Changes in Soil organic carbon and total nitrogen following long-term grazing exclusion in Saral grasslands, Kurdistan (Iran)

Changes in Soil organic carbon and total nitrogen following long-term grazing exclusion in Saral grasslands, Kurdistan (Iran) | 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 Changes in Soil organic carbon and total nitrogen following long-term grazing exclusion in Saral grasslands, Kurdistan (Iran) Isa Bandak, Parviz Karami, Mahtab Gurgin Karaji, Deirdre Dragovich This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2500894/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background and aims: Land use change favouring agriculture is considered a global threat as it interrupts ecosystem services of grasslands. However, exclosure from grazing has been widely known as effective in maintaining or even restoring grasslands. This study examined the impacts of long-term (45 years) exclosure, heavy grazing and rainfed wheat farming on soil organic carbon (SOC) and total nitrogen (TN) in the cold semi-arid grasslands of Saral Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Station, Kurdistan, Iran. Methods: In this investigation, 90 soil samples were taken from 0-20 cm depth within an area of 0.5 hectare for each land use (exclosure, heavy grazing, wheat farming). Samples were collected in the four non-consecutive years of 2009, 2013, 2017 and 2021. The Walkley-Black and Kjeldahl methods were used to measure SOC and TN respectively. Results: Results showed that value of SOC differed significantly among different land uses (P<0.01). In the studied years, SOC in the excluded site in 2021 had the highest level with 34,787 kg/ha, while the grazed site recorded the lowest SOC with 26,342 kg/ha in the same year. TN was also the highest at 0.130 percent in the excluded area in 2021, while TN was lower at 0.102 and 0.103 percent in the grazed and wheat-farming areas respectively in 2021. Conclusion: This suggests that in grasslands with the same ecological conditions, managers can choose appropriate grazing intensity as an alternative to either heavy grazing or rainfed wheat farming, though more investigations on the efficiency of different grazing intensities are needed. heavy grazing exclosure grazing intensity. soil organic carbon soil nitrogen rainfed wheat farming Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Introduction Grassland is the largest terrestrial biome, covering 3.2 billion ha worldwide, and a large part of this area is used by grazing herbivores (Scholtz and Twidwell 2022 ). Semi-natural grasslands are traditionally managed under diverse management regimes and host a great number of plant species, which is essentially why they contribute to the biodiversity of agricultural landscapes (Walden 2019 ). As one of the most widespread terrestrial ecosystems in the world, grasslands play a crucial role in the global carbon (C) cycle and provide key ecosystem services. Given that atmospheric carbon dioxide has dramatically increased over the last century, it has become increasingly crucial to know and understand the global carbon cycle (Schlesinger and Bernhardt et al. 2013). Soils are the largest terrestrial pool of carbon (C), encompassing about 1500 Pg organic C in the top meter worldwide. Therefore, small changes in the soil organic carbon (SOC) reservoir may significantly influence the concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere. With rising levels of atmospheric CO2, there has been growing interest in SOC sequestration in recent years. It is estimated that grasslands store 10–30% of the global SOC with a C sequestration rate of 0.5 Pg C year − 1 (Batjes 2018 ). Due to the strong potential for C sequestration, grassland soils may act as a sink for atmospheric CO2 and contribute to the mitigation of climate change. Management strategies play a pivotal role in nutrient concentration in soil and plants: many ecosystem services thus depend largely on the management and intensity of grassland use (Hein 2006 ; Eldridge et al. 2016 ; Lu et al. 2017 ; Zhao et al. 2021). Grazing by livestock is the most common management strategy which is applied in managing grasslands globally. Several researchers have shown that intensity of grazing affects not only forage quality but plant species composition (Skinner et al. 2004 ). Grazing also alters physiochemical properties of soils, in particular carbon and nitrogen cycles (Ren et al. 2012 ). A moderate grazing intensity can result in a heterogeneous sward structure with spatial variations in height, which in turn affects the floristic composition and structure of plant communities (Karami et al. 2019 ). Hence, management strategies applied in grasslands affect plant traits, and other studies have demonstrated that grazing intensity regulates the biogeochemical cycles of C, N and P in grassland ecosystems through affecting plant nutrient use efficiency and soil physicochemical processes (He et al. 2019 ). For example, Zhu et al. ( 2021 ) showed that grazing prohibition not only increased the aboveground biomass, total biomass and total meadow coverage but increased the soil total carbon, soil organic carbon, soil total nitrogen, soil total phosphorus and soil available phosphorus in subalpine meadow and swamp meadows. Moreover, grazing, as a key anthropogenic disturbance, affects ecosystem C, N and P cycles as well as their stoichiometry (He et al. 2020). In addition to SOC, soil N in grasslands has received much attention because it plays a key role in global biogeochemical cycles. Also, the interactions of C and N in soils are of great importance for regulating the main ecological processes of nutrient cycling and energy flow. Land use change of forests, rangelands and grasslands to agricultural lands is the most widespread conversion globally with dramatic changes in soil quality, soil productivity, vegetation type, carbon sequestration, microbial community composition and decreases in microbial biomass. Those alterations have crucial impacts on the global nitrogen cycle with subsequent effects on climate change and degradation of biodiversity (Tecimen 2017 ). Since most of the uncultivated grasslands are grazed by large mammals, the effect of grazing on SOC is vital for C sequestration in grasslands. Unfortunately, large areas of grasslands are experiencing overgrazing worldwide, which not only reduces plant biodiversity and productivity but also modifies the structure and function of the ecosystem, leading to a depletion of SOC stock (McCherry and Ritchie 2013; Liu et al. 2022). Changes in land use also alter the C and N cycles, which may change C and N accumulation in the soil (Piñeiro et al. 2006). In the context of climate change, the restoration of overgrazed and degraded grasslands is thus urgently needed to recover SOC levels. Research by Abdalla et al. ( 2022 ) has demonstrated that grassland restoration as a soil management strategy increases SOC in grasslands. Saral’s semi-natural grasslands in Kurdistan provide habitat for wild animals and endemic plant species and for recreational opportunities for people in the region (Karami et al. 2021 ). These grasslands also feed numerous springs and water resources which are used for agricultural, recreational, and household purposes. Although previous studies reported on the effects of grazing intensity on plant traits, there is no clear answer to the question of whether there are significant differences between rainfed wheat farming, heavy grazing, and long-term grazing exclosure with regard to SOC and TN concentrations in semi-natural grasslands. More importantly, there is insufficient evidence about changes in amounts of SOC and TN over time. This investigation, thus, was undertaken in 2022 using samples collected in 2009, 2013, 2017 and 2021 in the Saral grasslands (Kurdistan, Iran) with the objective of comparing the effects of the different land uses strategies of heavy grazing, exclosure from grazing and rainfed wheat farming on the amounts of SOC and TN. Material And Methods Study area This investigation was carried out in the 4 non-consecutive years of 2009, 2013, 2017, and 2021 in the Saral Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Station approximately 45 km from Sanandaj (46°46' to 47°47' E and 35°39'N to 35°40'N latitude) at an altitude of 2090 m (Fig. 1). The excluded, grazing and rainfed wheat farming sites have the same general conditions with regards to topography, climate, and soils. Mean annual precipitation is 473 mm. In most years the maximum monthly precipitation occurs in February and the minimum in June. The mean annual temperature is 16°C and the study area is described as cold semi-arid (BSk) in the Köppen Climate Classification. Soils have a sandy loam texture, with pH 6.5 in the grazed and rainfed wheat farming areas and pH 7 in the excluded sites. The private (governmental) excluded area which has a research use was excluded from grazing by fencing constructed around the site in 1976. Grazing (grazed sites) by sheep, goats, cows, and wild animals takes place from late April to late July without any additional management practices; overall grazing intensity has been determined as heavy (Karami et al., 2019). At the grazed sites, wild and domestic animals have had continuous access since 1976. In Western Iran, the main wheat variety grown in the rainfed farming areas is Sardary (Tavakoli et al. 2013). Species in grazed, excluded and rainfed wheat farming sites Overall, 58 plant species were found, of which 52 species were recorded in the excluded sites and 47 in the grazed sites (Table 1). Most species thus occurred in both the grazed and excluded areas, but the excluded sites recorded 6 more species. Table 1 Names and presence (+ is present, - is absent) of the species in grazed, excluded and rainfed farming sites. Species Grazed Site Excluded Site Rainfed farming Achillea millefolium L. - + Wheat Achillea vermicularis Trin. + + Alyssum linifolium Steph.ex Willd. + + Astragalus apricus Bunge + - Astragalus geminanus Boiss. & Hausskn + - Astragalus tortuosus DC. + + Bellevalia glauca (Lindl.) Kunth + + Bromus danthoniae Trin. + + Bromus tectorum L. + + Bromus tomentellus Boiss. - + Bunium cylindricum (Boiss. & Hohen.) Drude - + Campanula involucrata Auch.ex DC. + + Centaurea behen L. + + Centaurea pseudoscabiosa Boiss & Buhse. + + Cephalaria syriaca (L.) Roemer & Schultes + + Cerastium inflatum Link ex Desf. + + Chaerophyllum macropodun Boiss. + + Chenopodium album L. + + Cruciata taurica (Pallas ex Willd.) Ehrend. + + Dactylis glomerata L. + + Echinops haussknechtii Boiss. + + Elymus hispidus ( Opiz) Melderis + + Eremopoa persica ( Trin.) Roshev. + + Eryngium thyrsoideum Boiss. + + Euphorbia aleppica L. + + Ferula Haussknechtii Wolff ex Rech. f. - + Festuca ovina Boiss - + Geranium tuberosum L. - + Gypsophila bicolor ( Freyn& Sint.) Grossh. + + Heteranthelium piliferum (Banks & Soland.) Hochst. + + Hordeum bulbosum L. - + Hypericum scabrum L. + + Isatis kotschyana Boiss. & Hohen. - + lactuca serriola L. - + Lallemantia iberica (Stev.) Fisch. & C.A. Mey. + - Lathyrus chloranthus Boiss. - + Myosotis lithospermifolia (Willd.) Hornem. + - Neoa mucronata (Forsk.) Aschers. + + Nonnea hypoleia Bornm + + Onobrychis major ( Boiss.) Hand-Mzt. + - Onopordon acanthium L. + + Onosma microcarpum DC. + + Phlomis olivieri Benth. + + Poa annua L. - + Poa bulbosa L. + + Ranunculus aucheri Boiss. + + Rheum ribes L. + + Rumex scutatus L. + + Salvia multicaulis Vahl + + Scariola orientalis ( Boiss.) Sojak + - Scilla persica Hausskn. + + Scorzonera calyculata Boiss. + + Silene commelinifolia Boiss. + + Stroganowia persica Busch + + Thymus kotschyanus Boiss. & Hohen. + + Tragopogon bornmuelleri Rech.f. + + Veronica anagalis- aquatica L. + + Ziziphora clinopodioides Lam. + + Field design and statistical analysis In 2009, three land uses were selected which were located in close proximity to each other. To remove distortion from edge effects, a buffer zone of 30 m was retained between land uses. An area of approximately 0.5 ha was selected for each land use, with selected areas being identical in terms of environmental characteristics. Three transects (or plots) of 5 x 40 meters were laid out in each of the three land uses, giving a total of 9 transects. In each transect, 10 (1 × 1 m) plots were randomly selected as sub-plots. Soil samples were taken from a depth of 0–20 cm in the sub-plots using an auger (with a diameter of 6.1 cm) Sampling was done in the first week of each of the four years. Then, to obtain a composite sample that represented each transect, the soil from 10 sub-plots was thoroughly mixed. Each land use was thus represented by three composite samples. The collected soil samples were first air-dried and plant residues including plant roots and other visible residues were removed from the soil samples. Samples then were passed through a 2 mm sieve. To measure soil organic carbon and total nitrogen, the Walkley-Black Method (1934) and Kjeldahl methods were used respectively. The hydrometric method (Bouyoucos, 1962) was used to measure soil particle size percentage (sand, silt, and clay). Bulk density of the soil was measured by the cylinder method (Blake and Hartge, 1986) and EC meter was used to measure EC (Electrical conductivity) (Carter and Gregorich, 2007 ). Data for SOC and TN were also collected in the 3 non-consecutive years of 2013, 2017 and 2021 in the same way as in 2009, though soil particle size, bulk density and EC were measured only in the first year. This research was conducted as a 2-level factorial experiment in a completely randomized design with three replications. The first factor was land use in three levels (heavy grazing, excluded and rainfed wheat farming) and the second factor included year in four levels (2009, 2013, 2017 and 2021). One way analysis was used to analyze the data of pH, electrical conductivity, percentage of sand, silt and clay, and bulk density. Analysis of Variance was done using SPSS software. To compare the data, Duncan's test was used at the five percent probability level. Results Soil Chemical And Physical Characteristics Results of analysis of variance of pH, electrical conductivity, percentage of sand, silt and clay, and bulk density in the excluded site, grazed area and rainfed wheat cultivation in the study area are shown in Table 2 . The results showed that the values of bulk density (P < 0.05), electrical conductivity, and percentage of sand and silt (P 0.05). Table 2 Results of analysis variance of pH, electrical conductivity, percentage of sand, clay, silt and bulk density in the investigated land uses. Variable Df Mean Square F Sig. pH 2 0.168 ns 1.716 0.271 EC (ds/m) 2 0.009 ** 40.95 0.001 Sand (%) 2 102.750 ** 16.54 0.006 Silt (%) 2 70.083 ** 30.91 0.002 Clay (%) 2 10.433 ns 1.918 0.241 Bulk Density(g/cm 3 ) 2 0.129 * 7.728 0.030 *and **: significant at P< 0.05 and < 0.01, respectively; ns = non-significant Table 3 shows the average factors of pH, electrical conductivity, percentage of sand, clay, silt, and bulk density as well as soil texture in the three studied land uses. No significant difference between uses was recorded for pH, but electrical conductivity in the excluded rangeland was significantly higher than for the other two uses. Among the parameters that determine the soil texture, i.e., the percentage of sand, silt and clay, the amount of sand in the land under wheat cultivation is significantly higher than for the other two land uses, and the amount of silt is significantly less. There was no significant difference in the percentage of clay between the three studied land uses. Although the three land uses were significantly different in terms of the percentage of sand and silt, in general, the soil texture was the same (Table 3 ). Another physical factor which was studied was the bulk density. The results showed that there is a significant difference in bulk density between the three uses, with wheat cultivation areas (1.22 g/cm 3 ) being lower compared to the other two uses of exclosure from grazing (1.59 g/cm 3 ) and livestock grazing (1.67 g/cm 3 ) (Table 3 ). There was no significant difference between the two land uses of exclosure and livestock grazing in terms of bulk density. Table 3 Comparison of the average factors of pH, electrical conductivity, percentage of sand, clay, silt and bulk density as well as soil texture in the three land uses studied using Duncan's test. Variable Land Use Exclosure Grazed Wheat-land pH 6.9 ± 0.33 a 6.8 ± 0.01 a 7.3 ± 0.49 a EC (ds/m) 0.412 ± 0.021 a 0.312 ± 0.006 b 0.326 ± 0.001 b Sand (%) 19 ± 2.08 b 22.4 ± 0.87 b 31.9 ± 0.5 a Silt (%) 25.66 ± 0.88 a 25.66 ± 0.88 a 16 ± 1 b Clay (%) 55.33 ± 1.2 a 51.93 ± 1.7 a 52.1 ± 0.5 a Bulk Density(g/cm 3 ) 1.59 ± 0.04 a 1.67 ± 0.10 a 1.22 ± 0.5 b Soil Texture clay clay clay Superscripts with the same letter show that there is no significant difference Superscripts with a different letter show a significant difference Effects of land uses and year on SOC concentrations The results of the analysis of variance of SOC shows that there was a significant difference between the types of land use (P 0.05). The comparison of mean results for SOC using the Duncan test showed that SOC of the three different land uses for each studied year was not significantly different (Table 3 ). In 2009 mean results for excluded grasslands were significantly different, while no significant difference was seen in figures for the grazed site and wheat farming. SOC in the exclosure site (33,152 kg/ha) was substantially higher than the 26,947 kg/ha recorded in 2009 for the grazed area, and the 24,864 kg/ha for rainfed wheat farming. In 2013, although the differences were not as great as in 2009, the excluded grasslands again had the highest proportion of soil organic carbon (Table 5 ). The results of a comparison of mean soil organic carbon in 2017 and 2021 showed that the excluded grasslands had significantly higher levels of SOC than the land uses of rainfed wheat and grazed grasslands. In 2017, SOC in excluded area with 34563 was the highest whereas this figure in grazed area remained unchanged as 2013 at 27843kg/h. As for wheat farming, although SOC ratio was higher than 2013, the increase was not significant. In 2021, SOC in excluded area reached to 34787 kg/ha and formed the highest SOC ratio among the studied land uses and the years of the study. While SOC ratio weight in the grazed area decreased over the years of the study, SOC in wheat farming increased over the time, though this increase was not significant over the last decade of the study. Table 4 Analysis variance of soil organic carbon in three different land uses over 45 years Source Df Mean Square F Sig. Year 3 0.004 0.117 0.949 land use 2 0.460 14.96 0.0001 year * land use 6 0.003 0.113 0.994 Error 24 0.031 Total 36 Table 5 Soil organic carbon (kg/ha) in different land uses in studied years year land use 2009 2013 2017 2021 Exclosure 33152 ab 33600 ab 34563 a 34787 a Grazed 26947 bc 27843 abc 27843 bc 26342 bc Wheat-land 24864 c 25984 bc 26790 bc 26432 bc Superscripts with the same letter/s show that there is no significant difference Superscripts with different letter/s show a significant difference Effects of land uses and year on TN concentrations Results of the analysis of variance of soil nitrogen shows a significant difference between the type of land use and associated soil nitrogen (P 0.05). Figure 2 shows that the difference between the three land uses was not statistically significant in terms of soil nitrogen in the years of 2009 and 2013. However, in 2017 and 2021, soil nitrogen concentrations were higher in the excluded grasslands than in the other two land uses of grazing and rainfed wheat growing, which were not significantly different from each other. Table 6 Analysis of variance of soil nitrogen in three different land uses over 45 years Source Df Mean Square F Sig. year 3 0.000092 0.669 0.579 land use 2 0.002 12.998 0.001 year * land use 6 0.000046 0.338 0.910 Error 24 0.000 Total 36 Table 7 C/N ratios in different land uses year land use 2009 2013 2017 2021 Exclosure 12.63 11.78 12.03 12.10 Grazed 11.27 11.73 11.34 11.34 Wheat-land 11.48 10.57 11.57 11.57 Discussion The present study provides a baseline to monitor the responses of SOC and TN to different land uses as recorded over a 45-year period in the cold semi-arid grasslands of Saral. The investigation was conducted in 4 non-consecutive years in specific local areas and is thus indicative of SOC and TN conditions of the Saral grasslands under three different land uses. Based on the results, heavy grazing changed plant species composition by replacing highly palatable grass species with undesirable plants (Table 1). These findings are in line with those reported by Karami et al. ( 2019 ) in which continuous grazing caused some species, namely Ferula haussknechtii and Prangos ferulacea , to disappear in a heavily grazed area. In our study (Table 1), fewer species were recorded in the grazed site compared with the excluded site. Fewer species in the overgrazed site has led to lower SOC relative to the excluded site. As reported in Table 5 , exclosure from grazing significantly increased the SOC, while both overgrazing and rainfed wheat farming decreased SOC. These results support the findings of Su et al. (2003), Wachiye et al. ( 2022 ) and Abdalla et al. ( 2022 ) in which exclosure from grazing significantly increased plant-soil system C storage, and thus sequestration of atmospheric CO2. The increase in SOC after grazing exclusion is attributed to higher vegetation cover and biomass, and higher soil water content (Wachiye et al., 2022 ). Abdalla et al. (2018) also showed that low grazing intensity significantly increased SOC for C4-dominated grassland which is associated with significant increases in TN and reduced soil bulk density. However, in humid subtropical grasslands, Wade et al. ( 2021 ) provided evidence that grazing increased soil carbon stocks in the top 0–5 cm layer, but no significant difference in SOC was recorded between grazed and ungrazed areas for the upper 0–30 cm soil depth. The decrease in SOC in heavily grazed areas can be attributed to the decreased amount of plant material available to the soil due to plant removal by livestock grazing (Zhau et al. 2017; Liu et al. 2022). The grazing regime alters ecosystem carbon and nitrogen cycles through livestock feeding, trampling, and manure return in grassland ecosystems (Mipam et al. 2021 ; Yang et al. 2022). Plant defoliation and removal of different plant parts by livestock grazing are likely to decrease root elongation and biomass due to the decreased C allocation to roots (McSherry and Ritchie 2013 ). Grazing at higher intensities decreases aboveground biomass and plant production and this leads to a reduction in litterfall and litter mass (Liu et al. 2020; Wachiye et al. 2022 ). As Wachiye et al. ( 2022 ) and Li et al. (2018) have shown, a lower degree of vegetation cover in overgrazed areas could reduce root biomass thus lowering root respiration (an important source of carbon and energy for soil microorganisms). Also, changes in litter and root biomass decreased the soil bacterial community and diversity and then the microbial biomass and soil C pool (Bai et al. 2015 a). It has been demonstrated that C inputs from root production and biomass may have a significant effect on soil C storage compared to aboveground biomass (Lu et al. 2017 ). Along with grazing intensity, the type and size of the grazers browsing a site is likely to be important in affecting carbon and nitrogen cycles, though the probable effects are more indirect. For example, lower SOC in lightly grazed sites has been attributed to major defoliation and massive trampling by big mammals including buffaloes and elephants (Amra et al. 2020; Wachiye et al. 2022 ). This shift in plant species can affect the soil organic matter and root biomass (Klumpp et al., 2009 ). Consistent with the results of An and Li (2014), the highest TN concentrations in our study were recorded in excluded areas compared to the rainfed wheat farming and overgrazed sites (Fig. 2 ) – that is, compared to the other two land uses, grazing exclosure significantly increased TN. He et al. (2018) also demonstrated that light grazing significantly increased the C:N, C:P and N:P ratios of soil but heavy grazing decreased these ratios. Lower TN concentrations in overgrazed areas occur from frequent livestock trampling. Soil compaction and less plant productivity then result in higher bulk density and crust formation, with crust formation subsequently leading to soil vulnerability to water erosion and C and N losses (He et al. 2022; Ahmad et al. 2022). However, at higher grazing intensities, inputs of livestock urine and faeces can partly compensate for N loss which will lead to a decreased C:N ratio (He et al. 2022). There was a slight difference in TN amounts between the rainfed wheat farming and the overgrazed site (Fig. 2 ), which can be explained by grazing-induced root exudation, along with input of livestock urine and faeces. In rainfed wheat farming, however, lower TN is attributed to removal of residue, stubble burning and plowing twice a year (Chan and Heenan 2006 ). Using fertilizers in rainfed wheat farming compensates for the lack of soil fertility. However, in the studied area economic conditions of local farmers over the last few decades have made the cost of fertilizers prohibitive, so that TN follows a decreasing trend from the beginning of the period. Although the amount of SOC and TN changed within different studied land uses, the difference between the year, and the interaction between year × land uses, was not significant- that is, SOC and TN sequestration in different land uses remained substantially the same over the study period. With regard to the effects of time on changes in the SOC and TN values, our results do not support the findings of Wang et al. ( 2016 ) in which SOC and TN decreased over time. They demonstrated that SOC and TN values were higher in the first year of their 5-year experiment. Conclusion Our results contribute to closing the existing knowledge gap regarding the effects of different land uses undertaken in semi-natural grasslands. This information is of great importance in understanding carbon cycling in semi-natural grassland, as well as the identification of the potential consequences of increasing land pressure caused by rising livestock numbers. Of the three land uses investigated here, areas excluded from grazing had consistently higher SOC and TN than heavily grazed or rainfed wheat-growing areas. In addition, these levels of SOC and TN did not decline over the four non-consecutive years of study in non-grazed lands and can therefore act as a ‘benchmark’ for other land uses. More research is needed (a) on evaluating the optimum grazing intensity for soil C and N storage in semi-arid regions, and (b) on developing methods for enhancing C storage and maintaining N levels within the constraints of existing rainfed wheat-farming systems. Declarations Acknowledgement: We hereby thank the staff at the University of Kurdistan for their time and cooperation. Funding : This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. References Abdalla KH, Mutema M, Chivenge P, Everson C, Chaplot V (2022) Grassland rehabilitation significantly increases soil carbon stocks by reducing net soil CO2 emissions. Soil Use Manag 38:1250–1265. https://doi.org/10.1111/sum.12790 Ahmed IU, Assefa D, Godbold GL (2022) Organic Matter Fractions in Ethiopian Highlands Land-Use Change Depletes Quantity and Quality of Soil. Forests 13:69. https://doi.org/10.3390/f13010069 Amara E, Adhikari H, Heiskanen J, Siljander M, Munyao M, Omondi P, Pellikka P (2020) Aboveground biomass distribution in a multiuse savannah landscape in Southeastern Kenya: impact of land use and fences. Land 9(10):381. https://doi.org/10.3390/land9100381 An H, Li G (2015) Effects of grazing on carbon and nitrogen in plants and soils in a semiarid desert grassland, China. J Arid Land 7:341–349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40333-014-0049-x Bai W, Fang Y, Zhou M, Xie T, Li L, Zhang WH (2015) Heavily intensified grazing reduces root production in an Inner Mongolia temperate steppe. Agric Ecosyst Environ 200:143–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2014.11.01 Barančíková G, Makovníková J, Halas J (2016) Effect of land use change on soil organic carbon. Agricul ture 62(1). https://doi.org/10.1515/agri-2016-0002 Batjes HN (2018) Technologically achievable soil organic carbon sequestration in world croplands and grasslands. Land Degrad Dev 30. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.3209 Carter MR, Gregorich EG (2007) Soil sample and methods of analysis. Can Soc Soil Sci. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420005271 Chan KY, Heenan DP (2006) The effects of stubble burning and tillage on soil carbon sequestration and crop productivity in Southeastern Australia. Soil Use Manag 21:427–431. https://doi.org/10.1079/SUM2005357 Chen Y, Zhang S, Wang Y, Abzhanov T, Sarsekova D, Zhumabekova Zh (2022) The Spatial Distribution of Soil Nitrogen Storage and the Factors That Influence It in Central Asia’s Typical Arid and Semiarid Grasslands. https://doi.org/10.3390/d14060459 . Diversity14 Eldridge DJ, Delgado-Baquerizo M, Travers SK, Val J, Oliver I (2016) Do grazing intensity and herbivore type affect soil health? Insights from a semi-arid productivity gradient. Br Ecol Soc 3:976–985. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12834 Hein L (2006) The impacts of grazing and rainfall variability on the dynamics of a Sahelian rangeland. J Arid Environ 64:488–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2005.06.014 He M, Zhou G, Yuan T, Kees JVG, Shao J, Zhou X (2019) Grazing intensity significantly changes the C : N : P stoichiometry in grassland ecosystems. Glob Ecol Biogeogr. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.13028 Klumpp K, Fontaine S, Attard E, Roux LZ, Gleixner G, Sossana FJ (2009) Grazing triggers soil carbon altering plant roots and their control on soil microbial communities. J Ecol 97:876–885. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2745.2009.01549.x Karami P, Bandak I, Gorgin Karaji M (2019) Comparing the effects of continuous grazing and long term exclosure on floristic composition and plant diversity in rangeland ecosystems of Saral. Iran Int J Environ Sci Technol 16:7769–7776. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-018-02193-3 Karami P, Bandak I, Karaji MG, Dragovich D (2021) Effects of seasonal grazing and annual mowing on floristic composition and plant diversity in the Saral rangeland, Kurdistan, Iran. Global Ecol Conserv 27:e01515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01515 Li M, Lilong W, Li J, Zh P, Wang L, Zhang X, Xu sh, Li et al (2022)BMC Plant Biology, https://doi.org/org/10.1186/s12870-021-03400-z . Liu Xiang, Sheng H, Wang Zh, Zh M, Huang X, Li L (2020) Does Grazing Exclusion Improve Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Stocks in Alpine Grasslands on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau? A Meta-Analysis. Sustainability 12, 977; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12030977 Lu X, Kelsey KC, Yan Y, Sun J, Wang X, Cheng G, Neff J (2017) Effects of grazing on ecosystem structure and function of alpine grasslands in Qinghai–Tibetan Plateau. Ecosphere 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1656 McSherry M, Ritchie ME (2013) Effects of grazing on grassland soil carbon: a global review. Global Change Biology (2013), https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12144 Mengru Li M, Wang L, Li J, Peng Zh, Wang L, Zhang X, Xu Sh (2022) Grazing exclusion had greater effects than nitrogen addition on soil and plant community in a desert steppe. Northwest of China BMC Plant Biology 22:60. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-021-03400-z Mipam TD, Chen S, Liu J, Miehe G, Tian L (2021) Short-term yak-grazing alters plant-soil stoichiometric relations in an alpine meadow on the eastern Tibetan Plateau. Plant Soil 458(1):125–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-019-04401-6 Pin˜eiro G, Paruelo MJ, Esteban G, Robeert JB (2009) Grazing effects on belowground C and N stocks along a network of cattle exclosures in temperate and subtropical grasslands of South America. GLOBAL BIOGEOCHEMICAL CYCLES, VOL. 23, GB2003, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GB003168 Ren H, Schönbach P, Wan H, Gierus M, Taube F (2012) Effects of Grazing Intensity and Environmental Factors on Species Composition and Diversity in Typical Steppe of Inner Mongolia, China. PLoS ONE 7(12):e52180. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0052180 Ritchie ME (2020) Grazing management, forage production and soil carbon dynamics. Resources 9:49. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources9040049 Scholtz R, Twidwell D (2022) The last continuous grasslands on Earth: Identification and conservation importance. Conserv Sci Pract. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.626 . e626 Schlesinger HW, Bernhardt SE (2013) The Global Carbon Cycle. Biogeochemistry An Analysis of Global Change, 419–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-385874-0.00011-X Skinner RH, Gustine DL, Sanderson MA (2004) Growth, water relations, and nutritive value of pasture species mixtures under mositure stress. Crop Sci 44:1361–1369. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2004.1361 Tecimen HB (2017) Land use effect on nitrogen and phosphorus fluxes into and from soil Eurasian. J For Sci 5:8–12. https://doi.org/10.31195/ejejfs.327361 Wachiye Sh, Pellikka P, Rinne J, Heiskanen J, Abwanda Sh, Merbold L (2022) Effects of livestock and wildlife grazing intensity on soil carbon dioxide flux in the savanna grassland of Kenya. Agric Ecosyst Environ 325:107713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2021.107713 Wade C, Sonnier G, Boughton EG (2021) Does Grazing Affect Soil Carbon in Subtropical Humid Seminatural Grasslands? Rangeland ecology and management. 80:10–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rama.2021.09.004 Walden M (2019) Restoration of semi-natural grasslands: impacts on biodiversity, ecosystem services and stackholder perceptions. PhD dissertation, Stockholm University Wang J, Bai J, Zhao Q, Qiongqiong L, Zhijian X (2016) Five-year changes in soil organic carbon and total nitrogen in coastal wetlands affected by flow-sediment regulation in a Chinese delta. Sci Rep 6:21137. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep21137 Wang L, Xu H, Zhang H, Zhang Y (2022) Grazing and Mowing Affect the Carbon-to-Nitrogen Ratio of Plants by Changing the Soil Available Nitrogen Content and Soil Moisture on the Meadow Steppe, China. Plants 11, 286. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11030286 Wang L, Manuel -Baquerizo DM, Zhao X, Minna Zhang M, Song Y, Cai J, Chang Q, Li Zh, Chen Y, Liu J, Zhu H, Wang D, Han G, Liang C, Wang Ch, Xin Z (2020) Livestock overgrazing disrupts the positive associations between soil biodiversity and nitrogen availability. Funct Ecol 34:1713–1720. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.13575 Zainelabdeen Y, Mohamed R, Xin YX, Yan Y, Ahmed AI, Hou L, Zhang Yu (2020) "The Impact of Grazing on the Grass Composition in Temperate Grassland" Agronomy 10, no. 1230. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10091230 . 9 Zhao Y, Liu Zh, Wu J (2020) Grassland ecosystem services: a systematic review of research advances and future directions April 2020Landscape Ecology 35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-020-00980-3 Zhou G, Zhou X, He Y, Shao J, Hu Z, Liu R, Zhou H, Hoseinibai Sh (2017) Grazing intensity significantly affects belowground carbon and nitrogen cycling in grassland ecosystems: a meta-analysis. Glob Change Biol 23:1167–1179. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13431 Zhu G, Shangguan Zh, Hu X, Deng L (2021) Effects of land use changes on soil organic carbon, nitrogen and their losses in a typical watershed of the Loess Plateau, China. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.108443 . Ecological Indicators 133,108443 Zhu G, Yuan C, Gong H, Peng Y, Huang C, Wu C, Duan H (2021) Effects of short-term grazing prohibition on soil physical and chemical properties of meadows in Southwest China. PeerJ 9:e11598. http://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.11598 Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted 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-2500894","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":170819200,"identity":"d6b4d087-1851-48f3-b714-9b096a714e3e","order_by":0,"name":"Isa Bandak","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Isa","middleName":"","lastName":"Bandak","suffix":""},{"id":170819201,"identity":"1736283a-adc5-4501-a03b-85c7d7c252ca","order_by":1,"name":"Parviz Karami","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Kurdistan","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Parviz","middleName":"","lastName":"Karami","suffix":""},{"id":170819202,"identity":"ad6069ad-57b9-4560-a3aa-120bb79488d2","order_by":2,"name":"Mahtab Gurgin Karaji","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mahtab","middleName":"Gurgin","lastName":"Karaji","suffix":""},{"id":170819203,"identity":"f8d045f1-ff08-4f5e-8f87-59b710426e5e","order_by":3,"name":"Deirdre Dragovich","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Deirdre","middleName":"","lastName":"Dragovich","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2023-01-20 21:29:03","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-2500894/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2500894/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":32216511,"identity":"62369f93-f47c-49e8-a321-60dfe7eea585","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2023-01-30 15:48:51","extension":"jpg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":272822,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eLocation of the studied sites in Divandareh County, Kurdistan Province, Iran (Kurdistan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig1.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-2500894/v1/0ae5a4ed0f23be0fd3cd404a.jpg"},{"id":32217029,"identity":"10aa5527-beff-4033-b723-8133ebc37b4e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2023-01-30 15:56:51","extension":"jpg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":201412,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eComparison of soil nitrogen using the Duncan test.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig2.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-2500894/v1/80ccd6d5f81f981e655f96a6.jpg"},{"id":32420810,"identity":"f27daef1-755c-4b25-ad1a-e53bd2e4de2b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2023-02-03 07:40:20","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":453291,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-2500894/v1/49db18b9-f726-41fb-9fce-41c885e864ab.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"","formattedTitle":"Changes in Soil organic carbon and total nitrogen following long-term grazing exclusion in Saral grasslands, Kurdistan (Iran)","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eGrassland is the largest terrestrial biome, covering 3.2\u0026nbsp;billion ha worldwide, and a large part of this area is used by grazing herbivores (Scholtz and Twidwell \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Semi-natural grasslands are traditionally managed under diverse management regimes and host a great number of plant species, which is essentially why they contribute to the biodiversity of agricultural landscapes (Walden \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). As one of the most widespread terrestrial ecosystems in the world, grasslands play a crucial role in the global carbon (C) cycle and provide key ecosystem services. Given that atmospheric carbon dioxide has dramatically increased over the last century, it has become increasingly crucial to know and understand the global carbon cycle (Schlesinger and Bernhardt et al. 2013). Soils are the largest terrestrial pool of carbon (C), encompassing about 1500 Pg organic C in the top meter worldwide. Therefore, small changes in the soil organic carbon (SOC) reservoir may significantly influence the concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere. With rising levels of atmospheric CO2, there has been growing interest in SOC sequestration in recent years. It is estimated that grasslands store 10\u0026ndash;30% of the global SOC with a C sequestration rate of 0.5 Pg C year\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1 (Batjes \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Due to the strong potential for C sequestration, grassland soils may act as a sink for atmospheric CO2 and contribute to the mitigation of climate change.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eManagement strategies play a pivotal role in nutrient concentration in soil and plants: many ecosystem services thus depend largely on the management and intensity of grassland use (Hein \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Eldridge et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Lu et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Zhao et al. 2021). Grazing by livestock is the most common management strategy which is applied in managing grasslands globally. Several researchers have shown that intensity of grazing affects not only forage quality but plant species composition (Skinner et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). Grazing also alters physiochemical properties of soils, in particular carbon and nitrogen cycles (Ren et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). A moderate grazing intensity can result in a heterogeneous sward structure with spatial variations in height, which in turn affects the floristic composition and structure of plant communities (Karami et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Hence, management strategies applied in grasslands affect plant traits, and other studies have demonstrated that grazing intensity regulates the biogeochemical cycles of C, N and P in grassland ecosystems through affecting plant nutrient use efficiency and soil physicochemical processes (He et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). For example, Zhu et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) showed that grazing prohibition not only increased the aboveground biomass, total biomass and total meadow coverage but increased the soil total carbon, soil organic carbon, soil total nitrogen, soil total phosphorus and soil available phosphorus in subalpine meadow and swamp meadows. Moreover, grazing, as a key anthropogenic disturbance, affects ecosystem C, N and P cycles as well as their stoichiometry (He et al. 2020). In addition to SOC, soil N in grasslands has received much attention because it plays a key role in global biogeochemical cycles. Also, the interactions of C and N in soils are of great importance for regulating the main ecological processes of nutrient cycling and energy flow.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLand use change of forests, rangelands and grasslands to agricultural lands is the most widespread conversion globally with dramatic changes in soil quality, soil productivity, vegetation type, carbon sequestration, microbial community composition and decreases in microbial biomass. Those alterations have crucial impacts on the global nitrogen cycle with subsequent effects on climate change and degradation of biodiversity (Tecimen \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Since most of the uncultivated grasslands are grazed by large mammals, the effect of grazing on SOC is vital for C sequestration in grasslands. Unfortunately, large areas of grasslands are experiencing overgrazing worldwide, which not only reduces plant biodiversity and productivity but also modifies the structure and function of the ecosystem, leading to a depletion of SOC stock (McCherry and Ritchie 2013; Liu et al. 2022). Changes in land use also alter the C and N cycles, which may change C and N accumulation in the soil (Pi\u0026ntilde;eiro et al. 2006). In the context of climate change, the restoration of overgrazed and degraded grasslands is thus urgently needed to recover SOC levels. Research by Abdalla et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) has demonstrated that grassland restoration as a soil management strategy increases SOC in grasslands.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSaral\u0026rsquo;s semi-natural grasslands in Kurdistan provide habitat for wild animals and endemic plant species and for recreational opportunities for people in the region (Karami et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). These grasslands also feed numerous springs and water resources which are used for agricultural, recreational, and household purposes. Although previous studies reported on the effects of grazing intensity on plant traits, there is no clear answer to the question of whether there are significant differences between rainfed wheat farming, heavy grazing, and long-term grazing exclosure with regard to SOC and TN concentrations in semi-natural grasslands. More importantly, there is insufficient evidence about changes in amounts of SOC and TN over time. This investigation, thus, was undertaken in 2022 using samples collected in 2009, 2013, 2017 and 2021 in the Saral grasslands (Kurdistan, Iran) with the objective of comparing the effects of the different land uses strategies of heavy grazing, exclosure from grazing and rainfed wheat farming on the amounts of SOC and TN.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Material And Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStudy area\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis investigation was carried out in the 4 non-consecutive years of 2009, 2013, 2017, and 2021 in the Saral Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Station approximately 45 km from Sanandaj (46\u0026deg;46' to 47\u0026deg;47' E and 35\u0026deg;39'N to 35\u0026deg;40'N latitude) at an altitude of 2090 m (Fig. 1). The excluded, grazing and rainfed wheat farming sites have the same general conditions with regards to topography, climate, and soils. Mean annual precipitation is 473 mm. In most years the maximum monthly precipitation occurs in February and the minimum in June. The mean annual temperature is 16\u0026deg;C and the study area is described as cold semi-arid (BSk) in the K\u0026ouml;ppen Climate Classification. Soils have a sandy loam texture, with pH 6.5 in the grazed and rainfed wheat farming areas and pH 7 in the excluded sites. The private (governmental) excluded area which has a research use was excluded from grazing by fencing constructed around the site in 1976. Grazing (grazed sites) by sheep, goats, cows, and wild animals takes place from late April to late July without any additional management practices; overall grazing intensity has been determined as heavy (Karami et al., 2019). At the grazed sites, wild and domestic animals have had continuous access since 1976.\u0026nbsp; \u003cbr /\u003e In Western Iran, the main wheat variety grown in the rainfed farming areas is Sardary (Tavakoli et al. 2013).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSpecies in grazed, excluded and rainfed wheat farming sites\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOverall, 58 plant species were found, of which 52 species were recorded in the excluded sites and 47 in the grazed sites (Table\u0026nbsp;1). Most species thus occurred in both the grazed and excluded areas, but the excluded sites recorded 6 more species.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 1\u003c/strong\u003e Names and presence (+ is present, - is absent) of the species in grazed, excluded and rainfed farming sites.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n\u003ctable id=\"Taba\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSpecies\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGrazed Site\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eExcluded Site\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRainfed farming\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAchillea millefolium\u003c/em\u003e L.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e-\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eWheat\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAchillea vermicularis\u003c/em\u003e Trin.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd rowspan=\"57\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAlyssum linifolium\u003c/em\u003e Steph.ex Willd.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAstragalus apricus\u003c/em\u003e Bunge\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e-\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAstragalus geminanus\u003c/em\u003e Boiss. \u0026amp; Hausskn\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e-\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAstragalus tortuosus\u003c/em\u003e DC.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBellevalia glauca\u003c/em\u003e (Lindl.) Kunth\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBromus danthoniae\u003c/em\u003e Trin.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBromus tectorum\u003c/em\u003e L.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBromus tomentellus\u003c/em\u003e Boiss.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e-\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBunium cylindricum\u003c/em\u003e (Boiss. \u0026amp; Hohen.) Drude\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e-\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCampanula involucrata Auch.ex\u003c/em\u003e DC.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCentaurea behen\u003c/em\u003e L.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCentaurea pseudoscabiosa\u003c/em\u003e Boiss \u0026amp; Buhse.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCephalaria syriaca\u003c/em\u003e (L.) Roemer \u0026amp; Schultes\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCerastium inflatum\u003c/em\u003e Link ex Desf.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eChaerophyllum macropodun\u003c/em\u003e Boiss.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eChenopodium album\u003c/em\u003e L.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCruciata taurica\u003c/em\u003e (Pallas ex Willd.) Ehrend.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDactylis glomerata\u003c/em\u003e L.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEchinops haussknechtii\u003c/em\u003e Boiss.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eElymus hispidus (\u003c/em\u003eOpiz) Melderis\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEremopoa persica (\u003c/em\u003eTrin.) Roshev.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEryngium thyrsoideum\u003c/em\u003e Boiss.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEuphorbia aleppica\u003c/em\u003e L.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFerula Haussknechtii\u003c/em\u003e Wolff ex Rech. f.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e-\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFestuca ovina Boiss\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGeranium tuberosum\u003c/em\u003e L.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e-\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGypsophila bicolor (\u003c/em\u003eFreyn\u0026amp; Sint.) Grossh.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHeteranthelium piliferum\u003c/em\u003e (Banks \u0026amp; Soland.) Hochst.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHordeum bulbosum\u003c/em\u003e L.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e-\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHypericum scabrum L.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIsatis kotschyana\u003c/em\u003e Boiss. \u0026amp; Hohen.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e-\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003elactuca serriola L.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e-\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eLallemantia iberica\u003c/em\u003e (Stev.) Fisch. \u0026amp; C.A. Mey.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e-\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eLathyrus chloranthus\u003c/em\u003e Boiss.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e-\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMyosotis lithospermifolia\u003c/em\u003e (Willd.) Hornem.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e-\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNeoa mucronata\u003c/em\u003e (Forsk.) Aschers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNonnea hypoleia Bornm\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eOnobrychis major (\u003c/em\u003eBoiss.) Hand-Mzt.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e-\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eOnopordon acanthium\u003c/em\u003e L.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eOnosma microcarpum\u003c/em\u003e DC.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePhlomis olivieri\u003c/em\u003e Benth.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePoa annua\u003c/em\u003e L.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e-\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePoa bulbosa\u003c/em\u003e L.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRanunculus aucheri\u003c/em\u003e Boiss.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRheum ribes\u003c/em\u003e L.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRumex scutatus\u003c/em\u003e L.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSalvia multicaulis\u003c/em\u003e Vahl\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eScariola orientalis (\u003c/em\u003eBoiss.) Sojak\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e-\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eScilla persica Hausskn.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eScorzonera calyculata\u003c/em\u003e Boiss.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSilene commelinifolia\u003c/em\u003e Boiss.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eStroganowia persica\u003c/em\u003e Busch\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eThymus kotschyanus\u003c/em\u003e Boiss. \u0026amp; Hohen.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTragopogon bornmuelleri\u003c/em\u003e Rech.f.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eVeronica anagalis- aquatica\u003c/em\u003e L.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eZiziphora clinopodioides\u003c/em\u003e Lam.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e+\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eField design and statistical analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn 2009, three land uses were selected which were located in close proximity to each other. To remove distortion from edge effects, a buffer zone of 30 m was retained between land uses. An area of approximately 0.5 ha was selected for each land use, with selected areas being identical in terms of environmental characteristics. Three transects (or plots) of 5 x 40 meters were laid out in each of the three land uses, giving a total of 9 transects. In each transect, 10 (1 \u0026times; 1 m) plots were randomly selected as sub-plots. Soil samples were taken from a depth of 0\u0026ndash;20 cm in the sub-plots using an auger (with a diameter of 6.1 cm) Sampling was done in the first week of each of the four years. Then, to obtain a composite sample that represented each transect, the soil from 10 sub-plots was thoroughly mixed. Each land use was thus represented by three composite samples. The collected soil samples were first air-dried and plant residues including plant roots and other visible residues were removed from the soil samples. Samples then were passed through a 2 mm sieve.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo measure soil organic carbon and total nitrogen, the Walkley-Black Method (1934) and Kjeldahl methods were used respectively. The hydrometric method (Bouyoucos, 1962) was used to measure soil particle size percentage (sand, silt, and clay).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBulk density of the soil was measured by the cylinder method (Blake and Hartge, 1986) and EC meter was used to measure EC (Electrical conductivity) (Carter and Gregorich, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e). Data for SOC and TN were also collected in the 3 non-consecutive years of 2013, 2017 and 2021 in the same way as in 2009, though soil particle size, bulk density and EC were measured only in the first year.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research was conducted as a 2-level factorial experiment in a completely randomized design with three replications. The first factor was land use in three levels (heavy grazing, excluded and rainfed wheat farming) and the second factor included year in four levels (2009, 2013, 2017 and 2021). One way analysis was used to analyze the data of pH, electrical conductivity, percentage of sand, silt and clay, and bulk density. Analysis of Variance was done using SPSS software. To compare the data, Duncan's test was used at the five percent probability level.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results Soil Chemical And Physical Characteristics","content":"\u003cp\u003eResults of analysis of variance of pH, electrical conductivity, percentage of sand, silt and clay, and bulk density in the excluded site, grazed area and rainfed wheat cultivation in the study area are shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e. The results showed that the values of bulk density (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), electrical conductivity, and percentage of sand and silt (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) were significantly different among the three studied land uses, while there was no significant difference in clay percentage (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n\u003ctable id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eResults of analysis variance of pH, electrical conductivity, percentage of sand, clay, silt and bulk density in the investigated land uses.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/caption\u003e\n\u003cthead\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDf\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMean Square\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/thead\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003epH\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.168\u003csup\u003ens\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.716\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.271\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEC (ds/m)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.009\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e40.95\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSand (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e102.750\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e16.54\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.006\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSilt (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e70.083\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e30.91\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eClay (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e10.433\u003csup\u003ens\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.918\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.241\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBulk Density(g/cm\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.129\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7.728\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.030\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e*and **: significant at P\u0026lt; 0.05 and \u0026lt; 0.01, respectively; ns = non-significant\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e shows the average factors of pH, electrical conductivity, percentage of sand, clay, silt, and bulk density as well as soil texture in the three studied land uses. No significant difference between uses was recorded for pH, but electrical conductivity in the excluded rangeland was significantly higher than for the other two uses. Among the parameters that determine the soil texture, i.e., the percentage of sand, silt and clay, the amount of sand in the land under wheat cultivation is significantly higher than for the other two land uses, and the amount of silt is significantly less. There was no significant difference in the percentage of clay between the three studied land uses. Although the three land uses were significantly different in terms of the percentage of sand and silt, in general, the soil texture was the same (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). Another physical factor which was studied was the bulk density. The results showed that there is a significant difference in bulk density between the three uses, with wheat cultivation areas (1.22 g/cm\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e) being lower compared to the other two uses of exclosure from grazing (1.59 g/cm\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e) and livestock grazing (1.67 g/cm\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e) (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). There was no significant difference between the two land uses of exclosure and livestock grazing in terms of bulk density.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n\u003ctable id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eComparison of the average factors of pH, electrical conductivity, percentage of sand, clay, silt and bulk density as well as soil texture in the three land uses studied using Duncan's test.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/caption\u003e\n\u003cthead\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003cth rowspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLand Use\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eExclosure\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGrazed\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWheat-land\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/thead\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003epH\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6.9\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.33\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6.8\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.01\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7.3\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.49\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEC (ds/m)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.412\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.021\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.312\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.006\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.326\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSand (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e19\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.08\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e22.4\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.87\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e31.9\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.5\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSilt (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e25.66\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.88\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e25.66\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.88\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e16\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eClay (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e55.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.2\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e51.93\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.7\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e52.1\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.5\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBulk Density(g/cm\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.59\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.04\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.10\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.22\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.5\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSoil Texture\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eclay\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eclay\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eclay\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSuperscripts with the same letter show that there is no significant difference\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSuperscripts with a different letter show a significant difference\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEffects of land uses and year on SOC concentrations \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results of the analysis of variance of SOC shows that there was a significant difference between the types of land use (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). However, there was no significant difference between the year and the interaction between year \u0026times; land uses (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). The comparison of mean results for SOC using the Duncan test showed that SOC of the three different land uses for each studied year was not significantly different (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). In 2009 mean results for excluded grasslands were significantly different, while no significant difference was seen in figures for the grazed site and wheat farming. SOC in the exclosure site (33,152 kg/ha) was substantially higher than the 26,947 kg/ha recorded in 2009 for the grazed area, and the 24,864 kg/ha for rainfed wheat farming. In 2013, although the differences were not as great as in 2009, the excluded grasslands again had the highest proportion of soil organic carbon (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results of a comparison of mean soil organic carbon in 2017 and 2021 showed that the excluded grasslands had significantly higher levels of SOC than the land uses of rainfed wheat and grazed grasslands. In 2017, SOC in excluded area with 34563 was the highest whereas this figure in grazed area remained unchanged as 2013 at 27843kg/h. As for wheat farming, although SOC ratio was higher than 2013, the increase was not significant.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn 2021, SOC in excluded area reached to 34787 kg/ha and formed the highest SOC ratio among the studied land uses and the years of the study. While SOC ratio weight in the grazed area decreased over the years of the study, SOC in wheat farming increased over the time, though this increase was not significant over the last decade of the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n\u003ctable id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAnalysis variance of soil organic carbon in three different land uses over 45 years\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/caption\u003e\n\u003cthead\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDf\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMean Square\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/thead\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eYear\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.004\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.117\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.949\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eland use\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.460\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e14.96\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eyear * land use\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.113\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.994\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eError\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.031\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e36\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n\u003ctable id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSoil organic carbon (kg/ha) in different land uses in studied years\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/caption\u003e\n\u003cthead\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eyear\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eland use\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2009\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2013\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2017\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2021\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/thead\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eExclosure\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e33152\u003csup\u003eab\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e33600\u003csup\u003eab\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e34563\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e34787\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGrazed\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e26947\u003csup\u003ebc\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e27843\u003csup\u003eabc\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e27843\u003csup\u003ebc\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e26342\u003csup\u003ebc\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWheat-land\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e24864\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e25984\u003csup\u003ebc\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e26790\u003csup\u003ebc\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e26432\u003csup\u003ebc\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSuperscripts with the same letter/s show that there is no significant difference\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSuperscripts with different letter/s show a significant difference\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEffects of land uses and year on TN concentrations \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eResults of the analysis of variance of soil nitrogen shows a significant difference between the type of land use and associated soil nitrogen (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). However, there was no significant difference between the year and the interaction between year and land uses (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e shows that the difference between the three land uses was not statistically significant in terms of soil nitrogen in the years of 2009 and 2013. However, in 2017 and 2021, soil nitrogen concentrations were higher in the excluded grasslands than in the other two land uses of grazing and rainfed wheat growing, which were not significantly different from each other.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n\u003ctable id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 6\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAnalysis of variance of soil nitrogen in three different land uses over 45 years\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/caption\u003e\n\u003cthead\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDf\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMean Square\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/thead\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eyear\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.000092\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.669\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.579\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eland use\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e12.998\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eyear * land use\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.000046\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.338\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.910\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eError\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e36\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n\u003ctable id=\"Tab6\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 7\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eC/N ratios in different land uses\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/caption\u003e\n\u003cthead\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eyear\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eland use\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2009\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2013\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2017\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2021\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/thead\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eExclosure\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e12.63\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e11.78\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e12.03\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e12.10\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGrazed\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e11.27\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e11.73\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e11.34\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e11.34\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWheat-land\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e11.48\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e10.57\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e11.57\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e11.57\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe present study provides a baseline to monitor the responses of SOC and TN to different land uses as recorded over a 45-year period in the cold semi-arid grasslands of Saral. The investigation was conducted in 4 non-consecutive years in specific local areas and is thus indicative of SOC and TN conditions of the Saral grasslands under three different land uses. Based on the results, heavy grazing changed plant species composition by replacing highly palatable grass species with undesirable plants (Table\u0026nbsp;1). These findings are in line with those reported by Karami et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) in which continuous grazing caused some species, namely \u003cem\u003eFerula haussknechtii\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003ePrangos ferulacea\u003c/em\u003e, to disappear in a heavily grazed area. In our study (Table\u0026nbsp;1), fewer species were recorded in the grazed site compared with the excluded site. Fewer species in the overgrazed site has led to lower SOC relative to the excluded site. As reported in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, exclosure from grazing significantly increased the SOC, while both overgrazing and rainfed wheat farming decreased SOC. These results support the findings of Su et al. (2003), Wachiye et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) and Abdalla et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) in which exclosure from grazing significantly increased plant-soil system C storage, and thus sequestration of atmospheric CO2.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe increase in SOC after grazing exclusion is attributed to higher vegetation cover and biomass, and higher soil water content (Wachiye et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Abdalla et al. (2018) also showed that low grazing intensity significantly increased SOC for C4-dominated grassland which is associated with significant increases in TN and reduced soil bulk density. However, in humid subtropical grasslands, Wade et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) provided evidence that grazing increased soil carbon stocks in the top 0\u0026ndash;5 cm layer, but no significant difference in SOC was recorded between grazed and ungrazed areas for the upper 0\u0026ndash;30 cm soil depth.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe decrease in SOC in heavily grazed areas can be attributed to the decreased amount of plant material available to the soil due to plant removal by livestock grazing (Zhau et al. 2017; Liu et al. 2022). The grazing regime alters ecosystem carbon and nitrogen cycles through livestock feeding, trampling, and manure return in grassland ecosystems (Mipam et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Yang et al. 2022). Plant defoliation and removal of different plant parts by livestock grazing are likely to decrease root elongation and biomass due to the decreased C allocation to roots (McSherry and Ritchie \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Grazing at higher intensities decreases aboveground biomass and plant production and this leads to a reduction in litterfall and litter mass (Liu et al. 2020; Wachiye et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). As Wachiye et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) and Li et al. (2018) have shown, a lower degree of vegetation cover in overgrazed areas could reduce root biomass thus lowering root respiration (an important source of carbon and energy for soil microorganisms). Also, changes in litter and root biomass decreased the soil bacterial community and diversity and then the microbial biomass and soil C pool (Bai et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003ea). It has been demonstrated that C inputs from root production and biomass may have a significant effect on soil C storage compared to aboveground biomass (Lu et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlong with grazing intensity, the type and size of the grazers browsing a site is likely to be important in affecting carbon and nitrogen cycles, though the probable effects are more indirect. For example, lower SOC in lightly grazed sites has been attributed to major defoliation and massive trampling by big mammals including buffaloes and elephants (Amra et al. 2020; Wachiye et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). This shift in plant species can affect the soil organic matter and root biomass (Klumpp et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsistent with the results of An and Li (2014), the highest TN concentrations in our study were recorded in excluded areas compared to the rainfed wheat farming and overgrazed sites (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) \u0026ndash; that is, compared to the other two land uses, grazing exclosure significantly increased TN. He et al. (2018) also demonstrated that light grazing significantly increased the C:N, C:P and N:P ratios of soil but heavy grazing decreased these ratios. Lower TN concentrations in overgrazed areas occur from frequent livestock trampling. Soil compaction and less plant productivity then result in higher bulk density and crust formation, with crust formation subsequently leading to soil vulnerability to water erosion and C and N losses (He et al. 2022; Ahmad et al. 2022). However, at higher grazing intensities, inputs of livestock urine and faeces can partly compensate for N loss which will lead to a decreased C:N ratio (He et al. 2022). There was a slight difference in TN amounts between the rainfed wheat farming and the overgrazed site (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e), which can be explained by grazing-induced root exudation, along with input of livestock urine and faeces. In rainfed wheat farming, however, lower TN is attributed to removal of residue, stubble burning and plowing twice a year (Chan and Heenan \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). Using fertilizers in rainfed wheat farming compensates for the lack of soil fertility. However, in the studied area economic conditions of local farmers over the last few decades have made the cost of fertilizers prohibitive, so that TN follows a decreasing trend from the beginning of the period. Although the amount of SOC and TN changed within different studied land uses, the difference between the year, and the interaction between year \u0026times; land uses, was not significant- that is, SOC and TN sequestration in different land uses remained substantially the same over the study period. With regard to the effects of time on changes in the SOC and TN values, our results do not support the findings of Wang et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) in which SOC and TN decreased over time. They demonstrated that SOC and TN values were higher in the first year of their 5-year experiment.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eOur results contribute to closing the existing knowledge gap regarding the effects of different land uses undertaken in semi-natural grasslands. This information is of great importance in understanding carbon cycling in semi-natural grassland, as well as the identification of the potential consequences of increasing land pressure caused by rising livestock numbers. Of the three land uses investigated here, areas excluded from grazing had consistently higher SOC and TN than heavily grazed or rainfed wheat-growing areas. In addition, these levels of SOC and TN did not decline over the four non-consecutive years of study in non-grazed lands and can therefore act as a \u0026lsquo;benchmark\u0026rsquo; for other land uses. More research is needed (a) on evaluating the optimum grazing intensity for soil C and N storage in semi-arid regions, and (b) on developing methods for enhancing C storage and maintaining N levels within the constraints of existing rainfed wheat-farming systems.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgement:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eWe hereby thank the staff at the University of Kurdistan for their time and cooperation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e: This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbdalla KH, Mutema M, Chivenge P, Everson C, Chaplot V (2022) Grassland rehabilitation significantly increases soil carbon stocks by reducing net soil CO2 emissions. Soil Use Manag 38:1250\u0026ndash;1265. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/sum.12790\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/sum.12790\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAhmed IU, Assefa D, Godbold GL (2022) Organic Matter Fractions in Ethiopian Highlands Land-Use Change Depletes Quantity and Quality of Soil. Forests 13:69. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/f13010069\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/f13010069\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAmara E, Adhikari H, Heiskanen J, Siljander M, Munyao M, Omondi P, Pellikka P (2020) Aboveground biomass distribution in a multiuse savannah landscape in Southeastern Kenya: impact of land use and fences. Land 9(10):381. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/land9100381\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/land9100381\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAn H, Li G (2015) Effects of grazing on carbon and nitrogen in plants and soils in a semiarid desert grassland, China. J Arid Land 7:341\u0026ndash;349. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s40333-014-0049-x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s40333-014-0049-x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBai W, Fang Y, Zhou M, Xie T, Li L, Zhang WH (2015) Heavily intensified grazing reduces root production in an Inner Mongolia temperate steppe. Agric Ecosyst Environ 200:143\u0026ndash;150. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2014.11.01\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.agee.2014.11.01\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBaranč\u0026iacute;kov\u0026aacute; G, Makovn\u0026iacute;kov\u0026aacute; J, Halas J (2016) Effect of land use change on soil organic carbon. Agricul ture 62(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1515/agri-2016-0002\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1515/agri-2016-0002\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBatjes HN (2018) Technologically achievable soil organic carbon sequestration in world croplands and grasslands. Land Degrad Dev 30. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.3209\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/ldr.3209\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarter MR, Gregorich EG (2007) Soil sample and methods of analysis. Can Soc Soil Sci. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1201/9781420005271\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1201/9781420005271\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChan KY, Heenan DP (2006) The effects of stubble burning and tillage on soil carbon sequestration and crop productivity in Southeastern Australia. Soil Use Manag 21:427\u0026ndash;431. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1079/SUM2005357\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1079/SUM2005357\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChen Y, Zhang S, Wang Y, Abzhanov T, Sarsekova D, Zhumabekova Zh (2022) The Spatial Distribution of Soil Nitrogen Storage and the Factors That Influence It in Central Asia\u0026rsquo;s Typical Arid and Semiarid Grasslands. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/d14060459\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/d14060459\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. Diversity14\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEldridge DJ, Delgado-Baquerizo M, Travers SK, Val J, Oliver I (2016) Do grazing intensity and herbivore type affect soil health? Insights from a semi-arid productivity gradient. Br Ecol Soc 3:976\u0026ndash;985. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12834\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/1365-2664.12834\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHein L (2006) The impacts of grazing and rainfall variability on the dynamics of a Sahelian rangeland. J Arid Environ 64:488\u0026ndash;504. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2005.06.014\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jaridenv.2005.06.014\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHe M, Zhou G, Yuan T, Kees JVG, Shao J, Zhou X (2019) Grazing intensity significantly changes the C : N : P stoichiometry in grassland ecosystems. Glob Ecol Biogeogr. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/geb.13028\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/geb.13028\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKlumpp K, Fontaine S, Attard E, Roux LZ, Gleixner G, Sossana FJ (2009) Grazing triggers soil carbon altering plant roots and their control on soil microbial communities. J Ecol 97:876\u0026ndash;885. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2745.2009.01549.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1365-2745.2009.01549.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKarami P, Bandak I, Gorgin Karaji M (2019) Comparing the effects of continuous grazing and long term exclosure on floristic composition and plant diversity in rangeland ecosystems of Saral. Iran Int J Environ Sci Technol 16:7769\u0026ndash;7776. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-018-02193-3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s13762-018-02193-3\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKarami P, Bandak I, Karaji MG, Dragovich D (2021) Effects of seasonal grazing and annual mowing on floristic composition and plant diversity in the Saral rangeland, Kurdistan, Iran. Global Ecol Conserv 27:e01515. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01515\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01515\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi M, Lilong W, Li J, Zh P, Wang L, Zhang X, Xu sh, Li et al (2022)BMC Plant Biology, \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/org/10.1186/s12870-021-03400-z\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s12870-021-03400-z\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLiu Xiang, Sheng H, Wang Zh, Zh M, Huang X, Li L (2020) Does Grazing Exclusion Improve Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Stocks in Alpine Grasslands on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau? A Meta-Analysis. Sustainability 12, 977; \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/su12030977\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/su12030977\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLu X, Kelsey KC, Yan Y, Sun J, Wang X, Cheng G, Neff J (2017) Effects of grazing on ecosystem structure and function of alpine grasslands in Qinghai\u0026ndash;Tibetan Plateau. Ecosphere 8(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1656\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/ecs2.1656\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcSherry M, Ritchie ME (2013) Effects of grazing on grassland soil carbon: a global review. Global Change Biology (2013), \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12144\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/gcb.12144\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMengru Li M, Wang L, Li J, Peng Zh, Wang L, Zhang X, Xu Sh (2022) Grazing exclusion had greater effects than nitrogen addition on soil and plant community in a desert steppe. Northwest of China BMC Plant Biology 22:60. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-021-03400-z\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s12870-021-03400-z\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMipam TD, Chen S, Liu J, Miehe G, Tian L (2021) Short-term yak-grazing alters plant-soil stoichiometric relations in an alpine meadow on the eastern Tibetan Plateau. Plant Soil 458(1):125\u0026ndash;137. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-019-04401-6\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11104-019-04401-6\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePin˜eiro G, Paruelo MJ, Esteban G, Robeert JB (2009) Grazing effects on belowground C and N stocks along a network of cattle exclosures in temperate and subtropical grasslands of South America. GLOBAL BIOGEOCHEMICAL CYCLES, VOL. 23, GB2003, \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1029/2007GB003168\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1029/2007GB003168\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRen H, Sch\u0026ouml;nbach P, Wan H, Gierus M, Taube F (2012) Effects of Grazing Intensity and Environmental Factors on Species Composition and Diversity in Typical Steppe of Inner Mongolia, China. PLoS ONE 7(12):e52180. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0052180\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1371/journal.pone.0052180\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRitchie ME (2020) Grazing management, forage production and soil carbon dynamics. Resources 9:49. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/resources9040049\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/resources9040049\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eScholtz R, Twidwell D (2022) The last continuous grasslands on Earth: Identification and conservation importance. Conserv Sci Pract. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.626\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/csp2.626\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. e626\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchlesinger HW, Bernhardt SE (2013) The Global Carbon Cycle. Biogeochemistry An Analysis of Global Change, 419\u0026ndash;444. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-385874-0.00011-X\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/B978-0-12-385874-0.00011-X\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSkinner RH, Gustine DL, Sanderson MA (2004) Growth, water relations, and nutritive value of pasture species mixtures under mositure stress. Crop Sci 44:1361\u0026ndash;1369. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2004.1361\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2135/cropsci2004.1361\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTecimen HB (2017) Land use effect on nitrogen and phosphorus fluxes into and from soil Eurasian. J For Sci 5:8\u0026ndash;12. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.31195/ejejfs.327361\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.31195/ejejfs.327361\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWachiye Sh, Pellikka P, Rinne J, Heiskanen J, Abwanda Sh, Merbold L (2022) Effects of livestock and wildlife grazing intensity on soil carbon dioxide flux in the savanna grassland of Kenya. Agric Ecosyst Environ 325:107713. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2021.107713\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.agee.2021.107713\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWade C, Sonnier G, Boughton EG (2021) Does Grazing Affect Soil Carbon in Subtropical Humid Seminatural Grasslands? Rangeland ecology and management. 80:10\u0026ndash;17. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.rama.2021.09.004\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.rama.2021.09.004\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWalden M (2019) Restoration of semi-natural grasslands: impacts on biodiversity, ecosystem services and stackholder perceptions. PhD dissertation, Stockholm University\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang J, Bai J, Zhao Q, Qiongqiong L, Zhijian X (2016) Five-year changes in soil organic carbon and total nitrogen in coastal wetlands affected by flow-sediment regulation in a Chinese delta. Sci Rep 6:21137. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/srep21137\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/srep21137\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang L, Xu H, Zhang H, Zhang Y (2022) Grazing and Mowing Affect the Carbon-to-Nitrogen Ratio of Plants by Changing the Soil Available Nitrogen Content and Soil Moisture on the Meadow Steppe, China. Plants 11, 286. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/plants11030286\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/plants11030286\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang L, Manuel -Baquerizo DM, Zhao X, Minna Zhang M, Song Y, Cai J, Chang Q, Li Zh, Chen Y, Liu J, Zhu H, Wang D, Han G, Liang C, Wang Ch, Xin Z (2020) Livestock overgrazing disrupts the positive associations between soil biodiversity and nitrogen availability. Funct Ecol 34:1713\u0026ndash;1720. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.13575\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/1365-2435.13575\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZainelabdeen Y, Mohamed R, Xin YX, Yan Y, Ahmed AI, Hou L, Zhang Yu (2020) \"The Impact of Grazing on the Grass Composition in Temperate Grassland\" Agronomy 10, no. 1230. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10091230\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/agronomy10091230\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. 9\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhao Y, Liu Zh, Wu J (2020) Grassland ecosystem services: a systematic review of research advances and future directions April 2020Landscape Ecology 35. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-020-00980-3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10980-020-00980-3\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhou G, Zhou X, He Y, Shao J, Hu Z, Liu R, Zhou H, Hoseinibai Sh (2017) Grazing intensity significantly affects belowground carbon and nitrogen cycling in grassland ecosystems: a meta-analysis. Glob Change Biol 23:1167\u0026ndash;1179. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13431\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/gcb.13431\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhu G, Shangguan Zh, Hu X, Deng L (2021) Effects of land use changes on soil organic carbon, nitrogen and their losses in a typical watershed of the Loess Plateau, China. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.108443\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.108443\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. Ecological Indicators 133,108443\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhu G, Yuan C, Gong H, Peng Y, Huang C, Wu C, Duan H (2021) Effects of short-term grazing prohibition on soil physical and chemical properties of meadows in Southwest China. PeerJ 9:e11598. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.11598\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.7717/peerj.11598\" 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":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"heavy grazing, exclosure, grazing intensity. soil organic carbon, soil nitrogen, rainfed wheat farming","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-2500894/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2500894/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBackground and aims:\u003c/strong\u003e Land use change favouring agriculture is considered a global threat as it interrupts ecosystem services of grasslands. However, exclosure from grazing has been widely known as effective in maintaining or even restoring grasslands. This study examined the impacts of long-term (45 years) exclosure, heavy grazing and rainfed wheat farming on soil organic carbon (SOC) and total nitrogen (TN) in the cold semi-arid grasslands of Saral Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Station, Kurdistan, Iran.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMethods:\u003c/strong\u003e In this investigation, 90 soil samples were taken from 0-20 cm depth within an area of 0.5 hectare for each land use (exclosure, heavy grazing, wheat farming). Samples were collected in the four non-consecutive years of 2009, 2013, 2017 and 2021. The Walkley-Black and Kjeldahl methods were used to measure SOC and TN respectively.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResults: \u003c/strong\u003eResults showed that value of SOC differed significantly among different land uses (P\u0026lt;0.01). In the studied years, SOC in the excluded site in 2021 had the highest level with 34,787 kg/ha, while the grazed site recorded the lowest SOC with 26,342 kg/ha in the same year. TN was also the highest at 0.130 percent in the excluded area in 2021, while TN was lower at 0.102 and 0.103 percent in the grazed and wheat-farming areas respectively in 2021.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConclusion:\u003c/strong\u003e This suggests that in grasslands with the same ecological conditions, managers can choose appropriate grazing intensity as an alternative to either heavy grazing or rainfed wheat farming, though more investigations on the efficiency of different grazing intensities are needed.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Changes in Soil organic carbon and total nitrogen following long-term grazing exclusion in Saral grasslands, Kurdistan (Iran)","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2023-01-30 15:48:46","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-2500894/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"691d41dd-46af-4fab-86fa-783b29d3f970","owner":[],"postedDate":"January 30th, 2023","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2023-02-03T07:40:08+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2023-01-30 15:48:46","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-2500894","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-2500894","identity":"rs-2500894","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"_2-kVJe1T_tPrBINL-cwx","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}