of physiological traits and soil properties on carbon sequestration capacity of roadside vegetation along motorways. Urban Ecosyst 28:100. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-025-01713-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11252-025-01713-7\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBaltzinger M, Archaux F, Gosselin M, Chevalier R (2011) Contribution of forest management artefacts to plant diversity at a forest scale. Ann For Sci 68:395\u0026ndash;406. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-011-0026-x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s13595-011-0026-x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBeckett KP, Freer-Smith P, Taylor G, Arboriculture (2000) Urban Forestry (AUF) 26:12\u0026ndash;19. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.2000.002\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.48044/jauf.2000.002\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBunker DE, DeClerck F, Bradford JC et al (2005) Species Loss and Aboveground Carbon Storage in a Tropical Forest. Science 310:1029\u0026ndash;1031. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1126/science.1117682\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1126/science.1117682\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChave J, Andalo C, Brown S et al (2005) Tree allometry and improved estimation of carbon stocks and balance in tropical forests. Oecologia 145:87\u0026ndash;99. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-005-0100-x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s00442-005-0100-x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChave J, R\u0026eacute;jou-M\u0026eacute;chain M, B\u0026uacute;rquez A et al (2014) Improved allometric models to estimate the aboveground biomass of tropical trees. Glob Change Biol 20:3177\u0026ndash;3190. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12629\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/gcb.12629\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChen S, Wang Y, Ni Z et al (2020) Benefits of the ecosystem services provided by urban green infrastructures: Differences between perception and measurements. Urban Forestry Urban Green 54:126774. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126774\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126774\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCheng D, Liu B, Chen J (2016) Analysis On The Method Of Highway Carbon Sink Forest. In: Proceedings of the 2016 5th International Conference on Civil, Architectural and Hydraulic Engineering (ICCAHE 2016). Atlantis Press, Zhuhai, China\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDarabi H, Moarrab Y, Balist J, Naroei B (2023) Resilient plant species selection for urban green infrastructure development in arid regions: a case of Qom, Iran. Urban Ecosyst 26:1753\u0026ndash;1768. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-023-01410-3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11252-023-01410-3\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDas SC, Alam MS, Hossain MA (2018) Diversity and structural composition of species in dipterocarp forests: a study from Fasiakhali Wildlife Sanctuary, Bangladesh. J Res 29:1241\u0026ndash;1249. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-017-0548-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11676-017-0548-7\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDeb JC, Halim MA, Rahman HMT, Al-Ahmed R (2013) Density, diversity, composition and distribution of street trees in Sylhet Metropolitan City of Bangladesh. Arboricultural J 35:36\u0026ndash;49. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/03071375.2013.770656\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/03071375.2013.770656\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDewan AM, Yamaguchi Y (2009) Land use and land cover change in Greater Dhaka, Bangladesh: Using remote sensing to promote sustainable urbanization. Appl Geogr 29:390\u0026ndash;401. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2008.12.005\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.apgeog.2008.12.005\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDrever CR, Cook-Patton SC, Akhter F et al (2021) Natural climate solutions for Canada. Sci Adv 7:eabd6034. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abd6034\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1126/sciadv.abd6034\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEscobedo FJ, Nowak DJ, Wagner JE et al (2006) The socioeconomics and management of Santiago de Chile\u0026rsquo;s public urban forests. Urban Forestry Urban Green 4:105\u0026ndash;114. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2005.12.002\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ufug.2005.12.002\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFan C, Myint SW, Zheng B (2015) Measuring the spatial arrangement of urban vegetation and its impacts on seasonal surface temperatures. Prog Phys Geogr 39:199\u0026ndash;219. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0309133314567583\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0309133314567583\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFerrini F, Fini A (2011) Sustainable Management Techniques For Trees In The Urban Areas. 1:1\u0026ndash;19\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eForrester DI, Bauhus J (2016) A Review of Processes Behind Diversity\u0026mdash;Productivity Relationships in Forests. Curr Forestry Rep 2:45\u0026ndash;61. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s40725-016-0031-2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s40725-016-0031-2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFu D, Bu B, Wu J, Singh RP (2019) Investigation on the carbon sequestration capacity of vegetation along a heavy traffic load expressway. J Environ Manage 241:549\u0026ndash;557. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.09.098\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.09.098\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHaase D, G\u0026uuml;neralp B, Dahiya B et al (2018) Global Urbanization: Perspectives and Trends. In: Elmqvist T, Bai X, Frantzeskaki N et al (eds) Urban Planet, 1st edn. Cambridge University Press, pp 19\u0026ndash;44\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHairiah K, Sitompul S, van Noordwijk M, Palm C (2001) Methods for sampling carbon stocks above and below ground. International Centre for Research in Agroforestry, Bogor\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHooper DU, Adair EC, Cardinale BJ et al (2012) A global synthesis reveals biodiversity loss as a major driver of ecosystem change. Nature 486:105\u0026ndash;108. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/nature11118\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/nature11118\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIPCC (2013) The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (pp. 3\u0026ndash;29). Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA, pp 3\u0026ndash;29\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJaman M, Jahan I, Jamil M, Hossain M (2017) Structure and Composition of Plant across Different Urban Land Vegetation in Dhaka South City. Bangladesh JAERI 13:1\u0026ndash;14. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.9734/JAERI/2017/38562\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.9734/JAERI/2017/38562\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJaman MS, Wu H, Yu Q et al (2022) Contrasting responses of plant above and belowground biomass carbon pools to extreme drought in six grasslands spanning an aridity gradient. Plant Soil 473:167\u0026ndash;180. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-021-05258-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11104-021-05258-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJaman S, Zhang X, Islam F (2020) Carbon storage and tree diversity in the urban vegetation of Dhaka city, Bangladesh: a study based on intensive field investigation. Arboricultural J 42:76\u0026ndash;92. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/03071375.2020.1755186\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/03071375.2020.1755186\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKassambara A (2018) Ggpubr: ggplot2 based publication ready plots. R package version 0:2\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKhan MNI, Islam MR, Rahman A et al (2020) Allometric relationships of stand level carbon stocks to basal area, tree height and wood density of nine tree species in Bangladesh. Global Ecol Conserv 22:e01025. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e01025\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e01025\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKumar A, Sharma MP (2015) Estimation of carbon stocks of Balganga Reserved Forest, Uttarakhand, India. For Sci Technol 11:177\u0026ndash;181. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/21580103.2014.990060\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/21580103.2014.990060\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKumar BM, Agriculture (2011) Ecosyst Environ 140:430\u0026ndash;440. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2011.01.006\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.agee.2011.01.006\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKumar V, Jolli V, Babu CR (2019) Avenue plantations in Delhi and their efficacy in mitigating air pollution. Arboricultural J 41:35\u0026ndash;47. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/03071375.2019.1562800\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/03071375.2019.1562800\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLal R (2004) Soil Carbon Sequestration Impacts on Global Climate Change and Food Security. Science 304:1623\u0026ndash;1627. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1126/science.1097396\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1126/science.1097396\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLavelle M (2014) Your next roadside attraction: carbon storage. The DailyClimate\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLee CS, Chang K-H, Kim H (2018) Long-term (2005\u0026ndash;2015) trend analysis of PM2.5 precursor gas NO2 and SO2 concentrations in Taiwan. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:22136\u0026ndash;22152. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2273-y\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11356-018-2273-y\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLei XD, Tang MP, Lu YC et al (2009) Forest inventory in China: status and challenges. Int Forestry Rev 11:52\u0026ndash;63. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1505/ifor.11.1.52\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1505/ifor.11.1.52\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMartinez-Sanchez JL, Cabrales LC (2012) Is there a relationship between floristic diversity and carbon stocks in tropical vegetation in Mexico? Afr J Agric Res 7. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR11.599\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5897/AJAR11.599\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eM\u0026eacute;nard I, Thiffault E, Kurz WA, Boucher J-F (2022) Carbon sequestration and emission mitigation potential of afforestation and reforestation of unproductive territories. New Forest 54:1013\u0026ndash;1035. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-022-09955-5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11056-022-09955-5\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMendes P, Bourgeois B, Pellerin S et al (2024) Linkages between plant functional diversity and soil-based ecosystem services in urban and peri-urban vacant lots. Urban Ecosyst 27:1011\u0026ndash;1026. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-023-01470-5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11252-023-01470-5\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMeunier G, Lavoie C (2012) Roads as Corridors for Invasive Plant Species: New Evidence from Smooth Bedstraw (\u003cem\u003eGalium mollugo\u003c/em\u003e). Invasive plant sci manag 5:92\u0026ndash;100. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1614/IPSM-D-11-00049.1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1614/IPSM-D-11-00049.1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMo L, Zohner CM, Reich PB et al (2023) Integrated global assessment of the natural forest carbon potential. Nature 624:92\u0026ndash;101. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06723-z\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s41586-023-06723-z\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNagendra H, Gopal D (2011) Tree diversity, distribution, history and change in urban parks: studies in Bangalore, India. Urban Ecosyst 14:211\u0026ndash;223. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-010-0148-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11252-010-0148-1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNero BF, Kuusaana ED, Ahmed A, Campion BB (2024) Carbon storage and tree species diversity of urban parks in Kumasi, Ghana. City Environ Interact 24:100156. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.cacint.2024.100156\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.cacint.2024.100156\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNowak DJ, Crane DE (2002) Carbon storage and sequestration by urban trees in the USA. Environ Pollut 116:381\u0026ndash;389. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/S0269-7491(01)00214-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/S0269-7491(01)00214-7\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNowak DJ, Greenfield EJ (2020) The increase of impervious cover and decrease of tree cover within urban areas globally (2012\u0026ndash;2017). Urban Forestry Urban Green 49:126638. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126638\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126638\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNowak DJ, Hirabayashi S, Bodine A, Greenfield E (2014) Tree and forest effects on air quality and human health in the United States. Environ Pollut 193:119\u0026ndash;129. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2014.05.028\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.envpol.2014.05.028\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S et al (2018) nlme: Linear and Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePonce-Hernandez R, Koohafkan P, Antoine J (2004) Assessing Carbon Stocks and Modelling Win-win Scenarios of Carbon Sequestration Through Land-use Changes. Food \u0026amp; Agriculture Org\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePoorter H, Niinemets \u0026Uuml;, Ntagkas N et al (2019) A meta-analysis of plant responses to light intensity for 70 traits ranging from molecules to whole plant performance. New Phytol 223:1073\u0026ndash;1105. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/nph.15754\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/nph.15754\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePotter C, Gross P, Klooster S et al (2008) Storage of carbon in U.S. forests predicted from satellite data, ecosystem modeling, and inventory summaries. Clim Change 90:269\u0026ndash;282. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-008-9462-5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10584-008-9462-5\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eR Core Team (2021) R: A language and environment for statistical computing\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRahman MM, Kabir ME, Akon JU, Ando ASM K (2015) High carbon stocks in roadside plantations under participatory management in Bangladesh. Global Ecol Conserv 3:412\u0026ndash;423. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2015.01.011\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.gecco.2015.01.011\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchultz NL, Reid N, Lodge G, Hunter JT (2014) Broad-scale patterns in plant diversity vary between land uses in a variegated temperate Australian agricultural landscape. Austral Ecol 39:855\u0026ndash;863. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/aec.12154\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/aec.12154\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSilva AD, Braga Alves C, Alves S (2010) Roadside vegetation: estimation and potential for carbon sequestration. iForest 3:124\u0026ndash;129. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3832/ifor0550-003\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3832/ifor0550-003\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSrour N, Thiffault E, Boucher J-F (2024) Exploring the Potential of Roadside Plantation for Carbon Sequestration Using Simulation in Southern Quebec. Can Forests 15:264. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/f15020264\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/f15020264\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSu\u0026aacute;rez-Esteban A, Fahrig L, Delibes M, Fedriani JM (2016) Can anthropogenic linear gaps increase plant abundance and diversity? Landsc Ecol 31:721\u0026ndash;729. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-015-0329-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10980-015-0329-7\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTartaglia ES, Aronson MFJ (2024) Plant native: comparing biodiversity benefits, ecosystem services provisioning, and plant performance of native and non-native plants in urban horticulture. Urban Ecosyst 27:2587\u0026ndash;2611. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-024-01610-5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11252-024-01610-5\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTawhid KG (2004) Causes and Effects of Water Logging in Dhaka City, Bangladesh\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTilman D, Wedin D, Knops J (1996) Productivity and sustainability influenced by biodiversity in grassland ecosystems. Nature 379:718\u0026ndash;720. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/379718a0\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/379718a0\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVan Der Werf GR, Morton DC, DeFries RS et al (2009) CO2 emissions from forest loss. Nat Geosci 2:737\u0026ndash;738. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo671\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/ngeo671\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWickham H (2016) ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer-, New York\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWilliams NSG, Hahs AK, Vesk PA (2015) Urbanisation, plant traits and the composition of urban floras. Perspectives in Plant Ecology. Evol Syst 17:78\u0026ndash;86. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppees.2014.10.002\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ppees.2014.10.002\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang J, Wang W, Du H et al (2018) Differences in community characteristics, species diversity, and their coupling associations among three forest types in the Huzhong area, Daxinganling mountains. Acta Ecol Sin 38. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5846/stxb201706261149\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5846/stxb201706261149\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang Y, Duan B, Xian J et al (2011) Links between plant diversity, carbon stocks and environmental factors along a successional gradient in a subalpine coniferous forest in Southwest China. For Ecol Manag 262:361\u0026ndash;369. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2011.03.042\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.foreco.2011.03.042\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhao C, Sander HA (2015) Quantifying and Mapping the Supply of and Demand for Carbon Storage and Sequestration Service from Urban Trees. PLoS ONE 10:e0136392. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0136392\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1371/journal.pone.0136392\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhao X, Li Y, Song H et al (2020) Agents Affecting the Productivity of Pine Plantations on the Loess Plateau in China: A Study Based on Structural Equation Modeling. Forests 11:1328. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/f11121328\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/f11121328\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"urban-ecosystems","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"ueco","sideBox":"Learn more about [Urban Ecosystems](https://www.springer.com/journal/11252)","snPcode":"11252","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/11252/3","title":"Urban Ecosystems","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"Carbon storage, species richness, species diversity, urban roadside plantation","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6657761/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6657761/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eWhile the ecological role of urban main roadside (MR) plantation is well-documented, the contribution of sub roadside (SR) plantation remains unclear. Using both purposive and random sampling methods, we investigated species richness, diversity and above-below ground biomass carbon (AGC and BGC) storage of the MR and SR plantations in northern and southern parts of Dhaka urban city. We found that species richness is comparatively lower in SR than MR in Dhaka north (MR: 4.70\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.24, SR: 3.51\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.14), Dhaka south (MR: 4.45\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.24, SR: 4.20\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.32) and north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south (MR: 4.55\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.17, SR: 3.85\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.18) sites respectively. We also found that MR of the Dhaka north city showed higher mean AGC storage than SR (MR: 63.78\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;11.33 Mg ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e, SR: 40.16\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.03 Mg ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e), however the result is opposite in case of Dhaka south (MR: 80.99\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.50 Mg ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e, SR: 103.58\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.65 Mg ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e). When combined north\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;south roadside together, maximum AGC was found in MR (73.62\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.99, Mg ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e) than SR (71.87\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8.39 Mg ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e). Similar trend was observed in term of BGC and total biomass carbon (TC) where SR showed less carbon storage potentiality than MR. Significant positive (all, \u003cem\u003eP\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;0.05) relationships were observed among AGC, BGC and TC storage in response to species richness both MR and SR across sites with few exceptions in case of species diversity. Our study suggested that SR are contributing fewer ecosystem functions than MR of Dhaka urban mega city thus enhancement of SR plantation along with MR is strongly suggested to maintain sustainable urban ecosystem function.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Urban Main Roadside Plantation Enhances Species Richness, Diversity and Carbon Storage than Sub roadside Plantation: An Empirical Study in Dhaka City","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-05-20 09:51:49","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6657761/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"334720410594958128714188043487446785792","date":"2025-05-20T09:05:13+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"226825838620800446407643242651267292428","date":"2025-05-19T13:44:05+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"191324481129167080089904308117812828027","date":"2025-05-17T10:59:09+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"326990544974552296966751553054518665508","date":"2025-05-17T08:47:12+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"239568955467859469752273532899702038467","date":"2025-05-15T14:18:06+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-05-15T08:33:01+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-05-14T10:17:11+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-05-14T09:51:03+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Urban Ecosystems","date":"2025-05-13T17:14:33+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"urban-ecosystems","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"ueco","sideBox":"Learn more about [Urban Ecosystems](https://www.springer.com/journal/11252)","snPcode":"11252","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/11252/3","title":"Urban Ecosystems","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"3cbc2c3c-40da-4268-8dbb-c623376231fa","owner":[],"postedDate":"May 20th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-10-27T16:39:09+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-6657761","link":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-025-01816-1","journal":{"identity":"urban-ecosystems","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Urban Ecosystems"},"publishedOn":"2025-10-24 16:16:20","publishedOnDateReadable":"October 24th, 2025"},"versionCreatedAt":"2025-05-20 09:51:49","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1007/s11252-025-01816-1","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-025-01816-1","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6657761","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6657761","identity":"rs-6657761","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}