Geoderma Regional 36 (2024) e00759

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Geoderma Regional
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/geodrs

Soil organic carbon stocks and fertility in smallholder indigenous

agroforestry systems of the North-Eastern mountains, Tanzania
Oforo Didas Kimaro a, b, c, *, Ellen Desie b, Bruno Verbist d, Didas Nahum Kimaro c,
Karen Vancampenhout b, Karl-Heinz Feger a
a
Institute of Soil Science and Site Ecology, Faculty of Environmental Sciences, Technische Universität Dresden, Pienner Straße 19, 01737 Tharandt, Germany
b
Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, KU Leuven, Kleinhoefstraat 4, 2440 Geel, Belgium
c
Department of Agriculture, Earth & Environmental Sciences, Mwenge Catholic University, Moshi, Tanzania
d
Division of Forest, Nature and Landscape, KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Soil organic carbon and soil fertility are critical components of soil health and play a significant role in sustaining
Soil health agricultural productivity. Indigenous agroforestry practices have been identified as an interesting avenue to
Carbon stocks sequester carbon and enhance soil fertility in tropical smallholder farms. However, that potential remains poorly
Smallholder indigenous agroforestry systems
quantified. To better understand the dynamics of soil organic carbon stocks and fertility, this study evaluated and
Northeastern mountains
Tanzania
compared 4 different smallholder indigenous agroforestry systems (i.e., Kihamba, Ginger, Miraba, and Mixed
spices) in the northeastern volcanic and block mountains of Tanzania. Specifically, we compared old and young
agroforestry systems in terms of soil organic carbon stocks and soil fertility (proxied by effective cation exchange
capacity (eCEC)). In each agroforestry system, a network of old and young tree farm plots were selected for soil
sampling at different depths and physico-chemical parameters were analyzed (soil organic carbon, texture, bulk
density, pH-H2O, and eCEC). Our findings showed that there was no significant difference between young and
old agroforestry systems in terms of soil organic carbon stocks, except in the Kihamba system on the slopes of
Kilimanjaro. The highest soil carbon sequestering potential was found in the old Kihamba (located on Nitisols)
compared to other systems on Acrisols. Young agroforestry in Ginger and Miraba appeared to have a higher
capacity to sequester soil carbon than Mixed spices. Regarding eCEC levels, there was a significant difference
between old and young agroforestry systems in both the Kihamba and Miraba system. At the 0–10 cm depth, the
highest eCEC levels were found in young agroforestry for Kihamba, Miraba, and Mixed spices. Our results
implied that specific management and restoration strategies should focus on optimizing soil fertility and carbon
sequestration potential of agroforestry systems in the South Pare and Usambara Mountains characterized by low-
fertility Acrisols.

1. Introduction
Smallholder indigenous agroforestry systems (AGF) play a crucial
role in sustainable land management, biodiversity conservation and
carbon sequestration, making them vital components of agricultural
landscapes in the tropics (Oelbermann et al., 2005; Kuyah et al., 2019).
These systems have been identified as a promising avenue for seques­
tering carbon and enhancing soil fertility (Ma et al., 2020; Reetsch et al.,
2020; Ichinose et al., 2023). Furthermore, they contribute to safe­
guarding biodiversity and soil health (Oelbermann et al., 2006; Lorenz
and Lal, 2018; Chang and Cheng, 2019) and thus to reaching the global
sustainable development goals (SDGs) (International Institute for Sus­
tainable Development (IISD), 2018; Sharma et al., 2022; Telwala, 2023).
Soil organic carbon and fertility are critical components of soil health
and play a significant role in sustaining smallholder agricultural pro­
ductivity (Björsell, 2014). For example, a study on Chagga home gardens
in the Kilimanjaro highlands in Tanzania by Ichinose et al. (2020b)
demonstrated that approximately 80% of the population, of which
smallholder farmers are the majority, indirectly benefited from soil
carbon and soil fertility enhanced by AGF.

* Corresponding author at: Institute of Soil Science and Site Ecology, Faculty of Environmental Sciences, Technische Universität Dresden, Pienner Straße 19, 01737
Tharandt, Germany.
E-mail address: didas.oforo_kimaro@mailbox.tu-dresden.de (O.D. Kimaro).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geodrs.2024.e00759
Received 20 September 2023; Received in revised form 21 December 2023; Accepted 9 January 2024
Available online 10 January 2024
2352-0094/© 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
O.D. Kimaro et al.
Nonetheless, considerable differences in the potential to sequester
carbon and maintain soil health have been reported between systems.
For instance, A study conducted in the mid-hill region of Nepal
demonstrated that adopted agroforestry practices indicated higher soil
quality in terms of soil fertility with organic matter of 2.2% and effective
cation exchange capacity (eCEC) of 3.9 cmol(+)kg− 1 compared to con­
ventional systems with organic matter of 1.55% and eCEC of 3.1 cmol
(+)kg− 1 (Schwab et al., 2015). A study conducted in the mountainous
landscape of Sulawesi, Indonesia, reported that nitrogen-fixing shade
trees in cocoa-based AGF significantly improved soil carbon concen­
trations by 6% as well as soil structure and aggregation by 24% relative
to open areas (Gusli et al., 2020). The amount of soil organic carbon
stocks in three indigenous agroforestry systems (Enset [Ensete ven­
tricosum, Musaceae], Enset-Coffee and Fruit-Coffee) practiced in the
south-eastern rift valley escarpment in Ethiopia is reported to differ with
regions, agroforestry systems and soil depths with SOC stocks (0–60 cm)
ranging from 109 to 253 Mg ha− 1 (52–91% of total C stocks) (Negash,
2013; Negash and Starr, 2015). Other studies have reported the influ­
ence of agroforestry systems and soil management on SOC stocks at 30
cm soil depth (Ravindranath and Ostwald, 2008). The study demon­
strated that the effect of soil management on carbon stocks is negligible
for depths >30 cm. Furthermore, a growing population and short-term
needs in terms of food security, have induced extensive alterations in
some AGF with little focus on soil health, leading to AGF degradation,
particularly declining soil organic carbon stocks and fertility (Fahad
et al., 2022; Kimaro et al., 2024). Adaptive management recommenda­
tions for smallholder farmers to maximize food production while
maintaining or enhancing soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks and soil
fertility are still lagging behind (Ichinose et al., 2023) and would benefit
from a better understanding and quantification of the drivers of differ­
ences in the potential of AGF to sequester carbon and maintain soil
health.
The first important determinant of AGF soil fertility is the number of
vegetative layers. A compilation of tropical agroecosystem studies
demonstrated that agroforestry systems that contain two or more
vegetative layers on the soil surface contained more soil fertility than
systems with just a single vegetative layer (Labrière et al., 2015). In a
study of soil nutrients under indigenous homegardens in the savannas of
Roraima, Brazil, Pinho et al. (2011) found a progressive increase in
levels of P, K, Ca, Mg, organic matter, and pH, as well as a decrease in Al
with an increasing number of vegetative layers. Advanced species se­
lection in the overstory layer has been reported to influence nutrient
cycling. For instance, Albizia schimperiana Oliv. was reported to be very
useful in fixing nitrogen (Wagner et al., 2019; Bukomeko et al., 2019;
Kimaro et al., 2024). It is further reported that with respect to native
shade nitrogen-fixing tree species (Albizia schimperiana Oliv., Croton
macrostachyus and Markamia obtusifolia), a leaf biomass of 400 kg ha− 1
yr− 1 of dead matter has the potential of returning 80–120 kg ha− 1. yr− 1
N, 8–12 kg. ha− 1 yr− 1 P and 40–120 kg ha− 1 yr1 Ca to the soil by means
of litterfall whereby this flow of nutrients enriches the soil (Mkonda and
He, 2017).
Soil carbon stocks and improved soil fertility in agroforestry
(homegardens) are also correlated with the age (time in a number of
years) of AGF management practices (Singh and Sahoo, 2021). Under­
standing the influence of time (age of AGF) can help farmers who are just
starting with agroforestry to have realistic expectations on how long it
will take before increases in soil fertility and carbon storage will be
noticeable. For example, in South Bahia, Brazil, young cacao and rubber
agroforestry systems (4 years old) can accumulate soil organic carbon
efficiently, in the top 20 cm of the soil compared to old agroforestry
systems (Monroe et al., 2016). Additionally, in a study conducted in the
highland regions of Western Kenya, the age of agroforestry management
practices has been positively correlated with farm productivity and
household wealth attributed to improved soil fertility (Thorlakson and
Neufeldt, 2012). Furthermore, a study by Chatterjee et al. (2018) using
mixed-effect models and a meta-analytical approach, found that
2
Geoderma Regional 36 (2024) e00759
agroforestry systems aged between 10 and 20 years had higher soil
organic carbon (SOC) stocks than newly established, as well as <10-
year-old systems across soil depth classes. According to Nair et al.
(2009), the age of long-established agroforestry systems has limited
potential for sequestering additional carbon in multi-strata systems
compared to agroforestry systems in the early stages of their establish­
ment. Previous land use also plays a role, e.g., studies conducted in a
mountainous landscape of Sulawesi, Indonesia, revealed that converting
tropical forest to cocoa–based agroforestry led to a substantial decrease
of the total carbon stock, from in total around 320 t ha− 1 of secondary
forest to about 75 to 150 Mg ha− 1 of cocoa–based agroforestry (Gusli
et al., 2020). However, it was observed that SOC stocks could be restored
to approximately half of that found in the forest through the aging of the
cocoa agroforestry system or practicing long–term multi-strata agro­
forestry farming. In Zambia, 2 to 12-year-old trees in Leucaena spp.
woodlots stored up to 140 t ha− 1 of SOC (Kaonga, 2005; Kaonga and
Bayliss-Smith, 2009) Hence, despite the potential of AGF in SOC stocks
and soil fertility, there is a need for a more rigorous understanding of
how AGF management with regard to in multilayer composition and age
affects SOC stocks and soil fertility. This is of importance in promoting
strategies for guiding the restoration of agroforestry systems in degraded
smallholder landscapes.
In this study, we focus on four AGF of the northeastern mountains of
Tanzania. These systems include Chagga homegardens (‘Kihamba’; Mt.
Kilimanjaro region), Ginger agroforests (South Pare Mts), Mixed spices
agroforests (Clove, Cinnamon, Cardamom, and Black pepper; East
Usambara Mts) and Miraba hedged fields (West Usambara Mts). Previ­
ous work has shown that these systems differ in multilayer and tree
species composition and that they are presently undergoing degradation
exacerbated by the introduction of non-native tree species (Kimaro
et al., 2024). We aimed to evaluate SOC stocks and soil fertility of these
AGF in relation to their properties and time (age of AGF), to inform
policies for promoting restoration efforts of degraded AGF in tropical
mountainous environments. Specifically, the following research ques­
tions were addressed: (i) What are the relative quantities of SOC stocks
and soil fertility in the different agroforestry systems in the study area?
(ii) How do SOC stocks and soil fertility vary within and across AGF? (iii)
Is there any effect of the age of agroforestry (old and young) on SOC
stocks and soil fertility within and across the AGF? To answer the above
questions, we focused on four historical AGF (old and young) with
multilayer cropping patterns and tree species composition to explore
their contribution to soil health in terms of SOC stocks and soil fertility.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Description of the study area and study design
The northeastern mountains in Tanzania include Mount Kilimanjaro,
South Pare and Usambara Mountains, occupying an agricultural area of
about 8000 km2 (Burgess et al., 2007; Heckmann, 2011). This region is
an important agricultural area featuring favorable climatic conditions
and soil fertility (Lundgren, 1971; Zech, 2014). The agricultural setting
of these mountains is dominated by contrasting AGF (Akinnifesi et al.,
2008; Hall et al., 2011; Msita, 2013; Mmbando, 2015). Four moun­
tainous AGF were identified for this study (see Fig. 1). The AGF were
identified from Mt. Kilimanjaro (Chagga homegardens (Kihamba),
South Pare Mts. (Ginger), West Usambara Mts. (Miraba), and East
Usambara Mts. (Mixed spices (Clove, Cinnamon, Cardamom, and Black
pepper)), respectively at an elevation ranging from 800 to 2000 m asl
(Fig. 2). These AGF were selected because they are typical and represent
historical socio-cultural knowledge and management practices (Gon­
çalves et al., 2021; Kimaro et al., 2024) as well as cropping multilayer
patterns and tree species composition (including native and non-native).
The Kihamba AGF is located on the southern footridges of Mt. Kili­
manjaro, with Nitisols developed on volcanic bedrock, whereas the
other AGF are located on the slopes of the Pare and Usambara Mts., with
O.D. Kimaro et al. Geoderma Regional 36 (2024) e00759

Fig. 1. Smallholder indigenous agroforestry systems (AGF) in northeastern mountains of Tanzania: Kihamba (Chagga homegardens); a multi-layered agroforestry
system in Mt. Kilimanjaro; A = Trees (first layer), B = Banana (second layer), C = Coffee (third layer); D = include annual crops, sources of cattle feed from
agroforestry fallow gaps & farm edges (fourth layer). Ginger agroforestry in South Pare Mts.: A = Trees (first layer); B = Banana (second layer); C=Sugarcane (third
layer); D = Ginger (fourth layer). Miraba agroforestry in the West Usambara Mts.: A = Trees (first layer); B = Banana and Cassava patches near settlements (second
layer) C = Strips of Guatemala or Elephant grass, Maize and beans inside the square (third layer). Mixed spices agroforestry in the East Usambara Mts.: A&B = Clove
and Black pepper (woody climber) (first layer); C = Cinnamon (second layer); D = Cardamom (third layer). Data Source: (Kimaro et al., 2024).

Fig. 2. Location of the identified smallholder indigenous agroforestry systems (AGF) in northeastern mountains of Tanzania where soil samples from minipits and
representative soil profile pits were collected under old and young agroforestry farmplots: Mt. Kilimanjaro (Kihamba) (A); South Pare Mts. (Ginger) (B); West
Usambara Mts. (Miraba) (C); East Usambara Mts. (Mixed spices) (D). Data Source: Application Programming Interface Topo (Contours, Hillshade, and MapTiler
planet); Projection (WGS 84/UTM Zone 37 s).

3
O.D. Kimaro et al.
Acrisols developed on old Precambrian basement rocks, mainly different
types of quartz-rich gneiss.
It’s worth noting that for close to a millennium, all the mountainous
environments were dominated and covered by lush tropical montane
forests. However, with the advent of human habitation, the natural
forests were cleared for agricultural purposes and settlements (Johans­
son, 2001; Haruyama and Toko, 2005). In the case of Mt. Kilimanjaro,
some of the plots were converted into AGF, while others were left as
fallow gaps reserved for alternative uses such as inheritance for future
generations, pasture and grazing (Soini, 2005; Hemp, 2006). On the
other hand, the fallow plots that were not converted to AGF instead were
established as young AGF farm plots (Soini, 2005; Msuya et al., 2008). In
this study, each of the identified AGF, a network of six smallholder farm
plots (0.2–3 ha in size) was selected consisting of three old (AGF–O)
and three young (AGF–Y) (Fig. 2). The age of AGF-O i.e., >50 years was
estimated based on smallholder farmers knowledge and with support
from literature (Iversen, 1991; Soini, 2005; Vihemäki, 2005; Hall et al.,
2011; Kirsten, 2013; Msita, 2013; Hombegowda et al., 2016; von Hel­
lermann, 2016; Hugenschmidt and Kay, 2023; Ichinose et al., 2023;
O’Connor et al., 2023). Age of AGF-Y < 50 years was estimated from the
interview with current owners of the farm plot.
2.2. Data collection
A field campaign was carried out from July to September 2021. For
each farm plot coordinates, altitude, slope, and information on tree
layers and composition were recorded (cf. Kimaro et al., 2024). In
addition, soils were examined using hand augering for an assessment of
soil morphological characteristics. Sites for soil augering were chosen
according to the landscape characteristics (slope, altitude, tree layers
and species compositions). Auger cores were described to a depth of 1.2
m or less, depending on the depth of the bedrock. Subsequently, by
comparison of soil auger core descriptions, a representative site on mid-
slope position for each of the four AGF was identified for digging a soil
profile pit. Soil profile pits were dug to a depth of 2 m or a limiting layer
and described according to FAO Guidelines for Soil Description (FAO,
2006) and the WRB Soil Classification System (FAO, 2014). Each soil
profile pit and center of a farm plot location was geo-referenced using
Global Positioning System (GPS). In total four soil profile pits namely
AGF/KM (Kihamba), AGF/SPM (Ginger), AGF/WUM (Miraba) and
AGF/EUM (Mixed spices) were described and for each pit, soil samples
for physico-chemical analyses were taken from the different soil hori­
zons distinguished. Moreover, undisturbed (core) samples were taken
for the determination of bulk density from each horizon in each soil pit.
Supplementary data SP1, SP2, SP3, and SP4 present the soil profile de­
scriptions and their corresponding laboratory data.
In the selected farm plots, soil samples were taken in triplicate at
depths of 0–10 cm, 10–20 cm, 20–30 cm, and 30–40 cm for laboratory
soil analyses (cf. Kirsten et al., 2019). All soil sampling was done in
minipits located in a mid-slope position. The average slope angle
measured at all sampling sites was 36%. The collected soil samples were
brought to the National Soil Service (NSS) soil laboratory at Mlingano
for physico-chemical analyses. In the laboratory, the soils were dried at
40 ◦ C > 48 h (Kirsten et al., 2019) and sieved to <2 mm (fine earth) for
analysis of pH, organic carbon (% OC), total N, P, effective Cation Ex­
change Capacity (eCEC) and base cations following laboratory standard
procedures outlined by Van Reeuwijk (2002). Organic C was measured
using the dichromate oxidation method and pH in water by standard pH-
Meter with glass-calomel combination electrode using deionized water
at the soil-to-water ratio of 1:2.5 (w/v) (Van Reeuwijk, 2002). The eCEC
in combination with calculated base saturation (BS) was used as a proxy
for soil fertility. In addition, undisturbed soil samples were taken from
the same depths using soil cores with metal rings (100 cm3; ∅ 53 mm)
for the determination of soil bulk density (cf. Kirsten et al., 2016, 2019).
4
Geoderma Regional 36 (2024) e00759
2.3. Data analysis and statistical procedures
SOC stocks within the soil were calculated using the percentage of
organic carbon, the depth interval and bulk density values from each
farm plot. SOC stock (kg m− 2) calculation was done as shown in Eq. (1).
( ) ( )
SOCstock kg m− 2 = Soil depth (m) x BD g cm− 3 x%OC* 1000 (1)
Where:
SOC stock = Total soil organic carbon stock (kg m− 2).
Depth = Sample depth increment (m).
BD = Bulk density of a depth increment (g cm− 3).
%OC = Organic carbon content in (%).
The R Software (version 4.3.1; R Core Team, 2021) was used for
calculations of means, standard deviation, standard error and coefficient
of variation (CV) of SOC stock quantities and soil fertility status of the
sample data at the AGF site. To check if the data fulfilled the re­
quirements of variance of homogeneity and normal distribution we
conducted the Shapiro-Wilk test followed by Levene’s test within each
treatment group and soil depth. All data fulfilled the requirements of
normal distribution, which calls for further statistical tests i.e., ANOVA.
We employed the ANOVA to test the differences between AGF, old vs
young agroforestry and soil depth intervals. Our response variables
analyzed by ANOVA were SOC stocks and eCEC. To check for equality of
variance we applied the F-test among the treatment groups. The vari­
ability of SOC stocks and eCEC within AGF, based on the treatments
(AGF-O and AGF–Y) were compared using the stacked layer bar graph
and boxplot.
3. Results
3.1. General soil morphological and physico-chemical characteristics of
the four smallholder indigenous agroforestry soils
The soil profiles had comparable morphological characteristics to
150 cm depth among the four AGF. The B-horizons are dominantly red in
color throughout the profile (Supplementary Data SP1, SP2, SP3 and
SP4). Redder hue values were observed more in profiles AGF/SPM,
AGF/WUM and AGF/EUM, which are apparently more developed in
terms of pedogenesis. All studied profiles had friable moist consistency
throughout their profile depths. Soil structure varied widely among
profiles with top soils being dominantly weak and subsoils moderate to
strong subangular blocky. The soils demonstrate the Ah-Bt profile
(Table 1, Supplementary Data SP1, SP2, SP3, and SP4). Soil morpho­
logical information and laboratory analytical data were used to define
diagnostic horizons and other features for classifying soils. At the first
level of WRB, IUSS Working Group (2022), the soils of Kihamba in Mt.
Kilimanjaro belong to the reference soil group Eutri-Andic Nitisols,
while Ginger in SPM, Miraba in WUM and Mixed spices in EUM, belong
to Cutanic Vertic Acrisols (Profondic, Hyperdystric, Humic) and Haplic
Acrisols (Clayic, Humic).
Particle size distribution (texture) showed that all profiles are clayey
throughout their profile depths. Clay contents increased regularly with
depth in all profiles, in which clay eluviation-illuviation was evident as
indicated by the presence of clay cutans in varying amounts (Table 1,
Supplementary Data SP1, SP2, SP3 and SP4). Generally, the sand con­
tent in the topsoil was found to be higher than that of the subsoil. This is
due to the migration of fine-particle fractions from the topsoil to the
subsoil. Topsoil bulk density (BD) ranged from 0.7 to 1.5 g cm− 3 while
subsoil BD ranged from 1.1 to 1.4 g cm− 3 for all soil profiles (Table 1).
Profile AGF/KM had low BD in the topsoils of 0.7 g cm− 3.
The lowest pH-H2O values were observed in soil profiles of the AGF
on old crystalline Precambrian basement rocks (AGF/SPM, AGF/WUM
& AGF/EUM), with pH values ranging from 4.4 to 4.9 in subsoils. The
soil profile of volcanic origin had a topsoil pH of 4.7 and subsoil pH
values ranging from 5.3 to 5.4. Topsoil OC contents ranged from low
O.D. Kimaro et al. Geoderma Regional 36 (2024) e00759

Overview of landscape sites and selected soil morphological and physico-chemical characteristics: bulk density (BD), effective cation exchange capacity (eCEC), base saturation (BS) related to the eCEC, organic carbon (1.25%) to medium (1.77%) for soils developed on old crystalline rocks.
(OC), total nitrogen (Ntotal). All soils of Kihamba AGF in Kilimanjaro belong to the reference soil group Nitisols while profiles in the South Pare Mts., West Usambara Mts. and East Usambara MTt. are Acrisols. All data
The OC contents in the soil profile of volcanic origin were very low both

2
in topsoils and subsoils ranging from 0.23 to 0.51%. All the studied soil

stock

kg m−
SOC

0.5
1.1
1.3
3.1
3.9
1.7
1.7
2.2
1.9
3.9
9.3
1.0
2.2
3.3
1.1
3.0
0.7
0.8
profiles have varying amounts of eCEC ranging from 0.33 to 1.20 cmol
(+) kg− 1 soil for topsoils and 0.09 to 1.74 cmol(+) kg− 1 soil for subsoils.
Ntotal

0.27
0.06
0.03
0.03
0.09
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.04
0.09
0.07
0.06
0.17
0.09
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
The medium values were observed in the AGF/WUM on crystalline
bedrock in West Usambara Mts. The lowest values range from 0.33 cmol
0.23 (+) kg− 1 soil for topsoils and 0.07–0.13 cmol(+) kg− 1 for subsoils in the
0.25
0.27
0.51
1.77
0.81
0.51
0.46
0.43
1.25
1.17
0.86
1.45
1.11
0.45
0.40
0.13
0.16
(%)
OC

AGF/EUM East Usambara Mts. also on the old crystalline bedrocks.

3.2. The effect of smallholder indigenous agroforestry system

(%)
BS

61
62
72
62
65
53
53
61
56

64
53
57
56
57
52
6
4
5
3.2.1. Soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks
In our study, we evaluated the SOC stocks of AGF type in different
age groups (old and young) and soil depths (Table 2). Generally, the SOC
stocks varied from an average of 0.87 ± 0.64 kg m− 2 to 12.20 ± 13.80
(cmol (+)

kg m− 2 in our study sites (Table 2). In Kihamba, the highest SOC stocks
kg− 1)
eCEC

0.49
0.63
0.75
0.67
0.92
0.72
0.92
1.32
0.92
1.20
1.74
1.30
0.33
0.09
0.11
0.13
0.11
0.07
were found in AGF-O at 30–40 cm depth, with an average of 9.67 ± 3.58
kg m− 2. Conversely, the lowest value was observed in AGF-Y at 0–10 cm
depth, with an average of 2.20 ± 1.04 kg m− 2. In Ginger, the highest
SOC stocks were observed in AGF-Y at 20–30 cm depth, with an average
(H2O)

of 7.97 ± 2.40 kg m− 2, while the lowest was found in AGF-O at 0–10 cm

4.7
5.4
5.4
5.3
5.5
4.9
4.7
4.5
4.5
5.0
4.8
4.4
5.1
4.9
4.9
4.7
4.9
4.9
pH

depth, with an average of 2.00 ± 1.37 kg m− 2. Similar observations were

made in Miraba, with higher SOC stocks in AGF-Y at 20–30 cm depth
(12.20 ± 13.80 kg m− 2) and lower SOC stocks in AGF-O at 0–10 cm
Clay

depth (0.87 ± 0.64 kg m− 2). The situation in Mixed spices was compa­
39
48
66
60
46
54
62
64
58
56
64
71
36
62
65
67
56
42

rable to Kihamba, with higher stocks in AGF-O at 30–40 cm depth (7.57

Silt

± 1.94 kg m− 2) and lower stocks in AGF-Y at 0–10 cm depth (2.57 ±

41
17
30
28
16
13
14
12
14

16
14
11

10
10
2
4
2

8
(Mass %)

1.50 kg m− 2).
Sand

We further examined the SOC stocks across AGF type in different age
20
35

12
38
33
24
24
28
42
32
27
48
24
24
25
34
48
4

groups (old and young) and soil depths (Fig. 3). Our findings indicate
that there was a significantly higher amount of SOC stocks for AGF-O in
Kihamba and Mixed spices at 20–30 and 30–40 cm soil depths compared
to AGF-Y (Fig. 3). Similarly, AGF-Y within Ginger and Miraba exhibit
cm− 3)

higher significant SOC stocks at 20–30 and 30–40 cm soil depths (Fig. 3).
0.7
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
1.2
1.1
1.3
1.4
1.3
BD
belong to samples taken from a soil pit located at the mid-slope position of each selected landscape site.

(g

3.2.2. Soil fertility

Our research further focused on studying the eCEC levels in AGF
Horizon

types across different age groups (old and young) and soil depths. We
Bts1
Bts2
Bt1
Bt2
Bt3

Bt1
Bt2
Bt3

Bt1
Bt2
Bt3
Bt4
AB
Ap

Ap

Ap

Ap

BC

used eCEC as an indicator of the soil fertility status. In general, eCEC

levels varied greatly across study sites. On average, the eCEC ranged
from 1.2 ± 0.2 cmol(+)kg− 1 to 39.0 ± 27.5 cmol(+)kg− 1 (Table 3). In
110–160

120–160
160–200
70–110

95–130

90–190

62–120
30–70

15–30
30–55
55–95

24–90

15–40
40–62
depth

Kihamba, the highest eCEC levels were found in AGF-Y at 0–10 cm

0–30

0–15

0–24

0–15
(cm)
Soil

depth, with an average of 16.6 ± 6.7 cmol(+)kg− 1, while the lowest

average was observed in AGF-O at 30–40 cm depth, with an average of
324,751 E; 9,638,013

390,279 E; 9,521,208

415,881 E; 9,486,604

461,530 E; 9,440,180

6.6 ± 2.8 cmol(+)kg− 1. In Ginger, the highest eCEC levels were

observed in AGF-O at 10–20 cm depth, with an average of 39.0 ± 27.5
cmol(+)kg− 1, and the lowest levels were found in AGF-Y at 30–40 cm
Coordinates

depth, with an average of 4.0 ± 1.9 cmol(+)kg− 1. In Miraba, eCEC

followed a similar pattern to Kihamba, with higher levels in AGF-Y at
0–10 cm depth (20.0 ± 4.5 cmol(+)kg− 1) and lower levels in AGF-O at
N

30–40 cm depth (4.8 ± 6.2 cmol(+)kg− 1). However, in Mixed spices,

both the highest and lowest eCEC levels were found in AGF-Y at 0–10 cm
Kihamba

and 30–40 cm depth (7.2 ± 5.3 cmol(+)kg− 1 and 1.2 ± 0.2 cmol(+)
Miraba
Ginger

Mixed
spices
AGF

kg− 1), respectively.

In this study, we analyzed the levels of eCEC across different types of
AGF in both old and young groups, as well as at varying soil depths. Our
AGF/SPM
AGF/KM

results (Fig. 4) indicated that in Kihamba, Miraba and Mixed Spices,

WUM
AGF/

AGF/
Code

EUM

AGF-Y had higher levels of eCEC at soil depths of 0–10 cm and 10–20 cm
compared to AGF–O. However, in the case of Ginger, AGF-O had higher
eCEC levels than AGF-Y at a soil depth of 10–20 cm.
Mt. Kilimanjaro

South Pare Mts.

West Usambara

East Usambara

3.3. SOC stocks and soil fertility variability within and across AGF
Landscape
Table 1

Mts.

Mts.

3.3.1. SOC stocks variations

In the studied systems, AGF-Y in Miraba exhibits higher variability in

5
O.D. Kimaro et al. Geoderma Regional 36 (2024) e00759

Table 2 SOC stocks at both 20–30 cm and 30–40 cm soil depths, with an average
Means ± standard deviation of SOC stocks and coefficient of variation between of 5.23 ± 4.29 and 12.20 ± 13.80 kg m− 2, respectively compared to
treatment groups (old and young agroforestry plots) within and across small­ other AGF. The Coefficient of Variation (CV) for these depths was 114%
holder indigenous agroforestry systems; agroforestry old (n = 12); agroforestry and 82%, respectively (Table 2, Figs. 5, 6). Notably, low variability was
young (n = 12). found in Kihamba and Mixed spices at AGF-Y and soil depths 30–40 cm
Landscape AGF Type Treatment Soil SOC stocks CV and 10–20 cm with a coefficient of variation of 8% and 5%, respectively
depth (Table 2, and Figs. 5, 6).
(cm) [kg m¡2]

3.77 ± 3.3.2. Soil fertility variations

AGF-O 0–10 10.1
0.38 We also found that AGF-O in Miraba exhibited higher variability in
10–20
6.33 ±
31.2
eCEC levels at both 20–30 cm and 30–40 cm soil depths, with average
1.97 levels of 5.3 ± 6.6 and 4.8 ± 6.2 cmol(+)kg− 1, respectively, compared
8.17 ±
20–30
2.38
29.1 to other AGF. The Coefficient of Variation (CV) for these depths was
9.67 ± 125% and 130%, respectively (Table 3, Figs. 7, 8). It is worth noting that
30–40 37.1
3.58 low variability was found in Ginger and Kihamba at AGF-O and soil
Mt. Kilimanjaro Kihamba
AGF-Y 0–10
2.20 ±
47.5 depths 20–30 cm and 0–10 cm, with a coefficient of variation of 4.8%
1.04
and 13%, respectively (Table 3, Figs. 7, 8).
4.03 ±
10–20 46.8
1.89
4.23 ± 3.4. Effect of agroforestry age (old and young) within and across AGF
20–30 21.9
0.93
5.13 ± 3.4.1. SOC stocks
30–40 8.11
0.42
2.00 ±
The effect of agroforestry age on SOC stocks under each studied AGF
AGF-O 0–10 68.7 type and specific soil depth classes are elaborated in the following sec­
1.37
5.77 ± tion (Table 4, Fig. 6). Results showed that in general there is no signif­
10–20 25.1
1.45 icant difference between old and young agroforestry systems in terms of
5.63 ±
20–30 30.2 SOC stocks. However, only in the Kihamba there is a significant differ­
1.70
6.63 ± ence (P = 0.00488**) between old and young agroforestry systems in
30–40 19.1
1.27 terms of SOC stocks with a pronounced effect on old farm plots.
South Pare Mts. Ginger
AGF-Y 0–10
2.80 ±
38.6
(Table 4).
1.08
6.23 ±
10–20
3.29
52.7 3.4.2. Soil fertility
7.97 ± In the following section, we will explore the effect of agroforestry,
20–30 30.2
2.40 specifically old and young systems, on eCEC levels in various soil depths
30–40
7.33 ±
14.7 under different AGF types. Table 5 and Fig. 8 provide a summary of the
1.08
significant differences between old and young agroforestry systems in
0.87 ±
AGF-O 0–10
0.64
74.2 terms of eCEC levels. There is a notable difference between old and
5.13 ± young agroforestry regarding eCEC levels in Kihamba (P = 0.019*) and
10–20 39.8
2.04 Miraba (P = 0.016*) pronounced effect on young farm plots. However,
3.73 ± there was no significant difference observed in Ginger and Mixed spices
20–30 34.4
1.29
3.97 ±
(Table 5).
30–40 18.6
West Usambara 0.74
Miraba
Mts. 1.90 ± 4. Discussion
AGF-Y 0–10 72.4
1.37
6.63 ±
10–20 85.6 We compared the SOC stocks and soil fertility of old and young
5.68
12.20 ± agroforestry farm plots in Kihamba (located on Mt. Kilimanjaro with
20–30 114.
13.80 Nitisols developed from volcanic bedrock) and Ginger, Miraba, and
30–40
5.23 ±
81.9
Mixed spices (located on Acrisols developed from old crystalline Pre­
4.29 cambrian basement rocks) in the northeastern mountains of Tanzania.
3.00 ±
AGF-O 0–10
1.99
66.4 Our goal was to provide guidance for optimal management and resto­
6.07 ± ration strategies to improve soil fertility and carbon sequestration po­
10–20 37.5
2.27 tential in smallholder agroforestry systems in the tropics.
5.97 ±
20–30 46.5
2.77
4.1. Relative quantities of SOC stocks and soil fertility in the different
7.57 ±
East Usambara Mixed
30–40
1.94
25.6 agroforestry systems
Mts. spices 2.57 ±
AGF-Y 0–10 58.4
1.50 4.1.1. Relative Quantities and Comparison
5.30 ± Our results unveiled significant variations in the quantities of SOC
10–20 4.99
0.27
4.27 ±
stocks within and across the AGF, ranging from 0.87 ± 0.64 kg m− 2 to
20–30
0.40
9.47 12.20 ± 13.80 kg m− 2. Kihamba and Mixed spices showcased the
5.33 ± analogous observations with higher SOC stocks in AGF–O. The highest
30–40 18.5
0.99 SOC stocks in the Kihamba could be attributed to the proper integration
SOC stocks = Mean Soil Organic Carbon stocks, CV = Coefficient of variation of native tree species such as Maragaritaria discoidea, Bridelia micrantha,
(CV) for each AGF-O and AGF-Y (treatment groups) both within and across AGF. Albizia schimperiana, Cusonia holstii; Rauvolfia caffra and Cordia africana,
which are dominant in this agroforestry systems (cf. Wagner et al., 2019;
Lelamo, 2021; Kimaro et al., 2024). Our implication complements the
results of Gusli et al. and Wartenberg et al. (2020), who showed that a

6
O.D. Kimaro et al.
Fig. 3. Comparison of total SOC stocks (0–10, 10–20, 20–30, 30–40 cm) between old and young agroforestry farm plots (Kihamba in Mt. Kilimanjaro, Ginger in
South Pare Mts., Miraba in West Usambara Mts. and Mixed spices in East Usambara Mts.) within and across smallholder indigenous agroforestry systems in
northeastern mountains of Tanzania.
multilayer tropical agroforestry system in mountainous landscapes of
Southeast Sulawesi Indonesia had a positive effect on the total SOC
stocks significantly increased by 6% under mixed native shade trees
relative to open areas. Similarly, another study by Tonucci et al. (2023)
in the municipality of Sobral, Ceará state, Brazil examined SOC stocks of
a practiced multilayer AGF, which is consistent with our findings. The
AGF native shade trees have a high concentration of fine roots reaching
1–2 m deep which leads to shifts in carbon allocation to belowground
(root exudates, bioturbation, rhizodeposition) and from growth to litter
production which promotes soil carbon accretion (Tscharntke et al.,
2011; Rumpel and Kögel-Knabner, 2011). Together, these lines of evi­
dence suggest the complex composition of agroforestry systems which
involves combining leguminous and native woody shade tree species
with subsequent turnover of leaf litter and roots biomass, promotes an
increase in both quality and quantity of soil organic matter and carbon
stocks, in subsurface layers.
Additionally, the Kihamba might have been applied compost and/or
manure for quite a long time, leading to high SOC stocks in AGF-O (see
Reetsch et al., 2020). These results revealed the importance of pro­
moting improved agroforestry practices including the selection of
agroforestry tree species and shrubs, which are multipurpose and fast-
growing to provide biomass production for enhancement of soil car­
bon sequestration and soil fertility (cf. Kay et al., 2019; Kuyah et al.,
2019). According to Maia et al. (2010) agroforestry systems in the
Southwest Amazon region of Brazil consisting of multi-layers of different
vegetation functional types and varying vertical root distributions may
affect the stocks of soil organic carbon (SOC) at different depths.
7
Geoderma Regional 36 (2024) e00759
Kihamba, a multilayered system has a higher number of native tree
species and is also denser in terms of vegetation species composition,
arrangement and patterns when compared to the other systems in the
study area (cf. Kimaro et al., 2024). The higher SOC stocks could also be
attributed to increased clay content (Jobbágy and Jackson, 2000). Ac­
cording to a study by Saha et al. (2010) in Kerala, India, higher SOC
content was associated with silt and clay as well as the increased amount
of tree density in tropical homegardens. The higher level of SOC stocks
observed in the Mixed spices could be explained by a climate effect due
to the proximity of the EUM to the Indian Ocean. This creates micro­
climate conditions (warm and humid) favorable for more vegetation
cover and biomass (cf. Hamilton and Bensted-Smith, 1989; see also
Hombegowda et al., 2016 for the case of South India). The Mixed spices
agroforestry has been practiced for over 50 years in the East Usambara
Mountains (Hall et al., 2011). The management practices include the
thinning of canopy trees to create 50% shade and the complete clearance
of the lower strata of a once-natural forest (Reyes et al., 2005, 2006;
Reyes, 2008; Hall et al., 2011). This produces process for vegetation
functional types and biomass which may provide additional ecological
services such as soil organic carbon and fertility. The lowest SOC stocks
observed for AGF-Y in Kihamba and Mixed spices could be attributed to
frequent plowing, erosion and young stands (cf. Laub et al., 2023).
Young agroforestry in Ginger and Miraba on Acrisols demonstrated a
higher capacity to sequester soil carbon. This may be due to successional
stages whereby young agroforestry farmplots may have been established
more recently and during the early stages of its development, there is
often an influx of organic matter from plant residues, and decomposing
O.D. Kimaro et al. Geoderma Regional 36 (2024) e00759

Table 3 fertility in agroforestry systems (Salim et al., 2017; Ambaw et al., 2020;
Means ± standard deviation of eCEC and coefficient of variation between old Ichinose et al., 2020a, 2020b; Soliman et al., 2023). The highest eCEC
and young agroforestry plots (treatment groups) within and across smallholder levels in AGF-Y align with other studies that showed young systems may
indigenous agroforestry systems; agroforestry old (n = 12); agroforestry young enhance nutrient availability due to increased organic matter input from
(n = 12). smallholder management practices (see also van Straaten et al., 2007).
Landscape Land use Treatment Soil eCEC CV Our results are further supported by a study conducted in the multistrata
depth agroforestry in the humid tropics by Schroth et al. (2001), where it was
(cm) (cmol(þ) shown that smallholder farmers are motivated to practice agroforestry
kg¡1) systems due to the provision of multiple ecosystem services including
AGF-O 0–10 11.9 ± 1.6 13.4 indirect benefits such as soil fertility attributed to fast-growing trees,
10–20 9.4 ± 2.3 24.0 food crops, and short-lived cash crops together. Conversely, the lowest
20–30 7.9 ± 3.2 40.8 eCEC levels documented in the old agroforestry of Kihamba, Miraba and
Mt. 30–40 6.6 ± 2.8 42.6
Kilimanjaro
Kihamba AGF
AGF-Y 0–10 16.6 ± 6.7 40.2
Mixed spices possibly indicated the reduced cation availability in more
10–20 13.2 ± 2.8 20.8 mature systems. This could be further explained by the dependence of
20–30 12.3 ± 2.8 23.1 eCEC on the proportion of the stabilized SOC fraction in deeper soil
30–40 9.2 ± 1.4 15.2 horizons and soil pH (Lorenz and Lal, 2005; Haile et al., 2008; Shi et al.,
AGF-O 0–10 12.3 ± 3.6 29.3
2013). We have also observed that the soils of Kihamba in Mt. Kili­
39.0 ±
10–20
27.5
70.4 manjaro had higher BS values than the soils of the other AGF, while
20–30 9.6 ± 0.5 4.79 those of Miraba had the lowest values. The higher BS values in the soils
South Pare
Mts.
Ginger AGF 30–40 7.1 ± 1.1 14.9 of Kihamba can be easily explained by the mineral composition of the
AGF-Y 0–10 8.9 ± 4.6 51.5 volcanic parent material and receiving of fresh materials from volcanic
10–20 7.0 ± 3.4 48.1
20–30 4.7 ± 2.4 51.8
eruptions (cf. Msanya et al., 2007). However, the general soil fertility of
30–40 4.0 ± 1.9 45.8 the soils of these systems depends on many other factors including
AGF-O 0–10 8.1 ± 8.2 100 biophysical site characteristics (topography, vegetation and manage­
10–20 6.1 ± 6.9 114 ment practices, i.e., use of manure and composts: see Reetsch et al.,
20–30 5.3 ± 6.6 125
West 2020).
30–40 4.8 ± 6.2 130
Usambara Miraba AGF
AGF-Y 0–10 20.0 ± 4.5 22.6
Mts.
10–20 15.8 ± 6.2 39.0 4.2. SOC stocks and soil fertility variability in the different agroforestry
20–30 7.4 ± 6.7 90.5 systems
30–40 9.2 ± 3.8 41.4
AGF-O 0–10 6.2 ± 6.0 97.6
10–20 2.0 ± 0.8 41.1
4.2.1. Variations
20–30 1.8 ± 1.3 69.3 There is a remarkable contrast in AGF-Y in the Miraba, which dis­
East
Usambara
Mixed spices 30–40 2.4 ± 0.6 27.2 played elevated SOC stock variability at 20–30 cm and 30–40 cm depths,
AGF AGF-Y 0–10 7.2 ± 5.3 73.5 while Kihamba and Mixed spices exhibited low variability at AGF-Y and
Mts.
10–20 2.4 ± 0.6 25.3
depths 30–40 cm and 10–20 cm. Young agroforestry systems are re­
20–30 1.3 ± 0.3 20.4
30–40 1.2 ± 0.2 16.7 ported to experience higher heterogeneity in SOC stocks due to differ­
ences in vegetation growth rates, root development, and litter
eCEC = effective cation exchange capacity; CV = Coefficient of variation (CV)
decomposition (cf. Kim et al., 2016). Young agroforestry systems un­
for each AGF-O and AGF-Y (treatment groups) both within and across AGF.
dergo dynamic changes over time, which in the early stages of estab­
lishment, might experience varying degrees of soil disturbance and
biomass, contributing to higher SOC stocks. Studies by Pinho et al. modification, thereby contributing to enhanced SOC stock heterogeneity
(2012) and Desie et al. (2020) revealed that the selection of tree species (Kim et al., 2016). In our study, the old agroforestry, which may have
composition plays a role in the capacity of agroforestry systems to undergone more consistent and uniform land management over time,
sequester soil organic carbon and soil fertility status. Also, Monroe et al. showed reduced variability in SOC stock compared to the young agro­
(2016) reported that young agroforestry systems could be related to forestry. This is following findings by Parrotta (1999) and Takimoto
higher SOC stocks attributed to management practices such as planting et al., 2008, 2009. Our study findings align with research on agrofor­
of specific tree species, cover crops and mulching. estry systems in Saskatchewan, Canada (Dhillon and Van Rees, 2017).
Our study also focused on investigating the effect of AGF on soil The study found that younger shelterbelt agroforestry systems, during
fertility within and across the systems with a specific focus on old and their early establishment years, had significant temporal variation in soil
young agroforestry farm plots. We utilized the effective cation exchange organic carbon (SOC) stocks over different depths. This variation was
capacity (eCEC) together with base saturation (BS) as an indicator of soil attributed to the rapid mineralization of SOC and site preparation
fertility. It is an important soil chemical property, that describes the methods. Consequently, the observed variability in SOC stocks over
ability of the soil to hold key nutrients like potassium (K+), calcium different depths in our study resonates with the temporal dynamics re­
(Ca2+), magnesium (Mg2+), or ammonium‑nitrogen (NH+ 4 ), but also ported in the Canadian and Peninsular Spain studies, emphasizing that
takes into account soil acidity as aluminum (Al3+) and hydrogen (H+) significant variability in SOC stocks under agroforestry systems could be
(Weil and Brady, 2016). CEC of soils varies according to the percentage explained by 50%–74% in the surface 0–10 cm and subsurface 10–30 cm
of clay, the type of clay, soil pH and amount of organic matter, hence a due to combination of its salient features (age, structure, tree species
good indicator for soil fertility (cf. Solly et al., 2020). The effective composition, growth and diversity) and may require a decadal
cation exchange capacity (eCEC) is a measure that integrates informa­ perspective (Hontoria et al., 1999; Dhillon and Van Rees, 2017; Kimaro
tion about available soil surfaces to which metal cations are retained et al., 2024).
(Aprile and Lorandi, 2012). Studies on forest soils in Switzerland Our results revealed significant variations in eCEC levels with dis­
revealed that there is a strong confounding effect of soil organic matter parities within and across the AGF, ranging from 1.2 ± 0.2 cmol(+)kg− 1
contribution to the total eCEC (Solly et al., 2020). to 39.0 ± 27.5 cmol(+)kg− 1. Notably, Kihamba, Miraba and Mixed
Our study revealed that soil fertility was higher in the young agro­ spices exhibited similar pattern with the highest eCEC levels in AGF-Y at
forestry of the Kihamba, Miraba and Mixed spices. It has been widely 0–10 cm depth, while the lowest levels were observed in AGF-O at
reported that land management is an important factor influencing soil 30–40 cm depth. A study conducted in Brazil indicated that soil organic

8
O.D. Kimaro et al.
Fig. 4. Comparison of total eCEC levels (0–10, 10–20, 20–30, 30–40 cm) between old and young agroforestry farm plots (Kihamba in Mt. Kilimanjaro, Ginger in
South Pare Mts., Miraba in West Usambara Mts. and Mixed spices in East Usambara Mts.) within and across smallholder indigenous agroforestry systems in
northeastern mountains of Tanzania.
Fig. 5. SOC stocks variation between Agroforestry old (AGF–O) and Agro­
forestry young (AGF–Y) in the studied smallholder indigenous agroforestry
systems and the depth intervals (0–10, 10–20, 20–30, 30–40 cm).
matter contributes negligibly to the overall eCEC in weathered tropical
subsoils (>30 cm) due to mineralogy composition and management
practices (Ramos et al., 2018). In addition, Ramos et al. (2018) found
that the relationship between eCEC and subsoil SOC is largely mediated
by soil pH and management practices that shape soil physicochemical
conditions. In the central mid-hills of Nepal, eCEC of 3.9 cmol(+)kg− 1
was reported for soils sampled at a depth of 0–20 cm with organic matter
9
Geoderma Regional 36 (2024) e00759
of 1.55% for a mature, fully developed agroforestry system (old) with a
multitude of trees and shrubs (Schwab et al., 2015). In northeastern
Tanzania we found higher values than those observed in Nepal attrib­
uted to higher SOC stocks and pH of the soils in the studied agroforestry
systems. Our findings further discovered a notable contrast in the co­
efficient of variation (CV) for eCEC between old and young agroforestry
in the Miraba, across all soil depths. Specifically, the old agroforestry
showed a higher CV, particularly in the topsoil 0–10 cm, when compared
to the young agroforestry. The variability in eCEC values within the old
agroforestry could be attributed to the interactions among the different
tree species (Vinceti et al., 2013; Asase and Tetteh, 2016; Tumwebaze
and Byakagaba, 2016). Land-use history and previous land management
practices in the region (cf. Milne, 1937; Hamilton and Bensted-Smith,
1989; von Hellermann, 2016; Kimaro and Chidodo, 2021) may also
have played a role in creating such variability.
4.3. Effect of agroforestry age (old and young) in the different
agroforestry systems
The agroforestry age effect on SOC stocks in the study area, indicated
a significant difference only in Kihamba, while other sites exhibited no
significant disparity. These findings contribute to our understanding of
the complex interplay between the structure of agroforestry systems,
age, and SOC stocks, which enhance our grasp of sustainable soil man­
agement practices. Some studies have reported higher SOC stocks in
agroforestry systems compared to conventional agricultural systems,
indicating the potential of agroforestry to enhance soil carbon storage.
O.D. Kimaro et al. Geoderma Regional 36 (2024) e00759

Fig. 6. Variation between Agroforestry old (AGF–O) and Agroforestry young (AGF–Y) in terms of SOC stocks within and across smallholder indigenous agroforestry
systems and the depth intervals (0–10, 10–20, 20–30, 30–40 cm).

Fig. 7. Variation of eCEC levels between Agroforestry old (AGF–O) and Agroforestry young (AGF–Y) in the studied smallholder indigenous agroforestry systems
and the depth intervals (0–10, 10–20, 20–30, 30–40 cm).

However, the specific effects of agroforestry age on SOC stocks may vary
depending on the agroecological context and management practices
(Chatterjee et al., 2018). In a review of carbon stocks and stock changes
in agroforestry practices by Agevi et al. (2017), the amount of SOC in
agroforestry systems differs with regions, agroforestry systems, how
long the agroforestry has been practiced and soil depths. The significant
difference in SOC stocks between old and young agroforestry in
Kihamba aligns with studies that have highlighted the role of vegetation
age and biomass inputs in agroforestry systems influencing the amount
of soil organic carbon (e.g., Labata et al., 2012; Lorenz and Lal, 2018).
Additionally, interactions between tree species, agroforestry age and soil
conditions might vary between old and young agroforestry resulting in
different carbon sequestration potential (Tumwebaze et al., 2012).
Under this notion, several studies conducted by Kumar and Nair
(2004), Hemp and Hemp (2008), and a review by Shi et al. (2018), at a
regional scale, have found that tropics multilayer homegardens in
mountainous areas of West Africa, Kilimanjaro Tanzania, and Asia are
gaining more attention due to their excellent soil ecosystem services.
These services include high levels of SOC stocks, which are largely
influenced by the canopy, tree species age, density, richness, root ar­
chitecture, and age classes of the agroforestry systems. Nonetheless, the
lack of significant differences in other systems like Ginger and Miraba,

10
O.D. Kimaro et al. Geoderma Regional 36 (2024) e00759

Fig. 8. Variation between Agroforestry old (AGF–O) and Agroforestry young (AGF–Y) in terms of eCEC levels within and across smallholder indigenous agro­
forestry systems and the depth intervals (0–10, 10–20, 20–30, 30–40 cm).

results emphasize the role of agroforestry practices in enhancing soil

Table 4
fertility and suggest that middle-aged to mature tree species in agro­
Effect of agroforestry Old and Young in terms of soil organic carbon stocks
forestry systems may influence soil fertility. Additionally, interactions
within and across smallholder indigenous agroforestry systems.
between tree species, agroforestry age and soil conditions might vary
AGF F value Pr(>F)
between old and young agroforestry resulting in different soil fertility
Kihamba 9.792 0.00488 ** status (Tumwebaze et al., 2012).
Ginger 1.086 0.309 Moreover, it has been widely reported that land management is an
Miraba 1.775 0.196
important factor influencing soil fertility in agroforestry systems (Salim
Mixed_spices 2.26 0.147
et al., 2017; Ambaw et al., 2020; Ichinose et al., 2020a, 2020b). A study
Signif. codes: 0 ***, 0.001 **, 0.01 *, 0.05, 0.1, 1. by Ichinose et al. (2020) on the role of livestock and land use in the soil
fertility of traditional homegardens of Mt. Kilimanjaro brought evidence
that livestock density and land management with banana cultivation
Table 5
significantly enhanced the soil fertility of Chagga homegardens. The
Effect of agroforestry Old and young in terms of eCEC levels within and across
lack of significant differences between old and young in terms of eCEC
smallholder indigenous agroforestry systems.
levels observed in Ginger and Mixed spices calls for a broader under­
AGF F value Pr(>F)
standing of sustainable agroforestry management practices and their
Kihamba 6.395 0.0191 * implications for soil fertility enhancement. Further studies could delve
Ginger 4.261 0.051 into the underlying mechanisms driving the observed no differences and
Miraba 6.799 0.0161 *
Mixed_spices 0.002 0.966
explore potential interventions to optimize soil fertility within agrofor­
estry systems of varying ages and types. Overall, these findings provide
Signif. codes: 0 ***, 0.001 **, 0.01 *, 0.05, 0.1, 1. valuable insights to better understand the impact of the agroforestry age
on soil fertility.
suggests that biophysical site factors beyond system age, such as soil
type, tree species composition, and management practices may also play 5. Conclusions
a crucial role in influencing the observed amount of SOC stocks in the
study area (cf. Agevi et al., 2017). In our study, young agroforestry demonstrated a higher capacity to
Our findings on the effect of age of the agroforestry on eCEC levels sequester soil organic carbon and potential for soil fertility at 0–10 cm
revealed significant differences in Kihamba and Miraba, but not in across all agroforestry systems on Acrisols developed on base poor
Ginger and Mixed spices. This highlights the intricate relationship be­ crystalline bedrock. In this study, the effect of the smallholder indige­
tween agroforestry system type, age, and soil fertility, as evidenced by nous agroforestry age significantly influences soil organic carbon stocks
the varying eCEC levels across different AGF types and depths. The and soil fertility within and across the systems and soil depth in the
differences observed between old and young agroforestry in terms of northeastern mountains, of Tanzania. The SOC stocks and soil fertility
eCEC levels underscore the significance of age as a determinant of soil were more significant between the old and young agroforestry of the
fertility which corroborates with the findings of Dollinger and Jose Kihamba. Old Kihamba on Nitisols exhibited the highest soil carbon
(2018). This also aligns with research by Pardon et al. (2017). Their

11
O.D. Kimaro et al.
sequestering potential than other systems. Our results imply that specific
management and restoration strategies are required to optimize the soil
fertility and carbon sequestration potential of agroforestry systems in
the South Pare and Usambara Mountains.
Funding
This work was supported by the Deutscher Akademischer Aus­
tauschdienst (DAAD), Germany through a Research Grants - Doctoral
Programme [57507871] and the South Initiative (SI) VLIR-UOS (Live­
lablink) project funded by the Flemish Interuniversity Council (VLIR)
[TZ2020SIN312A101].
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Oforo Didas Kimaro: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal
analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Validation, Visualiza­
tion, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Ellen Desie:
Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Validation, Visualization,
Writing – review & editing. Bruno Verbist: Data curation, Methodol­
ogy, Validation, Writing – review & editing. Didas Nahum Kimaro:
Conceptualization, Data curation, Project administration, Supervision,
Writing – review & editing. Karen Vancampenhout: Conceptualiza­
tion, Funding acquisition, Project administration, Supervision, Visuali­
zation, Writing – review & editing. Karl-Heinz Feger: Funding
acquisition, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Visualiza­
tion, Writing – review & editing.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
I have attach the Supplementary file with data to increase clarity in
my article
Acknowledgment
The authors appreciate the financial support from the Deutscher
Akademischer Austauschdienst (DAAD), Germany through a PhD
scholarship to the first author and the South Initiative (SI)-VLIR-UOS
(Livelablink) project funded by the Flemish Interuniversity Council
(VLIR), Belgium. Furthermore, we received support from the Mwenge
Catholic University (MWECAU). The authors appreciate mentioning and
thank all our interviewed individual smallholder farmers of the north­
eastern mountains of Tanzania for dedicating their time, resources,
collaboration and information. It is of the same weight worth it to
mention staff and management of the National Soil Service (NSS) –
Mlingano and Dr. S. B Mwango; Tanzania Forest Research Institute
(TAFORI), Lushoto Centre; northeastern Tanzania Regions Rural District
Council and the whole team of extension staff for their devotion and
dedicated support.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.geodrs.2024.e00759.
References
Agevi, H., Onwonga, R., Kuyah, S., Tsingalia, M., 2017. Carbon stocks and stock changes
in agroforestry practices: a review. Trop. Subtrop. Agroecosyst. 20, 101–109.
Akinnifesi, F.K., Sileshi, G., Ajayi, O.C., Chirwa, P.W., Kwesiga, F.R., Harawa, R., 2008.
Contributions of agroforestry research and development to livelihood of smallholder
12
Geoderma Regional 36 (2024) e00759
farmers in Southern Africa: 2. Fruit, medicinal, fuelwood and fodder tree systems.
Agric. J. 3, 76–88.
Ambaw, G., Recha, J.W., Nigussie, A., Solomon, D., Radeny, M., 2020. Soil carbon
sequestration potential of climate-smart villages in east African countries. Climate 8,
124. https://doi.org/10.3390/cli8110124.
Aprile, F., Lorandi, R., 2012. Evaluation of cation exchange capacity (CEC) in tropical
soils using four different analytical methods. J. Agric. Sci. 4, 278–289. https://doi.
org/10.5539/jas. v4n6p278.
Asase, A., Tetteh, D.A., 2016. Tree diversity, carbon stocks, and soil nutrients in cocoa-
dominated and mixed food crops agroforestry systems compared to natural forest in
Southeast Ghana. Agroecol. Sustain. Food Syst. 40, 96–113. https://doi.org/
10.1080/21683565.2015.1110223.
Björsell, P., 2014. Soil Carbon in Small-Holder Plantain Farms, Uganda – A Comparison
between Agroforestry and Non-agroforestry. Bachelor thesis. Swedish University of
Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden, 40 p.
Bukomeko, H., Jassogne, L., Tumwebaze, S.B., Eilu, G., Vaast, P., 2019. Integrating local
knowledge with tree diversity analyses to optimize on-farm tree species composition
for ecosystem service delivery in coffee agroforestry systems of Uganda. Agrofor.
Syst. 93, 755–770.
Burgess, N.D., Butynski, T.M., Cordeiro, N.J., Doggart, N., Fjeldså, J., Howell, K.,
Kilahama, F., Loader, S.P., Lovett, J.C., Mbilinyi, B., Menegon, M., Moyer, D.,
Nashanda, E., Perkin, A., Stanley, W., Stuart, S., 2007. The biological importance of
the eastern Arc Mountains of Tanzania and Kenya. Biol. Conserv. 134, 209–231.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2006.08.015.
Chang, S.X., Cheng, Yi, 2019. Agroforestry Systems. The role of trees in ecosystem
services - A special issue in collaboration with the 4th World Congress on
Agroforestry (Accessed in July 30, 2023). ISBN 978-3-03928-165-7. https://res.
mdpi.com.
Chatterjee, N., Nair, P.K.R., Chakraborty, S., Nair, V.D., 2018. Changes in soil carbon
stocks across the forest-agroforest-agriculture/ pasture continuum in various
agroecological regions: a meta-analysis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 266, 55–67.
Desie, E., Vancampenhout, K., van Berg, L.D., Nyssen, B., Weijters, M., den Ouden, J.,
Muys, B., 2020. Litter share and clay content determine soil restoration effects of rich
litter tree species in forests on acidified sandy soils. For. Ecol. Manag. 474, 118377
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118377.
Dhillon, G.S., Van Rees, K.C.J., 2017. Soil organic carbon sequestration by shelterbelt
agroforestry systems in Saskatchewan. Can. J. Soil Sci. 97, 394–409. https://doi.org/
10.1139/cjss-2016-0094.
Dollinger, J., Jose, S., 2018. Agroforestry for soil health. Agrofor. Syst. 92, 213–219.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-018-0223-9.
Fahad, S., Chavan, S.B., Chichaghare, A.R., Uthappa, A.R., Kumar, M., Kakade, V.,
Pradhan, A., Jinger, D., Rawale, G., Yadav, D.K., Kumar, V., Farooq, T.H., Ali, B.,
Sawant, A.V., Saus, S., Chen, S., Poczai, P., 2022. Agroforestry systems for soil health
improvement and maintenance. Sustainability 14, 14877. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su142214877.
Zech, M., Hörold, C., Leiber-Sauheitl, K., Kühnel, A., Hemp, A., Zech, W., 2014. Buried
black soils on the slopes of Mt. Kilimanjaro as a regional carbon storage hotspot.
Catena 112, 125–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2013.05.015.
FAO (2006). Guidelines for soil description. 4th edition, Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy 77pp.
FAO, 2014. World Reference Base for Soil Resources 2014: International Soil
Classification System for Naming Soils and Creating Legends for Soil Maps. FAO,
Rome, Italy.
Gonçalves, C.Dd.B.Q., Schlindwein, M.M., Martinelli, G.Dd.C., 2021. Agroforestry
systems: a systematic review focusing on traditional indigenous practices, food and
nutrition security, economic viability, and the role of women. Sustainability 13,
1–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011397.
Gusli, S., Sumeni, S., Sabodin, R., Muqfi, I.H., Nur, M., Hairiah, K., Useng, D., van
Noordwijk, M., 2020. Soil organic matter, mitigation of and adaptation to climate
change in cocoa–based agroforestry systems. Land 9, 323. https://doi.org/10.3390/
land9090323.
Haile, S.G., Nair, P.K.R., Nair, V.D., 2008. Carbon storage of different soil-size fractions
in Florida silvopastoral systems. J. Environ. Qual. 37, 1789–1797. https://doi.org/
10.2134/jeq2007.0509.
Hall, J.M., Gillespie, T.W., Mwangoka, M., 2011. Comparison of agroforests and
protected forests in the east Usambara Mountains, Tanzania. Environ. Manag. 48,
237–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-010-9579-y.
Hamilton, A.C., Bensted-Smith, R., 1989. Forest Conservation in the East Usambara
Mountains, Tanzania. IUCN, The World Conservation Union, Gland, Switzerland.
Haruyama, S. Higeko, Toko, A. Yako, 2005. Local forest management in Tanzania-a case
study from Lushoto District, Usambara mountain. Sociedade & Natureza 1, 586–603
[fecha de Consulta 23 de Octubre de 2022]. ISSN: 0103-1570. Disponible en:
https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=321328500064.
Heckmann, C.M., 2011. Soil erosion History and Past Human Land Use in the North Pare
Mountains. A Geoarchaeological Study of Slope Deposits in North East Tanzania.
PhD thesis. University of York, United Kingdom, 284 p.
Hemp, A., 2006. The banana forests of Kilimanjaro: biodiversity and conservation of the
Chagga Homegardens. Biodivers. Conserv. 15, 1193–1217. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10531-004-8230-8.
Hemp, C., Hemp, A., 2008. The Chagga Homegardens on Kilimanjaro. Magazine of the
International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change.
Mountainous Regions: Laboratories for Adaptation 12–17.
Hombegowda, H.C., van Straaten, O., Köhler, M., Hölscher, D., 2016. On the rebound:
soil organic carbon stocks can bounce back to near forest levels when agroforests
replace agriculture in southern India. Soil 2, 13–23. https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-2-
13-2016.
O.D. Kimaro et al.
Hontoria, C.R.D.J., Saa, A., Rodríguez-Murillo, J.C., 1999. Relationships between soil
organic carbon and site characteristics in peninsular Spain. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 63,
614–621.
Hugenschmidt, J., Kay, S., 2023. Unmasking adaption of tree root structure in
agroforestry Systems in Switzerland using GPR. Geoderma Reg 34, e00659. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.geodrs.2023.e00659.
Ichinose, Y., Higuchi, H., Kubo, R., Nishigaki, T., Kilasara, M., Shinjo, H., Funakawa, S.,
2020a. Adaptation of farmland management strategies to maintain livelihood by the
Chagga people in the Kilimanjaro highlands. Agric. Syst. 181, 102829 https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.agsy.2020.102829.
Ichinose, Y., Nishigaki, T., Kilasara, M., Funakawa, S., 2020b. Central roles of livestock
and land-use in soil fertility of traditional homegardens on Mount Kilimanjaro.
Agrofor. Syst. 94, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1045 7-019-00357-9.
Ichinose, Y., Nishigaki, T., Shibata, M., Kilasara, M., Shinjo, H., Funakawa, S., 2023.
Carbon and nutrient budgets of the Chagga home garden system in the Kilimanjaro
highlands, Tanzania. Soil Use Manag. 39, 1155–1171. https://doi.org/10.1111/
sum.12923.
International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), 2018. Report shows
Agroforestry’s contribution to several SDGs. https://sdg.iisd.org/news/report-sho
ws-agroforestrys-contribution-to-several-sdgs/.
Iversen, T.I., 1991. The Usambara Mountains, NE Tanzania: History, Vegetation and
Conservation. Uppsala Universitet, Uppsala, Sweden.
Jobbágy, E.G., Jackson, R.B., 2000. The vertical distribution of soil organic carbon and
its relation to climate and vegetation. Ecol. Appl. 10, 423–436. https://doi.org/
10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[0423:TVDOSO]2.0.CO;2.
Johansson, L., 2001. Ten Million Trees Later. Land Use Change in the West Usambara
Mountains. The Soil Erosion Control and Agroforestry Project in Lushoto District,
Tanzania. 1981–2000. GTZ. Eschborn, 163pp.
Kaonga, M.L., 2005. Understanding Carbon Dynamics in Agroforestry Systems in Eastern
Zambia. PhD Thesis. Fitzwilliam College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Kaonga, M.L., Bayliss-Smith, T.P., 2009. Carbon pools in tree biomass and the soil in
improved fallows in eastern Zambia. Agrofor. Syst. 76, 37–51.
Kay, S., Rega, C., Moreno, G., den Herder, M., Palma, J.H.N., Borek, R., Crous-Duran, J.,
Freese, D., Giannitsopoulos, M., Graves, A., Jäger, M., Lamersdorf, N.,
Memedemin, D., Mosquera-Losada, R., Pantera, A., Paracchini, M.L., Paris, P., Roces-
Díaz, J.V., Rolo, V., Rosati, A., Sandor, M., Smith, Jo, Szerencsits, E., Varga, A.,
Viaud, V., Wawer, R., Burgess, P.J., Herzog, F., 2019. Agroforestry creates carbon
sinks whilst enhancing the environment in agricultural landscapes in Europe. Land
Use Policy 83, 581–593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.02.025.
Kim, D.G., Kirschbaum, M.U.F., Beedy, T.L., 2016. Carbon sequestration and net
emissions of CH4 and N2O under agroforestry: synthesizing available data and
suggestions for future studies. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 226, 65–78.
Kimaro, O.D., Chidodo, S., 2021. Remote sensing based analysis of land use/cover
change impact in the Interface between Magamba nature reserve and surrounding
villages in Lushoto District, Tanzania. Am. J. Environ. Protect. 10, 1–11. https://doi.
org/10.11648/j.ajep.20211001.11.
Kimaro, O.D., Desie, E., Kimaro, D.N., Vancampenhout, K., Feger, K.H., 2024. Salient
features and ecosystem services of tree species in mountainous indigenous
agroforestry systems of North-Eastern Tanzania. Front For Glob Change 6, 1082864.
https://doi.org/10.3389/ffgc.2023.1082864.
Kirsten, M., 2013. Effect of Land Use Change on Soil Carbon Pools in the Eastern
Usambara Mountains (Tanzania). MSc thesis. Institute of Soil Science and Site
Ecology, TU Dresden, Germany, 110 p.
Kirsten, M., Kaaya, A., Klinger, T., Feger, K.H., 2016. Stocks of soil organic carbon in
forest ecosystems of the eastern Usambara Mountains, Tanzania. Catena 137,
651–659.
Kirsten, M., Kimaro, D.N., Feger, K.H., Kalbitz, K., 2019. Impact of land use on soil
organic carbon stocks in the humid tropics of NE Tanzania. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci.
182, 625–636. https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.201800595.
Kumar, B.M., Nair, P.K.R., 2004. The enigma of tropical homegardens. Agrofor. Syst. 62,
135–152. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:AGFO.0000028995.13227.ca.
Kuyah, S., Whitney, C.W., Jonsson, M., Sileshi, G.W., Öborn, I., Muthuri, C.W.,
Luedeling, E., 2019. Agroforestry delivers a win-win solution for ecosystem services
in sub-Saharan Africa. A meta-analysis. Agron Sustain Dev 39, 47. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s13593-019-0589-8.
Labata, M.M., Aranico, E.C., Tabaranza, A.C.E., Patricio, J.H.P., Amparado Jr., R.F.,
2012. Carbon stock assessment of three selected agroforestry systems in Bukidnon,
Philippines. Adv. Environ. Sci. 4, 5–11.
Labrière, N., Locatelli, B., Laumonier, Y., Freycon, V., Bernoux, M., 2015. Soil erosion in
the humid tropics: a systematic quantitative review. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 203,
127–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2015.01.027.
Laub, M., Corbeels, M., Couëdel, A., Ndungu, S.M., Mucheru-Muna, M.W., Mugendi, D.,
Necpalova, M., Waswa, W., Van de Broek, M., Vanlauwe, B., Six, J., 2023. Managing
soil organic carbon in tropical agroecosystems: evidence from four long-term
experiments in Kenya. Soil 9, 301–323. https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-9-301-2023.
Lelamo, L.L., 2021. A review on the indigenous multipurpose agroforestry tree species
inEthiopia: management, their productive and service roles and constraints. Heliyon
7, e07874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07874.
Lorenz, K., Lal, R., 2005. The depth distribution of soil organic carbon in relation to land
use and management and the potential of carbon sequestration in subsoil horizons.
Adv. Agron. 88, 35–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(05)88002-2.
Lorenz, K., Lal, R., 2018. Agroforestry systems. In: Carbon Sequestration in Agricultural
Ecosystems. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92318-5_6.
Lundgren, B., 1971. Land-use problems in the Mountain Regions of Tanzania. Bulletins
from the. Ecological Research Committee/NFR 13, 124–127. https://www.jstor.org/
stable/20112068.
13
Geoderma Regional 36 (2024) e00759
Ma, Z., Chen, H.Y., Bork, E.W., Carlyle, C.N., Chang, S.X., 2020. Carbon accumulation in
agroforestry systems is affected by tree species diversity, age and regional climate: a
global meta-analysis. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 29, 1817–1828. https://doi.org/
10.1111/geb.13145.
Maia, S.M., Ogle, S.M., Cerri, C.C., Cerri, C.E., 2010. Changes in soil organic carbon
storage under different agricultural management systems in the Southwest Amazon
region of Brazil. Soil Tillage Res. 106, 177–184.
Milne, G., 1937. Essays in applied pedology. I.—soil type and soil management in
relation to plantation agriculture in eastern Usambara. East Afr Agric J 3, 7–20.
Mkonda, M.Y., He, X., 2017. The potentials of agroforestry Systems in East Africa: a case
of the eastern Arc Mountains of Tanzania. Int. J. Plant Soil Sci. 14, 1–11. https://doi.
org/10.9734/IJPSS/2017/31299.
Mmbando, G., 2015. Hydrological sensitivity of the Mkomazi River basin (Tanzania) to
climate change. Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Carl von Ossietzky
University of Oldenburg, Germany. PhD Dissertation.
Monroe, P.H.M., Gama-Rodrigues, E.F., Gama-Rodrigues, A.C., Marques, J.R.B., 2016.
Soil carbon stocks and origin under different cacao agroforestry systems in southern
Bahia, Brazil. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 221, 99–108.
Msanya, B.M., Otsuka, H., Araki, S., Fujitake, N., 2007. Characterization of volcanic ash
soils in southwestern Tanzania: morphology, physicochemical properties, and
classification. African Study Monographs, Suppl 34, 39–55.
Msita, H.B., 2013. Insights into indigenous soil and water conservation technologies in
Western Usambara Mountains, Tanzania. KU Leuven, Belgium, p. 198. PhD
dissertation.
Msuya, T.S., Mndolwa, M.A., Kapinga, C., 2008. Domestication: an indigenous method in
conserving plant diversity on farmlands in west Usambara Mountains, Tanzania. Afr.
J. Ecol. 46, 74–78.
Nair, P.K.R., Nair, V.D., Kumar, B.M., Haile, S.G., 2009. Soil carbon sequestration in
tropical agroforestry systems: a feasibility appraisal. Environ. Sci. Pol. 12,
81099–81111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2009.01.010.
Negash, M. (2013). The Indigenous Agroforestry Systems of the South-Eastern Rift Valley
Escarpment, Ethiopia: Their Biodiversity, Carbon Stocks, and Litterfall. Academic
dissertation, Department of Forest Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry,
University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland, pp74.
Negash, M., Starr, M., 2015. Biomass and soil carbon stocks of indigenous agroforestry
systems on the south-eastern rift valley escarpment, Ethiopia. Plant Soil 393,
95–107.
O’Connor, C., Zeller, B., Choma, C., Delbende, F., Siah, A., Waterlot, C., Andrianarisoa, K.
S., 2023. Trees in temperate alley-cropping systems develop deep fine roots 5 years
after plantation: what are the consequences on soil resources? Agric. Ecosyst.
Environ. 345, 108339 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2022.108339.
Oelbermann, M., Voroney, R.P., Kass, D.C.L., Schlönvoigt, A.M., 2005. Above- and
below-ground carbon inputs in 19-, 10- and 4-year-old Costa Rican Alley cropping
systems. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 105, 163–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
agee.2004.04.006.
Oelbermann, M., Voroney, R.P., Thevathasan, N.V., Gordon, A.M., Kass, D.C.L.,
Schlönvoigt, A.M., 2006. Soil carbon dynamics and residue stabilization in a Costa
Rican and southern Canadian alley cropping system. Agrofor. Syst. 68, 27–36.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-005-5963-7.
Pardon, P., Reubens, B., Reheul, D., Mertens, J., De Frenne, P., Coussement, T.,
Janssens, P., Verheyen, K., 2017. Trees increase soil organic carbon and nutrient
availability in temperate agroforestry systems. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 247, 98–111.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.06.018.
Parrotta, J.A., 1999. Productivity, nutrient cycling and succession in single- and mixed-
species stands of Casuarina equisetifolia, Eucalyptus robusta and Leucaena leucocephala
in Puerto Rico. For. Ecol. Manag. 124, 45–77.
Pinho, R.C., Alfaia, S.S., Miller, R.P., Uguen, K.M., Leovone, D., Ayres, M.F.V.,
Trancoso, R., 2011. Islands of fertility: soil improvement under indigenous
homegardens in the savannas of Roraima, Brazil. Agrofor. Syst. 81, 235–247.
Pinho, R.C., Miller, R.P., Alfaia, S.S., 2012. Agroforestry and the improvement of soil
fertility: a view from Amazonia. Appl. Environ. Soil Sci. 12, 1–11. https://doi.org/
10.1155/2012/616383.
R Core Team, 2021. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R
Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL. https://www.R-project.
org/.
Ramos, F.T., de Carvalho Dores, E.F.G., dos Santos Weber, O.L., Beber, D.C., Campelo, J.
H., de Souza Maia, J.C., 2018. Soil organic matter doubles the cation exchange
capacity of tropical soil under no-till farming in Brazil. J. Sci. Food Agric. 98,
3595–3602. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.8881.
Ravindranath, N.H., Ostwald, M., 2008. Methods for estimating Above-Ground Biomass.
Carbon inventory methods handbook for greenhouse gas inventory, Carbon
mitigation and roundwood production projects. In: Beniston, M., Allen-Diaz, B.,
Bradley, R.S., Cramer, W., et al. (Eds.), Advances in Global Change Research.
Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 113–147.
Reetsch, A.; Kimaro, D.; Feger, K.H.; Schwärzel, K. (2020). Traditional and adapted
composting practices applied in smallholder banana-coffee-based farming systems:
case studies from Kagera and Morogoro Regions, Tanzania In: Hettiarachchi H.,
Caucci S., Schwärzel K. (Eds.): Organic Waste Composting through Nexus Thinking.
Springer, Cham, pp. 165–184.doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36283-6_8.
https://link.springer.com/chapter/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36283-
6_8#Sec2.
Reyes, T., 2008. Agroforestry Systems for Sustainable Livelihoods and Improved Land
Management in the East Usambara Mountains, Tanzania. PhD thesis. University of
Helsinki, Finland, 166p.
O.D. Kimaro et al.
Reyes, T., Quiroz, R., Msikula, S., 2005. Socio-economic comparison between traditional
and improved cultivation methods in the east Usambara Mountains, Tanzania.
Environ. Manag. 36, 682–690.
Reyes, T., Luukkanen, O., Quiroz, R., 2006. Small cardamom – precious for people,
harmful for mountain forests: possibilities for sustainable cultivation in the east
Usambaras, Tanzania. Mt. Res. Dev. 26, 131–137. https://doi.org/10.1659/0276-
4741(2006)26 [131: scfphf]2.0.co;2.
Rumpel, C., Kögel-Knabner, I., 2011. Deep soil organic matter - a key but poorly
understood component of terrestrial C cycle. Plant Soil 338, 143–158. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11104-010-0391-5.
Saha, S.K., Nair, P.K.R., Nair, V.D., Kumar, B.M., 2010. Carbon storage in relation to soil
size-fractions under tropical tree-based land use systems. Plant Soil 328, 433–446.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-009-0123-x.
Salim, M.V.D.C., Miller, R.P., Ticona-Benavente, C.A., van Leeuwen, J., Alfaia, S.S.,
2017. Soil fertility management in indigenous homegardens of Central Amazonia,
Brazil. Agrofor. Syst. 92, 463–472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-017-0105-6.
Schroth, G., Lehmann, J., Rodrigues, M.R.L., Barros, E., Macêdo, J.L.V., 2001. Plant-soil
interactions in multistrata agroforestry in the humid tropics. Agrofor. Syst. 53,
85–102. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013360000633.
Schwab, N., Schickhoff, U., Fischer, E., 2015. Transition to agroforestry significantly
improves soil quality: a case study in the central mid-hills of Nepal. Agric. Ecosyst.
Environ. 205, 57–69.
Sharma, R., Mina, U., Kumar, B.M., 2022. Homegarden agroforestry systems in
achievement of sustainable development goals. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 42,
44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-022-00781-9.
Shi, S., Zhang, W., Zhang, P., Yu, Y., Ding, F., 2013. A synthesis of change in deep soil
organic carbon stores with afforestation of agricultural soils. For. Ecol. Manag. 296,
53–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2013.01.026.
Shi, L., Feng, W., Xu, J., Kuzyakov, Y., 2018. Agroforestry systems: Meta-analysis of soil
carbon stocks, sequestration processes, and future potentials. Land Degrad. Dev. 29,
3886–3897. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.3136.
Singh, S.L., Sahoo, U.K., 2021. Tree species composition, diversity and soil organic
carbon stockin homegardens and shifting cultivation fallows of Mizoram, Northeast
India. Vegetos 34, 220–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42535-021-00194-1.
Soini, E., 2005. Changing livelihoods on the slopes of Mt. Kilimanjaro, Tanzania:
challenges and opportunities in the Chagga homegarden system. Agrofor. Syst. 64,
157–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-004-1023-y.
Soliman, Y.M., Soliman, W.S., Abbas, A.M., 2023. Alley cropping and organic compost:
an efficient and sustainable agro-ecological strategy for improving turmeric
(Curcuma longa L.) growth and attributes. Agriculture 13, 149. https://doi.org/
10.3390/agriculture13010149.
Solly, E.F., Weber, V., Zimmermann, S., Walthert, L., Hagedorn, F., Schmidt, M.W.I.,
2020. A critical evaluation of the relationship between the effective cation exchange
capacity and soil organic carbon content in Swiss Forest soils. Front. Forests Global
Change 3, 98. https://doi.org/10.3389/ffgc.2020.00098.
Takimoto, A., Nair, P.K.R., Nair, V.D., 2008. Carbon stock and sequestration potential of
traditional and improved agroforestry systems in the west African Sahel. Agric.
Ecosyst. Environ. 125, 159–166.
14
Geoderma Regional 36 (2024) e00759
Takimoto, A., Nair, V.D., Nair, P.R., 2009. Contribution of trees to soil carbon
sequestration under agroforestry systems in the west African Sahel. Agrofor. Syst. 76,
11–25.
Telwala, Y., 2023. Unlocking the potential of agroforestry as a nature-based solution for
localizing sustainable development goals: a case study from a drought-prone region
in rural India. Nature-Based Solut. 3, 100045 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
nbsj.2022.100045.
Thorlakson, T., Neufeldt, H., 2012. Reducing subsistence farmers’ vulnerability to
climate change: evaluating the potential contributions of agroforestry in western
Kenya. Agric & Food Secur 1, 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/2048-7010-1-15.
Tonucci, R.G., Vogado, R.F., Silva, R.D., Pompeu, R.C.F.F., Oda-Souza, M., Souza, H.A.,
2023. Agroforestry system improves soil carbon and nitrogen stocks in depth after
land-use changes in the Brazilian semi-arid region. Rev Bras Cienc Solo 47,
e0220124. https://doi.org/10.36783/18069657rbcs20220124.
Tscharntke, T., Clough, Y., Bhagwat, S.A., Buchori, D., Faust, H., Hertel, D., Hölscher, D.,
Juhrbandt, J., Kessler, M., Perfecto, I., Scherber, C., Schroth, G., Veldkamp, E.,
Wanger, T.C., 2011. Multifunctional shade-tree management in tropical agroforestry
landscapes—a review. J. Appl. Ecol. 48, 619–629.
Tumwebaze, S.B., Byakagaba, P., 2016. Soil organic carbon stocks under coffee
agroforestry systems and coffee monoculture in Uganda. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.
216, 188–193.
Tumwebaze, S.B., Bevilacqua, E., Briggs, R., Volk, T., 2012. Soil organic carbon under a
linear simultaneous agroforestry system in Uganda. Agrofor. Syst. 84, 11–23.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-011-9448-6.
Van Reeuwijk, L.P., 2002. Procedures for Soil Analysis, 6th edition. International Soil
Reference and Information Centre (ISRIC), FAO, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
119pp.
van Straaten, P.M., van Noordwijk, M., Hairiah, K., 2007. Soil nutrient dynamics in
agroforestry systems: a review. Agrofor. Syst. 69, 23–44.
Vihemäki, H., 2005. Politics of participatory forest conservation: cases from the east
Usambara Mountains, Tanzania. J. Transdiscipl. Environ. Stud. 4, 1–16.
Vinceti, B., Termote, C., Ickowitz, A., Powell, B., Kehlenbeck, K., Hunter, D., 2013. The
contribution of forests and trees to sustainable diets. Sustainability 5, 4797–4824.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su5114797.
von Hellermann, P., 2016. Tree symbolism and conservation in the south Pare
Mountains, Tanzania. Conserv. Soc. 14, 368–379.
Wagner, S., Rigal, C., Liebig, T., Mremi, R., Hemp, A., Jones, M., Price, E., Preziosi, R.,
2019. Ecosystem services and importance of common tree species in Coffee-
Agroforestry systems: Local knowledge of small-scale farmers at Mt. Kilimanjaro,
Tanzania. Forest 10, 963. https://doi.org/10.3390/f10110963.
Wartenberg, A.C., Blaser, W.J., Roshetko, J.M., Van Noordwijk, M., Six, J., 2020. Soil
fertility and Theobroma cacao growth and productivity under commonly
intercropped shade-tree species in Sulawesi, Indonesia. Plant Soil 453, 87–104.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-018-03921-x.
Weil, R., Brady, N.C., 2016. Nature and Properties of Soils. Pearson New, International
edition. Pearson Higher Ed, London.
WRB, IUSS Working Group, 2022. World Reference Base for Soil Resources. International
Soil Classification System for Naming Soils and Creating Legends for Soil Maps, 4th
ed. International Union of Soil Science (IUSS).