Please wait a minute...
Journal of Arid Land
Journal of Arid Land  2025, Vol. 17 Issue (6): 846-864    DOI: 10.1007/s40333-025-0101-z     CSTR: 32276.14.JAL.0250101z
Review article     
Effect of long-term restoration on soil phosphorus transformation and desorption in the semi-arid degraded land, India
Jyotirmay ROY1, Dipak Ranjan BISWAS1, Biraj Bandhu BASAK1, Ranjan BHATTACHARYYA1, Shrila DAS1, Sunanda BISWAS1, Renu SINGH1, Avijit GHOSH2,*()
1Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR)-Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), New Delhi 110012, India
2ICAR-Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute (IGFRI), Jhansi 284003, India
Download: HTML     PDF(950KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      

Abstract  

Understanding how different vegetation-based restoration practices alter soil chemical and microbial characteristics is crucial, as restoration practices influence phosphorus (P) transformation and fractions and modify P adsorption behavior during the restoration process of degraded land. This study investigated the impacts of vegetation-based restoration practices on soil chemical and microbial parameters, P fractions, and patterns of P adsorption and desorption, and highlighted the combined influence on P availability. To evaluate the impact of vegetation-based restoration practices on P fractions and adsorption behavior in the semi-arid degraded land in India, this study compared three distinct tree-based restoration systems, including Leucaena leucocephala (Lam.) de Wit-based silviculture system (SCS), Acacia nilotica (L.) Willd. ex Delile-based silvopasture system (SPS), and Emblica officinalis Gaertn-based hortipasture system (HPS), with a natural grassland system (NGS) and a degraded fallow system (FS) as control. The soil samples across various soil depths (0-15, 15-30, and 30-45 cm) were collected. The findings demonstrated that SCS, SPS, and HPS significantly improved soil organic carbon (SOC) and nutrient availability. Moreover, SCS and SPS resulted in increased microbial biomass phosphorus (MBP) content and phosphatase enzyme activity. The P fractionation analysis revealed that ferrum-associated phosphorus (Fe-P) was the major P fraction, followed by aluminum-associated phosphorus (Al-P), reflecting the dominance of ferrum (Fe) and aluminum (Al) oxides in the semi-arid degraded land. Compared with FS, vegetation-based restoration practices significantly increased various P fractions across soil depths. Additionally, P adsorption and desorption analysis indicated a lower adsorption capacity in tree-based restoration systems than in FS, with FS soils adsorbing higher P quantities in the adsorption phase but releasing less P during the desorption phase. This study revealed that degraded soils responded positively to ecological restoration in terms of P fraction and desorption behavior, influencing the resupply of P in restoration systems. Consequently, litter rich N-fixing tree-based restoration systems (i.e., SCS and SPS) increased total phosphorus (TP) stock for plants and sustained the potential for long-term P supply in semi-arid ecosystems. With the widespread adoption of restoration practices across degraded landscapes, SCS and SPS would significantly contribute to soil restoration and improve productivity by maintaining the soil P supply in semi-arid ecosystems in India.

Key words： phosphorus fixation      phosphorus fraction      phosphorus adsorption      phosphorus desorption      land restoration      structural equation model     
Received: 13 January 2025      Published: 30 June 2025
Corresponding Authors: *Avijit GHOSH (E-mail: avijit.ghosh@icar.org.in)
Service
E-mail this article
Add to my bookshelf
Add to citation manager
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
Jyotirmay ROY
Dipak Ranjan BISWAS
Biraj Bandhu BASAK
Ranjan BHATTACHARYYA
Shrila DAS
Sunanda BISWAS
Renu SINGH
Avijit GHOSH
Cite this article:

Jyotirmay ROY, Dipak Ranjan BISWAS, Biraj Bandhu BASAK, Ranjan BHATTACHARYYA, Shrila DAS, Sunanda BISWAS, Renu SINGH, Avijit GHOSH. Effect of long-term restoration on soil phosphorus transformation and desorption in the semi-arid degraded land, India. Journal of Arid Land, 2025, 17(6): 846-864.

URL:

http://jal.xjegi.com/10.1007/s40333-025-0101-z     OR     http://jal.xjegi.com/Y2025/V17/I6/846

Land system Coverage area (hm2) Sand (%) Silt (%) Clay (%) Coordinate Year of establishment Soil erosion rate (Mg/(hm2•a))
Silviculture system (SCS) 3.0 53.80 30.70 15.50 25°31ʹ12ʺN, 78°32ʹ35ʺE 2000 23.50
Silvopasture system (SPS) 1.1 59.80 24.70 15.50 25°31ʹ11ʺN, 78°32ʹ53ʺE 2010 25.27
Hortipasture system (HPS) 1.2 51.80 34.70 13.50 25°31ʹ24ʺN, 78°32ʹ32ʺE 1996 25.46
Natural grassland system (NGS) 2.0 59.80 24.70 15.50 25°31ʹ28ʺN, 78°32ʹ51ʺE 2000 26.59
Fallow system (FS) 2.0 59.80 26.70 13.50 25°31ʹ14ʺN, 78°32ʹ52ʺE 1980 53.29
Table 1 Land system in the study area
Fig. 1 Landscape of land system in the semi-arid area in India. (a), Leucaena leucocephala (Lam.) de Wit based silviculture system (SCS); (b), Acacia nilotica (L.) Willd. ex Delile based silvopasture system (SPS); (c), Emblica officinalis Gaertn based hortipasture sytem (HPS); (d), natural grassland system (NGS); (e), fallow system (FS).
P fraction Extractant Condition
Soluble and loosely bound phosphorus (Sal-P) 1.000 M NH4Cl Shake for 30 min and centrifuge at 10,000 r/min
Aluminum-associated phosphorus (Al-P) 0.500 M NH4F Shake for 17 h, centrifuge at 10,000 r/min, and wash with saturated NaCl
Ferrum-associated phosphorus
(Fe-P)		 0.100 M NaOH Shake for 1 h, centrifuge at 10,000 r/min, and wash with saturated NaCl
Calcium-associated phosphorus
(Ca-P)		 0.250 M H2SO4 Shake for 1 h, centrifuge at 10,000 r/min, and wash with saturated NaCl
Reductant soluble
phosphorus
(Res-P)		 0.300 M trisodium citrate dihydrate, 1.000 M NaHCO3, and 0.5 g Na2S2O4 Water bath, stir, heat at 80°C, centrifuge at 10,000 r/min, and wash with saturated NaCl
Table 2 Phosphorus (P) fractionation scheme used by this study
Soil depth (cm) Land system pH EC (dS/m) SOC (g/kg) AN (mg/kg) AK (mg/kg)
0-15 SCS 5.74±0.15a 0.049±0.004a 9.05±0.08a 104.02±10.04a 121.44±15.73a
SPS 5.57±0.24a 0.021±0.003b 7.34±0.12ab 96.82±6.23a 35.26±8.70d
HPS 5.47±0.10a 0.033±0.005bc 5.93±0.06b 83.86±4.19b 60.82±5.55b
NGS 5.02±0.03b 0.022±0.003bc 5.33±0.02b 83.85±4.42b 54.91±4.35bc
FS 4.60±0.01b 0.015±0.004c 2.01±0.04c 52.16±4.91c 40.22±3.86c
15-30 SCS 5.90±0.00a 0.044±0.004a 5.13±0.05a 82.19±8.15a 56.32±8.72a
SPS 5.57±0.16ab 0.021±0.003a 4.02±0.06b 82.19±8.27a 25.26±3.55c
HPS 5.54±0.19ab 0.036±0.006b 3.67±0.04b 63.42±6.06b 32.16±6.94bc
NGS 5.36±0.13bc 0.020±0.003b 2.66±0.01c 69.29±4.28b 41.04±8.11b
FS 4.99±0.15c 0.019±0.004b 1.56±0.02c 42.95±2.83c 33.92±4.03bc
30-45 SCS 5.82±0.05a 0.042±0.005a 4.47±0.08a 74.48±4.91a 51.83±6.86a
SPS 5.58±0.15a 0.020±0.001b 4.52±0.06ab 74.50±4.22a 22.33±4.89c
HPS 5.58±0.02a 0.029±0.003b 3.47±0.04b 59.76±4.24b 29.54±4.76bc
NGS 5.25±0.01b 0.021±0.003b 2.36±0.02c 59.72±4.17b 44.11±5.33b
FS 4.90±0.05c 0.020±0.006b 1.61±0.01c 39.29±3.19c 32.12±5.06bc
Table 3 Impact of land restoration on soil chemical property
Microbial
parameter		 Soil depth (cm) Land system
SCS SPS HPS NGS FS
DHA activity
(μg TPF/(g•24h))		 0-15 78.42±3.33a 46.33±4.15b 45.91±5.66b 50.52±1.64b 31.62±3.12c
15-30 50.82±3.06a 32.79±2.49b 26.86±2.63b 30.85±0.62b 25.54±0.97b
30-45 21.53±1.50a 18.18±0.39b 17.57±0.62b 18.08±1.32b 16.35±0.27b
ACP activity
(μg PNP/(g•h))		 0-15 146.50±1.84a 120.35±2.21b 89.29±1.93c 74.80±7.13d 46.51±5.06e
15-30 94.42±4.05a 75.44±5.29ab 85.62±2.60b 39.08±2.14c 22.71±0.43d
30-45 90.44±2.52a 55.61±8.61b 68.55±5.74b 28.04±4.86c 15.30±0.52c
ALP activity
(μg PNP/(g•h))		 0-15 75.31±5.34a 42.22±1.41b 43.11±4.71b 21.38±1.03c 15.60±2.17c
15-30 67.12±2.46a 37.46±1.45b 35.72±1.54b 10.85±1.44c 10.4±2.17c
30-45 44.06±7.41a 33.53±6.51a 29.37±2.35a 10.60±0.61b 9.6±1.44b
MBC
(mg/kg)		 0-15 928.48±24.21a 805.29±40.50ab 831.83±16.15ab 683.46±101.25b 428.49±68.33c
15-30 849.17±36.79a 743.62±26.48a 782.10±35.39a 602.84±37.40b 378.45±66.48c
30-45 637.33±22.10a 512.32±36.22b 540.46±18.74b 378.92±38.35c 348.35±43.36c
MBP
(mg/kg)		 0-15 8.80±0.67a 8.16±0.61a 5.59±0.46b 4.93±0.21b 4.43±0.20b
15-30 6.26±0.47a 4.15±0.53b 4.26±0.23b 4.16±0.60b 3.18±0.41b
30-45 4.41±0.27a 3.83±0.08ab 3.53±0.44ab 3.47±0.80ab 2.88±0.20b
Table 4 Impact of land restoration practice on soil microbial property
Fig. 2 Impact of different land restoration practices on soil phosphorus (P) fraction at different soil depths. (a), soluble and loosely bound-phosphorus (Sal-P); (b), aluminium-associated phosphorus (Al-P); (c), ferrum-associated phosphorus (Fe-P); (d), calcium-associated phosphorus (Ca-P); (e), reductant soluble phosphorus (Res-P); (f), organic P; (g), total phosphorus (TP); (h), available phosphorus (AP). Different lowercase letters within the same soil depth indicate statistical significant differences among different land systems at P<0.05 level. Bars represent standard errors.
Fig. 3 P adsorption curve under different restoration practices. Bars represent standard errors.
Land system Langmuir adsorption parameter Freundlich adsorption parameter
b (µg/g) k (mL/µg) y (mL/g) a n
SCS 190±10b 0.069±0.013b 12.9±1.6b 21±1c 1.95±0.05b
SPS 231±21ab 0.093±0.013b 21.0±1.2b 29±3bc 1.98±0.10b
HPS 271±44ab 0.085±0.003b 22.8±2.8b 34±3b 2.01±0.07b
NGS 294±55ab 0.081±0.015b 22.6±2.6b 36±5b 2.04±0.02b
FS 315±30a 0.144±0.013a 45.3±5.4a 62±8a 2.43±0.04a
Table 5 Langmuir and Freundlich adsorption parameter for different land systems
Fig. 4 P desorption curve under different restoration practices. Bars represent standard errors.
Land system Aboveground biomass (Mg/hm2) Litterfall (g/m2) Root biomass (g/m2)
0-15 cm 15-30 cm 30-45 cm
SCS 12.53±1.24a 147.44±11.02b 84.67±7.22a 71.37±7.12a 34.69±3.11b
SPS 9.89±0.97b 126.25±12.64c 58.64±5.42b 75.67±7.31a 54.27±5.22a
HPS 10.24±0.87b 198.14±8.47a 40.33±4.02c 62.34±6.47b 52.21±5.17a
NGS 3.25±0.35c 57.14±3.29d 38.33±3.02c 32.34±3.17c 25.21±2.17c
FS 0.03±0.00d 15.2.14±3.28e 5.28±0.52d 4.67±0.45d 1.27±0.22d
Table 6 Aboveground biomass, litterfall, and root biomass in different land systems
Fig. 5 Structural equation model illustrating the influence of microbial, soil chemical, and P adsorption properties on the distribution of soil P fractions and P availability. The numbers in frames represent the proportion of variance explained for the respective latent variable; while the numbers above arrows represent z-standardized path coefficients, of which, positive numbers represent positive relationship between two variables and negative numbers represent negative relationship between two variables. *, P<0.05 level.
[1]   Agbeshie A A, Abugre S, Adjei R, et al. 2020. Impact of land use types and seasonal variations on soil physico-chemical properties and microbial biomass dynamics in a tropical climate, Ghana. Advances in Research, 21(1): 34-49.
[2]   Anderson J M, Ingram J S I. 1993. Tropical Soil Biology and Fertility: A Handbook of Methods (2nd ed.). Wallingford: CAB International, 22-27.
[3]   Ayenew B, Tadesse A M, Kibret K, et al. 2018. Phosphorous status and adsorption characteristics of acid soils from Cheha and Dinsho districts, southern highlands of Ethiopia. Environmental Systems Research, 7: 17, doi: 10.1186/s40068-018-0121-1.
[4]   Azene B, Zhu R H, Pan K W, et al. 2023. Land use change alters phosphatase enzyme activity and phosphatase-harboring microbial abundance in the subalpine ecosystem of southeastern Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, China. Ecological Indicators, 153: 110416, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.110416.
[5]   Bai X J, Dippold M A, An S S, et al. 2021. Extracellular enzyme activity and stoichiometry: The effect of soil microbial element limitation during leaf litter decomposition. Ecological Indicators, 121: 107200, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.107200.
[6]   Bandyopadhyay S, Maiti S K.2022. Steering restoration of coal mining degraded ecosystem to achieve sustainable development goal-13 (climate action): United Nations decade of ecosystem restoration (2021-2030). Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(59): 88383-88409.
[7]   Baradwal H, Ghosh A, Kumar A, et al. 2022. Ecological restoration of degraded lands with alternate land use systems improves soil functionality in semiarid tropical India. Land Degradation & Development, 33(7): 1076-1087.
[8]   Baradwal H, Ghosh A, Singh A K, et al. 2023. Soil nutrient dynamics under silviculture, silvipasture and hortipasture as alternate land-use systems in semi-arid environment. Forests, 14(1): 125, doi: 10.3390/f14010125.
[9]   Bardgett R D, Bullock J M, Lavorel S, et al. 2021. Combatting global grassland degradation. Nature Reviews Earth and Environment, 2(10): 720-735.
[10]   Barrow N J. 1980. Evaluation and utilization of residual phosphorus in soils. In: KhasawnehF E, SampleE C, KamprathE J. The Role of Phosphorus in Agriculture. Madison: American Society of Agronomy, 333-359.
[11]   Berhongaray G, Cotrufo F M, Janssens I A, et al. 2019. Below-ground carbon inputs contribute more than above-ground inputs to soil carbon accrual in a bioenergy poplar plantation. Plant and Soil, 434: 363-378.
doi: 10.1007/s11104-018-3850-z
[12]   Bohm W. 1979. Methods of Studying Root Systems. Berlin: Springer, 39-47.
[13]   Borggaard O K, Jdrgensen S S, Moberg J P, et al. 1990. Influence of organic matter on phosphate adsorption by aluminium and iron oxides in sandy soils. Journal of Soil Science, 41(3): 443-449.
[14]   Bray R H, Kurtz L T. 1945. Determination of total, organic, and available forms of phosphorus in soils. Soil Science, 59(1): 39-45.
[15]   Brkljača M, Kulišić K, Andersen B. 2019. Soil dehydrogenase activity and organic carbon as affected by management system. Agriculturae Conspectus Scientificus, 84(2): 135-142.
[16]   Brookes P C, Powlson D S, Jenkinson D S. 1982. Measurement of microbial biomass phosphorus in soil. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 14(4): 319-329.
[17]   Casida Jr L E, Klein D A, Santoro T. 1964. Soil dehydrogenase activity. Soil Science, 98(6): 371-376.
[18]   Chakraborty D, Prasad R. 2023. Phosphorus management for agriculture and the environment. In: RouachedH B, SatbhaiS. PlantPhosphorus Nutrition. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1-17.
[19]   Chave J, Réjou-Méchain M, Búrquez A, et al. 2014. Improved allometric models to estimate the aboveground biomass of tropical trees. Global Change Biology, 20(10): 3177-3190.
doi: 10.1111/gcb.12629 pmid: 24817483
[20]   Chen J, van Groenigen K J, Hungate B A, et al. 2020. Long-term nitrogen loading alleviates phosphorus limitation in terrestrial ecosystems. Global Change Biology, 26(9): 5077-5086.
[21]   Chen L H, Dörsch P, Chen R S, et al. 2024. Contrasts in phosphorus speciation and supply across aggregates in subtropical forest soils with different lithology. Authorea Preprints, doi: 10.22541/au.172530519.91937079/v1.
[22]   Chen X D, Condron L M, Dunfield K E, et al. 2021. Impact of grassland afforestation with contrasting tree species on soil phosphorus fractions and alkaline phosphatase gene communities. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 159: 108274, doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2021.108274.
[23]   Cui Y X, Fang L C, Guo X B, et al. 2019. Natural grassland as the optimal pattern of vegetation restoration in arid and semi-arid regions: Evidence from nutrient limitation of soil microbes. Science of the Total Environment, 648: 388-397.
[24]   Dai Z M, Liu G F, Chen H H, et al. 2020. Long-term nutrient inputs shift soil microbial functional profiles of phosphorus cycling in diverse agroecosystems. The ISME Journal, 14(3): 757-770.
[25]   Ferreira A C F, Andrade F V, Mendonça E D S, et al. 2022. Land use and altitude: How do they influence the phosphorus fractions? Acta Scientiarum: Agronomy, 44(1): e54801, doi: 10.4025/actasciagron.v44i1.54801.
[26]   Freundlich H M F. 1907. Uber die adsorption in Lösungen. Zeitschrift für Physikalische Chemie, 57(1): 385-470. (in German)
[27]   Fu D G, Wu X N, Duan C Q, et al. 2020. Response of soil phosphorus fractions and fluxes to different vegetation restoration types in a subtropical mountain ecosystem. CATENA, 193: 104663, doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2020.104663.
[28]   Guan X H, Shang C, Chen G H. 2006. Competitive adsorption of organic matter with phosphate on aluminum hydroxide. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 296(1): 51-58.
[29]   Hairiah K, Sitompul S M, van Noordwijk M, et al. 2001. Methods for sampling carbon stocks above and below ground. In: ASBLecture Note 4B. International Centre for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF).Bogor, Indonesia,1-23.
[30]   Hanway J J, Heidal H. 1952. Soil analysis methods as used in Iowa State College Soil Testing Laboratory. Iowa State College of Agriculture Bulletin, 57(1): 1-31.
[31]   Hu L N, Li Q, Yan J H, et al. 2022. Vegetation restoration facilitates belowground microbial network complexity and recalcitrant soil organic carbon storage in Southwest China karst region. Science of the Total Environment, 820: 153137, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153137.
[32]   Jackson M L. 1973. Soil Chemical Analysis. New Delhi: Prentice Hall of India Private Limited, 38-56.
[33]   Jackson R B, Canadell J, Ehleringer J R, et al. 1997. A global analysis of root distributions for terrestrial biomes. Oecologia, 108(3): 389-411.
[34]   Jin Z, Luo D, Yu Y L, et al. 2022. Soil pH changes in a small catchment on the Chinese Loess Plateau after long-term vegetation rehabilitation. Ecological Engineering, 175: 106503, doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2021.106503.
[35]   Johan P D, Ahmed O H, Omar L, et al. 2021. Phosphorus transformation in soils following co-application of charcoal and wood ash. Agronomy, 11(10): 2010, doi: 10.3390/agronomy11102010.
[36]   Karadihalli Thammaiah M, Pandey R N, Purakayastha T J, et al. 2023. Impact of low molecular weight organic acids on soil Olsen phosphorus and its phyto-availability to soybean (Glycine max). Journal of Plant Nutrition, 46(5): 765-781.
[37]   Kaur T, Sehgal S K, Singh S, et al. 2021. Assessment of seasonal variability in soil nutrients and its impact on soil quality under different land use systems of lower Shiwalik foothills of Himalaya, India. Sustainability, 13(3): 1398, doi: 10.3390/su13031398.
[38]   Kumar P, Mishra A K, Chaudhari S K, et al. 2018. Carbon pools and nutrient dynamics under Eucalyptus-based agroforestry system in semi-arid region of north-west India. Journal of the Indian Society of Soil Science, 66(2): 188-199.
[39]   Kuo S. 1996. Phosphorus. In: SparksD L. Methodsof Soil Analysis.Part 3: Chemical Methods. Madison: ACSESS, 869-919.
[40]   Langmuir I. 1918. The adsorption of gases on plane surfaces of glass, mica and platinum. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 40(9): 1361-1403.
[41]   Li H Y, Chang L, Liu H J, et al. 2024. Diverse factors influence the amounts of carbon input to soils via rhizodeposition in plants: A review. Science of the Total Environment, 948: 174858, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.174858.
[42]   Li Y, Niu S L, Yu G R. 2016. Aggravated phosphorus limitation on biomass production under increasing nitrogen loading: a meta-analysis. Global Change Biology, 22(2): 934-943.
doi: 10.1111/gcb.13125 pmid: 26463578
[43]   Luo G W, Xue C, Jiang Q H, et al. 2020. Soil carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus cycling microbial populations and their resistance to global change depend on soil C:N:P stoichiometry. mSystems, 5(3): 00162-20, doi: 10.1128/msystems.00162-20.
[44]   Luo X Z, Hou E Q, Zhang L L, et al. 2023. Altered soil microbial properties and functions after afforestation increase soil carbon and nitrogen but not phosphorus accumulation. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 59(6): 645-658.
[45]   Ma W M, Tang S H, Dengzeng Z M, et al. 2022. Root exudates contribute to belowground ecosystem hotspots: A review. Frontiers in Microbiology, 13: 937940, doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.937940.
[46]   Mabagala F S, Mng'ong'o M E. 2022. On the tropical soils; The influence of organic matter (OM) on phosphate bioavailability. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences, 29(5): 3635-3641.
doi: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2022.02.056 pmid: 35844405
[47]   Margenot A J, Singh B R, Rao I M, et al. 2016. Phosphorus fertilization and management in soils of Sub-Saharan Africa. In: LalR, StewartB A. SoilPhosphorus. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 151-208.
[48]   Martinengo S. 2024. Rhizosphere processes driving phosphorus cycling in rice systems. PhD Dissertation. Turin: University of Turin.
[49]   Meena A, Rao K S. 2021. Assessment of soil microbial and enzyme activity in the rhizosphere zone under different land use/cover of a semiarid region, India. Ecological Processes, 10: 16, doi: 10.1186/s13717-021-00288-3.
[50]   Meena G L, Sethy B K, Meena H R, et al. 2023. Quantification of impact of land use systems on runoff and soil loss from ravine ecosystem of western India. Agriculture, 13(4): 773, doi: 10.3390/agriculture13040773.
[51]   Modak K, Biswas D R, Bhattacharyya R, et al. 2024. Phosphorus adsorption and desorption as affected by long-term fertilization under rice-rice cropping system in an acidic Inceptisol. Journal of the Indian Society of Soil Science, 72(1): 56-65.
[52]   Murphy J, Riley J P. 1962. A modified single solution method for the determination of phosphate in natural waters. Analytica Chimica Acta, 27: 31-36.
[53]   Neffar S, Beddiar A, Menasria T, et al. 2022. Planting prickly pears as a sustainable alternative and restoration tool for rehabilitating degraded soils in dry steppe rangelands. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 15: 287, doi: 10.1007/s12517-022-09579-1.
[54]   Niederberger J, Kohler M, Bauhus J. 2019. Distribution of phosphorus fractions with different plant availability in German forest soils and their relationship with common soil properties and foliar P contents. Soil, 5(2): 189-204.
doi: 10.5194/soil-5-189-2019
[55]   Nyameasem J K, Reinsch T, Taube F, et al. 2020. Nitrogen availability determines the long-term impact of land use change on soil carbon stocks in grasslands of southern Ghana. Soil, 6(2): 523-539.
doi: 10.5194/soil-6-523-2020
[56]   Padalia K, Bargali S S, Bargali K, et al. 2022. Soil microbial biomass phosphorus under different land use systems of Central Himalaya. Tropical Ecology, 63(1): 30-48.
[57]   Page A L, Miller R H, Keeney D R. 1982. Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 2 Chemical and Microbiological Properties (2nd ed.). Madison: American Society of Agronomy, 404-406.
[58]   Phillips I R, Courtney R. 2022. Long term field trials demonstrate sustainable nutrient supply and uptake in rehabilitated bauxite residue. Science of the Total Environment, 804: 150134, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150134.
[59]   Ren C, Li Y F, Zhou Q, et al. 2021. Phosphate uptake by calcite: Constraints of concentration and pH on the formation of calcium phosphate precipitates. Chemical Geology, 579: 120365, doi: 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2021.120365.
[60]   Roy J, Biswas D R, Basak B B, et al. 2025. Long-term impact of silviculture systems on phosphorus transformation and adsorption behaviour in semi-arid restored lands. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 381: 109449, doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2024.109449.
[61]   Schaap K J, Fuchslueger L, Hoosbeek M R, et al. 2021. Litter inputs and phosphatase activity affect the temporal variability of organic phosphorus in a tropical forest soil in the Central Amazon. Plant and Soil, 469: 423-441.
[62]   Schofield R K, Taylor A W. 1955. The measurement of soil pH. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 19(2): 164-167.
[63]   Singhal V K, Ghosh A, Singh A K, et al. 2025. How grasses stabilize soil organic carbon in aggregates of semi-arid ecologically restored land: Evidence from 13C natural abundance. CATENA, 249: 108627, doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2024.108627.
[64]   Smercina D N, Evans S E, Friesen M L, et al. 2019. To fix or not to fix: controls on free-living nitrogen fixation in the rhizosphere. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 85(6): e0254618, doi: 10.1128/AEM.02546-18.
[65]   Sun X D, Ye Y Q, Ma Q X, et al. 2021. Variation in enzyme activities involved in carbon and nitrogen cycling in rhizosphere and bulk soil after organic mulching. Rhizosphere, 19: 100376, doi: 10.1016/j.rhisph.2021.100376.
[66]   Tabatabai M A. 1994. Soil enzymes. Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 2 Microbiological and Biochemical Properties. Madison: American Society of Agronomy, 775-833.
[67]   Tian J, Ge F, Zhang D Y, et al. 2021. Roles of phosphate solubilizing microorganisms from managing soil phosphorus deficiency to mediating biogeochemical P cycle. Biology, 10(2): 158, doi: 10.3390/biology10020158.
[68]   Tuyishime J M, Adediran G A, Olsson B A, et al. 2022. Phosphorus abundance and speciation in acid forest podzols—Effect of postglacial weathering. Geoderma, 406: 115500, doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2021.115500.
[69]   Vance E D, Brookes P C, Jenkinson D S. 1987. An extraction method for measuring soil microbial biomass C. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 19(6): 703-707.
[70]   Velescu A, Homeier J, Bendix J, et al. 2021. Response of water-bound fluxes of potassium, calcium, magnesium and sodium to nutrient additions in an Ecuadorian tropical montane forest. Forest Ecology and Management, 501: 119661, doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119661.
[71]   Walkley A, Black I A. 1934. An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter, and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science, 37(1): 29-38.
[72]   Wang B, Sun J S, Liu H, et al. 2017. The characteristics of phosphorus adsorption and desorption in gray desert soil of Xinjiang, China. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 77: 012020, doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/77/1/012020.
[73]   Wang Q P, Liao Z Y, Yao D X, et al. 2021. Phosphorus immobilization in water and sediment using iron-based materials: a review. Science of the Total Environment, 767: 144246, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144246.
[74]   Wang Y Y, Luo D H, Xiong Z Y, et al. 2023. Changes in rhizosphere phosphorus fractions and phosphate-mineralizing microbial populations in acid soil as influenced by organic acid exudation. Soil and Tillage Research, 225: 105543, doi: 10.1016/j.still.2022.105543.
[75]   Wei Y Q, Xiong X, Ryo M, et al. 2022. Repeated litter inputs promoted stable soil organic carbon formation by increasing fungal dominance and carbon use efficiency. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 58(6): 619-631.
[76]   Yan J L, Jiang T, Yao Y, et al. 2016. Preliminary investigation of phosphorus adsorption onto two types of iron oxide-organic matter complexes. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 42: 152-162.
doi: S1001-0742(15)00382-4 pmid: 27090706
[77]   Yan W D, Farooq T H, Chen Y, et al. 2022. Soil nitrogen transformation process influenced by litterfall manipulation in two subtropical forest types. Frontiers in Plant Science, 13: 923410, doi: 10.3389/fpls.2022.923410.
[78]   Yang S B, Feng C, Ma Y H, et al. 2021. Transition from N to P limited soil nutrients over time since restoration in degraded subtropical broadleaved mixed forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 494: 119298, doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119298.
[79]   Yang W L, Xiang W, Bao Z Y, et al. 2022. Phosphorus sorption capacity of various iron-organic matter associations in peat soils. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(51): 77580-77592.
[80]   Yang X Y, Chen X W, Yang X T. 2019. Effect of organic matter on phosphorus adsorption and desorption in a black soil from Northeast China. Soil and Tillage Research, 187: 85-91.
[81]   Yegna E, Shiferaw W, Gochera A. 2024. The effects of various land use types on particular physicochemical characteristics of the soil in Mante Watershed, South Regional Government of Ethiopia. Applied and Environmental Soil Science, 2024(1): 1415819, doi: 10.1155/2024/1415819.
[82]   Yu W, Ding X, Xue S, et al. 2013. Effects of organic-matter application on phosphorus adsorption of three soil parent materials. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 13(4): 1003-1017.
[83]   Zhang H L, Kovar J L. 2009. Phosphorus fractionation. In: PierzynskiG M. Methods of Phosphorus Analysis for Soils, Sediments, Residualsand Waters. SouthernCooperative Series Bulletin No.396. Raleigh: North Carolina State University, 50-59.
[84]   Zhang Y Q, Finn D, Bhattacharyya R, et al. 2021. Long-term changes in land use influence phosphorus concentrations, speciation, and cycling within subtropical soils. Geoderma, 393: 115010, doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2021.115010.
[85]   Zhong H T, Smith C, Robinson B, et al. 2021. Soil phosphorus dynamics along a short‐term ecological restoration trajectory of a coastal sandplain forest in New Zealand. Land Degradation & Development, 32(3): 1250-1261.
[86]   Zhu H, Bing H J, Wu Y H, et al. 2021. Low molecular weight organic acids regulate soil phosphorus availability in the soils of subalpine forests, eastern Tibetan Plateau. CATENA, 203: 105328, doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2021.105328.
[1] ZHANG Xiaoxue, YUE Ping, SONG Zhaobin, ZUO Xiaoan, ZHANG Rui, WANG Zhengjiaoyi, QIAO Jingjuan. Impact of nitrogen addition and precipitation on net ecosystem exchange in the Urat desert steppe, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2025, 17(3): 337-349.
[2] LEI Hangyu, DUAN Dantong, CHEN Yi, GUO Huifeng, LI Jiangtao, LI Xiang. Effects of landscape fragmentation of plantation forests on carbon storage in the Loess Plateau, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(2): 266-281.
[3] KE Zengming, LIU Xiaoli, MA Lihui, TU Wen, FENG Zhe, JIAO Feng, WANG Zhanli. Effects of restoration modes on the spatial distribution of soil physical properties after land consolidation: a multifractal analysis[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2021, 13(12): 1201-1214.
[4] LI Yue, WANG Jijun, HAN Xiaojia, GUO Mancai, CHENG Simin, QIAO Mei, ZHAO Xiaocui. Coupling between the Grain for Green Program and a household level-based agricultural eco-economic system in Ansai, Shaanxi Province of China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2020, 12(2): 199-214.
[5] Rentao LIU, STEINBERGER Yosef, Jingwei HOU, Juan ZHAO, Jianan LIU, Haitao CHANG, Jing ZHANG, Yaxi LUO. Conversion of cropland into agroforestry land versus naturally-restored grassland alters soil macro-faunal diversity and trophic structure in the semi-arid agro-pasture zone of northern China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2019, 11(2): 306-317.
[6] Michael J JACOBS, Catherine A SCHLOEDER, Philip D TANIMOTO. Dryland agriculture and rangeland restoration priorities in Afghanistan[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2015, 7(3): 391-402.