Effects of tree planting geometry on lentil nutritional quality, tree biomass, and economic returns in Melia dubia-based agroforestry system in Bundelkhand region of India

Introduction: Low farm productivity, declining soil fertility, and climatic stress in the semi-arid Bundelkhand region demand sustainable land-use strategies. Integrating Melia dubia with lentil-based systems offers potential to enhance soil fertility, resource efficiency, and profitability. However, limited studies have examined how tree spacing influences lentil seed quality, litterfall nutrient dynamics, and carbon sequestration in M. dubia-based agroforestry.

Methods: A field experiment was conducted during the 2023–24 Rabi season at the Forestry Research Farm, Rani Lakshmi Bai Central Agricultural University, Jhansi, India. The study employed a split-plot design with three M. dubia spacings (5 × 5 m, 5 × 4 m, and 5 × 3 m) and two lentil varieties (IPL 316 and L 4727), along with a sole crop control, replicated thrice. Observations included lentil nutrient composition, litterfall quantity and nutrient content, tree growth, biomass, carbon storage, and economic returns. Statistical analysis was performed using OPSTAT software.

Results: Tree spacing significantly affected lentil nutrient composition, litterfall production, and system productivity. The 5 × 4 m spacing recorded the highest lentil seed protein (26.21%) and nitrogen (4.19%) contents, whereas phosphorus and calcium were maximum under 5 × 3 m spacing (0.45% and 0.58%, respectively). Variety IPL 316 exhibited superior nutrient profiles with higher nitrogen, potassium, calcium, copper, and zinc concentrations compared to L 4727. Denser plantations (5 × 3 m) produced maximum litterfall (1.19 Mg ha⁻¹), with peak nutrient release during January–February, indicating efficient nutrient recycling. Phosphorus and potassium concentrations in litter were also higher under closer spacings. Photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) decreased with increasing tree density, ranging from 652.85 µmol m⁻² s⁻¹ in sole lentil to 135.26 µmol m⁻² s⁻¹ under 5 × 3 m spacing. The 5 × 3 m spacing achieved the highest total biomass (42.7 Mg ha⁻¹), carbon stock (21.32 Mg ha⁻¹), and CO₂ sequestration potential (78.37 Mg ha⁻¹). Economically, the same spacing yielded maximum gross returns (US$ 4227 ha⁻¹), net returns (US$ 2783 ha⁻¹), and benefit–cost ratio (2.92).

Conclusion: In conclusion, closer planting geometry of M. dubia (5 × 3 m) enhanced biomass, carbon storage, and profitability without compromising lentil quality. The integration of lentil under M. dubia optimized resource use, nutrient cycling, and carbon sequestration, demonstrating its suitability for sustainable and climate-resilient agroforestry in Bundelkhand.

Introduction

Forests are highly significant to mankind as they make a substantial contribution to enhancing the environment, economy, and society. In a developing country like India, there is a significant need for timber, fuel wood, and tree fodder. This demand is primarily fulfilled by trees located outside of forest areas on agricultural lands (Chakravarty et al., 2019). Forests have a crucial role in preserving ecological balance, serving as habitats for numerous plant and animal species, and safeguarding the soil against water and wind erosion (Liu, 2025; Ponyane et al., 2025). Climate change has recently provided a boost to forests and trees. Around 27 percent of India’s population continues to depend on forests for their sustenance through numerous ways (Pandey et al., 2016). The country has a total forest and tree cover of 25.17 percent (Forest Survey of India, 2023). To enhance the extent of forest and tree cover, it is imperative to undertake operations like as reforestation, enrichment planting, and agroforestry (Gupta et al., 2020; Jinger et al., 2023; Singhal et al., 2024).

Agroforestry, which involves the incorporation of trees into agricultural landscapes, has been demonstrated to be a practical and self-sustaining land use system in this area (Ghosh et al., 2014; Gautam et al., 2025). The incorporation of rapidly growing trees on degraded soil in the area can exploit the economic benefits of trees for the rural community (Palsaniya et al., 2010; Jinger et al., 2021; Selvan et al., 2023). It is often considered as a financially viable strategy for mitigating climate change (Lasco et al., 2014; Jinger et al., 2022a). Agroforestry systems capture carbon in both soil and woody biomass. The carbon storage capacity in most agroforestry systems varies based on tree species (Nair et al., 2009; Saleem et al., 2023) and management approaches (Nair, 2012). Agroforestry has been implemented globally for decades, predominantly in tropical and subtropical regions. This is a fledgling concept and technique that combines crop production with the conservation of natural resources, addressing environmental and human needs simultaneously (Kreitzman et al., 2022; Jinger et al., 2022b; Vikas and Ranjan, 2024). Currently, agroforestry fulfils roughly 50 percent of the fuelwood requirement, two-thirds of the small timber demand, 60 percent of the raw materials necessary for paper pulp, 70–80 percent of the plywood industry’s needs, and 9–11 percent of the green fodder demand (Dev et al., 2017). Recently, the total area of agroforestry in India has been reported as approximately 28.427 million hectares, representing 8.65 percent of the nation’s total geographical area (Arunachalam et al., 2022). The Bundelkhand region in central India is located in the semi-arid tropical zone. The region’s vulnerability to climate change and resource scarcity results in poor crop yields and elevated production risks (Sharma, 2023; Deshmukh et al., 2025). The region experiences a shortage of fodder and fuelwood due to intense biotic pressure on forests, community lands, and a decline in vegetation cover.

Malabar Neem (Melia dubia) is a most promising agroforestry tree which grows in deciduous forests around 600 - 1,800 meters above mean sea level. Cultivating M. dubia in an agroforestry system provides an alternative source for the supply of pulp wood and fodder (Chauhan et al., 2018; Akhilraj et al., 2023; Jinger et al., 2024). Spacing in the M. dubia in an agroforestry system may differ according to the utility of wood. For pulpwood production, closer spacing of 2 m × 2 m and 3 m × 2 m is usually recommended, whereas for plywood production, wider spacing of 5 m × 5 m and 5 m × 4 m can be used. For timber purposes, wider spacing of 6 m × 6 m and 8 m × 8 m can be used for M. dubia-based agroforestry (Sirohi et al., 2018). Melia dubia undergoes complete leaf shedding in the winter season. Trees assimilate nutrients for growth and development, with certain amounts of these nutrients translocating into various tree components, from which a substantial quantity is returned to the soil through litterfall (Zheng et al., 2022). Litterfall is a critical element of the nutrient cycle that influences soil health by contributing to soil organic matter, facilitating nutrient exchange, replenishing nutrients, conserving biodiversity, and supporting other ecosystem activities (Awasthi et al., 2022; Jinger et al., 2025). The quantity of nutrients released to the soil via leaf litter is reliant upon tree spacing, litter quality, and specific nutrient concentrations (Elias et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2021). The supplementary nutrients may enhance soil fertility, and nutrient return data can serve as an indicator to predict the relationship between tree species and nutrient recycling in agroforestry systems, thereby improving productivity and ensuring long-term sustainability (Lal, 2025).

Intercropping pulses with commercial tree species during the early phases of establishment is advantageous as it allows legumes to restore soil fertility and provides farmers with extra income (Ghosh et al., 2007; Kumar et al., 2023; Akchaya et al., 2025). Although shade diminishes the productivity of field crops, it paradoxically improves seed quality (Pohlmann et al., 2024). The nitrogen-fixing capacity of legumes renders them extremely appropriate for integration into low-input cropping systems. India is the world’s top producer, consumer, and importer of pulses, accounting for 25% of global production, 27% of global consumption, and 14% of global imports (Ketali et al, 2024). While pulses are cultivated during both the Kharif and Rabi seasons, those grown in the Rabi season make up over 60% of the total production (Bhat et al., 2022). Winter legumes like Lens culinaris, with flat, lens-shaped seeds, require little water. The plants are usually short and produce self-pollinating flowers (Semba et al., 2021). Lentil seeds are rich in carbohydrates, protein, energy, fat, fibre, phosphorus, zinc, iron, vitamins, carotene, and antioxidants (Riaz et al., 2024). Lentils are mostly grown as a rainfed crop, requiring cool temperatures during the growth phase and warmer conditions for maturity (Venugopalan et al., 2021). The Bundelkhand region in Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh is distinguished for its lentil production, accounting for approximately 25% of the national total (Malik et al., 2022). Although agroforestry has been widely promoted as a sustainable land-use practice in semi-arid regions, lentil-based systems in Bundelkhand have received little scientific attention. Most studies in the region have focused on cereal-based or oilseed-based agroforestry models, while lentil; a protein-rich pulse well suited to marginal lands has been underrepresented. Consequently, there is inadequate understanding of how tree spacing and crop variety influence productivity, quality attributes, and carbon sequestration in Melia dubia-based agroforestry systems. Despite the recognized potential of M. dubia, its influence on litterfall nutrient return, carbon sequestration, and intercrop performance under different spacing regimes in semi-arid Bundelkhand remains underexplored. The current study was designed with objectives considering the potential of M. dubia as a commercially significant fast-growing agroforestry tree species and the suitability of lentil cultivation in the semi-arid regions of Bundelkhand viz. to assess how different spacings of M. dubia affect lentil quality, tree growth, litterfall dynamics in Bundelkhand’s semi-arid conditions along with quantification of biomass and carbon sequestration, and determine the economic viability of the agroforestry system.

Materials and methods

Experimental site

The experiment was carried out in Rabi 2023 in field H-12 in the M. dubia plantation located at the Forestry Research Farm, Bhojla, under the Rani Lakshmi Bai Central Agricultural University, Jhansi (U.P.). The experimental site is situated at an elevation of 284 meters above sea level, positioned at 25.517457° N latitude and 78.561147° E longitude. Jhansi exhibits an annual average temperature of 25.80°C and an average precipitation of approximately 870 mm (Ram et al., 2025). The soil at the experimental site is classified as sandy loam in texture with a pH of 6.9, low in organic carbon content (0.45%), available nitrogen (182 kg ha^-1), available phosphorus (9.3 kg ha^-1), and available potassium (176 kg ha^-1).

Experimental details

The research employed a split-plot design using M. dubia arranged at 5m × 5m (G₁), 5m × 4m (G₂), and 5m × 3m (G₃) as main plots (Figure 1). Three spacings of M. dubia were evaluated against sole cropping (G₀). During the experimental period, two lentil varieties were employed as the subplots, namely V₁ (IPL 316) and V₂ (L 4727), and replicated three times under M. dubia (Figure 2). These two varieties are low-water-requiring and are recommended for use in the Bundelkhand region. Lentil was sown at a spacing of 30 cm × 10 cm and a seed rate of 40 kg ha^-1. For M. dubia, no additional fertilization, irrigation, or pest control was applied during the experimental period beyond the standard plantation practices followed at the research farm. For Lens culinaris, recommended agronomic practices were followed for sowing and weeding, chemical fertilizers, and irrigation were applied. Fertilizer was applied to the lentil crop at the rate of 20 kg N ha^-1, 40 kg P₂₅ ha^-1, 20 kg K₂O ha^-1, and 20 kg S ha^-1 at the time of sowing. Intercultural operations were conducted when necessary, and the lentil crop was harvested in March. M. dubia was planted in July 2020, and the trees were three years old at the time of the lentil intercropping experiment conducted during Rabi 2023. Litterfall, tree growth, biomass, and carbon sequestration data were recorded over a continuous three-year period (2020–2023), beginning from the year of plantation establishment. However, the lentil intercropping experiment, including crop quality analysis, was conducted only during Rabi 2023 under the established M. dubia stand. For estimation of litterfall and its nutrient concentrations, the months were treated as subplots. Tree growth and biomass parameters were estimated under different treatments using a Randomized Block Design, with observations recorded at two intervals i.e. before sowing and after harvesting of lentil in order to assess the seasonal influence of intercrop management on tree performance.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Representation of experimental layout showing different spatial arrangements of M. dubia-based agroforestry system intercropped with lentil varieties namely G₀: Sole cropping, G₁: Melia dubia at 5m × 5m, G₂: Melia dubia at 5m × 4m and G₃: Melia dubia at 5m × 3m.

Figure 2

Figure 2. View of M. dubia plantation before sowing of lentil (a) and during the lentil crop growth period (b).

Nutrient analysis of lentil

Reliable sampling is crucial for acquiring dependable plant analysis outcomes. For nutrient quality analysis, three replications were maintained by compositing seeds obtained from nine randomly selected lentil plants at harvest in each treatment plot. Mechanical grinding of the seeds was conducted and utilized for chemical analysis according to the standard methodology (Jackson, 1973; AOAC, 1990). To determine the total nitrogen in the litterfall, a specified weight of the sample was digested in strong sulfuric acid (H₂SO₄). The sample was digested in a diacid mixture of HNO₃ and HClO₄ in a 3:1 ratio for the measurement of other nutrients. Nitrogen (N) in the digest was quantified using distillation utilizing a Kjeldahl apparatus with a boric acid indicator solution. The phosphorus (P) level in the digest was quantified using the vanadomolybdate phosphoric yellow colour method within a nitric acid medium. The concentrations of potassium (K) and calcium (Ca) in the digest were measured using a flame photometer. The amounts of iron (Fe), copper (Cu), and zinc (Zn) were determined using an atomic absorption spectrophotometer.

Litterfall analysis

Leaf litter was collected from the trees from the onset of litterfall in November until the trees were entirely devoid of leaves in February across a three-year growth period. Three replications were employed for each treatment. Four metal litter traps measuring 1 m × 1 m × 10 cm were placed in each replication for each spacing. Leaf litterfall was obtained from these traps in paper bags during the leaf-shedding phase of M. dubia at biweekly intervals, and the quantities from two intervals were combined to get monthly litterfall values. The freshly weighed samples included a representative 50 g from each replication for subsequent analysis. The typical samples were subjected to oven drying at 70° C until a constant weight was achieved to determine the dry weight of litterfall (Mg ha^-1). Subsequently, the dried samples were crushed with an electric grinder equipped with stainless steel blades and sieved through a 2 mm mesh. The concentration of several nutrients was assessed according to the standard protocol on a monthly basis. The identical procedures employed for estimating nutrient contents in litterfall were also used for nutritional analysis in lentil seeds. The data were statistically analyzed using a split-plot design, with tree spacings as the main plot and months as the subplots.

PAR

The data for PAR was taken with the help of the Lux meter two times a week in three slots, i.e., morning, afternoon, and evening. The Lux reading was converted into (µ mol m^-2 s^-1) by the following formula, PAR= Lux × 0.0185 µ mol m^-2 s^-1.

Tree growth, biomass, and carbon assessment

Tree height (m) was recorded using a Ravi Altimeter for each tree before sowing and after harvesting the intercrops. Girth at breast height (GBH) was measured at 1.37 meters above the ground using a measuring tape. Crown spread was assessed in both the north-south and east-west directions using ground-based measurements, both for trees under agroforestry systems and those in pure stands. Biomass estimation was performed by calculating above-ground biomass (AGB) using the pan-tropical allometric equation developed by Chave et al. (2014): AGB = 0.0673 × (WD × DBH² × H) ^0.975, where wood density (WD) of 3-year-old M. dubia was 0.468 g cm^-³ as reported by Saravanan et al (2014). Below-ground biomass (BGB) was estimated by multiplying AGB by a root-to-shoot ratio of 0.26 (Ravindranath and Ostwald, 2008), and total biomass was the sum of AGB and BGB. Carbon storage was determined by multiplying the total biomass by a carbon fraction of 0.5, based on the assumption that 50 percent of dry biomass constitutes carbon (MacDicken, 1997). Subsequently, the carbon dioxide (CO₂) sequestration potential was calculated by multiplying the carbon stock by a conversion factor of 3.67 (Howard et al., 2014), representing the molecular weight ratio of CO₂ to carbon.

Economic analysis

The costs related to the cultivation of lentil and M. dubia trees were evaluated based on the net cultivated area per hectare. The labour and mechanical power necessary for operations, including ploughing, harrowing, weeding, and harvesting, together with the costs associated with seeds and farmyard manure, were computed on a per-hectare basis utilizing the prevailing rates at the experimental farm. Returns were calculated on a per-hectare basis, considering the market selling prices of the cultivated crops. The total returns from M. dubia were assessed by evaluating the above-ground volume. Net returns were calculated by deducting total costs from gross returns and reported in US dollars. Net returns were calculated using formula of Bhatia et al. (2024).

Net Returns (US$ ha^-1) = Gross Returns (US$ ha^-1) – Cost of Cultivation (US$ ha^-1)

Similarly, Benefit Cost Ratio of the gross returns per dollar invested was calculated as

B: C Ratio = Gross returns (US$ ha^-1)/Cost of Cultivation (US$ ha^-1).

Statistical analysis

Data on lentil nutritional quality, litterfall characteristics, and economic returns were analysed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) for a split-plot design, with tree spacings (G₀–G₃) as main plots and lentil varieties (V₁ and V₂) as sub-plots. Data on tree growth, biomass, and carbon sequestration were analysed using a Completely Randomized Block Design (CRBD). The significance of differences was tested at the 5% probability level using OPSTAT statistical software.

Results and discussions

Nutrient contents in lentil seed

The nutrient content of lentil seed was significantly influenced by tree spacings and varieties was recorded and is presented in Table 1. Among different tree spacings, 5m × 4m (G₂) recorded significantly higher nutrients, viz. protein content (Figure 3), nitrogen, and calcium, i.e., 26.21%, 4.19%, and 0.47% which was at par with 5m × 5m (G₁) (25.7%, 4.11%, and 0.45%). Iron and Zinc were also significantly higher in 5m × 4m (G₂) (6.8 mg 100g^-1, 3.98 mg 100g^-1), which was at par with 5m × 5m (G₁) (6.75 mg 100g^-1, 3.93 mg 100g^-1) and 5m × 3m (G₃) (6.73 mg 100g^-1, 3.93 mg 100g^-1), respectively. Phosphorus was significantly higher in 5m × 3m (G₃) (0.45%), which was at par with 5m × 4m (G₂) (0.43). The potassium was significantly higher in 5m × 5m (G₁) (0.77%) and 5m × 4m (G₂) (0.77%), which was at par with 5m × 3m (G₃) (0.75%). The copper content was significantly higher in 5m × 3m (G₃) (2.56 mg 100g^-1), which was at par with 5m × 4m (G₂) (2.55 mg 100g^-1) and 5m × 5m (G₁) (2.5 mg 100g^-1). The lentil variety IPL 316 (V₁) exhibited the most significant nutrient content among the tested varieties. viz. protein content, nitrogen, potassium, calcium, copper, and zinc, i.e., 26.01%, 4.16%, 0.79%, 0.46%, 2.59 mg 100g^-1, 3.92 mg 100g^-1) respectively. The phosphorus content was significantly higher in L 4727 (V₂), viz., 0.44%. There was no significant difference of lentil varieties on iron content in lentil seeds. The nutrient composition of lentil seeds is significantly affected by tree spacing and genetic potential in agroforestry systems, as it influences the microclimate, resource availability, and plant competition (Amassaghrou et al., 2023). The elevated phosphorus concentrations observed in high density Melia dubia plots may be attributed to nutrient sourcing from deeper soil layers facilitated by extensive root systems, which enhance vertical nutrient translocation. The favourable C:N ratio in lentils, coupled with their nitrogen-fixing ability, likely contributed to improved soil fertility and enhanced biomass accumulation of M. dubia under intercropped conditions. This symbiotic nitrogen input may have supported tree growth in denser spacings by alleviating competition for soil nitrogen. In agroforestry systems, wider spacings generally provide superior light availability, less root competition, and enhanced access to soil nutrients for the intercrop, thus improving nutrient uptake and accumulation in seeds (Keprate et al., 2024). Conversely, reduced spacings may result in shade and underground competition, thus diminishing nutrient availability to plants and consequently decreasing seed nutritional content. Consequently, altering tree spacing is essential for improving intercrop yield and raising the nutritional quality of seeds, impacting both food security and the sustainability of soil fertility (Kumar et al., 2023). The relation between tree spacing and lentil variety is crucial in shaping the ultimate seed nutritional composition, and improving productivity in agroforestry systems. Zaki et al. (2017) reported that protein content and other quality parameters of pea seed were enhanced under Sesbania sesban-based alley cropping as compared to pea sole cropping. Painkra et al. (2023) revealed the enhancement of quality parameters of intercrops under peach-based agroforestry in the Chhattisgarh region. Dhewa et al. (2017) also observed an increase in protein content and other nutrients of green gram under Tectona grandis as compared with sole cropping of green gram. Sharma et al. (2023) studied the biochemical analysis, which demonstrated that the levels of total soluble protein were significantly elevated in the seeds of soybean cultivated under Aonla compared to the sole crop. Qiao et al. (2020) reported the increase in protein content of wheat under apricot based agroforestry, but the nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorus were reduced.

Table 1

Table 1. Effect of M. dubia tree spacing on nutrient content in the seeds of lentil varieties.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Effect of Melia dubia tree spacing on protein content (%) in seeds of lentil varieties under a Melia dubia-based agroforestry system. (Treatments: G₀ = Sole lentil crop; G₁ = Melia dubia at 5 m × 5 m; G₂ = Melia dubia at 5 m × 4 m; G₃ = Melia dubia at 5 m × 3 m; V₁ = Lentil variety IPL 316; V₂ = Lentil variety L 4727).

Litterfall and its nutrient concentration

Significant variations were observed in the litterfall and its nutrient concentrations under different tree spacings (Table 2). The significantly higher leaf litterfall was observed in 5m × 3m (G₃) (1.19 Mg ha^-1), which was followed by tree spacing 5m × 4m (G₂) (1.07 Mg ha^-1) and 5m × 5m (G₁) (0.99 Mg ha^-1). There was no significant effect of tree spacing on nutrient content in nitrogen, iron, and zinc. Phosphorus content was significantly higher in 5m × 3m (G₃) (0.17%), which was at par with 5m × 4m (G₂) (0.16%). Potassium content was significantly higher in 5m × 3m (G₃) (0.8%) and 5m × 4m (G₂) (0.8%), while calcium and copper were found significantly higher in 5m × 3m (G₃) (0.58%, 3.49 mg 100g^-1). Among the four months, the significantly higher leaf litterfall was observed in February (1.21 Mg ha^-1), whereas the lowest was observed in November (0.93 Mg ha^-1). The nitrogen content was significantly higher in December (0.92%) and January (0.92%), which was at par with November (0.9%). Phosphorus content was significantly higher in December (0.18%), whereas potassium, iron, and copper content were significantly higher in January (0.83%, 115.59 mg 100g^-1, 5.31 mg 100g^-1). Calcium was having significant differences among different months and was highest in January (0.58%) which was at par with December (0.56%), while zinc was significantly higher in January (11.44 mg 100g^-1) which was at par with February (11.28 mg 100g^-1). Litterfall and its nutrient composition are profoundly affected by tree spacing and seasonal variations in agroforestry systems, as space influences canopy structure, leaf density, and therefore the volume of biomass deposited into the soil (Bhardwaj et al., 2024). The higher litterfall observed under closer M. dubia spacing may arise from intensified competition and accelerated nutrient translocation, leading to increased leaf turnover. However, leaves shed in these conditions are often lower in nutrient concentration, suggesting that quantity of litterfall may not always correspond to nutrient quality. The quantity and timing of litterfall are directly affected by tree spacing; closer spacings lead to denser canopies and increased litterfall during peak months, whereas wider spacings may decrease total litterfall. The nutrient-dense litter, especially regarding nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K), is essential for restoring soil fertility and facilitating intercrop development (Fahad et al., 2022). Therefore, regulating tree spacing is crucial for enhancing biomass production and sustaining balanced nutrient input into the soil via litterfall, thereby ensuring the agroforestry system’s sustainability. In M. dubia-based agroforestry systems, litterfall generally reaches its peak during the dry season, typically from December to March, when leaf senescence is most apparent due to moisture stress and physiological cycles. Gupta et al. (2010) found the higher leaf litter production in the Albizia lebbeck-based agroforestry system without any pruning regimes, with more addition of nutrients. Kumar et al. (2021) revealed that the highest litterfall was noted in closer spacing than wider spacing, along with different nutrient concentrations in leaf litterfall in Eucalyptus tereticornis-based agroforestry. Gawali (2014) found that litterfall was significantly higher in closer spacing of 4m x 4 m than wider spacings in Ceiba pentandra-based agroforestry. Singh et al. (2007); Singh (2009), and Singh et al. (2024) studied the litterfall content, nutrient concentrations in different spacings and different months of Poplar-based agroforestry in Punjab, wherein the highest litterfall was observed in closer spacing. Singh et al. (2023) reported a pattern of nutrient dynamics through litterfall in M. composita plantation with different espacements under agroforestry, with the highest litterfall in closer spacing in December month with the highest nutrient contents.

Table 2

Table 2. Production and nutrient concentrations in leaf litterfall of M. dubia plantations under different spacings.

Photosynthetically active radiation

The data in Figure 4 showed clear variations in the photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) received by the crop across several agroforestry system treatments. The photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) values varied between 304.09 and 652.85 µ mol m^-2 s^-1 in the G₀ (Lens culinaris sole cropping) and between 135.26 and 509.22 µ mol m^-2 s^-1 in the intercropped treatments (G₁, G₂, and G₃) during the October 2023 to March 2024 crop growth period. A decrease in light availability resulting from the presence of M. dubia trees was consistently seen in the intercropped treatments, as evidenced by lower PAR values compared to the sole cropping. Among tree spacings, 5 m × 3 m (G₃) exhibited the lowest PAR values, with values ranging from 135.26 to 410.68 µ mol m^-2 s^-1. The results emphasise the shading impact caused by M. dubia trees in the agroforestry system, leading to decreased light availability for the intercropped lentil crop. The diminishing pattern in PAR values as tree density increases highlights the need to take into account light availability during the establishment of agroforestry systems that include lentil or comparable pulse crops. Reduced PAR values under denser tree spacing not only limit photosynthesis but also alter the red:far-red phytochrome ratio, a key light quality signal regulating crop morphology and resource allocation under shaded environments (Smith, 2000). This change in light quality may explain variations in seed nutrient quality and growth responses of lentil under M. dubia spacing regimes. To achieve a satisfactory balance between tree benefits and agricultural yield in such environments, it is essential to optimize tree spacing and canopy management (Handiso et al., 2024). The shading caused by M. dubia leaves reduces the intensity of light, which in turn becomes a limiting factor in the decrease in yield of intercrops cultivated under M. dubia. Because of the shadowed conditions prevalent under block plantation, the data on PAR were higher in open conditions than under M. dubia. Gill et al. (2009) reported similar findings in the case of M. dubia, where there was a decrease in PAR under intercropping. Furthermore, several studies have examined the effects of various light conditions on crops in temperate agroforestry systems, including durum wheat and apple (Moretti et al., 2020). Peng et al. (2009) reported a significant reduction in photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) in a 4-year-old plantation of walnut and plum-based agroforestry spaced at 5 m × 3 m when intercropped with soybean maize. The effects of tree competition significantly reduced PAR in Neem-based agroforestry intercropped with black gram as compared to sole cropping (Pandey et al., 2010). Comparable results were also reported by Mukherjee and Sarkar (2016) in Acacia auriculiformis, Casuarina equisetifolia, Dalbergia sissoo, Glyricidia sepium, Albizia lebbek, Gmelina arborea, and Eucalyptus hybrid when intercropped with the tea crop in the eastern region of India.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Effect of M. dubia tree spacings on PAR (Photosynthetically Active Radiation) during the crop growth period.

Tree growth parameters

Perusal of data (Table 3) showed that there was no significant effect on tree growth parameters. The highest final height (8.49 m) was recorded in G₃V₁, which had the initial height of 8.2 m. G₁V₁ recorded the highest final GBH (48.88 cm), which started with an initial GBH of 42.41 cm. G₃V₁ had the highest initial crown spread of 5.19 m and final crown spread of 5.73 m. The intercropped treatments in all spacings exhibited superior growth characteristics compared to sole trees indicating that reduction in the distance between trees and cultivating them together with lentil varieties contributed to the increase in height and non-significant changes in the girth of M. dubia trees in a very short span of time. The results revealed favourable impacts of intercropping on the growth of trees in the agroforestry systems. A possible cause for this result may be the complementarity between the tree and the crop. The finding was consistent with other research by Ashalatha et al. (2015) and Ali et al. (2023) that the height of the M. dubia tree was higher when it was grown alongside the agricultural crops in comparison to sole M. dubia trees. A similar trend was observed by Nandal and Kumar (2010) that the tree height of M. dubia was higher under an intercropped field than pure stand of M. dubia. Similar findings were obtained by Thakur et al. (2019) that the highest girth was observed in M. composita-based silvimedicinal system spaced at 3 m × 3 m compared to pure stands of M. dubia spaced at 2 m × 2 m. Several scientific studies have reported the advantageous impacts of intercropping on the girth of trees in M. dubia-based agroforestry systems (Mohanty et al., 2019). Prasad et al. (2010) observed that the growth attributes like height and diameter increased under different spatial arrangements of Eucalyptus-based agroforestry as compared to sole stands of Eucalyptus. Singh and Kumar (2014) found that a greater distance between trees in agroforestry systems led to a wider spread of the tree crown in poplar-based agroforestry. These findings align with the research conducted by Singh et al. (2017), which showed that intercropping with leguminous crops enhanced the development and enlargement of tree crowns of poplar in Uttar Pradesh.

Table 3

Table 3. Growth, biomass, and carbon sequestration attributes of M. dubia under lentil intercropping in an agroforestry system.

Biomass and carbon estimation

Significant differences were observed among treatments for biomass estimation (Table 3). Before sowing, the significantly higher above ground biomass, below ground biomass and total biomass were recorded under G₃V₁ (24.51 Mg ha^-1, 6.37 Mg ha^-1, 30.88 Mg ha^-1), which was at par with G₃V₂ (24.45 Mg ha^-1, 6.35 Mg ha^-1, 30.8 Mg ha^-1), and G₃ (24.26 Mg ha^-1, 6.31 Mg ha^-1, 30.57 Mg ha^-1) while the lowest was under G₁ (14.97 Mg ha^-1, 3.89 Mg ha^-1, 18.86 Mg ha^-1). After harvest, biomass values increased markedly, with G₃V₂ showing the highest above ground biomass, below ground biomass and total biomass (33.89 Mg ha^-1, 8.81 Mg ha^-1, 42.7 Mg ha^-1), which was at par with G₃V₁ (33.08 Mg ha^-1, 8.6 Mg ha^-1, 41.68 Mg ha^-1) and G₃ (31.8 Mg ha^-1, 8.26 Mg ha^-1, 40.06 Mg ha^-1). There were significant differences observed for Carbon storage and CO₂ sequestration potential. Before sowing, the highest Carbon storage and CO₂ sequestration potential was recorded under G₃V₁ (15.44 Mg ha^-1, 56.68 Mg ha^-1), which was at par with G₃V₂ (15.41 Mg ha^-1, 56.54 Mg ha^-1), and G₃ (15.28 Mg ha^-1, 56.1 Mg ha^-1), while the lowest was under G₁ (9.55 Mg ha^-1, 35.06 Mg ha^-1). After harvest, carbon storage and CO₂ sequestration potential increased markedly, with G₃V₂ showing the highest carbon storage and CO₂ sequestration potential (21.35 Mg ha^-1, 78.37 Mg ha^-1), which was at par with G₃V₁ (20.84 Mg ha^-1, 76.48 Mg ha^-1) and G₃ (20.03 Mg ha^-1, 73.52 Mg ha^-1). These studies have also shown that closer spacing in trees and intercropping practices can augment tree biomass production in agroforestry systems (Figure 5). Similar results were given by Ramesh et al. (2023) that Eucalyptus intercropped with pearl millet recorded higher above-ground biomass as compared to a sole stand of Eucalyptus. A three-year-old M. dubia plantation at a density of 500 trees per hectare could sequester 25.64 Mg C ha^-1 in the Bundelkhand region of Central India (Gautam et al., 2025). Prajapati et al. (2020) also found a similar trend in an M. dubia-based silvopasture system. Vanlalngurzauva et al. (2010) found the biomass of Gmelina arborea increases when intercropped with black gram and groundnut as compared to sole G. arborea. These findings further substantiate the results reported in our study by Prajapati et al. (2023) that higher biomass was obtained under spacing of 4m × 4m M. dubia-based silvipasture system. Chandana et al. (2020) observed that highest carbon stock was observed under closer spacing of M. dubia-based agroforestry. Agroforestry has substantial potential for carbon sequestration, this finding aligns with previous studies that have highlighted positive effects of intercropping (Murthy et al., 2013). Chauhan et al. (2012) demonstrated that carbon sequestration potential of Populus deltoides tree was higher under intercropping in poplar-wheat-based agroforestry.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Total biomass [(a) initial biomass; (b) final biomass] of Melia dubia under under Lentil intercropping in agroforestry system (Treatments: G₁V₁ = Melia dubia at 5m × 5m + Lentil variety IPL 316, G₁V₂ = Melia dubia at 5m × 5m + Lentil variety L 4727, G₁ = Melia dubia at 5m × 5m sole tree, G₂V₁ = Melia dubia at 5m × 4m + Lentil variety IPL 316, G₂V₂ = Melia dubia at 5m × 4m + Lentil variety L 4727, G₂ = Melia dubia at 5m × 4m sole tree, G₃V₁ = Melia dubia at 5m × 3m + Lentil variety IPL 316, G₃V₂ = Melia dubia at 5m × 3m + Lentil variety L 4727, G₃ = Melia dubia at 5m × 3m sole tree). Lowercase letters on error bar denote statistical significance (p ≤ 0.05) among treatment means. Treatment with same letter on error bar is statistically at par and vice versa.

Economic analysis

The cost of cultivating one hectare of land using various combinations of the M. dubia-based agroforestry system showed different trends (Table 4). As compared to lentil sole cropping, the expenses increased by 2–3 percent when planting M. dubia alongside lentil. The total cost of cultivation was calculated for the entire three-year establishment period of the M. dubia plantation, including the lentil intercrop season of 2023. On the other hand, when lentil was intercropped with M. dubia under 5m × 3m (G₃) and 5m × 4m (G₂) spacing, the net returns were $2782 ha^-1 and $2420 ha⁻¹, respectively. These returns were higher than sole cropping (G₀). Profitability increased progressively from G₀ to G₃, indicating that closer tree spacing positively impacts returns. The significantly higher Benefit-Cost Ratio (B:C) of 2.92 under 5m × 3m (G₃). Both varieties had similar costs of cultivation but differed slightly in gross returns, making IPL 316 (V₁) the preferred choice. Among the lentil varieties, the highest net returns of $1930 ha⁻¹ with a Benefit-Cost Ratio of 2.7 were achieved by IPL 316 (V₁). The lesser return in sole cropping can be linked to the sole presence of a single crop, which produces comparatively lesser amounts and so generates diminished income. The findings align with the study conducted by Dev et al. (2020), which assessed the performance of sesame-chickpea in a bamboo-based agroforestry system and revealed that sesame-chickpea cultivation growing with bamboo yielded greater gross returns and profits compared to growing it as a sole crop. Similar results were given by Pratap et al. (2020) under M. composita-based agroforestry. Thakur et al. (2022) and Jilariya et al. (2019) also observed higher net returns and greater benefit-cost ratio for M. dubia-based agroforestry in comparison to sole cropping.

Table 4

Table 4. Economic Analysis of the M. dubia-based agroforestry system.

Conclusion

The study emphasizes the diverse advantages of incorporating M. dubia into agroforestry systems alongside L. culinaris farming in the semi-arid Bundelkhand region. The spacing of trees markedly affected the nutrient composition of lentil seeds, the quantity and quality of litterfall, tree development patterns, biomass accumulation, carbon sequestration, and overall economic feasibility. The 5m × 3m (G₃) tree spacing exhibited optimal performance regarding total biomass (42.7 Mg ha^-1), carbon storage (21.35 Mg ha^-1), and CO₂ sequestration potential (78.37 Mg ha^-1), in addition to the highest litterfall (1.19 Mg ha^-1) and nutrient return to the soil, thereby improving ecosystem sustainability. The lentil variety IPL 316 (V₁) consistently outperformed L 4727 (V₂) in terms of nutrient quality attributes and profitability with net returns ($ 1930 ha^-1). The economic analysis indicated that the G₃ spacing yielded the highest net returns ($ 2783 ha^-1) and Benefit-Cost Ratio (2.92), suggesting that denser spacings can enhance profitability while preserving the ecological balance. Despite diminished photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) under denser tree cover impacting crop light availability, the compensatory benefit of improved soil nutrient recycling and elevated crop nutritional quality highlights the benefits of optimized agroforestry systems. This study confirms that a properly managed M. dubia-based agroforestry system can enhance crop production, ecological resilience, and farmers’ income, establishing it as a sustainable land use model for climate-vulnerable areas.

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Author contributions

PD: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Software, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. PT: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. MD: Conceptualization, Resources, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. RY: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Resources, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. AH: Conceptualization, Methodology, Resources, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. NK: Conceptualization, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. DR: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. ID: Data curation, Formal Analysis, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. DY: Conceptualization, Data curation, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. HA: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal Analysis, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. AS: Investigation, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. VS: Formal Analysis, Methodology, Software, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. AK: Data curation, Formal Analysis, Software, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. SB: Formal Analysis, Supervision, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

Funding

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

The reviewer JD declared a shared affiliation with the author(s) AK to the handling editor at the time of review.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declare that no Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

Akchaya K., Parasuraman P., Pandian K., Vijayakumar S., Thirukumaran K., Mustaffa M. R., et al. (2025). Boosting resource use efficiency, soil fertility, food security, ecosystem services, and climate resilience with legume intercropping: A review. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 9. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1527256

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Akhilraj T. M., Parthiban K. T., and Kambli S. S. (2023). Assessment of leaf fodder quality of Melia dubia genetic resources for proximate and mineral composition. Indian J. Ecol. 50, 926–931. doi: 10.55362/IJE/2023/3991

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ali S., Vasudev K. L., Devagiri G. M., Hegde R., and Naik K. (2023). Growth performance of Melia dubia in agroforestry in the central dry zone of Karnataka. Int. J. Advanced Biochem. Res. SP7, 478–481. doi: 10.33545/26174693.2023.v7.i2Sg.254

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Amassaghrou A., Barkaoui K., Bouaziz A., Alaoui S. B., Fatemi Z. E. A., and Daoui K. (2023). Yield and related traits of three legume crops grown in olive-based agroforestry under an intense drought in the South Mediterranean. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 30, 103597. doi: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2023.103597, PMID: 36910463

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

AOAC (1990). Official methods of analysis of the association of official analytical chemists. 15th Edition (Washington, D.C: Association of Official Analytical Chemists).

Google Scholar

Arunachalam A., Rizvi R. H., Handa A. K., and Ramanan S. S. (2022). Agroforestry in India: area estimates and methods. Curr. Sci. 123, 743–744. doi: 10.18520/cs/v123/i6/743-744

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ashalatha A., Divya M. P., and Ajayghosh V. (2015). Development of suita ble Melia dubia-based agroforestry models for higher productivity. Madras Agric. J. 102, 264–267. doi: 10.29321/MAJ.10.001115

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

OPSTAT statistical software. Available online at: http://opstat.somee.com/opstat/onefactor/onefactor.html (Accessed August 20, 2024).

Google Scholar

Awasthi P., Bargali K., Bargali S. S., and Khatri K. (2022). Nutrient return through decomposing Coriaria Nepalensis litter in degraded hills of Kumaun Himalaya, India. Front. For. Glob. Change 5. doi: 10.3389/ffgc.2022.1008939

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Bhardwaj K. K., Yadav R., Goyal V., and Sharma M. K. (2024). Pattern of litterfall production and nutrient addition in soil through litterfall by different tree species: A review. Environ. Conserv. J. 25, 257–266. doi: 10.36953/ECJ.24592671

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Bhat S., Aditya K. S., Kumari B., Acharya K. K., and Sendhil R. (2022). “Pulses production, trade and policy imperatives: A global perspective,” in Advances in legumes for sustainable intensification. Eds. Meena R. S. and Kumar S. (Academic Press, San Diego, CA), 639–656. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-323-85797-0.00018-5

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Bhatia A., Sharma K., Thakur M., Kumar S., Sharma R., and Kumar A. (2024). Ecological and economical assessment of harar–soybean agroforestry system in subtropical conditions of Himachal Pradesh, India. Agroforestry Syst. 98, 151–164. doi: 10.1007/s10457-023-00896-2

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Chakravarty S., Pala N. A., Tamang B., Sarkar B. C., Manohar K. A., Rai P., et al. (2019). “Ecosystem services of trees outside forest,” in Sustainable agriculture, forest and environmental managementEds. Jhariya M. K., Banerjee A., Meena R., and Yadav D. (Springer, Singapore), 327–352. doi: 10.1007/978-981-13-6830-1_10

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Chandana P., Lata A. M., Khan M. A., and Krishna A. (2020). Climate change smart option and doubling farmer’s income through Melia dubia-based agri-silviculture system. Curr. Sci. 118, 444–448. doi: 10.18520/cs/v118/i3/444-448

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Chauhan S. K., Brar M. S., and Sharma R. (2012). Performance of poplar (Populus deltoides) and its effect on wheat yield under agroforestry system in irrigated agro-ecosystem, India. Caspian J. Environ. Sci. .10, 53–60.

Google Scholar

Chauhan R. S., Jadeja D. B., Thakur N. S., Jha S. K., and Sankanur M. S. (2018). Selection of candidate plus trees (CPTs) of Malabar neem (Melia dubia Cav.) for enhancement of farm productivity in south Gujarat, India. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci. 7, 3582–3592. doi: 10.20546/ijcmas.2018.705.414

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Chave J., Réjou-Méchain M., Búrquez A., Chidumayo E., Colgan M. S., Delitti W. B., et al. (2014). Improved allometric models to estimate the aboveground biomass of tropical trees. Global Change Biol. 20, 3177–3190. doi: 10.1111/gcb.12629

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Deshmukh P. P., Tiwari P., Dobriyal M. J., Yadav R. P., Handa A. K., Shekhawat V., et al. (2025). Optimizing Pulse Cultivation: Impact of Malabar Neem (Melia dubia Cav.) Spacings on Growth and Yield of Lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.) Vis-a-Vis Soil Health in Semi-arid Conditions of Bundelkhand. Legume Research-An Int. J., 1–8. doi: 10.18805/LR-5491

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Dev I., Ram A., Ahlawat S. P., Palsaniya D. R., Newaj R., Tewari R. K., et al. (2017). Bamboo (Dendrocalamus strictus) + sesame (Sesamum indicum) based agroforestry model: A sustainable livelihood option for farmers of semi-arid region. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 87, 1528–1534. doi: 10.56093/ijas.v87i11.75746

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Dev I., Ram A., Ahlawat S. P., Palsaniya D. R., Singh R., Dhyani S. K., et al. (2020). Bamboo-based agroforestry system (Dendrocalamus strictus+ sesame–chickpea) for enhancing productivity in semi-arid tropics of central India. Agrofor. Syst. 94, 1725–1739. doi: 10.1007/s10457-020-00492-8

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Dhewa J. S., Daniel S., and Sulochana (2017). Effect of different levels of phosphorus and sulphur on yield and quality of green gram (Vigna radiata L.) under teak (Tectona grandis L.) -based agroforestry system. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci. 6, 520–534. doi: 10.20546/ijcmas.2017.602.059

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Elias D. M., Robinson S., Both S., Goodall T., Majalap-Lee N., Ostle N. J., et al. (2020). Soil microbial community and litter quality controls on decomposition across a tropical forest disturbance gradient. Front. For. Glob. Change 3. doi: 10.3389/ffgc.2020.0008

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Fahad S., Chavan S. B., Chichaghare A. R., Uthappa A. R., Kumar M., Kakade V., et al. (2022). Agroforestry systems for soil health improvement and maintenance. Sustainability 14, 14877. doi: 10.3390/su142214877

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Forest Survey of India (2023). “Forest and tree cover,” in India state of forest report 2023, volume I (Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India, Dehradun).

Google Scholar

Gautam K., Kumar N., Ram A., Dev I., Choudhury B. U., Singh N. R., et al. (2025). Root architecture and carbon sequestration potential of fast-growing agroforestry tree species in semi-arid Central India. Front. Agron. 7. doi: 10.3389/fagro.2025.1597122

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Gawali A. (2014). Litterfall, carbon and nutrient returns in stands of ceiba pentandra (L.) gaertn. Subhumid tropics of eastern India. Indian J. Ecol. 41, 57–62.

Google Scholar

Ghosh P. K., Bandyopadhyay K. K., Wanjari R. H., Manna M. C., Misra A. K., Mohanty M., et al. (2007). Legume effect for enhancing productivity and nutrient use-efficiency in major cropping systems – an Indian perspective: a review. J. Sustain. Agric. 30, 59–86. doi: 10.1300/J064v30n01_07

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ghosh P. K., Kumar S., and Singh G. (2014). Agronomic practices for agroforestry systems in India. Indian J. Agron. 59, 497–510. doi: 10.59797/ija.v59i4.4571

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Gill R. I. S., Singh B., and Kaur N. (2009). Productivity and nutrient uptake of newly released wheat varieties at different sowing times under poplar plantation in north-western India. Agrofor. Syst. 76, 579–590. doi: 10.1007/s10457-009-9223-0

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Gupta S. R., Dagar J. C., and Teketay D. (2020). “Agroforestry for rehabilitation of degraded landscapes: Achieving livelihood and environmental security,” in Agroforestry for degraded landscapes: recent advances and emerging challenges vol. 1. Eds. Dagar J. C. and Teketay D. (Springer, Singapore), 23–68. doi: 10.1007/978-981-15-4136-0_2

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Gupta G., Yadav R. S., Maurya D., and Mishra S. V. (2010). Litter dynamics under different pruning regimes of Albizia procera based agroforestry system in semiarid region. Asian Sci. 5, 93–97.

Google Scholar

Handiso M. A., Asfaw Z., Glaser B., Bromm T., Gross A., and Lemma B. (2024). Effects of canopy management of umbrella tree (Terminalia brownii Fres.) on microclimate and maize (Zea mays L.) yield in agroforestry parkland of South Ari District, southern Ethiopia. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 8. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2024.1464609

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Howard J., Hoyt S., Isensee K., Telszewski M., and Pidgeon E. (2014). Coastal Blue Carbon: Methods for assessing carbon stocks and emissions factors in mangroves, tidal salt marshes, and seagrass meadows (Arlington, VA, USA: Conservation International; IOCUNESCO; IUCN), 180.

Google Scholar

Jackson M. L. (1973). Soil chemical analysis (New Delhi: Prentice Hall of India Pvt. Ltd.), 1–498.

Google Scholar

Jilariya D. J., Thakur N. S., Singh N., and Gunaga R. P. (2019). Economics of cultivation of Melia dubia Cav.-Aloe vera L. silvi-medicinal model. Indian J. Agrofor. 21, 35–40.

Google Scholar

Jinger D., Kakade V., Bhatnagar P. R., Paramesh V., Dinesh D., Singh G., et al. (2024). Enhancing productivity and sustainability of ravine lands through horti-silviculture and soil moisture conservation: A pathway to land degradation neutrality. J. Environ. Manage. 364, 121425. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.121425, PMID: 38870789

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Jinger D., Kakade V., Kaushal R., Bhatnagar P. R., Ghosh A., Mahawer S. K., et al. (2025). Nature-based solutions for enhancing soil health and M. sequestration in degraded ravine lands through silvo-aromatic system and soil moisture conservation techniques. J. Environ. Manage. 380, 124904. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.124904, PMID: 40090097

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Jinger D., Kakade V. D., Kaushal R., Dinesh D., Bhatnagar P. R., and Singhal V. (2021). Rehabilitation of degraded lands through different planting techniques in Melia dubia Cav. Food Sci. Rep. 2, 7–9.

Google Scholar

Jinger D., Kaushal R., Kumar R., Paramesh V., Verma A., Shukla M., et al. (2023). Degraded land rehabilitation through agroforestry in India: Achievements, current understanding, and future prospectives. Front. Ecol. Evol. 11. doi: 10.3389/fevo.2023.1088796

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Jinger D., Khatri P., Kumari K., and Kumar D. (2022b). Agroforestry-Based ecosystem services for livelihood resilience. Food Sci. Rep. 3, 50–55.

Google Scholar

Jinger D., Kumar R., Kakade V., Dinesh D., Singh G., Pande V. C., et al. (2022a). Agroforestry system for controlling soil erosion and enhancing system productivity in ravine lands of Western India under climate change scenarios. Environ. Monit. Assess. 194, 267. doi: 10.1007/s10661-022-09910-z, PMID: 35262801

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Keprate A., Bhardwaj D. R., Sharma P., Kumar D., and Rana R. K. (2024). Biomass partitioning, carbon storage, and pea (Pisum sativum L.) crop production under a Grewia optiva-based agroforestry system in the mid-hills of the northwestern Himalayas. Sustainability 16, ), 7438. doi: 10.3390/su16177438

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ketali S. S., Swaminathan B., and Aiswarya S. (2024). Towards atmanirbharta (self-reliance) in the production of pulse crops in India: A situational analysis of future demand and supply. Int. J. Humanities Soc. Sci. Manage. 4, 241–254.

Google Scholar

Kreitzman M., Chapman M., Keeley K. O., and Chan K. M. (2022). Local knowledge and relational values of Midwestern woody perennial polyculture farmers can inform tree-crop policies. People Nat. 4, 180–200. doi: 10.1002/pan3.10275

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kumar S., Gopinath K. A., Sheoran S., Meena R. S., Srinivasarao C., Bedwal S., et al. (2023). Pulse-based cropping systems for soil health restoration, resources conservation, and nutritional and environmental security in rainfed agroecosystems. Front. Microbiol. 13. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.1041124, PMID: 36817102

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kumar T., Kumari B., Arya S., Jayaswal D., and Kaushik P. (2021). Litterfall guided soil nutrient return in Eucalyptus based agroforestry system. Indian J. Traditional Knowledge 20, 544–549.

Google Scholar

Lal R. (2025). Managing soil health in africa (MASHA) by re-carbonization of its agroecosystems. Egyptian J. Soil Sci. 65, 301–320. doi: 10.21608/ejss.2024.334426.1913

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Lasco R. D., Delfino R. J. P., and Espaldon M. L. O. (2014). Agroforestry systems: helping smallholders adapt to climate risks while mitigating climate change. Wiley Interdiscip. Reviews: Climate Change 5, 825–833. doi: 10.1002/wcc.301

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Liu J. (2025). Progress in research on the effects of environmental factors on natural forest regeneration. Front. For. Glob. Change 8. doi: 10.3389/ffgc.2025.1525461

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

MacDicken K. G. (1997). “A guide to monitoring carbon storage in forestry and agroforestry projects,” in Winrock international institute for agricultural development, forest carbon monitoring program. (Arlington, VA).

Google Scholar

Malik D. P., Devi M., and Reddy A. A. (2022). Global status of lentil production with special reference to India. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 92, 46–50. doi: 10.56093/ijas.v92i4.123972

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Mohanty S., Thakur N. S., Gunaga R. P., and Gajbhiye N. (2019). Influence of Melia dubia Cav. Spatial Geometries on Growth, Herbage Yield and Essential Oil Constituents of Cymbopogon martinii (Roxb.) Wats. J. Essential Oil Bearing Plants 22, 630–648. doi: 10.1080/0972060X.2019.1642144

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Moretti B., Fracasso A., Sacco D., and Nervo G. (2020). Morphology, phenology, yield, and quality traits of durum wheat cultivars grown under different light regimes in a temperate agroforestry system. Agronomy 10, 1789. doi: 10.3390/agronomy10111789

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Mukherjee A. and Sarkar S. (2016). Impact of photosynthetic active radiation on performance of tea crop under agro forestry ecosystem in eastern India. Ital J. Agrometeorol-Rivista Italiana Di Agrometeorologia 21, 37–46.

Google Scholar

Murthy I. K., Gupta M., Tomar S., Munsi M., Tiwari R., Hegde G. T., et al. (2013). Carbon sequestration potential of agroforestry systems in India. J. Earth Sci. Climate Change 4, 1–7. doi: 10.4172/2157-7617.1000131

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Nair P. K. R. (2012). Carbon sequestration studies in agroforestry systems: a reality-check. Agrofor. Syst. 86, 243–253. doi: 10.1007/s10457-011-9434-z

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Nair P. K. R., Mohan Kumar B., and Nair V. D. (2009). Agroforestry as a strategy for carbon sequestration. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 172, 10–23. doi: 10.1002/jpln.200800030

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Nandal D. P. S. and Kumar R. (2010). Influence of Melia azedarach-based land use systems on economics and reclamation of salt affected soil. Indian J. Agrofor. 12, 23–26.

Google Scholar

Painkra D. S., Toppo P., Tirkey J., Kashyap P., Yadav P., Minj S. K., et al. (2023). Economics of Potato Varieties (Solanum tuberosum L.) and Soil Health under Peach-based Agroforestry System in Northern Hills Zone of Chhattisgarh, India. Int. J. Plant Soil Sci. 35, 1016–1020. doi: 10.9734/ijpss/2023/v35i203896

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Palsaniya D. R., Tewari R. K., Singh R., Yadav R. S., and Dhyani S. K. (2010). Farmer-agroforestry land use adoption interface in degraded agroecosystem of Bundelkhand region, India. Range Manage. Agroforestry 31, 11–19.

Google Scholar

Pandey A. K., Gupta V. K., and Solanki K. R. (2010). Productivity of neem-based agroforestry system in semi-arid region of India. Range Manage. Agroforestry 31, 144–149.

Google Scholar

Pandey A. K., Tripathi Y. C., and Kumar A. (2016). Non timber forest products (NTFPs) for sustained livelihood: Challenges and strategies. Res. J. Forestry 10, 1–7. doi: 10.3923/rjf.2016.1.7

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Peng X., Zhang Y., Cai J., Jiang Z., and Zhang S. (2009). Photosynthesis, growth and yield of soybean and maize in a tree-based agroforestry intercropping system on the Loess Plateau. Agrofor. Syst. 76, 569–577. doi: 10.1007/s10457-009-9227-9

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Pohlmann V., Schöffel E. R., Eicholz E. D., Guarino E. D. S. G., Eicholz M. D., Del Pino B. S., et al. (2024). Impacts of agroforestry systems and intercropping on the growth, production, and seed quality of corn and beans. Agrofor. Syst. 98, 3075–3088. doi: 10.1007/s10457-024-01075-7

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ponyane P., Dina Ebouel F. J., and Eze P. N. (2025). Formation pathways, ecosystem functions, and the impacts of land use and environmental stressors on soil aggregates. Front. Environ. Sci. 13. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2025.1628746

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Prajapati D. R., Thakur N. S., Gunaga R. P., and Bhuva D. C. (2023). Growth and production of Melia dubia under silvi-pasture systems and sole plantations: Positive implications of intercropping hybrid napier. Indian J. Agrofor. 25, 41–47.

Google Scholar

Prajapati D. R., Thakur N. S., Singh N., Gunaga R. P., and Patel V. R. (2020). Economic feasibility of Melia dubia-Sorgham Sudan grass based silvi-pasture systems. Indian J. Ecol. 47, 502–506.

Google Scholar

Prasad J. V. N. S., Korwar G. R., Rao K. V., Mandal U. K., Rao C. A. R., Rao G. R., et al. (2010). Tree row spacing affected agronomic and economic performance of Eucalyptus-based agroforestry in Andhra Pradesh, Southern India. Agrofor. Syst. 78, 253–267. doi: 10.1007/s10457-009-9275-1

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Pratap U. B., Pant K. S., Kumar S., and Tiwari P. (2020). Economic feasibility of Melia composita-radish based agrisilviculture systems. Int. J. Chem. Stud. 8, 257–260. doi: 10.22271/chemi.2020.v8.i5e.10620

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Qiao X., Chen X., Lei J., Sai L., and Xue L. (2020). Apricot-based agroforestry system in Southern Xinjiang Province of China: influence on yield and quality of intercropping wheat. Agrofor. Syst. 94, 477–485. doi: 10.1007/s10457-019-00412-5

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ram A., Choure S., Dev I., Kumar N., Singh D., Kumar D, et al. (2025). Soil carbon and nutrient cycling regulated by fine roots distribution and dynamics in teak (Tectona grandis L.) -based agroforestry system in semi-arid central India. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 25, 7281–7293. doi: 10.1007/s42729-025-02595-6

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ramesh K. R., Deshmukh H. K., Sivakumar K., Guleria V., Umedsinh R. D., Krishnakumar N., et al. (2023). Influence of Eucalyptus agroforestry on crop yields, soil properties, and system economics in Southern Regions of India. Sustainability 15, 3797. doi: 10.3390/su15043797

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ravindranath N. H. and Ostwald M. (2008). Carbon inventory methods: handbook for greenhouse gas inventory, carbon mitigation and roundwood production projects (Advances in global change research, vol. 29) (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands). doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-6547-7

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Riaz F., Hameed A., and Asghar M. J. (2024). Grain nutritional and antioxidant profiling of diverse lentil (Lens culinaris Medikus) genetic resources revealed genotypes with high nutritional value. Front. Nutr. 11. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2024.1344986, PMID: 38585617

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Saleem I., Mugloo J. A., Pala N. A., Bhat G. M., Masoodi T. H., Mughal A. H., et al. (2023). Biomass production, carbon stock and sequestration potential of prominent agroforestry systems in north-western Himalaya, India. Front. For. Glob. Change 6. doi: 10.3389/ffgc.2023.1192382

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Saravanan V., Parthiban K. T., Thiruneraiselvan S., Kumar P., Vennila S., and Kanna S. U. (2014). Comparative study of wood physical and mechanical properties of Melia dubia with Tectona grandis at different Age Gradation. Res. J. Recent Sci. 3, 256–263.

Google Scholar

Selvan T., Panmei L., Murasing K. K., Guleria V., Ramesh K. R., Bhardwaj D. R., et al. (2023). Circular economy in agriculture: Unleashing the potential of integrated organic farming for food security and sustainable development. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 7. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2023.1170380

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Semba R. D., Ramsing R., Rahman N., Kraemer K., and Bloem M. W. (2021). Legumes as a sustainable source of protein in human diets. Global Food Secur. 28, 100520. doi: 10.1016/j.gfs.2021.100520

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Sharma A. (2023). Rainfall deficiency, drought and economic growth in the Bundelkhand region of India. Sustain. Water Resour. Manage. 9, 72. doi: 10.1007/s40899-023-00851-0

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Sharma A., Sharma K., Thakur M., and Kumar S. (2023). Protein content enhanced in soybean under aonla-based agroforestry system. Agrofor. Syst. 97, 261–272. doi: 10.1007/s10457-023-00804-8

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Singh B. (2009). Return and release of nutrients from poplar litterfall in an agroforestry system under subtropical condition. J. Indian Soc Soil Sci. 57, 214–218.

Google Scholar

Singh B., Gill R., and Kaur N. (2007). Litterfall and nutrients return in poplar plantation varying in row directions and spacings. Indian J. Agrofor. 9, 33–37.

Google Scholar

Singh B., Kaur H., Gill R., Kaur N., and Singh A. (2023). Pattern of nutrient dynamics through litterfall in Melia composita plantation with different espacements under agroforestry. Indian J. Agrofor. 25, 82–88.

Google Scholar

Singh B., Kaur H., Kaur S., Kaur N., and Gill R. I. S. (2024). Nutrient return through litterfall from Poplar plantation having different spacings in an agroforestry system. Agric. Res. J. 61, 388–394. doi: 10.5958/2395-146X.2024.00050.X

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Singh A. and Kumar A. (2014). Critical issue in Poplar-based agroforestry system. Indian J. Agrofor. 16, 58–67.

Google Scholar

Singh A. K., Kumar A., and Singh R. (2017). Growth and yield of poplar (Populus deltoides) based agroforestry system in eastern Uttar Pradesh, India. Indian J. Agrofor. 19, 1–8.

Google Scholar

Singhal V., Jinger D., Rathore A. C., Pal R., Samal I., Bhoi T. K., et al. (2024). COVID-19, deforestation, and green economy. Front. For. Glob. Change 6. doi: 10.3389/ffgc.2023.1305779

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Sirohi C., Bangarwa K. S., and Dhillon R. S. (2018). Melia dubia: a potential tree and source of income generation under agroforestry. Indian Farming 68.

Google Scholar

Smith H. (2000). Phytochromes and light signal perception by plants—an emerging synthesis. Nature 407, 585–591. doi: 10.1038/35036500, PMID: 11034200

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Thakur N. S., Mohanty S., Hegde H. T., Chauhan R. S., Gunaga R. P., and Bhuva D. C. (2019). Performance of Melia dubia under Cymbopogon spp.-based agroforestry systems. J. Tree Sci. 38, 28–34. doi: 10.5958/2455-7129.2019.00005.0

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Thakur N. S., Prajapati D. R., Singh N., Gunaga R. P., Bhuva D. C., and Mevada R. J. (2022). Economics of cultivation of Melia dubia-Hybrid Napier silvi-pasture models. Indian J. Agrofor. 24, 35–40.

Google Scholar

Vanlalngurzauva T., Dhara P. K., Banerjee H., and Maiti S. (2010). Growth and productivity of different intercrops grown under gamhar (Gmelina arborea) based agroforestry system. Indian J. Agrofor. 12, 105–108.

Google Scholar

Venugopalan V. K., Nath R., Sengupta K., Nalia A., Banerjee S., Chandran M. A. S., et al. (2021). The response of lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.) to soil moisture and heat stress under different dates of sowing and foliar application of micronutrients. Front. Plant Sci. 12. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2021.679469, PMID: 34367204

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Vikas and Ranjan R. (2024). Agroecological approaches to sustainable development. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 8. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2024.1405409

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Wang K., Zhang R., Song L., Yan T., and Na E. (2021). Comparison of C: N: P stoichiometry in the plant–litter–soil system between poplar and elm plantations in the Horqin Sandy Land, China. Front. Plant Sci. 12. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2021.655517, PMID: 33981324

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Zaki H., Mahmoud A., Abd El-Ati Y., Hammad A., and Sayed R. (2017). Studies on pea (Pisum sativum L.) growth and productivity under agroforestry system: 2. Yield and seed quality of pea under alley cropping system with two types of trees. J. Basic Appl. Res. Biomedicine 3, 1–9.

Google Scholar

Zheng Y., Guan F., Fan S., Yan X., and Huang L. (2022). Dynamics of leaf-litter biomass, nutrient resorption efficiency and decomposition in a moso bamboo forest after strip clearcutting. Front. Plant Sci. 12. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2021.799424, PMID: 35154189

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar