Are syntropic agroforestry systems microclimatically similar to tropical forests?

Are syntropic agroforestry systems microclimatically similar to tropical forests? | 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 Are syntropic agroforestry systems microclimatically similar to tropical forests? Sabrina Mendes Pereira, Maurício Rigon Hoffman, Luiz Felippe Salemi This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4169975/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 One possible way to make agricultural systems more sustainable is to mimic natural ecosystems. In this regard, syntropic agroforestry systems are agroecosystems that imitate, to some extent, the structure and natural dynamics of forests. This study aims to address the following question: Are SAS microclimatically similar to tropical forests? To investigate, climate variables such as canopy coverage, relative air humidity, air temperature, soil temperature, and illuminance were measured in both a tropical forest area and an adjacent Syntropic Agroforestry System. The results showed significant differences in relative humidity, air temperature, and illuminance compared to the forest. These differences may be attributed to the higher density of tree individuals and the number of strata, which are greater in the tropical forest compared to the syntropic agroforestry system. It is concluded that, despite resembling a tropical forest in appearance, syntropic agroforestry systems do not have microclimatic conditions similar to tropical forests. tropical agriculture sustainable agriculture regenerative agriculture sustainable development Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 INTRODUCTION The current challenge of agricultural systems is to produce food to meet society's demands, utilizing ecologically planned and designed agroecosystems, thereby reviving traditional practices while integrating interdisciplinary scientific knowledge to enhance production, landscape, and ecosystem services (Vallejo-Ramos et al. 2016 ; Neves e Imperador 2022; McGunnigle et al. 2023 ). Agricultural expansion and land use change fragment habitats, leading to biodiversity loss and increasing concerns about climate change (Luo et al. 2022 ; Roi et al. 2022; Ma et al. 2023 ). In this context, developing agricultural systems capable of combining food production with other ecosystem services becomes an increasingly pressing demand in scientific discussions. Studies demonstrate alternative food production methods that can reduce the impacts of agriculture on ecosystems and thus enhance productive capacity over time, strengthening ecosystem services (Chen et al. 2022 ; Puech e Starkb 2023). Based on an environmentally sustainable approach, with a focus on food security, human health, and social and economic well-being (Basche e De Long 2019; Waldron et al. 2020 ; Das et al. 2022 ), among such agricultural practices are syntropic agroforestry systems (SASs), which involve combining different plant species of agricultural interest. SASs are based on species succession, nutrient cycling, plant diversity, and management through the use of severe pruning (Micollis et al. 2016 ; Roseto et al. 2021 ; Pereira et al. 2021 ). Building upon this approach, studies show that the use of shade trees in agroforestry systems offers the possibility to mitigate extremes in terms of temperature, humidity, and other microclimatic variables (Lin 20007; Glazle et al. 2021 ; Wang et al. 2022 ). Such adaptations in agricultural areas are important for mitigating the annual changes that arise in the climate, thus ensuring food production. Given that syntropic agroforestry systems (SASs) mimic, to some extent, tropical forests, it is expected that these systems also provide substantial improvement in microclimatic conditions, perhaps resembling those of a tropical forest. However, there are no studies attesting to this in SASs. Therefore, this study aims to answer the following question: Are SASs similar, in terms of microclimatic conditions, to tropical forests? To achieve this, several microclimatic variables were evaluated in both a SAS and a tropical forest. Some authors suggest that traditional agroforestry systems resemble forests, especially regarding shade provision and microclimatic conditions (Lin 2007 ; Frenne et al. 2021 ; Glazle et al. 2021 ; Ulman et al. 2021 ; Merle et al. 2022 ; Wang et al. 2022 ). In this context, the present study tests the hypothesis that the microclimate of the Syntropic Agroforestry System is similar to that of a tropical forest. METHODS Study Area The study was conducted at the Elo Florestal Inkóra Farm, located in the Rural Nucleus of Taquaras, in Planaltina-DF, in the Preto River basin, at UTM coordinates 244,850.00 mE and 8,275,995.59 mS (Fig. 1 ). The soil is classified as Latosol. This type of soil is characterized as deep, highly weathered, with a moderate A horizon and a latosolic B horizon, rich in sesquioxides, highly porous, and well-drained (Santos et al. 2018 ). The average annual precipitation in the Federal District is 1,477.4 mm (INMET 2021) with two well-defined seasons (rainy period from October to April and dry season from May to September), according to Köppen-Geiger (Alvares et al. 2013 ). The Syntropic Agroforestry System (SAS) in the study area is characterized as a mature system (20 years old). It is a highly diverse system, with over 20 species present, including Senna obtusifolia, Leucaena leucocephala, Hymenaea courbaril, Ceiba pentandra, Swietenia macrophylla, Dipteryx alata, Inga marginata, Cajanus cajan, Tephrosia cândida, Morus nigra, Cosmos sulphureus, Hylocereus undatus, Citrus sinensis, Bixa orellana, Persea americana, Citrus limon, Ananas comosus, Psidium guajava, Annona squamosa, Carica papaya, Musa sp (Fig. 2 A). The selected forest for the study is a gallery forest characterized by high plant species diversity, bordering a small stream, forming a protective corridor along the watercourse. It is a forest type with trees ranging from 20 to 30 meters in height, with a canopy coverage of 75–90%. Common species found in this type of forest include Cheiloclinum cognatum, Copaifera langsdorffii, Cupania vernalis, Emmotum nitens, Matayba guianensis, Tapirira guianensis, Tapura amazonica, and Virola sebifera , along with the presence of epiphytic plants such as those from the Orchidaceae family (Ribeiro et al 2001 ) (Fig. 2 B). Additionally, this forest has about 2 to 3 layers of vegetation. Sampling Design Five variables were measured: illuminance, canopy coverage, relative air humidity, air temperature, and soil temperature. In this regard, seven replicates were established and randomly allocated using a randomizer. Within the seven replicates, three repetitions were conducted with a distance of 1 meter between them, where all variables were measured (Fig. 3 ). Sampling was conducted between the rows of the Syntropic Agroforestry System, while in the forest, sampling was conducted at a distance of at least 2 meters from the trees. This measure was taken to ensure that sampling in both the forest and the SAS were comparable. Variables The variables illuminance, air temperature, and relative humidity were measured using a multiparameter probe model THDL-400 from Instrutherm Instrumentos de Medição Ltda. Canopy coverage was measured using the Canopy Capture software, integrated with a smartphone. All these variables were measured at a height of 2 meters above the ground surface. Soil temperature was measured using a portable digital thermometer INSTRUTERM model TE-400, inserting the thermometer into the soil at a depth of 10 cm, at the same location where the other variables were collected. All variables were collected in the same replica within each of the repetitions. Data Analysis The normality of residuals and the homogeneity of variances were assessed, respectively, by the Shapiro-Wilk and Levene tests. The residuals exhibited a normal distribution for canopy coverage, air temperature, soil temperature, and relative humidity. The groups showed variance homogeneity for all variables except illuminance. Therefore, the One-Way ANOVA test was used to assess differences between SAS and forest for canopy coverage, air temperature, soil temperature, and relative humidity. For illuminance, given the absence of normality of residuals and homogeneity of variances, Welch's analysis of variance (Welch-ANOVA) was conducted. The Pearson test was used to assess the significance of the relationship between air temperature and relative humidity. All analyses were performed using the Paleontological Statistic software - PAST (Hammer et al. 2001 ) at a significance level of 0.05. RESULTS The mean (± standard deviation) canopy coverage was 78 (± 2.50)% in the sintropic agroforestry system, whereas in the forest it was 81 (± 2.85)%. There was no significant difference (p > 0.23). The variables illuminance, air temperature, and relative humidity showed significant differences. Their means (± standard deviation) are, respectively, for the SAS 188 (± 114) lux and for the forest 28 (± 5.13) lux (p < 0.01) (Fig. 5 ); for the SAS 25.6 (± 0.92) °C and for the forest 23.5 (± 0.92) °C (p < 0.05) (Fig. 6 ); and for the SAS 61.3 (± 2.86) % and for the forest 76.9 (± 1.85) % (p 0.05) (Fig. 8 ). Relative humidity was associated with air temperature in both the SAS and the forest. Both showed a negative correlation, without significance (SAS: R = -0.54; p > 0.05 and forest: R = -0.39; p > 0.05). DISCUSSION The results of the present study demonstrate that illuminance and air temperature were significantly higher in the SAS compared to the tropical forest. On the other hand, relative humidity was significantly higher in the tropical forest compared to the agroforestry system. Finally, the systems did not show significant differences regarding canopy coverage and soil temperature. An explanation for the significant differences found regarding illuminance, air temperature, and relative humidity may be associated with the density of tree individuals and the number of strata in each system under consideration. Regarding density, in the agroforestry system, density varies between 160 to 508 individuals/ha (Amador & Viana, 1998 ; Duarte, 2011 ; Cruz et al., 2019; Pezzopane et al., 2021 ), while in gallery forests, density varies between 643 to 1,500 individuals/ha (Silva Jr 2004 ; Araujo et al. 2009). Concerning stratification, tropical forests have 3 to 4 strata (Do Vale et al. 2009 ), which provides them with superior capacity, compared to agroforestry, to intercept more solar radiation, reducing air temperature and consequently increasing relative humidity (Ribeiro et al. 2021; Lóis et al. 2011 ). The Syntropic Agroforestry System, on the other hand, presents trees cultivated in different configurations, designed by the layout chosen by the producer for agricultural purposes, and it only has 2 tree and herbaceous strata (biomass-producing grasses in the alleyway). The absence of significant differences in soil temperature can be explained by the high density of herbaceous plants (e.g., Urochloa sp, Pennisetum purpureum , and other spontaneous plants) and the presence of a large amount of organic material accumulated on the soil from the severe pruning typical of syntropic agroforestry systems (Micollis et al. 2016 ). These elements contribute to soil protection against solar irradiation, thereby keeping the soil covered and at lower temperatures similar to those in the forest. Regarding soil temperature, despite the absence of significant differences, it is noted that there was a much higher temperature amplitude in the SAS compared to the tropical forest. Given that there was no significant difference in canopy coverage, this fact is attributed to stratification. Tropical forests, due to having more strata, have a higher leaf area index (LAI) than agroforests. For example, gallery forests in the region of the present study have LAI values ​​ranging from 3.1 to 4.2 (Silva et al. 2008 ; Paiva et al. 2015 ), while in agroforestry systems, it varies from 2.28 to 3.17 (Righi et al. 2008). Consequently, agroforests are subject to greater variation in light input than tropical forests and, consequently, greater variation in soil temperature. The canopy coverage, as well as the soil temperature, did not exhibit significant differences between the study areas, which could be attributed to the tree strata. The production lines within the syntropic agroforestry system comprise tall-strata trees that grow and develop, forming canopies that close. Thus, they provide a canopy coverage akin to that of the forest. Despite the air temperature, relative humidity, and illuminance of the SAS not being similar to those of the tropical forest, other studies have shown results demonstrating that agroforests have the ability to alter microclimates when compared to conventional monoculture systems (Niether et al. 2018 ). For example, it has been documented that shaded coffee agroforestry systems promote a reduction in both air and soil temperature compared to coffee monoculture (Carvalho et al. 2021 ). Similarly, the agroforestry system consisting of a consortium between black pepper and rubber trees, compared to conventional pepper production (in full sunlight exposure), decreased both solar radiation incidence and air temperature below the canopy. Consequently, there was an increase in relative humidity (Oliosi et al., 2021 ). CONCLUSIONS The differences observed in air temperature, relative humidity, illuminance, and greater soil temperature range between the Syntropic Agroforestry System and the tropical forest indicate that the hypothesis that these systems would have similar microclimatic conditions was rejected. In other words, despite resembling a tropical forest in appearance, syntropic agroforests do not possess microclimatic conditions similar to tropical forests. Declarations Acknowledgements This study was partly financed by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES), Brasil. Funding Not applicable for that specific section. Conflict of interest All authors have no conflict of interest. Ethical Approval All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Author Contribution Pereira and Salemi in the methodological and theoretical construction. Pereira, Hoffmann and Salemi contributed to collecting data in the field. Pereira and Salemi construction of the figures. References Alvares, C. A.; Stape, J. L.; Sentelhas, P. C.; Moraes Gonçalves, J L; SPAROVEK, G. (2013) Mapa de classificação climática de Köppen para o Brasil. Meteorologische Zeitschrift , v. 22, n. 6, p. 711–728. https://doi.org/10.1127/0941-2948/2013/0507 Amador, D. B. & Viana, V. M. (1998) Sistemas agroflorestais para recuperação de fragmentos florestais. Série Técnica IPEF, v. 12, n. 32, p. 105-110. Araujo, R. T.; Fagg, C. W.; Roitman, I. (2016) Diversidade e Estrutura da Mata de Galeria do Ribeirão Gama em 2009. Fronteiras: Journal of Social, Technological and Environmental Science, v.5, n.1, p. 128-144. http://dx.doi.org/10.21664/2238-8869.2016v5i1 Basche, A.; De Long, M. S. (2019) Comparing infiltration rates in soil managed with conventional and alternative farming methods: A meta-analysis. Plos One, v. 14, n. 9. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215702 Carvalho, A. F.; Fernandes-Filho, E. I.; Daher, M.; Gomes, L. C.; Cardoso, I. M.; Fernandes, R. B. A.; Schaefer, C. E. G. R. (2021) Microclimate and soil and water loss in shaded and unshaded agroforestry coffee systems. Agroforest System, v. 95, p. 119-134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-020-00567-6 Chen, C; Zou, X.; Singh, A. K.; Zhu, X.; Jiang, X.; Wu, J.; Liu, W. (2022) Effects of grazing exclusion on soil infiltration and preferential flow in savannah grazing systems. LDD - Land Degradation & Development, v. 33, n. 16, p. 3010-3022. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.4368 Das, B. S.; Wani, S. P.; Benbi, D. K.; Muddu, S.; Bhattacharyya, T.; Madal, B.; Santra, P.; Chakrabarty, D.; Bhattacharyya, R.; Basak, N.; Reddy, N. N. (2022) Soil health and its relationship with food security and human health to meet the sustainable development goals in India. Soil Security, v. 8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soisec.2022.100071 Do Vale, V. S.; Schiavini, I.; Lopes, S. F.; Dias Neto, O. C.; Oliveira, A. P.; Gusson, A. E. (2009) Composição florística e estrutura do componente arbóreo em um remanescente primário de floresta estacional semidecidual em Araguari, Minas Gerais, Brasil. Hohenea, v.36, n. 3, p. 417-429 Duarte, E. M. G. (2011) Árvores em sistemas agroflorestais: ciclagem de nutrientes e formação da matéria orgânica do solo. (Tese). Universidade Federal de Viçosa- UFV. 135 p., Viçosa-MG. Cruz, J. F.; Souza, E. B.; Souza, M. V. V.; Azevedo, J. M. A.; Souza, R. E. (2019) Caracterização de um quintal agroflorestal no município de Cruzeiro do Sul, AC. Revista Instituto Florestal, v. 31, n. 2, p. 91-107. http://dx.doi.org/10.24278/2178-5031.20193120 Frenne, P; De; Lenoir, J.; Luto, M.; Scheffers, B. R.; Zellweger, F.; Aalto, J.; Ashcroft, M. B.; Christiansen, D. M.; Decocp, G.; De Pauw, K.; Govaert, S.; Greiser, C.; Gril, E.; Hampe, A.; Jucker, T.; Klinges, D. H.; Koelemeijer, I. A.; Lembrechts, J. J.; Marrec, R.; Meeussen, C.; Ogée. J.; Tyystjarvi, V.; Vangansbeke, P.; Hylander, K. (2021) Forest microclimates and climate change: Importance, drivers and future research agenda. Global Change Biology, v. 27, p. 2279-2297. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15569 Glazle, S.; Stuerz, S.; Geize, M.; Pereira, M.; Almeida, R. G.; Bungenstab, D. J.; Macedo, M. C. M.; Aach, F. (2021) Seasonal Dynamics of Soil Moisture in an Integrated-Crop-Livestock-Forestry System in Central-West Brazil. Agriculture, v. 11, n. 3, p. 245-266. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11030245 Hammer, Ø.; Harper, D. A. T.; Ryan, P. D. (2001) PAST: Paleontological Statistics, v. 4, n. 9, p. Lin, B. B. (2007) Agroforestry management as an adaptive strategy against potential microclimate extremes in coffee agriculture. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, v.144, 85–94. Lóis, E.; Labaki, L. C.; Santos, R. F. (2011) Efeitos de diferentes estruturas de vegetação ciliar sobre as variáveis do microclima e sensação de conforto térmico. Revista Instituto Florestal, v. 23, n. 1, p. 117-136. Luo, R.; Yang, S.; Wang, Z.; Zhang, T.; Gao, P. (2022) Impact and trade of analysis of land use change on spatial pattern of ecosystem services in Chishui River Basin. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, v 29, 20234-20248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17188-w Ma, S.; Wang, L.; Jiang J.; Zao, Y. (2023) Direct and indirect effects of agricultural expansion and landscape fragmentation processes on natural habitats. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, v. 351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2023.108555 Mayer, S.; Wiesmeier, M.; Sakamoto, E.; Hubner, R.; Cardinael, R.; Kuhnel, A.; Kogel-Knabner, I. (2022) Soil organic carbon sequestration in temperate agroforestry systems – A meta-analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment, v. 323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2021.107689 McGunnigle, N; Bardsley, D.; Nuremberg, I.; Cardamom, E.; Pandit, B. H. (2023) The Succession of Farmer’s Perceptions of Transitioning Landscapes - A case study of agroforestry in the Middle Hills of Nepal. Human Ecology: an interdisciplinary journal, v. 51 (4), 699-717. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-023-00423-y Merle, I.; Villarreyna-Acuña, R.; Ribeyre, F.; Roupsard, O.; Cilas, C.; Avelino, J. (2022) Microclimate estimation under different coffee-based agroforestry systems using full-sun weather data and shade tree characteristics. European Journal of Agronomy, v. 132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2021.126396 Micollis, A.; Penereiro, F. M.; Marques, H. R.; Vieira, D. L. M.; Arco-Verde, M. F.; Hoffman, M. R.; Rehder, T.; Pereira, A. V. B. (2016) Restauração ecológica com sistemas agroflorestais: como conciliar conservação com produção - opções para o Cerrado e Caatinga. Instituto Sociedade, População e Natureza – ISPN / Centro Internacional de Pesquisa Agroflorestal - ICRAF. Brasília-DF, 266 p. Neves, J. A.; Imperador, A. M. (2022) A transição Agroecológica: desafios para agricultura sustentável. Revista GEAMA, Scientific Journal of Environmental Sciences and Biotechnology, v. 8, n. 3, p. 05-14. Niether, W.; Armengot, L.; Andres, C.; Schneider.; Gerold, G. (2018) Shade trees and tree pruning alter throughfall and microclimate in cocoa (Theobroma cacao L.) production systems. Annals of Forest Science, v 75 (38). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-018-0723-9 Oliosi, G.; Oliveira, M. G.; Partelli, F. L. (2021) Microclimate and development of black pepper intercropped with rubber tree. Agroforest Syst, v 95, 1635–1645. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-021-00674-y Paiva, A. O.; Silva, L. C. R.; Haridasan, M. (2015) Productivity-efficiency tradeoffs in tropical gallery forest-savanna transitions: linking plant and soil processes through litter input and composition. Plant Ecology, v. 216, p. 775-787. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-015-0466-8 Pereira, S. M.; Jacobson, T. K. B.; Gomide, C. S.; De Paula, A. M. (2021) Características químicas, físicas e microbiológicas de sistemas agroflorestais em diferentes estágios sucessionais em Brasília. Revista Verde, v. 16, n. 3, p. 280-290. https://doi.org/10.18378/rvads.v16i3.8638 Pezzopane, J. R. M.; Bosi, C.; Bernardi, A. C. C.; Muller, M. D.; Oliveira, P. P. A. (2021) Managing eucalyptus trees in agroforestry systems: Productivity parameters and PAR transmittance. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, v 312. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2021.107350 Puech, T.; Starkb, F. (2023) Diversification of an integrated crop-livestock system: Agroecological and food production assessment at farm scale. Agriculture, Ecosystem & Environment, v. 344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2022.108300 Ribeiro, J. F.; Lazarini da Fonseca, C. E.; Sousa-Silva, J. C. (2001) Cerrado: caracterização e recuperação de matas de galeria. Embrapa Cerrados, 899p. Righi, C. A. & Bernardes, M. S. (2008) The potential for increasing rubber production by matching tapping intensity to leaf area index. Agroforestry Systems, v. 72, p. 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-007-9092-3 Roseto, A.; Borek, R.; Canali, S. (2021) Agroforestry and organic agriculture. Agroforestry System, v. 95. p. 805-821. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-020-00559-6 Roy, P. S,; Ramachandran, R. M.; Paul, O.; Thakur, P. K.; Ravan, S.; Behera, M. D.; Sarangi, C.; Kanawade, V. P. (2022) Anthropogenic Land Use and Land Cover Changes—A Review on Its Environmental Consequences and Climate Change. Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing, v. 50 (8), 1615–1640. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-022-01569-w Santos, H. G. dos; Jacomine, P. K. T.; Anjos, L. H. C. dos; Oliveira, V. A. de; Lumbreras, J. F.; Coelho, M. R.; Almeida, J. A. de; Araujo Filho, J. C. de; Oliveira, J. B. de; Cunha, T. J. F. (2018) Sistema Brasileiro de Classificação de Solos. EMBRAPA Solos, 5ª edição, revista e ampliada, Brasília-DF, 356 p. Silva Jr., M. C. (2004) Fitossociologia e estrutura diamétrica da mata da galeria do Taquara, na Reserva Ecológica do IBGE, DF. Sociedade de Investigações Florestais, v 28 (3), 419-428. Silva, L. C. R.; Sternberg, L.; Haridasan, M.; Hoffman, W. A.; Miralles-Wilhelm, F.; Franco, A. C. (2008) Expansion of gallery forests into central Brazilian savannas. Global Change Biology, v. 14, n. 4, p. 2108-2118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01637 Ulman, Y.; Singh, M.; Kumar, A.; Sharma, M. Conservation of Plant Diversity in Agroforestry Systems in a Biodiversity Hotspot Region of Northeast India. Agricultural Research, v. 10 (4), 569-581, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40003-020-00525-9 Vallejo-Ramos, M.; Moreno-Calles, A. I.; Casas, A. (2016) TEK and biodiversity management in agroforestry systems of different socioecological contexts of the Tehuacán Valley. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, v. 12 (31). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-016-0102-2 Waldron, A.; Garrity, D.; Malhi, Y.; Girardin, C.; Miller, D. C.; Seddon, N. (2020) Agroforestry Can Enhance Food Security While Meeting Other Sustainable Development Goals. Tropical Conservation Science, v. 10, n. 1, p. 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940082917720667 Wang, X.; Shen, L.; Liu, T.; Wei, W.; ZHANG, S.; Li, L.; Zhang, W. (2022) Microclimate, yield, and income of a jujube-cotton agroforestry system in Xinjiang, China. Industrial Crops & Products, v. 182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2022.114941 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. 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-4169975","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":284506205,"identity":"1265943c-1d09-4fbd-bb1b-e787848c060e","order_by":0,"name":"Sabrina Mendes Pereira","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Brasília","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Sabrina","middleName":"Mendes","lastName":"Pereira","suffix":""},{"id":284506206,"identity":"60a9c2cb-f6d4-47f1-9032-4ff4b74137bc","order_by":1,"name":"Maurício Rigon Hoffman","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Brasília","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Maurício","middleName":"Rigon","lastName":"Hoffman","suffix":""},{"id":284506207,"identity":"9f7e85df-b293-4582-b6ee-bedd39430d2a","order_by":2,"name":"Luiz Felippe Salemi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Brasília","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Luiz","middleName":"Felippe","lastName":"Salemi","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-03-26 12:53:30","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4169975/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4169975/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":53876834,"identity":"815259b7-ad0d-4b1f-812f-932aeb88dfbe","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-04-01 16:42:33","extension":"jpg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":272388,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eLocation map of the study area.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig1.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4169975/v1/7d9abad3b8dec397a37bb2da.jpg"},{"id":53876835,"identity":"4cf90ab1-aa47-460e-b79b-da81b1ba982c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-04-01 16:42:33","extension":"jpg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":80188,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe two ecosystems studied: a) Syntropic agroforestry system and b) Tropical forest.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig2.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4169975/v1/ae079caabb6dc1873a3e1435.jpg"},{"id":53876842,"identity":"96a4b30f-73e0-45e7-a1df-b5b7c0afb836","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-04-01 16:42:34","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":5522256,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSampling design used in the present study. Seven replicates (green rectangles) were randomly located in the field within each of the study areas. Within the replicates, three repetitions (blue circles) were conducted. Within each repetition, the following variables were measured: LU - illuminance; RH - relative air humidity; AT - air temperature; ST - soil temperature; and CC - canopy coverage.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4169975/v1/3ea66a58ee415d6553a01d44.png"},{"id":53876838,"identity":"f4448785-efcc-4de8-bb13-b0b59e58379a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-04-01 16:42:33","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":16308,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eBox plots of canopy coverage in the Syntropic Agroforestry System (light green) and forest (dark green). The horizontal lines inside the box represent the median. The x represents the mean. The horizontal limits of the boxes represent the first and third quartiles. The ends of the vertical lines represent the maximum (upper) and minimum (lower) values. Different letters indicate that there were no significant differences.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4169975/v1/ce53a9125698505eb8d12195.png"},{"id":53876839,"identity":"22dd2f3b-d824-40b8-b8c3-6da73275722f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-04-01 16:42:33","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":15691,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eBox plots of illuminance in the Syntropic Agroforestry System (light green) and forest (dark green). The horizontal lines inside the box represent the median. The x represents the mean. The horizontal limits of the boxes represent the first and third quartiles. The ends of the vertical lines represent the maximum (upper) and minimum (lower) values. Different letters indicate that there were no significant differences.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4169975/v1/8c9c7e18a947daa4d1e08496.png"},{"id":53876836,"identity":"9b21a002-dac5-4a32-851d-44bf1698a15e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-04-01 16:42:33","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":15395,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eBox plots of air temperature in the Syntropic Agroforestry System (light green) and forest (dark green). The horizontal lines inside the box represent the median. The x represents the mean. The horizontal limits of the boxes represent the first and third quartiles. The ends of the vertical lines represent the maximum (upper) and minimum (lower) values. Different letters indicate that there were no significant differences.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4169975/v1/82d93d09b8c7fed66a7f3726.png"},{"id":53876837,"identity":"7135cbb6-d4c9-4947-abd9-03d2a33c7b22","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-04-01 16:42:33","extension":"png","order_by":7,"title":"Figure 7","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":15027,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eBox plots of relative air humidity in the Syntropic Agroforestry System (light green) and forest (dark green). The horizontal lines inside the box represent the median. The x represents the mean. The horizontal limits of the boxes represent the first and third quartiles. The ends of the vertical lines represent the maximum (upper) and minimum (lower) values. Different letters indicate that there were no significant differences.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig7.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4169975/v1/5e0e86a66f0ff3f2b84c717d.png"},{"id":53876840,"identity":"766dec71-0744-456c-8a3c-2b0bf52061ab","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-04-01 16:42:34","extension":"png","order_by":8,"title":"Figure 8","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":16757,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eBox plots of soil temperature in the Syntropic Agroforestry System (light green) and forest (dark green). The horizontal lines inside the box represent the median. The x represents the mean. The horizontal limits of the boxes represent the first and third quartiles. The ends of the vertical lines represent the maximum (upper) and minimum (lower) values. Different letters indicate that there were no significant differences.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig8.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4169975/v1/5de964a258d9d716c3a297b9.png"},{"id":53876843,"identity":"c1969bea-2f71-40fd-ae27-3d4bc4f86fcd","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-04-01 16:42:34","extension":"png","order_by":9,"title":"Figure 9","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":22905,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eCorrelation between relative humidity and air temperature in the Syntropic Agroforestry System and in the forest.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig9.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4169975/v1/7a68f25f3d98465a656e12cb.png"},{"id":58814573,"identity":"f6ef5260-b50f-4616-a546-ba356fdf52f2","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-06-21 12:57:02","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":9770001,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4169975/v1/0cb562ce-4b2f-420d-917c-f0f8f1b190c0.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Are syntropic agroforestry systems microclimatically similar to tropical forests?","fulltext":[{"header":"INTRODUCTION","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe current challenge of agricultural systems is to produce food to meet society's demands, utilizing ecologically planned and designed agroecosystems, thereby reviving traditional practices while integrating interdisciplinary scientific knowledge to enhance production, landscape, and ecosystem services (Vallejo-Ramos et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Neves e Imperador 2022; McGunnigle et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Agricultural expansion and land use change fragment habitats, leading to biodiversity loss and increasing concerns about climate change (Luo et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Roi et al. 2022; Ma et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn this context, developing agricultural systems capable of combining food production with other ecosystem services becomes an increasingly pressing demand in scientific discussions. Studies demonstrate alternative food production methods that can reduce the impacts of agriculture on ecosystems and thus enhance productive capacity over time, strengthening ecosystem services (Chen et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Puech e Starkb 2023). Based on an environmentally sustainable approach, with a focus on food security, human health, and social and economic well-being (Basche e De Long 2019; Waldron et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Das et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), among such agricultural practices are syntropic agroforestry systems (SASs), which involve combining different plant species of agricultural interest. SASs are based on species succession, nutrient cycling, plant diversity, and management through the use of severe pruning (Micollis et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Roseto et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Pereira et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBuilding upon this approach, studies show that the use of shade trees in agroforestry systems offers the possibility to mitigate extremes in terms of temperature, humidity, and other microclimatic variables (Lin 20007; Glazle et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Wang et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Such adaptations in agricultural areas are important for mitigating the annual changes that arise in the climate, thus ensuring food production. Given that syntropic agroforestry systems (SASs) mimic, to some extent, tropical forests, it is expected that these systems also provide substantial improvement in microclimatic conditions, perhaps resembling those of a tropical forest. However, there are no studies attesting to this in SASs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTherefore, this study aims to answer the following question: Are SASs similar, in terms of microclimatic conditions, to tropical forests? To achieve this, several microclimatic variables were evaluated in both a SAS and a tropical forest. Some authors suggest that traditional agroforestry systems resemble forests, especially regarding shade provision and microclimatic conditions (Lin \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e; Frenne et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Glazle et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Ulman et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Merle et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Wang et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). In this context, the present study tests the hypothesis that the microclimate of the Syntropic Agroforestry System is similar to that of a tropical forest.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"METHODS","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStudy Area\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study was conducted at the Elo Florestal Ink\u0026oacute;ra Farm, located in the Rural Nucleus of Taquaras, in Planaltina-DF, in the Preto River basin, at UTM coordinates 244,850.00 mE and 8,275,995.59 mS (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe soil is classified as Latosol. This type of soil is characterized as deep, highly weathered, with a moderate A horizon and a latosolic B horizon, rich in sesquioxides, highly porous, and well-drained (Santos et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe average annual precipitation in the Federal District is 1,477.4 mm (INMET 2021) with two well-defined seasons (rainy period from October to April and dry season from May to September), according to K\u0026ouml;ppen-Geiger (Alvares et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Syntropic Agroforestry System (SAS) in the study area is characterized as a mature system (20 years old). It is a highly diverse system, with over 20 species present, including \u003cem\u003eSenna obtusifolia, Leucaena leucocephala, Hymenaea courbaril, Ceiba pentandra, Swietenia macrophylla, Dipteryx alata, Inga marginata, Cajanus cajan, Tephrosia c\u0026acirc;ndida, Morus nigra, Cosmos sulphureus, Hylocereus undatus, Citrus sinensis, Bixa orellana, Persea americana, Citrus limon, Ananas comosus, Psidium guajava, Annona squamosa, Carica papaya, Musa sp\u003c/em\u003e (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003eA).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe selected forest for the study is a gallery forest characterized by high plant species diversity, bordering a small stream, forming a protective corridor along the watercourse. It is a forest type with trees ranging from 20 to 30 meters in height, with a canopy coverage of 75\u0026ndash;90%. Common species found in this type of forest include \u003cem\u003eCheiloclinum cognatum, Copaifera langsdorffii, Cupania vernalis, Emmotum nitens, Matayba guianensis, Tapirira guianensis, Tapura amazonica, and Virola sebifera\u003c/em\u003e, along with the presence of epiphytic plants such as those from the Orchidaceae family (Ribeiro et al \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003eB). Additionally, this forest has about 2 to 3 layers of vegetation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eSampling Design\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFive variables were measured: illuminance, canopy coverage, relative air humidity, air temperature, and soil temperature. In this regard, seven replicates were established and randomly allocated using a randomizer. Within the seven replicates, three repetitions were conducted with a distance of 1 meter between them, where all variables were measured (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). Sampling was conducted between the rows of the Syntropic Agroforestry System, while in the forest, sampling was conducted at a distance of at least 2 meters from the trees. This measure was taken to ensure that sampling in both the forest and the SAS were comparable.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eVariables\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe variables illuminance, air temperature, and relative humidity were measured using a multiparameter probe model THDL-400 from Instrutherm Instrumentos de Medi\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o Ltda. Canopy coverage was measured using the Canopy Capture software, integrated with a smartphone. All these variables were measured at a height of 2 meters above the ground surface. Soil temperature was measured using a portable digital thermometer INSTRUTERM model TE-400, inserting the thermometer into the soil at a depth of 10 cm, at the same location where the other variables were collected. All variables were collected in the same replica within each of the repetitions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eData Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe normality of residuals and the homogeneity of variances were assessed, respectively, by the Shapiro-Wilk and Levene tests. The residuals exhibited a normal distribution for canopy coverage, air temperature, soil temperature, and relative humidity. The groups showed variance homogeneity for all variables except illuminance. Therefore, the One-Way ANOVA test was used to assess differences between SAS and forest for canopy coverage, air temperature, soil temperature, and relative humidity. For illuminance, given the absence of normality of residuals and homogeneity of variances, Welch's analysis of variance (Welch-ANOVA) was conducted. The Pearson test was used to assess the significance of the relationship between air temperature and relative humidity. All analyses were performed using the Paleontological Statistic software - PAST (Hammer et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e) at a significance level of 0.05.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"RESULTS","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe mean (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;standard deviation) canopy coverage was 78 (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.50)% in the sintropic agroforestry system, whereas in the forest it was 81 (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.85)%. There was no significant difference (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.23).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe variables illuminance, air temperature, and relative humidity showed significant differences. Their means (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;standard deviation) are, respectively, for the SAS 188 (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;114) lux and for the forest 28 (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.13) lux (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) (Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e); for the SAS 25.6 (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.92) \u0026deg;C and for the forest 23.5 (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.92) \u0026deg;C (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) (Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e); and for the SAS 61.3 (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.86) % and for the forest 76.9 (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.85) % (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) (Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe soil temperature was 23.2 (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.41) \u0026deg;C in the SAS and 22.3 (\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.20) \u0026deg;C in the forest. There was no significant difference (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) (Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRelative humidity was associated with air temperature in both the SAS and the forest. Both showed a negative correlation, without significance (SAS: R = -0.54; p\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05 and forest: R = -0.39; p\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"DISCUSSION","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe results of the present study demonstrate that illuminance and air temperature were significantly higher in the SAS compared to the tropical forest. On the other hand, relative humidity was significantly higher in the tropical forest compared to the agroforestry system. Finally, the systems did not show significant differences regarding canopy coverage and soil temperature.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAn explanation for the significant differences found regarding illuminance, air temperature, and relative humidity may be associated with the density of tree individuals and the number of strata in each system under consideration. Regarding density, in the agroforestry system, density varies between 160 to 508 individuals/ha (Amador \u0026amp; Viana, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e; Duarte, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Cruz et al., 2019; Pezzopane et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), while in gallery forests, density varies between 643 to 1,500 individuals/ha (Silva Jr \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e; Araujo et al. 2009). Concerning stratification, tropical forests have 3 to 4 strata (Do Vale et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e), which provides them with superior capacity, compared to agroforestry, to intercept more solar radiation, reducing air temperature and consequently increasing relative humidity (Ribeiro et al. 2021; L\u0026oacute;is et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). The Syntropic Agroforestry System, on the other hand, presents trees cultivated in different configurations, designed by the layout chosen by the producer for agricultural purposes, and it only has 2 tree and herbaceous strata (biomass-producing grasses in the alleyway).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe absence of significant differences in soil temperature can be explained by the high density of herbaceous plants (e.g., \u003cem\u003eUrochloa sp, Pennisetum purpureum\u003c/em\u003e, and other spontaneous plants) and the presence of a large amount of organic material accumulated on the soil from the severe pruning typical of syntropic agroforestry systems (Micollis et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). These elements contribute to soil protection against solar irradiation, thereby keeping the soil covered and at lower temperatures similar to those in the forest.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding soil temperature, despite the absence of significant differences, it is noted that there was a much higher temperature amplitude in the SAS compared to the tropical forest. Given that there was no significant difference in canopy coverage, this fact is attributed to stratification. Tropical forests, due to having more strata, have a higher leaf area index (LAI) than agroforests. For example, gallery forests in the region of the present study have LAI values ​​ranging from 3.1 to 4.2 (Silva et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Paiva et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e), while in agroforestry systems, it varies from 2.28 to 3.17 (Righi et al. 2008). Consequently, agroforests are subject to greater variation in light input than tropical forests and, consequently, greater variation in soil temperature.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe canopy coverage, as well as the soil temperature, did not exhibit significant differences between the study areas, which could be attributed to the tree strata. The production lines within the syntropic agroforestry system comprise tall-strata trees that grow and develop, forming canopies that close. Thus, they provide a canopy coverage akin to that of the forest.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite the air temperature, relative humidity, and illuminance of the SAS not being similar to those of the tropical forest, other studies have shown results demonstrating that agroforests have the ability to alter microclimates when compared to conventional monoculture systems (Niether et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). For example, it has been documented that shaded coffee agroforestry systems promote a reduction in both air and soil temperature compared to coffee monoculture (Carvalho et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSimilarly, the agroforestry system consisting of a consortium between black pepper and rubber trees, compared to conventional pepper production (in full sunlight exposure), decreased both solar radiation incidence and air temperature below the canopy. Consequently, there was an increase in relative humidity (Oliosi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"CONCLUSIONS","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe differences observed in air temperature, relative humidity, illuminance, and greater soil temperature range between the Syntropic Agroforestry System and the tropical forest indicate that the hypothesis that these systems would have similar microclimatic conditions was rejected. In other words, despite resembling a tropical forest in appearance, syntropic agroforests do not possess microclimatic conditions similar to tropical forests.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgements \u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis \u0026nbsp; study \u0026nbsp;was \u0026nbsp;partly \u0026nbsp; financed \u0026nbsp;by \u0026nbsp;the Coordena\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o de Aperfei\u0026ccedil;oamento de Pessoal de N\u0026iacute;vel Superior (CAPES), \u0026nbsp;Brasil.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable for that specific section.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConflict of interest\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll authors have no conflict of interest.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthical Approval\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll authors read and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePereira and Salemi in the methodological and theoretical construction. Pereira, Hoffmann and Salemi contributed to collecting data in the field. Pereira and Salemi construction of the figures.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAlvares, C. A.; Stape, J. L.; Sentelhas, P. C.; Moraes Gon\u0026ccedil;alves, J L; SPAROVEK, G. (2013) Mapa de classifica\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o clim\u0026aacute;tica de K\u0026ouml;ppen para o Brasil. Meteorologische Zeitschrift , v. 22, n. 6, p. 711\u0026ndash;728. https://doi.org/10.1127/0941-2948/2013/0507\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAmador, D. B. \u0026amp; Viana, V. M. (1998) Sistemas agroflorestais para recupera\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o de fragmentos florestais. S\u0026eacute;rie T\u0026eacute;cnica IPEF, v. 12, n. 32, p. 105-110.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAraujo, R. T.; Fagg, C. W.; Roitman, I. (2016) Diversidade e Estrutura da Mata de Galeria do Ribeir\u0026atilde;o Gama em 2009. Fronteiras: Journal of Social, Technological and Environmental Science, v.5, n.1, p. 128-144. http://dx.doi.org/10.21664/2238-8869.2016v5i1\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBasche, A.; De Long, M. S. (2019) Comparing infiltration rates in soil managed with conventional and alternative farming methods: A meta-analysis. Plos One, v. 14, n. 9. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215702\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCarvalho, A. F.; Fernandes-Filho, E. I.; Daher, M.; Gomes, L. C.; Cardoso, I. M.; Fernandes, R. B. A.; Schaefer, C. E. G. R. (2021) Microclimate and soil and water loss in shaded and unshaded agroforestry coffee systems. Agroforest System, v. 95, p. 119-134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-020-00567-6\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eChen, C; Zou, X.; Singh, A. K.; Zhu, X.; Jiang, X.; Wu, J.; Liu, W. (2022) Effects of grazing exclusion on soil infiltration and preferential flow in savannah grazing systems. LDD - Land Degradation \u0026amp; Development, v. 33, n. 16, p. 3010-3022. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.4368\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDas, B. S.; Wani, S. P.; Benbi, D. K.; Muddu, S.; Bhattacharyya, T.; Madal, B.; Santra, P.; Chakrabarty, D.; Bhattacharyya, R.; Basak, N.; Reddy, N. N. (2022) Soil health and its relationship with food security and human health to meet the sustainable development goals in India. Soil Security, v. 8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soisec.2022.100071\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDo Vale, V. S.; Schiavini, I.; Lopes, S. F.; Dias Neto, O. C.; Oliveira, A. P.; Gusson, A. E. (2009) Composi\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o flor\u0026iacute;stica e estrutura do componente arb\u0026oacute;reo em um remanescente prim\u0026aacute;rio de floresta estacional semidecidual em Araguari, Minas Gerais, Brasil. Hohenea, v.36, n. 3, p. 417-429\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDuarte, E. M. G. (2011) \u0026Aacute;rvores em sistemas agroflorestais: ciclagem de nutrientes e forma\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o da mat\u0026eacute;ria org\u0026acirc;nica do solo. (Tese). Universidade Federal de Vi\u0026ccedil;osa- UFV. 135 p., Vi\u0026ccedil;osa-MG.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCruz, J. F.; Souza, E. B.; Souza, M. V. V.; Azevedo, J. M. A.; Souza, R. E. (2019) Caracteriza\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o de um quintal agroflorestal no munic\u0026iacute;pio de Cruzeiro do Sul, AC. Revista Instituto Florestal, v. 31, n. 2, p. 91-107. http://dx.doi.org/10.24278/2178-5031.20193120\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFrenne, P; De; Lenoir, J.; Luto, M.; Scheffers, B. R.; Zellweger, F.; Aalto, J.; Ashcroft, M. B.; Christiansen, D. M.; Decocp, G.; De Pauw, K.; Govaert, S.; Greiser, C.; Gril, E.; Hampe, A.; Jucker, T.; Klinges, D. H.; Koelemeijer, I. A.; Lembrechts, J. J.; Marrec, R.; Meeussen, C.; Og\u0026eacute;e. J.; Tyystjarvi, V.; Vangansbeke, P.; Hylander, K. (2021) Forest microclimates and climate change: Importance, drivers and future research agenda. Global Change Biology, v. 27, p. 2279-2297. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15569\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGlazle, S.; Stuerz, S.; Geize, M.; Pereira, M.; Almeida, R. G.; Bungenstab, D. J.; Macedo, M. C. M.; Aach, F. (2021) Seasonal Dynamics of Soil Moisture in an Integrated-Crop-Livestock-Forestry System in Central-West Brazil. Agriculture, v. 11, n. 3, p. 245-266. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11030245\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHammer, \u0026Oslash;.; Harper, D. A. T.; Ryan, P. D. (2001) PAST: Paleontological Statistics, v. 4, n. 9, p.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLin, B. B. (2007) Agroforestry management as an adaptive strategy against potential microclimate extremes in coffee agriculture. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, v.144, 85\u0026ndash;94.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eL\u0026oacute;is, E.; Labaki, L. C.; Santos, R. F. (2011) Efeitos de diferentes estruturas de vegeta\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o ciliar sobre as vari\u0026aacute;veis do microclima e sensa\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o de conforto t\u0026eacute;rmico. Revista Instituto Florestal, v. 23, n. 1, p. 117-136.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLuo, R.; Yang, S.; Wang, Z.; Zhang, T.; Gao, P. (2022) Impact and trade of analysis of land use change on spatial pattern of ecosystem services in Chishui River Basin. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, v 29, 20234-20248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17188-w\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMa, S.; Wang, L.; Jiang J.; Zao, Y. (2023) Direct and indirect effects of agricultural expansion and landscape fragmentation processes on natural habitats. Agriculture, Ecosystems \u0026amp; Environment, v. 351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2023.108555\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMayer, S.; Wiesmeier, M.; Sakamoto, E.; Hubner, R.; Cardinael, R.; Kuhnel, A.; Kogel-Knabner, I. (2022) Soil organic carbon sequestration in temperate agroforestry systems \u0026ndash; A meta-analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment, v. 323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2021.107689\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMcGunnigle, N; Bardsley, D.; Nuremberg, I.; Cardamom, E.; Pandit, B. H. (2023) The Succession of Farmer\u0026rsquo;s Perceptions of Transitioning Landscapes - A case study of agroforestry in the Middle Hills of Nepal. Human Ecology: an interdisciplinary journal, v. 51 (4), 699-717. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-023-00423-y\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMerle, I.; Villarreyna-Acu\u0026ntilde;a, R.; Ribeyre, F.; Roupsard, O.; Cilas, C.; Avelino, J. (2022) Microclimate estimation under different coffee-based agroforestry systems using full-sun weather data and shade tree characteristics. European Journal of Agronomy, v. 132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2021.126396\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMicollis, A.; Penereiro, F. M.; Marques, H. R.; Vieira, D. L. M.; Arco-Verde, M. F.; Hoffman, M. R.; Rehder, T.; Pereira, A. V. B. (2016) Restaura\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o ecol\u0026oacute;gica com sistemas agroflorestais: como conciliar conserva\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o com produ\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o - op\u0026ccedil;\u0026otilde;es para o Cerrado e Caatinga. Instituto Sociedade, Popula\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o e Natureza \u0026ndash; ISPN / Centro Internacional de Pesquisa Agroflorestal - ICRAF. Bras\u0026iacute;lia-DF, 266 p.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eNeves, J. A.; Imperador, A. M. (2022) A transi\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o Agroecol\u0026oacute;gica: desafios para agricultura sustent\u0026aacute;vel. Revista GEAMA, Scientific Journal of Environmental Sciences and Biotechnology, v. 8, n. 3, p. 05-14.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eNiether, W.; Armengot, L.; Andres, C.; Schneider.; Gerold, G. (2018) Shade trees and tree pruning alter throughfall and microclimate in cocoa (Theobroma cacao L.) production systems. Annals of Forest Science, v 75 (38). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-018-0723-9\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eOliosi, G.; Oliveira, M. G.; Partelli, F. L. (2021) Microclimate and development of black pepper intercropped with rubber tree. Agroforest Syst, v 95, 1635\u0026ndash;1645. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-021-00674-y\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePaiva, A. O.; Silva, L. C. R.; Haridasan, M. (2015) Productivity-efficiency tradeoffs in tropical gallery forest-savanna transitions: linking plant and soil processes through litter input and composition. Plant Ecology, v. 216, p. 775-787. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-015-0466-8\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePereira, S. M.; Jacobson, T. K. B.; Gomide, C. S.; De Paula, A. M. (2021) Caracter\u0026iacute;sticas qu\u0026iacute;micas, f\u0026iacute;sicas e microbiol\u0026oacute;gicas de sistemas agroflorestais em diferentes est\u0026aacute;gios sucessionais em Bras\u0026iacute;lia. Revista Verde, v. 16, n. 3, p. 280-290. https://doi.org/10.18378/rvads.v16i3.8638\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePezzopane, J. R. M.; Bosi, C.; Bernardi, A. C. C.; Muller, M. D.; Oliveira, P. P. A. (2021) Managing eucalyptus trees in agroforestry systems: Productivity parameters and PAR transmittance. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, v 312. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2021.107350\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePuech, T.; Starkb, F. (2023) Diversification of an integrated crop-livestock system: Agroecological and food production assessment at farm scale. Agriculture, Ecosystem \u0026amp; Environment, v. 344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2022.108300\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRibeiro, J. F.; Lazarini da Fonseca, C. E.; Sousa-Silva, J. C. (2001) Cerrado: caracteriza\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o e recupera\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o de matas de galeria. Embrapa Cerrados, 899p.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRighi, C. A. \u0026amp; Bernardes, M. S. (2008) The potential for increasing rubber production by matching tapping intensity to leaf area index. Agroforestry Systems, v. 72, p. 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-007-9092-3\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRoseto, A.; Borek, R.; Canali, S. (2021) Agroforestry and organic agriculture. Agroforestry System, v. 95. p. 805-821. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-020-00559-6\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRoy, P. S,; Ramachandran, R. M.; Paul, O.; Thakur, P. K.; Ravan, S.; Behera, M. D.; Sarangi, C.; Kanawade, V. P. (2022) Anthropogenic Land Use and Land Cover Changes\u0026mdash;A Review on Its Environmental Consequences and Climate Change. Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing, v. 50 (8), 1615\u0026ndash;1640. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-022-01569-w\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSantos, H. G. dos; Jacomine, P. K. T.; Anjos, L. H. C. dos; Oliveira, V. A. de; Lumbreras, J. F.; Coelho, M. R.; Almeida, J. A. de; Araujo Filho, J. C. de; Oliveira, J. B. de; Cunha, T. J. F. (2018) Sistema Brasileiro de Classifica\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o de Solos. EMBRAPA Solos, 5\u0026ordf; edi\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o, revista e ampliada, Bras\u0026iacute;lia-DF, 356 p.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSilva Jr., M. C. (2004) Fitossociologia e estrutura diam\u0026eacute;trica da mata da galeria do Taquara, na Reserva Ecol\u0026oacute;gica do IBGE, DF. Sociedade de Investiga\u0026ccedil;\u0026otilde;es Florestais, v 28 (3), 419-428.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSilva, L. C. R.; Sternberg, L.; Haridasan, M.; Hoffman, W. A.; Miralles-Wilhelm, F.; Franco, A. C. (2008) Expansion of gallery forests into central Brazilian savannas. Global Change Biology, v. 14, n. 4, p. 2108-2118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01637\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eUlman, Y.; Singh, M.; Kumar, A.; Sharma, M. Conservation of Plant Diversity in Agroforestry Systems in a Biodiversity Hotspot Region of Northeast India. Agricultural Research, v. 10 (4), 569-581, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40003-020-00525-9\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eVallejo-Ramos, M.; Moreno-Calles, A. I.; Casas, A. (2016) TEK and biodiversity management in agroforestry systems of different socioecological contexts of the Tehuac\u0026aacute;n Valley. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, v. 12 (31). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-016-0102-2\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWaldron, A.; Garrity, D.; Malhi, Y.; Girardin, C.; Miller, D. C.; Seddon, N. (2020) Agroforestry Can Enhance Food Security While Meeting Other Sustainable Development Goals. Tropical Conservation Science, v. 10, n. 1, p. 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940082917720667\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWang, X.; Shen, L.; Liu, T.; Wei, W.; ZHANG, S.; Li, L.; Zhang, W. (2022) Microclimate, yield, and income of a jujube-cotton agroforestry system in Xinjiang, China. Industrial Crops \u0026amp; Products, v. 182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2022.114941\u003c/li\u003e\n\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":"tropical agriculture, sustainable agriculture, regenerative agriculture, sustainable development","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4169975/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4169975/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eOne possible way to make agricultural systems more sustainable is to mimic natural ecosystems. In this regard, syntropic agroforestry systems are agroecosystems that imitate, to some extent, the structure and natural dynamics of forests. This study aims to address the following question: Are SAS microclimatically similar to tropical forests? To investigate, climate variables such as canopy coverage, relative air humidity, air temperature, soil temperature, and illuminance were measured in both a tropical forest area and an adjacent Syntropic Agroforestry System. The results showed significant differences in relative humidity, air temperature, and illuminance compared to the forest. These differences may be attributed to the higher density of tree individuals and the number of strata, which are greater in the tropical forest compared to the syntropic agroforestry system. It is concluded that, despite resembling a tropical forest in appearance, syntropic agroforestry systems do not have microclimatic conditions similar to tropical forests.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Are syntropic agroforestry systems microclimatically similar to tropical forests?","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-04-01 16:42:28","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4169975/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":"c8289ea4-292f-43a0-b491-35e99bf99609","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 1st, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-06-21T12:48:51+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-04-01 16:42:28","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4169975","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4169975","identity":"rs-4169975","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}