Pine afforestation on degraded lands: a global review of carbon sequestration potential

Abstract

Pine plantations on degraded lands play an important role in providing ecosystem services, among the most significant being soil and land protection against erosion, water source protection, carbon sequestration, and the restoration of landscape and biodiversity. In addition, these plantations also have a significant social and economic role. This study offers a comprehensive bibliometric and systematic analysis of publications on the use of pines in plantations on degraded lands and the environmental effects of these plantations, especially regarding soil, water, carbon storage, and more. The study’s results include an assessment of research trends, key contributors, and their influence on scientific progress in forestry, ecological restoration, and environmental protection. A total of 281 publications on the use of pines in plantations on degraded lands were identified, published between 1983 and 2024. These publications mainly originate from the USA, China, and Spain, with additional contributions from European institutions. The research findings are published in top journals in the fields of forestry, ecology, and the environment, highlighting their global impact. These articles belong to the scientific fields of environmental science and ecology, forestry, agriculture, water sciences, and others. The research results have been published in numerous journals, with the most frequently cited being Forest Ecology and Management, Forests, and Land Degradation & Development. The most frequently used keywords include afforestation, forest, restoration, pine, and carbon. The analysis of publications on the use of pines for afforestation of degraded lands highlights the widespread use of pine species in reforestation, underlining the resilience and adaptability of these species in various degraded land conditions. Future research should focus on innovative techniques for ecological reconstruction and pine forest regeneration, measures to adapt these plantations to climate change, the impact of ecosystem management practices on degraded lands on their carbon storage potential, and the effectiveness of pine species in various ecological conditions.

1 Introduction

Soil erosion is a major environmental issue, affecting more than 1,100 million hectares of land globally and redistributing approximately 75 billion tons of soil annually (Lavelle et al., 2005; Pimentel et al., 1995). The eroded soil contains 1.5–5% carbon, contributing significantly to global carbon loss (Lal, 2001). Soil erosion depletes nutrients, reduces soil depth, and leads to land degradation and desertification. It disrupts nutrient cycling and soil productivity, severely affecting agricultural systems and ecosystems. The consequences extend beyond on-site degradation, as off-site impacts include siltation of water bodies, water flow irregularities, reduced irrigation capacity, water pollution, and agrochemical runoff (Uri, 2001; Ananda and Herath, 2003). Global warming is expected to intensify the hydrological cycle, resulting in more total precipitation and an increased frequency of high-intensity rainfall events (Tudose et al., 2022; Marin et al., 2022). These climatic changes, in combination with shifts in temperature, solar radiation, and atmospheric CO₂ levels, are anticipated to significantly influence soil erosion processes (Nearing et al., 2004). The most immediate impact of climate change on erosion is the alteration in rainfall erosivity, which directly affects the detachment and transport of soil particles (Favis-Mortlock and Guerra, 1999; Mullan, 2013; Mihalache et al., 2020). Furthermore, modeling studies indicate that future climate scenarios will lead to higher rates of soil erosion and soil organic carbon loss, especially in areas with steep slopes, sandy soils, and fallow land (Mondal et al., 2016; Marin et al., 2024). Recent studies further support this, showing that climate-induced changes in erosion patterns and nutrient redistribution could intensify land degradation and food insecurity in vulnerable regions (e.g., Shen et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2024).

Under conditions of climate change and the expansion of environmental degradation processes, degraded lands present potential locations for tree plantations. When managed well, these plantations can restore landscapes and sustainably produce wood and non-wood resources (Dincă et al., 2015). Moreover, the use of highly resilient seedlings obtained in genetic breeding programs and the creation of favorable species mixtures composition could ensure the success of forest lands restoration programs (Budeanu et al., 2014; Apostol et al., 2020; Marcu et al., 2020; Budeanu et al., 2025). The benefits of afforesting degraded lands include biodiversity improvement, ecosystem stability, protection against soil erosion, provision of recreational activities, and increased carbon accumulation (Maestre and Cortina, 2004; Semwal et al., 2013; Moscatelli et al., 2017; Oprică et al., 2022). Nevertheless, in the beginning of 18th and the late of 20th century, resinous monocultures of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) and Norway spruce (Picea abies) were introduced well in Central Europe (Knoke et al., 2008; Heinrichs et al., 2019), resulting the forest composition of the current inventory, used to define the forest types (Simons et al., 2021). Moreover, conifer forests of Silver fir provide different ecosystem services such as productivity and resistance toward the disturbing factors as well as fulfill different types of both protective and ecological functions, especially at higher altitudes (Dincă et al., 2022).

Pine species have been and continue to be frequently used for restoration of forest vegetation on degraded lands (eroded, ravine-affected, rocky lands, mining dumps and so on), coastal areas, and low-productivity lands in many countries worldwide (United States, Brazil, India, China, Germany, Spain, and so on). Pine plantations have also been established to replace low-productivity or derived forests or to afforest lands outside their natural range (Constandache et al., 2021). The installation of protective forestry cultures made up of pine species had as its main purpose the reduction of degradation processes, the protection of socio-cultural objectives by reducing the intensity of torrential rain, soil, climate and development works in torrent control structures (Silvestru-Grigore et al., 2016).

Among the many pine species globally (187 identified species), the most commonly used for afforesting degraded lands have been Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.), black pine (Pinus nigra Arn.), and, less frequently, eastern white pine (Pinus strobus L.), ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa Laws.), and others. The first two species are known for their modest requirements regarding climatic and soil conditions (Șofletea and Curtu, 2007; Vlad et al., 2019), making them suitable for afforesting degraded lands (Untaru et al., 2008; Silvestru-Grigore et al., 2018) as well as other types of land outside their natural range (Enescu and Dănescu, 2013). Pine plantations have also been established to replace low-productivity forests (productivity classes IV and V) or derived forests (e.g., hornbeam forests, mixed stands) (Arhip, 1998) on lands outside their natural range (Constandache et al., 2021).

The effects of pine plantations on degraded lands include land restoration and making use of lands unsuitable for other purposes (Constandache et al., 2024), as well as mitigating climate change effects due to their high capacity for atmospheric CO₂ sequestration (Dincă et al., 2015). They also help prevent land degradation through soil stabilization and improvement (Nicolescu et al., 2018), reduce anthropogenic pressure on natural forest ecosystems, and provide an alternative for fossil fuel production (Spîrchez and Lunguleasa, 2016).

Several studies provide valuable insights on the ecological restoration or silvicultural management of specific pine species or regions (e.g., Pausas et al., 2004; Allen et al., 2002; Mechergui et al., 2022; Imanuddin et al., 2020; Wasserman et al., 2022). Compared with previous studies, our research differs in terms of scope, methodology, and contribution.

First of all, we provide a global perspective through systematically synthesized data on pine plantations across multiple continents, while previous papers focus on a specific region (e.g., Mediterranean, southwestern USA, Indonesia) or individual species (e.g., Pinus pinea, Pinus merkusii, ponderosa pine). Second, we integrate the quantitative bibliometric analysis (e.g., publication trends, co-authorship, keyword evolution) with traditional review on ecological restoration, carbon stocks, and land rehabilitation. In doing so, we were able to map the development of research on pines in restoration contexts and identify knowledge gaps, key collaborative networks, and emerging research themes through VOSviewer. Third, while other studies address biomass or carbon storage (e.g., Mechergui et al., 2022) we offer an updated analysis of carbon sequestration in pine plantations considering both above- and below-ground in varied ecological conditions and management practices. Finally, we conducted a cross-comparison of thinning and afforestation practices, as well as their environmental impacts, across species and ecosystems, thereby enabling comparative insights into best practices for degraded land restoration.

Considering the worldwide expansion of afforestation initiatives, particularly under climate policy and carbon credit frameworks, our research provides policy-relevant insights regarding the potential and limits of using pines on degraded lands. Moreover, our analysis serves as a baseline for further research and supports practitioners and researchers to improve their knowledge on the ecological trade-offs of pine-based restoration at a global scale. There are bibliometric studies on carbon stock (Jiang et al., 2022; Wu et al., 2024; Yu and Song, 2023). In recent years, bibliometric analysis has also been used in forestry studies (Bullock and Lawler, 2015; Ma et al., 2022; Sullivan, 2022; Santillán-Fernández et al., 2023; Oluwajuwon et al., 2024).

The goal of this study is to review and analyze the utilization of pine species for afforestation on degraded lands, focusing on their role in land restoration, soil stabilization, and carbon sequestration. Through a bibliometric and literature review approach, the study aims to assess the environmental benefits of pine plantations, evaluate their contribution to carbon stock accumulation, and identify key trends, challenges, and research gaps in this field. Additionally, it seeks to provide insights into the most frequently studied pine species, their effectiveness in different ecological conditions, and the impact of forest management practices on their carbon storage potential.

This study is significant because it synthesizes over four decades of global research on pine-based afforestation efforts, offering a comprehensive understanding of their ecological and climate-related benefits. By mapping the evolution of scientific knowledge and highlighting priority areas for future research, the study supports the development of informed policies and strategies for restoring degraded ecosystems and enhancing climate resilience through pine plantations.

2 Materials and methods

We used the Web of Science Core Collections from the Web of Science (WOS) platform (Web of Science, 2024) and Scopus platform to compile a bibliographic database on pine plantations established on degraded lands. Recognized for its reliability, WOS is a preferred resource among researchers and is extensively utilized in recent bibliometric studies (e.g., Dincă et al., 2024; Mi'raj and Ulev, 2024; Yardibi et al., 2024). Employing WOS’s “Advanced Search” functionality, we performed searches using terms like “Utilization of pines on degraded lands and carbon stocks” and “pines on degraded lands and carbon stocks,” focusing on publications dated between January 1, 1983, and December 31, 2024.

Data processing involved Web of Science Core tools (Clarivate, 2024), alongside Excel (Microsoft, 2024) and Geochart (Google, 2024). Visualization of maps and cluster analysis were carried out using VOSviewer version 1.6.20 (VOS Viewer, 2010). From the initial 1,489 records identified, we excluded duplicates (i.e., articles indexed in both Web of Science and Scopus), conference proceedings, book chapters, articles without abstracts, studies with unclear geographic origin, and those unrelated to the research topic (e.g., not focused on carbon stocks in pine forests). After applying these criteria, 281 articles remained for detailed analysis.

The bibliometric analysis aimed to uncover emerging themes, prominent contributors, and insights into articles, authors, and journals relevant to the topic. The study focused on 10 primary aspects: (1) publication types, (2) WOS Categories for Web of Science data and All Science Journal Classification codes for Scopus data, (3) publication years, (4) countries, (5) institutions, (6) language, (7) journals, (8) publishers, (9) authors, and (10) keywords.

The study’s second phase adopted a traditional review methodology, providing an in-depth assessment of numerous articles (1,489 were examined). Results were grouped into two key categories: “Pines and Carbon Stock” and “Pines on Degraded Lands and Carbon Stock.” The first category included four main themes: Carbon sequestration across Pine species; Allometric models for estimating Pine biomass and carbon stock; Carbon dynamics in mixed versus pure Pine stands and Effects of thinning on carbon allocation in Pine forests.

A schematic presentation of the adopted methodology is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1

3 Results

3.1 Bibliometric review

The first article on this topic was published in a renowned scientific journal in 1983. After that, the number of published articles followed an increasing trend, with a significant rise especially after 2015 (Figure 2). Citations have followed a similar upward trend, in line with the number of published articles. Citation data: citing articles = 7,389, times cited = 8,058, average per item = 2,984 (Web of Science, 2024).

Figure 2

A total of 204 authors who have published at least one article on this topic were identified. The most prolific contributors in the area of pine use on degraded lands were Lucian Dinca and Cristinel Constandache (5 articles each), and John Stanturf (4 articles), reflecting a strong focus on ‘degraded land’ terminology in Romanian research. In contrast, the most productive authors in studies focusing on carbon stocks in pine stands were primarily from Finland and Spain—such as Seppo Kellomäki (18 articles), Keli Peltola (14), Miren del Río (13), and Ricardo Ruiz-Peinado (13 articles)—highlighting regional specialization. Although the largest number of articles originated from institutions in the USA and China, these contributions were more widely distributed among a larger pool of authors with fewer publications each.

The most well-represented countries are the USA (72 articles), China (41 articles), Spain (30 articles), Canada (16 articles), and Germany (15 articles) (Table 1).

The countries of origin of the authors who have published articles on this topic can be grouped into five clusters: the first cluster includes England, Ecuador, Belgium, France, and the Czech Republic; the second cluster includes Spain, Brazil, Mexico, Sweden, Italy, Poland, and Norway; the third cluster includes China, Russia, and Turkey; the fourth cluster includes the USA, Iran, Argentina, and Sri Lanka; the fifth cluster includes Germany, Chile, and South Korea (Figure 3).

Figure 3

The most representative institutions where authors publishing on this topic are active include: Chinese Academy of Science (with 18 articles), United State Department of Agriculture (with 17 articles), United States Forest Service (with 17 articles), Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas (with 10 articles), University of Wisconsin Madison (with 9 articles) and University of Wisconsin System (with 9 articles).

Articles on this topic have been published in 306 journals, with the highest number of articles appearing in: Forest Ecology and Management (25 articles), Forests (16 articles) and Land Degradation & Development (11 articles). However, when considering total link strength, the top three journals in the ranking are: Forest Ecology and Management, Catena, and Geoderma (Table 2).

The journals can be grouped into six clusters: Cluster 1: Applied Soil Ecology + Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment + Ecological Engineering; Cluster 2: Journal of Hydrology + Ecological Indicators + Science of the Total Environment + Agricultural and Forest Meteorology; Cluster 3: Forest Ecology and Management + Land Degradation + Ambio; Cluster 4: Restoration Ecology + Ecological Applications + New Forests + Plant and Soil; Cluster 5: Catena + European Journal of Forest Research + Geoderma + Biodiversity and Conservation + Land Degradation & Development; Cluster 6: Forests + iForest-Biogeosciences and Forestry + Bioenergy Research + Scientific Papers Series E-Land (Figure 4). Journals were grouped into clusters using co-citation analysis and the VOSviewer clustering algorithm based on their bibliographic coupling strength (VOS Viewer, 2010).

Figure 4

The most frequently used keywords are forest, afforestation, nitrogen, and plantations, highlighting the central themes in the literature on pine-related restoration. The keywords are grouped into four distinct clusters, each reflecting different thematic emphases in the field. The first cluster includes 16 words, such as forest, nitrogen, management, organic carbon, and sequestration, indicating a strong focus on soil nutrient dynamics and carbon management in forested systems. This cluster underscores the ecological processes underpinning carbon sequestration and nutrient cycling in pine-based restoration efforts. The second cluster consists of 15 words, including biodiversity, growth, restoration, reforestation, land, and succession. These terms suggest a broader ecological restoration narrative, where biodiversity recovery and vegetative succession are central outcomes of reforestation, particularly with pine species, especially when planted in their native range or in admixtures. The third cluster, comprising 10 words such as biomass, land use, plantations, Scots pine, and climate change, reflects the intersection of land-use change, biomass productivity, and climate mitigation potential—highlighting pine plantations’ role in sustainable land management. Lastly, the fourth cluster includes 7 keywords like pine, soil, erosion, and impact, pointing to the role of pine species in controlling land degradation, particularly through soil stabilization and erosion reduction. Together, these clusters provide a multifaceted view of how pine species contribute to degraded land recovery, linking soil health, biodiversity, carbon cycling, and climate resilience. This clustering helps structure the ongoing scientific conversation and identifies integrated themes across ecological and management domains (Table 3 and Figure 5).

Figure 5

While in the 2012–2013 period the keywords used were plantations, vegetation, reforestation, and dynamics, in the years 2014–2016, the most used were nitrogen, land-use, restoration, and growth. In more recent years (2017–2020), the most common keywords have been biodiversity, communities, pine plantations, and climate change (Figure 6).

Figure 6

3.2 Pines and carbon stock

3.2.1 Pine species used in afforesting degraded lands for carbon

Many published articles refer to different pine species and their relationships with carbon stock (Table 4). These studies show that pine species have been widely investigated across a range of geographic zones, with notable concentrations in China, Mexico, and the United States. China appears most frequently, with at least seven different species studied, indicating significant interest in pine afforestation for carbon sequestration. Similarly, multiple species from Mexico and the USA highlight the ecological and silvicultural relevance of pines in North American carbon strategies. Some species, such as Pinus sylvestris and Pinus radiata, are examined in multiple continents, reflecting their global use in plantation forestry and carbon projects. Several Pinus species, including P. taeda, P. massoniana, P. densata, P. pinceana, P. cembroides, P. occidentalis, P. caribaea, and P. halepensis, are mentioned in research articles related to carbon stocks on degraded lands. These studies explore the potential of Pinus species to sequester carbon in various degraded ecosystems, including abandoned agricultural lands, degraded forests, and sites affected by erosion (Li et al., 2024). The pine species plays a role in carbon sequestration and can help stabilize slopes and reduce erosion on degraded lands (Torres et al., 2021). Thematically, research spans natural forests, degraded lands, and commercial plantations, showing that pines play a versatile role in both ecological restoration and climate mitigation.

3.2.2 Allometric models for estimating pine biomass and carbon stock

Generally, tree allometry establishes quantitative relations between some key characteristic dimensions of trees (usually fairly easy to measure) and other properties (often more difficult to assess). In this paper, allometric equations refer to total tree-level aboveground biomass and are necessary for predicting carbon stock. These equations use different variables, the most commonly used being diameter at breast height (DBH) and height (H), and, in case additional or distinctive elements appear – not found in other works (ex. geometric equations, etc.), we have also completed the presentation with the equations adjacent to the models, for the beauty of the exhibition. For clarity of the exposition, we have presented in each case, within the limits of possibilities, the structure of the generic equations. An exposition cannot be made without presenting the structure of the generic equations. Examples of allometric equations for different pine species are provided in Supplementary Table S1. The table is structured as follows: section (a) generic allometric equations – for a clear and clever presentation – in this way we include the generic, the results could be exposed more obviously; −(b) the connected geometric, graphical fitted or supplementary variable equations etc. in connection with the anterior expression for completeness or clearer presentation; − (c) the allometric identified equations’ parameters with eventually R –square or other coefficients of determination. For a faithful presentation, we kept the notations and names of the variables in accordance with the authors’ presentation method. Having respect for the authors, we included most of the models presented in the articles.

3.2.3 Carbon dynamics in mixed versus pure pine stands

Organic carbon stock dynamics have been extensively studied in various forest ecosystems, with particular attention to pine (Pinus spp.) due to its ecological and economic significance. In many cases, pine species have been examined both in monoculture and in combination with other tree species, allowing for insights into their relative performance in carbon sequestration.

In southern boreal forests, a comparative study between Jack pine (Pinus banksiana Lamb.) and trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) demonstrated that extending the rotation age beyond 90 years does not necessarily enhance carbon sequestration (Wang et al., 2012). This finding challenges the assumption that older stands always contribute to higher carbon storage, particularly in boreal environments.

In forestry shelterbelts, a combination of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) and red cedar (Juniperus virginiana) significantly increased soil organic carbon (SOC) in the topsoil layer (0–15 cm) compared to cultivated fields (3.994 g m⁻² vs. 3.623 g m⁻²) (Sauer et al., 2007). Similarly, in a 34-year-old plantation in Mozambique, Loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) combined with Eucalyptus grandis Hill showed improved SOC storage in the 0–50 cm soil profile (Guedes et al., 2016), highlighting the benefits of mixed-species afforestation in tropical and subtropical regions.

In China, the introduction of Pinus massoniana in mixture with Castanopsis hystrix contributed to an increase in ecosystem carbon stock (You et al., 2018). Furthermore, modeling projections for the period 2000–2,100 in Spain found that mixed plantations of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) consistently outperformed pure stands in terms of CO₂ accumulation across all biomass fractions (aboveground and belowground) (Rodríguez de Prado et al., 2023).

Contrasts between pine and broadleaf species are also notable. In northern Germany, thinned Scots pine forests demonstrated lower carbon sequestration potential compared to naturally developing beech (Fagus sylvatica) forests (Förster et al., 2021). However, soil carbon storage was, on average, approximately 80% higher under pine than under beech. The total soil organic carbon (SOC) stock in the soil profile (organic layer plus mineral soil, measured up to 60 cm and extrapolated to 100 cm) was about 40 and 20% higher under pine, respectively (Diers et al., 2021), indicating a significant belowground advantage for pine in certain contexts.

Simulation studies further support the role of pine in carbon dynamics. Vallet et al. (2009) modeled the conversion of sessile oak (Quercus petraea) stands to black pine (Pinus nigra subsp. laricio), revealing a potential increase in carbon storage of 1.6 tC ha⁻¹ yr.⁻¹ over a 64-year rotation period of the conifer plantation.

Nevertheless, pine is not universally superior in terms of carbon sequestration. Recent research from Spain found that Quercus forests stored more total carbon than Pinus halepensis plantations. Notably, Pinus sequestered 55% of its carbon in aboveground biomass, while Quercus stored approximately 60% belowground, in roots and soil (Bor et al., 2023). These findings underscore the importance of considering both aboveground and belowground carbon pools when assessing forest management strategies for carbon mitigation.

In South Korea, Pinus densiflora and Quercus variabilis stands exhibit similar carbon stock distributions, with limited influence from interspecific differences such as litterfall and decomposition rates. However, P. densiflora shows significantly higher total carbon input from litterfall, and litter-derived organic carbon is decomposed more rapidly compared to Q. variabilis (Baek and Kim, 2024).

Consequently, although pine monocultures may have certain economic advantages (higher productivity), mixed pine forests with deciduous trees often demonstrate greater potential for carbon storage and ecosystem restoration on degraded lands.

3.2.4 Effects of thinning on carbon allocation in pine forests

Thinning plays a crucial role in modifying carbon dynamics in pine forests, though its effects on carbon stock are highly context-dependent. Outcomes vary based on thinning intensity, species-specific traits, site conditions (e.g., climate, soil, and topography), stand age, forest structure, and the carbon accounting approach used (i.e., whether off-site storage in harvested wood products is included).

3.2.4.1 Thinning intensity and species-specific responses

Heavier thinning intensities often promote individual tree growth by reducing competition for light, water, and nutrients, which can lead to increased aboveground biomass. In Masson pine (Pinus massoniana), for instance, heavy thinning increased diameter growth and reduced the height-to-diameter ratio, improving stand stability and biomass accumulation (Deng et al., 2019). Similar trends were observed in young Pinus halepensis in Spain and P. pinaster in Mediterranean regions, where growth improvements translated to increased carbon sequestration, especially when harvested wood carbon was included (Lull et al., 2024; del Río et al., 2017).

Different pine species exhibit contrasting responses in carbon allocation. In heavily thinned stands of P. halepensis and P. sylvestris, soil organic carbon (SOC) increased post-treatment, while no such effect was seen in P. nigra (Navarro-Cerrillo et al., 2022). In southern Italy, P. laricio responded positively, with intense thinning significantly enhancing SOC (Settineri et al., 2018), suggesting that thinning can stimulate belowground carbon processes in some species.

3.2.4.2 Site conditions: climate, soil, and topography

Environmental context modulates the impact of thinning. For example, in the Southern Carpathians of Romania, higher altitude and specific site types correlated with increased wood mass production and carbon accumulation (Murariu et al., 2021; Crișan et al., 2024). Soil carbon responses, however, varied geographically. In Norway, P. sylvestris forests showed increased soil carbon stocks following thinning (Pohjola and Valsta, 2007), whereas in Turkey, thinning in P. brutia plantations had no significant effect on soil or biomass carbon pools (Erkan et al., 2023). In some Spanish P. pinaster stands, thinning did not significantly alter soil carbon, highlighting the role of site-specific variables such as soil texture, nutrient availability, and moisture (Ruiz-Peinado et al., 2016).

3.2.4.3 Stand age and forest structure

The developmental stage of a forest stand influences its response to thinning. Younger stands often exhibit compensatory growth and biomass accumulation, while older stands may respond with reduced growth and lower carbon gains (Meyer et al., 2021). In Germany, forest plots with higher mean diameter at breast height (DBH) stored more carbon overall, though structural traits and wood density also played a role (Springer et al., 2024). Thinning strategies should therefore consider both stand age and structural characteristics to optimize carbon outcomes.

3.2.4.4 Carbon allocation and accounting approaches

The impact of thinning on total carbon stock is also shaped by how carbon is measured. Some studies report declines in biomass carbon post-thinning, as seen in P. sylvestris (Ruiz-Peinado et al., 2013; Bravo-Oviedo et al., 2015), yet soil carbon often remains stable or may increase due to changes in microclimate, litter input, and root turnover. In the western US, Powers et al. (2012) highlighted that thinning primarily altered the distribution of carbon among above- and belowground pools, rather than the total carbon stock itself.

In summary, thinning can enhance or reduce carbon stock in pine forests, depending on its intensity, species involved, local site conditions, stand development stage, and how carbon is accounted for. Soil carbon dynamics, though less frequently emphasized than aboveground biomass, play a vital role in long-term carbon sequestration. Integrating both biomass and soil responses, and considering harvested wood products, provides a more comprehensive view of the carbon implications of thinning. Particularly on degraded lands, pine thinning practices that are context-sensitive can support carbon goals while contributing to ecosystem restoration.

3.2.5 Soil carbon dynamics in pine afforestation and management

Soil carbon plays a critical role in the long-term carbon sequestration potential of pine afforestation and forest management practices. Across the literature, pine plantations on degraded or marginal lands have shown variable yet often positive impacts on soil organic carbon (SOC) accumulation, depending on species, site conditions, and silvicultural interventions.

3.2.5.1 Pine afforestation impacts on degraded soils

Numerous studies demonstrate that afforestation with pine species enhances SOC, especially in the upper soil layers (0–30 cm), through increased litterfall, root biomass, and organic matter inputs. For example, afforestation with Pinus sylvestris in boreal and temperate zones has led to a gradual build-up of organic matter, particularly in formerly cultivated or degraded lands (Pohjola and Valsta, 2007). In China, Pinus massoniana plantations improved SOC and microbial biomass in subtropical degraded lands, indicating the ecological restoration potential of pines (You et al., 2018).

3.2.5.2 Effect of species composition and stand type

Mixed stands of pine and broadleaved species may enhance SOC compared to monocultures, by diversifying litter inputs and modifying decomposition rates. For example, mixed Pinus densiflora and Quercus variabilis stands in Korea had higher total carbon input through litterfall and faster decomposition under pine, reflecting species-specific dynamics (Baek and Kim, 2024). Similarly, Pinus taeda mixed with Eucalyptus grandis increased SOC in tropical regions (Guedes et al., 2016).

3.2.5.3 Soil response to thinning

Thinning effects on SOC are highly context-dependent. In some studies, such as those involving Pinus halepensis and P. sylvestris, soil carbon increased post-thinning due to enhanced root turnover and understory development (Navarro-Cerrillo et al., 2022). Conversely, in Pinus brutia stands in Turkey, thinning had no significant impact on SOC (Erkan et al., 2023), highlighting the importance of local soil texture, nutrient availability, and climatic conditions.

3.2.5.4 Vertical distribution and long-term storage

The vertical distribution of SOC varies among species. Scots pine stands typically accumulate substantial organic matter in the upper mineral soil and forest floor layers. However, in mixed forests with beech (Fagus sylvatica), SOC tends to be distributed deeper in the soil profile, suggesting different implications for long-term carbon stability (Diers et al., 2021).

We can conclude that soil carbon dynamics under pine afforestation and management are influenced by species traits, site conditions, and stand treatments. Restoration strategies that incorporate pine afforestation should consider these dynamics to maximize both ecological and carbon sequestration benefits.

3.3 Afforestation with pines on degraded lands: carbon recovery and soil enhancement

Plantations with different pine species (pure or mixed with deciduous trees) were established on degraded or abandoned lands, contributing to the restoration of the ecosystem and biodiversity. Restoring and preserving forest carbon (C) stocks in subtropical and tropical regions is an effective way to capture atmospheric CO₂ (Griscom et al., 2020; Koch and Kaplan, 2022). Afforesting degraded soils is essential for ecosystem recovery (Lamb et al., 2005; Coban et al., 2022). Reforestation with loblolly pine on degraded lands can restore soil carbon stocks to levels similar to subtropical natural forests within 30 years (Veloso et al., 2018).

3.3.1 Carbon sequestration in mined and degraded lands

Reclaiming mined lands accelerates post-mining ecosystem recovery and enhances carbon sequestration. In Poland, afforestation with Scots and black pine restored 20 and 27% of carbon stocks, respectively, after 35 years (Woś et al., 2022). Young forest ecosystems also showed relatively high C-sequestration compared to unmined managed pine forests (Pietrzykowski and Daniels, 2014). In Estonia, Scots pine stands in reclaimed oil shale mines accumulated 7.8 t·ha⁻¹ of carbon by 1990, 34.5 t·ha⁻¹ by 1983, and 133.4 t·ha⁻¹ by 1968, with increasing C allocation to tree stems over time (Karu et al., 2009).

3.3.2 Pine afforestation in semi-arid regions

Mongolian Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica) has been widely used for vegetation restoration and windbreaks in Horqin Sandy Land, Northern China, due to its resilience to climate stress (Khan et al., 2022). Afforestation of active sand dunes with Mongolian Scots pine significantly increased soil carbon sequestration, with soil C levels 6.1 times higher in 25-year-old plantations and 10.2 times higher in 35-year-old plantations compared to active sand dunes (Li et al., 2012). However, in Keerqin Sandy Lands, afforestation of grasslands with Mongolian Scots pine did not significantly affect soil organic carbon (SOC) in the 0–100 cm layer, with C sequestration mainly attributed to tree biomass (Zhang et al., 2023).

In northeastern Mexico, three pinyon pine species (Pinus cembroides, Pinus pinceana, and Pinus nelsonii) are recommended for large-scale reforestation due to their high organic carbon storage (Rios-Carrasco et al., 2009). In China, planting Mongolian Scots pine on degraded grasslands initially decreased bulk topsoil (0–15 cm) carbon but increased as forests matured (Chen et al., 2010).

3.3.3 Afforestation and soil carbon improvement

Afforestation with various pine species enhances soil organic matter and atmospheric carbon sequestration (Panagopoulos and Hatzistathis, 1995; Ouimet et al., 2007). In Mozambique, Pinus and Eucalyptus plantations replacing degraded mountain miombo woodlands significantly increased carbon sequestration. Miombo woodlands stored ~116 Mg ha⁻¹ of C, while Pinus taeda stands stored 363 Mg ha⁻¹ (Guedes et al., 2018). Similarly, in the Himalayas, Pinus roxburghii plantations on degraded lands increased carbon storage (Jina et al., 2008).

In Nepal, pine-dominated forests on degraded lands had higher total carbon stock per hectare than mixed forests due to greater tree biomass, although mixed forests had higher litter and soil organic carbon (Aryal et al., 2013). In Ecuador, Pinus patula plantations had the highest aboveground and belowground carbon storage across most locations (Quiroz Dahik et al., 2021).

3.3.4 Carbon recovery in afforested lands

In southeastern China, Pinus massoniana ecologically managed forests significantly contributed to forest carbon density and soil carbon recovery in degraded landscapes, especially during the period of 2000–2015, when the C density rate was higher (25–48%) than the intermission period during 1989–2000 (only 9–18%) (Xu et al., 2019). In Spain, large-scale afforestation efforts since the 1950s helped restore severely eroded soils. In the Central Spanish Pyrenees, afforestation with Pinus sylvestris and Pinus nigra led to increased soil organic carbon (SOC), the results have revealed that more than 50 years after the land abandonment, the composition of SOC was largely similar across the different land-cover types, with significant differences observed under P. nigra afforestation, both in the topsoil and at depth (Campo et al., 2019).

In Chile, P. radiata plantations on degraded lands accumulated 181–212 Mg ha⁻¹ of carbon in aboveground biomass, with total carbon stocks reaching 343 Mg ha⁻¹, showing a 138% increase in above-ground biomass C and carbon stock from age 10 to 20, with accumulation continuing beyond its 22–24-year economic rotation (Olmedo et al., 2020).

3.4 Ecological benefits of pine plantations in restoration

Beyond carbon sequestration, pine plantations contribute to a suite of ecological functions that make them valuable tools in the restoration of degraded landscapes. Their roles in soil stabilization, hydrological regulation, microclimate amelioration, and biodiversity enhancement support ecosystem recovery and resilience (Chirino et al., 2006; Martín-Peinado et al., 2016; Cifuentes-Croquevielle et al., 2020).

Soil stabilization and erosion control: Pine root systems, particularly those of species like Pinus halepensis and P. pinaster, are effective in stabilizing soils on slopes and erosion-prone areas (Danjon et al., 2005; Pérez-Rodríguez et al., 2007). Their dense root mats reduce surface runoff and enhance soil cohesion, critical in restoring degraded hillsides and preventing landslides or gully formation.

Hydrological regulation: Pine plantations can influence hydrological processes through canopy interception, evapotranspiration, and improved infiltration. In semi-arid and Mediterranean environments, Pinus halepensis plantations have shown mixed effects, with some studies indicating reduced runoff and better water infiltration due to improved ground cover, while others highlight potential water consumption trade-offs (Voltas et al., 2015; Vicente et al., 2018). Site-specific planning is thus essential to avoid adverse water balance impacts.

Microclimate improvement: Pines contribute to the amelioration of local microclimates by providing shade, reducing temperature extremes, and increasing air humidity (Castro et al., 2002; Gómez-Aparicio et al., 2008). This can foster the re-establishment of understory vegetation and soil microbial activity, creating favorable conditions for broader ecosystem development.

Biodiversity enhancement through admixtures: Although monoculture pine plantations often support lower biodiversity than natural forests, mixed-species plantations or those managed for structural heterogeneity can enhance habitat value (Carnus et al., 2006). Integrating broadleaved species such as Quercus, Populus, or native shrubs with pine increases vertical and horizontal complexity, promoting faunal and floral diversity (Barbaro and Rossi, 2006; Arnold and Larsson, 2017; Constandache et al., 2016). For instance, mixtures of Pinus sylvestris with native species in Europe have been shown to support higher bird and insect diversity compared to pure stands (Felton et al., 2010).

Ecological legacy and resilience: Over time, pine plantations can serve as ecological scaffolds—facilitating the return of native species, improving soil fertility, and enabling transitions toward more diverse forest systems. Their adaptability to poor soils and harsh conditions makes them particularly useful as pioneer species in restoration trajectories (Parrotta et al., 1997; Ruiz-Jaen and Aide, 2005).

In sum, the ecological benefits of pine plantations go beyond carbon to encompass multiple ecosystem functions vital for landscape rehabilitation. When designed with ecological principles and long-term goals, pine plantations can be a cornerstone of integrated restoration strategies.

4 Discussion

4.1 Bibliographic analysis

Most of the publications on this topic are articles (90%), distributed across 30 research areas, of which the most representative are Environmental Science, Ecology, Forestry, and Agriculture.

The most prominent research areas and journals are directly linked to the causes and consequences of land degradation and the outcomes of pine plantations on different land categories. Moreover, the keywords used in recent years align with modern trends in research on this topic and with management methods for pine stands. As some researchers point out, an analysis of the keywords used by authors reflects research trends (Onan et al., 2016). In the early years (2012–2013), the research focus was primarily on practical aspects of land recovery, reflected in keywords such as plantations, vegetation, reforestation, and dynamics. During the mid-period (2014–2016), studies increasingly addressed ecological processes, with prominent terms like nitrogen, land-use, restoration, and growth. More recently (2017–2020), the attention has shifted toward broader environmental concerns, with keywords including biodiversity, communities, pine plantations, and climate change, indicating a growing integration of ecological and climate-related themes into pine-related land restoration research. The keywords chosen for the article titles are among the top keywords used by the authors who published on this topic: pine ranks 10th, reforestation 12th, and management 11th. However, afforestation ranks 1st, and forest 2nd, highlighting the crucial role that afforestation and forests play in improving degraded lands. Other top keywords include plantations (4th), dynamics (7th), and carbon (8th). Keywords related to land use also occupy a special place (14th and 15th), and if combined, would likely rank 2nd.

The number of published articles as well as citations has increased significantly after 2015. The growing trend of published articles, observed in other bibliometric studies (Liu et al., 2019), also applies to the topic of pines on degraded lands. This phenomenon can be explained by two main factors: a recent substantial increase in the number of journals and scientific publications, along with a growing level of interest among researchers in this topic. Furthermore, the average annual number of scientific publications is expected to increase, driven by the growing demand for strategies that enhance carbon uptake, particularly in forest and grassland ecosystems, given their significant role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions (Ma et al., 2025). The increase in publications reflects the growing attention given to pines, especially in regions such as the Mediterranean Region, the Alps, and the USA. Our analysis identified authors from 66 countries across five continents who have contributed to this topic (Figure 7). We included only 23 countries out of 66, because we have considered only the most representative clusters (those with at least 5 countries).

Figure 7

Out of a total of 187 known pine species (World Flora Online, 2024), our bibliographic study identified 38 species (20% of the total number of pine species) for which articles have been published regarding afforestation and carbon stocks, with Pinus banksiana Lamb. being the most cited. The most commonly used species for afforestation of degraded lands, especially in Europe, has been the black pine (Pinus nigra Arn.), known as a species with modest requirements regarding climatic and soil conditions (Șofletea and Curtu, 2007; Vlad et al., 2019), with good results in halting soil erosion and landscape degradation. Various pine species (Pinus sylvestris L., Pinus cembra L., Pinus ponderosa Douglas ex C. Lawson) have been used both for afforestation of degraded lands (Untaru et al., 2008; Silvestru-Grigore et al., 2018) and on other land categories outside their natural range or to replace poorly productive stands (Enescu and Dănescu, 2013).

Since the chosen topic also refers to pines in mountainous areas, some review articles address this component (Vallauri et al., 2002; Hofstede et al., 2002). Other articles focus on plant inventory methods, such as monitoring (Traci and Untaru, 1986), remote sensing (Mapuru et al., 2023), stand structure in specific geographical regions (Thanasis et al., 2007), or the evolution of plantations under different climatic and soil conditions (Constandache et al., 2024). Also, some articles focus on the examination of scientific literature about agroforestry practices and their role in enhancing agricultural productivity (Enescu et al., 2025) as well as the influence of climatic factors on health and sustainability (Bratu et al., 2025; Tudor et al., 2023). Review articles analyzing the influence of climate change on pine plantations on degraded lands are also well represented (Vlad et al., 2019).

Since this topic concerns areas of afforested degraded lands, it is natural that the authors come from countries with significant afforested areas, such as the USA, China, and Germany. Regarding the journals in which articles on this topic have been published, many have titles including terms such as forest, ecology, environment (e.g., Forest Ecology and Management, Forests, Restoration Ecology, Science of the Total Environment, Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment) or include restoration, aligning with the primary scientific fields discussed above.

4.2 Ecological and environmental benefits of pine afforestation

Afforestation with pines on degraded lands serves as an effective strategy for soil stabilization, nutrient retention, and landscape restoration. The results indicate that pine plantations enhance soil organic carbon (SOC) levels, particularly in severely degraded and mined lands. Studies from Poland and Estonia demonstrate that afforested lands with Scots and black pine show a marked increase in carbon sequestration over time, aligning with findings from previous research on carbon recovery in forested ecosystems (Woś et al., 2022; Karu et al., 2009). Moreover, pine species such as Mongolian Scots pine have proven particularly effective in semi-arid regions for mitigating desertification and improving soil carbon content. In most European countries, afforestation of degraded lands began at the end of the 19th century, with the main goal of conserving soil and landscapes. Pines were widely used in afforestation efforts in Greece, France, and Hungary. Afforestation was primarily carried out with black pine (Pinus nigra ssp. nigra and P. nigra ssp. laricio), with plantations needed to stop soil erosion and landscape degradation in hilly areas. This species is much more tolerant to maritime influences, such as salt-laden winds, than Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris), which is why it often grows closer to the sea. In Mediterranean Region, during the second half of the 20th century, many large reforestation projects were conducted in the south of Europe (Villar-Salvador, 2016). Several reforestation programs were undertaken in degraded areas where different pine species were planted, focused on reducing erosion and increase the forest productivity (Pausas et al., 2004).

In France, in the southwestern Alps region Haute-Provence, at 120 years after the first tree plantings, the plant communities are still early seral assemblages for the most part, with Austrian black pine occurring alone in the canopy. In contrast, most of the marly soils have physically recovered part of their total depth, with layers of fragmented and altered material equal to 50 cm, but their structure and chemical fertility are still poor (Vallauri et al., 2002). Pinus nigra Arnold var. austriaca has been widely used in reforestations in Greece. The use of P. nigra to restore the degraded ecosystems around Mt. Olympus was deemed as successful (Thanasis et al., 2007).

In Hungary, black pine, being quite drought-resistant and heat-tolerant, was used to improve lands characterized by dolomitic and sandy soils, where vigorous stands resulted (Tamas, 2003). In Bulgaria, the first afforestation efforts date from 1884 to 1887, when anti-erosion afforestation was undertaken on about 4,000 hectares. Forest plantations were established, predominantly of coniferous tree species [Pinus sylvestris L., Pinus nigra Arn., Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco and so on] (Aleksandrov and Tonchev, 2021).

In the Southern United States, by the end of the 20th century, there were 32 million acres of pine plantations on cutover forest land and degraded agricultural land, and this region is now the woodbasket of the world (Fox et al., 2004).

In the Himalayan sub-tropical region, Chir pine (Pinus roxburghii), is the predominant tree species (Champion and Seth, 1968; Forest Survey of India, 2019), distributed within an altitude range of 450–2,300 m above mean sea level, covering nearly all major valleys and slopes in the region (Forest Survey of India, 2019) having the ability to mitigate soil erosion, improve soil quality and promote sustainable ecosystems (Razafindrabe et al., 2010).

In tree plantations in the Ecuadorian Andes, in extreme climatic and site conditions and soils developed in recent volcanic ashes, pine-based forestry programs are still promoted, using arguments such as the future demand for timber, the social acceptance of exotic species, and the possible ecological benefits of forest plantations in general (Hofstede et al., 2002).

Environmental factors, especially temperature and precipitation, significantly influence the results of studies on the behavior of pine trees in different areas. Temperature affects growth and development, while precipitation influences water availability and, therefore, the health and vitality of trees (Köse et al., 2025; Ramírez-Valiente et al., 2021) having an impact in biomass accumulation and carbon stock (Wu et al., 2025). In regions experiencing moderate increases in precipitation, carbon stocks may be sustained as long as moisture availability does not constrain vegetation growth, while elevated temperatures, can negatively affect biomass accumulation and carbon uptake, acting as a stress factor that may limit soil organic carbon storage (Murphy et al., 2025). Spatial and temporal variations in these factors can lead to different growth responses among pine populations, even within the same species (Zhao et al., 2024).

The impact of pine plantations cannot be generalized but should be evaluated case by case while care is taken in implementing plantations until more knowledge is obtained about the effects on the ecosystem as a whole, especially considering their ecological importance.

In conclusion, pine plantations can be a valuable way for both carbon sequestration and ecological reconstruction of degraded lands, but their effectiveness depends on the composition of the forest, the management practices applied and the intervention of damaging factors, requiring permanent long-term monitoring.

4.3 Carbon sequestration and stock accumulation

Many published articles refer to various pine species and their relationship with carbon stocks (Wang et al., 2012), to growth dynamics using allometric equations with different variables, and to the effect of silvicultural practices on plantations and carbon stocks (del Río et al., 2017).

A key focus of the reviewed studies was the assessment of carbon sequestration capacity of various pine species. The results indicate that different pine species contribute differently to carbon stocks depending on site conditions, forest management practices, and climatic variables (Navarro-Cerrillo et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2013; Węgiel and Polowy, 2020). Additionally, some authors used the cluster related to the “forest floor” to estimate biomass, including both total carbon and litter carbon storage, while assessing the effects of tree species (Huang et al., 2020). Their findings indicated that pine species exhibited higher carbon stocks in both the forest floor and soil organic layers (Usuga et al., 2010). The comparison between pure pine stands and mixed-species forests suggests that while pine plantations accumulate significant aboveground biomass carbon, mixed forests may provide a better balance of belowground and aboveground carbon storage (Rodríguez de Prado et al., 2023). Furthermore, thinning interventions were found to have variable impacts on carbon sequestration, influenced by several interacting factors. These include thinning intensity (Deng et al., 2019; del Río et al., 2017), tree species (Navarro-Cerrillo et al., 2022; Pohjola and Valsta, 2007), stand age (Lull et al., 2024; Powers et al., 2012), and site conditions such as soil type, elevation, and climate (Murariu et al., 2021; Crișan et al., 2024). Heavier thinning often promotes individual tree growth and increases carbon allocation to fewer, larger trees, potentially enhancing long-term biomass carbon stock (Deng et al., 2019; del Río et al., 2017). However, it can also temporarily reduce total ecosystem carbon due to biomass removal (Bravo-Oviedo et al., 2015; Ruiz-Peinado et al., 2013). Soil carbon responses are equally variable: thinning has been shown to increase soil organic carbon in some pine species and regions (Settineri et al., 2018), while in others, the changes were negligible or absent (Erkan et al., 2023; Ruiz-Peinado et al., 2016). Other relevant factors include the presence of understory vegetation, post-thinning regeneration, and whether the harvested biomass is stored in long-lived wood products (Alfaro-Sánchez et al., 2015; del Río et al., 2017). Therefore, the impact of thinning on carbon storage is highly context-dependent and must be evaluated within specific ecological and silvicultural frameworks.

4.4 Challenges and considerations in pine afforestation

Most articles analyzed environmental conditions and their effects on pine plantations, their structure, yield, and functions, to provide insights on estimating the success of reforestation or ecological restoration and on selecting optimal planting, maintenance, and stand management techniques about the species used and the environmental conditions.

Despite the benefits, challenges associated with pine afforestation must be acknowledged. The ecological impact of pine plantations, particularly regarding biodiversity, soil properties, and long-term sustainability, requires careful management. This suggests that afforestation efforts should consider the trade-offs between rapid biomass accumulation and long-term soil carbon stability.

Additionally, the selection of pine species is crucial for afforestation success. While Scots pine and black pine have been extensively used due to their adaptability to poor soils and harsh climates, other species such as P. taeda and P. radiata have demonstrated high productivity in specific regions.

After 1950, afforestation with coniferous species was widespread in the lower forest belt, which is outside their natural range. Now, due to the already advanced age of the artificial plantations established in the 1960s and 1970s, as well as the initiated processes of intensive degradation, their great ecological and economic value requires taking timely decisions on their future management (Aleksandrov and Tonchev, 2021).

For example, P. hartwegii exhibits more than 70% mortality due to water stress (Flores et al., 2021). Under such conditions, pine species will face adaptation difficulties and will not achieve the intended ecological reconstruction and protection goals. In recent years, there has been growing concern about restoring degraded ecosystems with pines and hardwood species, with various models being promoted to optimize their structure at acceptable costs (Vlad et al., 2019).

4.5 Future research directions

Future research should explore the long-term impacts of different pine species on soil condition and carbon cycling to optimize afforestation strategies.

The bibliometric analysis indicates an increasing trend in research on pines and carbon sequestration, yet gaps remain. Future studies should focus on the long-term monitoring of carbon stocks in pine afforestation projects, integrating remote sensing and modeling techniques to improve carbon estimation accuracy. Additionally, comparative studies between pine afforestation and other land-use strategies (e.g., agroforestry, mixed-species plantations) are needed to determine the most effective approaches for maximizing carbon sequestration and ecosystem resilience.

Moreover, climate change projections should be incorporated into afforestation planning, as changing precipitation patterns and temperature extremes may affect pine growth, survival, and carbon sequestration potential (Vasile et al., 2017; Mustățea et al., 2022; Tudose et al., 2023a, 2023b). Research on adaptive management strategies, including species selection, thinning regimes, and soil amendments, will be critical for ensuring the long-term viability of pine afforestation on degraded lands.

Studies on artificially planted pine forests analyzing their structure, yield and function are needed to provide answers about site suitability for each tree species used and for the estimation of reforestation success (Thanasis et al., 2007). Future research should focus on innovative techniques for ecological restoration and regeneration of pine forests, measures to adapt them to climate change, the impact of forest ecosystem management practices on degraded lands’, carbon storage potential, and the effectiveness of different pine species under various ecological conditions.

This study highlights how the authors of existing studies analyze the impact of environmental factors on pine forests, using modeling, statistical analysis or experimental approaches. These methods help to understand how variations in environmental factors, such as temperature and precipitation, affect the state and evolution of pine forests, especially those on degraded lands, but also their ecosystem functions, in the context of climate change. In conclusion, pine forests are sensitive to changes in temperature and precipitation, and these factors can influence their distribution, growth, and health. Understanding these relationships is essential for predicting future forest dynamics and developing effective management strategies in the context of climate change.

There are also some gaps and limitations of our study: Limited geographic scope – While the study covers a broad range of regions where pine plantations have been used for degraded lands restoration, some areas with significant afforestation efforts may be underrepresented due to data availability constraints. Lack of long-term data – Many studies focus on short- to medium-term effects of pine afforestation, while the long-term ecological impacts, including biodiversity shifts and soil nutrient cycling, remain less explored. Exclusion of unpublished data and local case studies – The review primarily relies on published scientific literature indexed in databases such as Web of Science. Important local studies, government reports, and unpublished research may be missing. Lack of socioeconomic analysis – While the study focuses on ecological and carbon sequestration benefits, it does not comprehensively address economic and social aspects, such as cost-effectiveness, local community involvement, and policy implications of pine plantations on degraded lands.

To address these limitations, future studies should: Incorporate long-term ecological research/monitoring of pine plantations; Integrate socio-economic factors into afforestation analysis; Investigate the ecological trade-offs between pine afforestation and native species conservation.

5 Conclusion

This study presents a bibliometric and systematic review of publications on pine plantations, focusing on their role in the afforestation of degraded lands and their contribution to carbon stock accumulation. The analysis demonstrates that pine species are frequently utilized for ecological restoration, particularly due to their adaptability to degraded soil and climate conditions. The bibliometric data reveal a marked increase in research interest after 2015, especially in countries like the United States, China, and Spain.

Our findings underscore the potential of pine plantations to support soil stabilization, landscape restoration, and aboveground carbon sequestration in certain contexts. However, the ecological effects of these plantations vary depending on species selection, site conditions, and management practices. Although technological advances have improved establishment and monitoring methods, further research is needed to fully understand the long-term ecological outcomes, especially belowground carbon dynamics and biodiversity implications.

While the study synthesizes a large body of literature on pines and degraded lands, it does not provide original field data or meta-analytical effect sizes. Therefore, the conclusions should be interpreted as reflecting broad trends in the literature rather than definitive ecological outcomes. Future interdisciplinary research should explore these themes with empirical field validation to better inform land restoration strategies using pine species.

References

• 1

  Aleksandrov N. Tonchev T. (2021). Ecosystem fit of scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) plantations in South-Western Bulgaria. Baltic For.27, 253–265. doi: 10.46490/BF601

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 2

  Alfaro-Sánchez R. López-Serrano F. R. Rubio E. Sánchez-Salguero R. Moya D. Hernández-Tecles E. et al . (2015). Response of biomass allocation patterns to thinning in Pinus halepensis differs under dry and semiarid Mediterranean climates. Ann. For. Sci.72, 595–607. doi: 10.1007/s13595-015-0480-y

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 3

  Ali A. Ashraf M. I. Gulzar S. Akmal M. (2020). Development of an allometric model for biomass estimation of Pinus roxburghii, growing in subtropical pine forests of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Sarhad J. Agric.36, 236–244. doi: 10.17582/journal.sja/2020/36.1.236.244

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 4

  Ali N. Saad M. Ali A. Ahmad N. Khan I. A. Ullah H. et al . (2023). Assessment of aboveground biomass and carbon stock of subtropical pine forest of Pakistan. J. For. Sci.69, 287–304. doi: 10.17221/125/2022-JFS

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 5

  Allen C. D. Savage M. Falk D. A. Suckling K. F. Swetnam T. W. Schulke T. et al . (2002). Ecological restoration of southwestern ponderosa pine ecosystems: a broad perspective. Ecol. Appl.12, 1418–1433. doi: 10.1890/1051-0761(2002)012[1418:EROSPP]2.0.CO;2

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 6

  Amir M. Liu X. Ahmad A. Saeed S. Mannan A. Muneer M. A. (2018). Patterns of biomass and carbon allocation across chronosequence of Chir pine (Pinus roxburghii) forest in Pakistan: inventory-based estimate. Adv. Meteorol.2018, 1–8. doi: 10.1155/2018/3095891

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 7

  Ananda J. Herath G. (2003). Soil erosion in developing countries: a socio-economic appraisal. J. Environ. Manag.68, 343–353. doi: 10.1016/S0301-4797(03)00082-3

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 8

  Apostol E. N. Stuparu E. Scarlatescu V. Budeanu M. (2020). Testing Hungarian oak (Quercus frainetto ten.) provenances in Romania. iForest13, 9–15. doi: 10.3832/ifor3108-012

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 9

  Araujo P. I. Austin A. T. (2020). Exotic pine forestation shifts carbon accumulation to litter detritus and wood along a broad precipitation gradient in Patagonia, Argentina. For. Ecol. Manag.460:117902. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2020.117902

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 10

  Arhip C. (1998). Awareness about resinous cultures realized outside their natural vegetation areal and which can be managed and exploited in order to produce wood for celluloses. Bucov. Forest.6, 47–48.

  • Google Scholar

• 11

  Arnold J. F. Larsson S. (2017). Structural heterogeneity and species richness in mixed Pinus sylvestris and native shrub stands. For. Ecol. Manag.391, 18–26. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2017.01.001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 12

  Aryal S. Bhattarai D. R. Devkota R. P. (2013). Comparison of carbon stocks between mixed and pine-dominated forest stands within the Gwalinidaha community forest in Lalitpur District, Nepal. Small-Scale For.12, 659–666. doi: 10.1007/s11842-013-9236-4

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 13

  Baek G. Kim C. (2024). Litterfall, litter decomposition, and carbon storage of Pinus densiflora and Quercus variabilis stands in South Korea. Folia Oecol.51, 39–46. doi: 10.2478/foecol-2024-0004

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 14

  Bai Y. Ding G. (2024). Estimation of changes in carbon sequestration and its economic value with various stand density and rotation age of Pinus massoniana plantations in China. Sci. Rep.14:16852. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-67307-z

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 15

  Balboa-Murias M. A. Rodríguez-Soalleiro R. Merino A. Álvarez-González J. G. (2006). Temporal variations and distribution of carbon stocks in aboveground biomass of radiata pine and maritime pine pure stands under different silvicultural alternatives. For. Ecol. Manag.237, 29–38. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2006.09.024

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 16

  Barbaro L. Rossi J. P. (2006). Mixed plantations of Populus and Pinus improve bird community diversity in managed forests. Biodivers. Conserv.15, 1359–1374. doi: 10.1007/s10531-005-2934-x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 17

  Bor B. Castro-Díez P. Alonso Á. (2023). Above- and belowground carbon stock of pine plantations and native oak forests coexisting in Central Spain. New For.54, 941–959. doi: 10.1007/s11056-023-10011-z

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 18

  Bratu I. Dinca L. Constandache C. Murariu G. (2025). Resilience and decline: the impact of climatic variability on temperate oak forests. Climate13:119. doi: 10.3390/cli13060119

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 19

  Bravo-Oviedo A. Ruiz-Peinado R. Modrego P. Alonso R. Montero G. (2015). Forest thinning impact on carbon stock and soil condition in southern European populations of P. sylvestris L.For. Ecol. Manag.357, 259–267. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2015.08.005

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 20

  Budeanu M. Besliu E. Pepelea D. (2025). Testing the radial increment and climate–growth relationship between Swiss stone pine European provenances in the Romanian Carpathians. Forests16:391. doi: 10.3390/f16030391

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 21

  Budeanu M. Şofletea N. Petriţan I. C. (2014). Among-population variation in quality traits in two Romanian provenance trials with Picea abies L.Balt. For.20, 37–47.

  • Google Scholar

• 22

  Bullock R. Lawler J. (2015). Community forestry research in Canada: a bibliometric perspective. Forest Policy Econ.59, 47–55. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2015.05.009

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 23

  Bulut S. (2023). Machine learning prediction of above-ground biomass in pure Calabrian pine (Pinus brutia ten.) stands of the Mediterranean region, Türkiye. Ecol. Inform.74:101951. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoinf.2022.101951

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 24

  Campo J. Stijsiger R. J. Nadal-Romero E. Cammeraat E. L. (2019). The effects of land abandonment and long-term afforestation practices on the organic carbon stock and lignin content of Mediterranean humid mountain soils. Eur. J. Soil Sci.70, 947–959. doi: 10.1111/ejss.12736

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 25

  Cao J. Wang X. Tian Y. Wen Z. Zha T. (2012). Pattern of carbon allocation across three different stages of stand development of a Chinese pine (Pinus tabulaeformis) forest. Ecol. Res.27, 883–892. doi: 10.1007/s11284-012-0965-1

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 26

  Carnus J. M. Parrotta J. Brockerhoff E. Arbez M. Jactel H. Kremer A. et al . (2006). Planted forests and biodiversity. J. For.104, 65–77. doi: 10.1093/jof/104.2.65

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 27

  Cassol P. C. Fachini L. Mafra Á. L. Brand M. A. Simonete M. Coimbra J. L. M. (2019). Changes in organic carbon in soil of natural grassland converted to Pinus taeda plantations at three ages. Ciênc. Florestal.29, 545–558. doi: 10.5902/198050986301

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 28

  Castro J. Zamora R. Hódar J. A. Gómez J. M. (2002). Benefits of using shrubs as nurse plants for reforestation in Mediterranean mountains: a 4-year study. Restor. Ecol.10, 297–305. doi: 10.1046/j.1526-100x.2002.01032.x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 29

  Champion H. G. Seth S. K. (1968). A revised survey of the forest types of India. New Delhi, India: Manager of Publications.

  • Google Scholar

• 30

  Chatterjee A. Vance G. F. Tinker D. B. (2009). Carbon pools of managed and unmanaged stands of ponderosa and lodgepole pine forests in Wyoming. Can. J. For. Res.39, 1893–1900. doi: 10.1139/X09-112

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 31

  Chen F. S. Zeng D. H. Fahey T. J. Liao P. F. (2010). Organic carbon in soil physical fractions under different-aged plantations of Mongolian pine in semi-arid region of Northeast China. Appl. Soil Ecol.44, 42–48. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2009.09.003

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 32

  Cheng X. Han H. Kang F. Song Y. Liu K. (2014). Variation in biomass and carbon storage by stand age in pine (Pinus tabulaeformis) planted ecosystem in Mt. Taiyue, Shanxi, China. J. Plant Interact.9, 521–528. doi: 10.1080/17429145.2013.862360

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 33

  Chirino E. Bonet A. Bellot J. Sánchez J. R. (2006). Effects of 30-year-old Aleppo pine plantations on runoff, soil erosion, and plant diversity in a semi-arid landscape in south eastern Spain. Catena65, 19–29. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2005.09.003

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 34

  Cifuentes-Croquevielle C. Stanton D. E. Armesto J. J. (2020). Soil invertebrate diversity loss and functional changes in temperate forest soils replaced by exotic pine plantations. Sci. Rep.10:7762. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-64652-2

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 35

  Clarivate . (2024). Web of science Core collection. Available online at: https://clarivate.com/products/scientific-and-academic-research/research-discovery-and-workflow-solutions/webofscience-platform/web-of-science-core-collection/ (Accessed August 21, 2024)

  • Google Scholar

• 36

  Coban O. De Deyn G. B. van der Ploeg M. (2022). Soil microbiota as game-changers in restoration of degraded lands. Science375:abe0725. doi: 10.1126/science.abe0725

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 37

  Constandache C. Peticilă A. Dincă L. Vasile D. (2016). The usage of sea buckthorn (Hippophae rhamnoides L.) for improving Romania's degraded lands. AgroLife Scientific Journal5, 50–58.

  • Google Scholar

• 38

  Constandache C. Tudor C. Popovici L. Vlad R. Crișan V. Dincă L. C. (2024). Structural characteristics of the pine stands on degraded lands in the south-east of Romania, in the context of climate changes. Appl. Sci.14:8127. doi: 10.3390/app14188127

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 39

  Constandache C. Tudor C. Vlad R. Dincă L. Popovici L. (2021). The productivity of pine stands on degraded lands. Sci. Pap. Ser. E. Land Reclam. Earth Obs. Surv. Environ. Eng.10, 76–84.

  • Google Scholar

• 40

  Correia A. C. Tomé M. Pacheco C. A. Faias S. Dias A. C. Freire J. et al . (2010). Biomass allometry and carbon factors for a Mediterranean pine (Pinus pinea L.) in Portugal. For. Syst.19, 418–433.

  • Google Scholar

• 41

  Crișan V. E. Dincă L. Vasile D. Murariu G. Drasovean R. Mocanu G. D. et al . (2024). Characteristics of oak (Quercus petraea (Matt.) Liebl), hornbeam (Carpinus betulus L.) and ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.) in a plain–low hills–mountains–plateau sequence. Heliyon10:e39297. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e39297

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 42

  Cutini A. Chianucci F. Manetti M. C. (2013). Allometric relationships for volume and biomass for stone pine (Pinus pinea L.) in Italian coastal stands. iForest Biogeosci. Forestry6, 331–335. doi: 10.3832/ifor0941-006

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 43

  Danjon F. Fourcaud T. Bert D. (2005). Root architecture and wind-firmness of mature Pinus pinaster. New Phytol.168, 387–400. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2005.01497.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 44

  del Río M. Barbeito I. Bravo-Oviedo A. Calama R. Cañellas I. Herrero C. et al . (2017). “Mediterranean pine forests: Management effects on carbon stocks” in Managing forest ecosystems: the challenge of climate change, Eds. F. Bravo, V. LeMay and R. Jandl. (Springer International Publishing), 301–327.

  • Google Scholar

• 45

  Deng C. Zhang S. Lu Y. Froese R. E. Ming A. Li Q. (2019). Thinning effects on the tree height–diameter allometry of Masson pine (Pinus massoniana Lamb.). Forests10:1129. doi: 10.3390/f10121129

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 46

  Diers M. Weigel R. Culmsee H. Leuschner C. (2021). Soil carbon and nutrient stocks under scots pine plantations in comparison to European beech forests: a paired-plot study across forests with different management history and precipitation regimes. Forest Ecosyst.8, 1–16. doi: 10.1186/s40663-021-00330-y

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 47

  Dincă L. Crișan V. Ienașoiu G. Murariu G. Drasovean R. (2024). Environmental indicator plants in mountain forests: a review. Plants13:3358. doi: 10.3390/plants13233358

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 48

  Dincă L. Dincă M. Vasile D. Spârchez G. Holonec L . (2015). Calculating organic carbon stock from forest soils.Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca43, 568–575. doi: 10.15835/nbha43210141

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 49

  Dincă L. Marin M. Radu V. Murariu G. Drasovean R. Cretu R. et al . (2022). Which are the best site and stand conditions for silver fir (Abies alba mill.) located in the Carpathian Mountains?Diversity14:547. doi: 10.3390/d14070547

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 50

  Durkaya B. Durkaya A. Yağcı H. (2019). Biomass equations in natural black pines. Fresenius Environ. Bull.28, 1132–1139.

  • Google Scholar

• 51

  Enescu C. M. Dănescu A. (2013). Black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia L.) – an invasive neophyte in the conventional land reclamation flora in Romania. Bull. Transilvania Univ. Brașov.6, 23–30.

  • Google Scholar

• 52

  Enescu C. M. Mihalache M. Ilie L. Dinca L. Constandache C. Murariu G. (2025). Agricultural benefits of shelterbelts and windbreaks: a bibliometric analysis. Agriculture15:1204. doi: 10.3390/agriculture15041204

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 53

  Erkan N. Güner Ş. T. Aydın A. C. (2023). Thinning effects on stand growth, carbon stocks, and soil properties in Brutia pine plantations. Carbon Balance Manag.18:6. doi: 10.1186/s13021-023-00226-0

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 54

  Favis-Mortlock D. T. Guerra A. J. T. (1999). The implications of general circulation model estimates of rainfall for future erosion: a case study from Brazil. Catena37, 329–354. doi: 10.1016/S0341-8162(99)00025-9

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 55

  Felton A. Nilsson U. Sonesson J. Ranius T. (2010). Mixed forests provide increased habitat heterogeneity and bird diversity in production landscapes. For. Ecol. Manag.260, 1839–1846. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2010.08.038

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 56

  Flores A. Méndez-González J. Muñoz-Flores H. J. (2021). Degraded forest lands and pine plantations in homogeneous ecological areas in Mexico. Agro Productividad14:1911. doi: 10.32854/agrop.v14i7.1911

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 57

  Forest Survey of India . Ministry of Environment Forest and climate change, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India. (2019). Available online at: https://launch.ruralindiaonline.org/en/library/resource/india-state-of-forest-report-2019-volume-i/ (accessed on November 18, 2024)

  • Google Scholar

• 58

  Förster A. Culmsee H. Leuschner C. (2021). Thinned northern German scots pine forests have a low carbon storage and uptake potential in comparison to naturally developing beech forests. For. Ecol. Manag.479:118575. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118575

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 59

  Foster N. W. Morrison I. K. (2002). Carbon sequestration by a jack pine stand following urea application. For. Ecol. Manag.169, 45–52. doi: 10.1016/S0378-1127(02)00297-9

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 60

  Fox T. R. Jokela E. J. Allen H. L. (2004). “The evolution of pine plantation silviculture in the southern United States” in Gen. Tech. Eds. H. M. Rauscher and K. H. Johnsen. Rep. SRS–75 (Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station), 63–82.

  • Google Scholar

• 61

  Fradette O. Marty C. Tremblay P. Lord D. Boucher J. F. (2021). Allometric equations for estimating biomass and carbon stocks in afforested open woodlands with black spruce and jack pine, in the eastern Canadian boreal forest. Forests12:59. doi: 10.3390/f12010059

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 62

  Fu L. Lei X. Hu Z. Zeng W. Tang S. Marshall P. et al . (2017a). Integrating regional climate change into allometric equations for estimating tree aboveground biomass of Masson pine in China. Ann. For. Sci.74, 1–15. doi: 10.1007/s13595-017-0671-4

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 63

  Fu L. Zeng W. Tang S. (2017b). Individual tree biomass models to estimate forest biomass for large spatial regions developed using four pine species in China. For. Sci.63, 241–249. doi: 10.5849/FS-2016-038

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 64

  Gómez Y. Paolini J. Hernández R. M. (2008). Substitution of native savanna by Pinus caribaea (Pinaceae) plantations in Venezuela: effect on parameters that indicated changes in soil carbon content. Rev. Biol. Trop.56, 2041–2053.

  • Google Scholar

• 65

  Gómez-Aparicio L. Zamora R. Gómez J. M. Hódar J. A. Castro J. Baraza E. (2008). Facilitation and microclimate amelioration by Pinus halepensis during forest succession in Mediterranean ecosystems. J. Veg. Sci.19, 605–616. doi: 10.3170/2008-8-18397

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 66

  Gonzalez-Benecke C. A. Gezan S. A. Albaugh T. J. Allen H. L. Burkhart H. E. Fox T. R. et al . (2014). Local and general above-stump biomass functions for loblolly pine and slash pine trees. For. Ecol. Manag.334, 254–276. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2014.09.001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 67

  Gonzalez-Benecke C. A. Zhao D. Samuelson L. J. Martin T. A. Leduc D. J. Jack S. B. (2018). Local and general above-ground biomass functions for Pinus palustris trees. Forests9:310. doi: 10.3390/f9060310

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 68

  Google . (2024). Geochart. Available online at: https://developers.google.com/chart/interactive/docs/gallery/geochart (accessed August 23, 2024)

  • Google Scholar

• 69

  Griscom B. W. Busch J. Cook-Patton S. C. Ellis P. W. Funk J. Leavitt S. M. et al . (2020). National mitigation potential from natural climate solutions in the tropics. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci.375:20190126. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2019.0126

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 70

  Guedes B. S. Olsson B. A. Egnell G. Sitoe A. A. Karltun E. (2018). Plantations of Pinus and Eucalyptus replacing degraded mountain miombo woodlands in Mozambique significantly increase carbon sequestration. Glob. Ecol. Conserv.14:e00401. doi: 10.1016/j.gecco.2018.e00401

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 71

  Guedes B. S. Olsson B. A. Karltun E. (2016). Effects of 34-year-old Pinus taeda and Eucalyptus grandis plantations on soil carbon and nutrient status in former miombo forest soils. Glob. Ecol. Conserv.8, 190–202. doi: 10.1016/j.gecco.2016.09.007

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 72

  Guo L. B. Cowie A. L. Montagu K. D. Gifford R. M. (2008). Carbon and nitrogen stocks in a native pasture and an adjacent 16-year-old Pinus radiata D. Don plantation in Australia. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.124, 205–218. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2007.10.010

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 73

  Hartiningtias D. Fule P. Z. Gunawan A. A. (2020). Wildfire effects on forest structure of Pinus merkusii in Sumatra, Indonesia. For. Ecol. Manag.457:117660. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2019.117660

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 74

  Heinrichs S. Ammer C. Mund M. Boch S. Budde S. Fischer M. et al . (2019). Landscape-scale mixtures of tree species are more effective than stand-scale mixtures for biodiversity of vascular plants, bryophytes and lichens. Forests10:73. doi: 10.3390/f10010073

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 75

  Hernández-Vera D. Pompa-García M. Yerena-Yamallel J. I. Alanís-Rodríguez E. (2017). Within-tree carbon concentration variation in three Mexican pine species. Bosque38, 381–386. doi: 10.4067/S0717-92002017000200381

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 76

  Hicke J. A. Sherriff R. L. Veblen T. T. Asner G. P. (2004). Carbon accumulation in Colorado ponderosa pine stands. Can. J. For. Res.34, 1283–1295. doi: 10.1139/x04-012

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 77

  Hofstede R. G. M. Groenendijk J. P. Coppus R. Fehse J. C. Sevink J. (2002). Impact of pine plantations on soils and vegetation in the Ecuadorian high Andes. Mount. Res. Dev.22, 159–167. doi: 10.1659/0276-4741(2002)022[0159:IOPPOS]2.0.CO;2

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 78

  Huang L. Zhou M. Lv J. Chen K. (2020). Trends in global research in forest carbon sequestration: a bibliometric analysis. J. Clean. Prod.252:119908. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119908

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 79

  Imanuddin R. Hidayat A. Rachmat H. H. Turjaman M. Pratiwi P. Nurfatriani F. et al . (2020). Reforestation and sustainable management of Pinus merkusii forest plantation in Indonesia: a review. Forests11:1235. doi: 10.3390/f11121235

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 80

  Jandl N. Jandl R. Schindlbacher A. (2018). Future management options for cembran pine forests close to the alpine timberline. Ann. For. Sci.75, 1–12. doi: 10.1007/s13595-018-0754-0

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 81

  Jiang L. Yang T. Yu J. (2022). Global trends and prospects of blue carbon sinks: a bibliometric analysis. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res.29, 65924–65939. doi: 10.1007/s11356-022-20436-1

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 82

  Jina B. S. Sah P. Bhatt M. D. Rawat Y. S. (2008). Estimating carbon sequestration rates and total carbon stockpile in degraded and non-degraded sites of oak and pine forest of Kumaun central Himalaya. Ecoprint15, 75–81.

  • Google Scholar

• 83

  Jörgensen K. Granath G. Lindahl B. D. Strengbom J. (2021). Forest management to increase carbon sequestration in boreal Pinus sylvestris forests. Plant Soil466, 165–178. doi: 10.1007/s11104-021-05105-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 84

  Karu H. Szava-Kovats R. Pensa M. Kull O. (2009). Carbon sequestration in a chronosequence of scots pine stands in a reclaimed opencast oil shale mine. Can. J. For. Res.39, 1507–1517. doi: 10.1139/X09-075

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 85

  Kenina L. Bardulis A. Matisons R. Kapostins R. Jansons A. (2018). Belowground biomass models for young oligotrophic scots pine stands in Latvia. iForest Biogeosci, Forestry11, 206–211. doi: 10.3832/ifor2713-011

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 86

  Khan I. Hayat U. Mujahid A. Majid A. Chaudhary A. Badshah M. T. et al . (2021). Evaluation of growing stock, biomass and soil carbons and their association with a diameter: a case study from a planted Chir pine (Pinus roxburghii) forest. Appl. Ecol. Environ. Res.19, 1457–1472. doi: 10.15666/aeer/1902_14571472

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 87

  Khan D. Kouassi C. J. A. Zhang K. Zhang X. Shi Z. Uddin S. et al . (2022). Effect of climate change on stem biomass and carbon stock of Mongolian scots pine (Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica) plantation forests in Horqin sandy land, China. Appl. Ecol. Environ. Res.20, 1–21. doi: 10.15666/aeer/2004_1-21

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 88

  Khan A. Zhang X. Zhang K. Iqbal A. Ahmad A. Saeed S. et al . (2020). Tree distribution pattern, growing stock characteristics and biomass carbon density of Mongolian scots pine (Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica) plantation of Horqin Sandy land, China. Pak. J. Bot.52, 995–1002.

  • Google Scholar

• 89

  Kim C. Jeong J. Kim R. H. Son Y. M. Lee K. H. Kim J. S. et al . (2011). Allometric equations and biomass expansion factors of Japanese red pine on the local level. Landsc. Ecol. Eng.7, 283–289. doi: 10.1007/s11355-010-0131-2

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 90

  Kim C. Yoo B. O. Jung S. Y. Lee K. S. (2017). Allometric equations to assess biomass, carbon and nitrogen content of black pine and red pine trees in southern Korea. iForest Biogeosci. Forest.10, 483–490. doi: 10.3832/ifor2164-010

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 91

  Knoke T. Ammer C. Stimm B. Mosandl R. (2008). Admixing broadleaved to coniferous tree species: a review on yield, ecological stability and economics. Eur. J. Forest Res.127, 89–101. doi: 10.1007/s10342-007-0186-2

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 92

  Koch A. Kaplan J. O. (2022). Tropical forest restoration under future climate change. Nat. Clim. Chang.12, 279–283. doi: 10.1038/s41558-022-01289-6

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 93

  Köse N. Türkes M. Çelik H. Akkemik Ü. (2025). Is Pinus pinea growth affected by climate change in western Anatolia?iForest Biogeosci. Forest.18, 93–101. doi: 10.3832/ifor4641-018

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 94

  Kumar M. Kumar A. Kumar R. Konsam B. Pala N. A. Bhat J. A. (2021). Carbon stock potential in Pinus roxburghii forests of Indian Himalayan regions. Environ. Dev. Sustain.23, 12463–12478. doi: 10.1007/s10668-020-01178-y

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 95

  Lal R. (2001). Soil degradation by erosion. Land Degrad. Dev.12, 519–539. doi: 10.1002/ldr.472

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 96

  Lamb D. Erskine P. D. Parrotta J. A. (2005). Restoration of degraded tropical forest landscapes. Science310, 1628–1632. doi: 10.1126/science.1111773

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 97

  Lavelle P. Dugdale R. Scholes R. Berhe A. A. Carpenter E. Codispoti L. et al . (2005). “Nutrient cycling” in Ecosystems and human well-being: current state and trends. Findings of the condition and trends working group. eds. HassanR.ScholesR.AshN., vol. 1 (Washington, DC: Island Press), 331–353.

  • Google Scholar

• 98

  Li Y. Awada T. Zhou X. Shang W. Chen Y. Zuo X. et al . (2012). Mongolian pine plantations enhance soil physico-chemical properties and carbon and nitrogen capacities in semi-arid degraded sandy land in China. Appl. Soil Ecol.56, 1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2012.01.007

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 99

  Li P. Liu X. Wang C. Lu Y. Luo L. Tao L. et al . (2024). The carbon storage of reforestation plantings on degraded lands of the red soil region, Jiangxi province, China. Forests15:320. doi: 10.3390/f15020320

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 100

  Li X. Son Y. M. Lee K. H. Kim R. H. Jin G. Son Y. et al . (2013). Biomass and carbon storage in an age-sequence of Japanese red pine (Pinus densiflora) forests in Central Korea. For. Sci. Technol.9, 39–44. doi: 10.1080/21580103.2013.773666

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 101

  Li X. Yi M. J. Son Y. Park P. S. Lee K. H. Son Y. M. et al . (2011). Biomass and carbon storage in an age-sequence of Korean pine (Pinus koraiensis) plantation forests in Central Korea. J. Plant Biol.54, 33–42. doi: 10.1007/s12374-010-9140-9

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 102

  Li C. Zha T. Liu J. Jia X. (2013). Carbon and nitrogen distribution across a chronosequence of secondary lacebark pine in China. For. Chron.89, 192–198.

  • Google Scholar

• 103

  Liu W. Wang J. Li C. Chen B. Sun Y. (2019). Using bibliometric analysis to understand the recent progress in agroecosystem services research. Ecol. Econ.156, 293–305. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.10.031

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 104

  Lull C. Gil-Ortiz R. Bautista I. del Campo A. Lidón A. (2024). The short-term effects of heavy thinning on selected soil carbon pools and microbial activity in a young Aleppo pine forest. Forests15:658. doi: 10.3390/f15040658

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 105

  Ma Z. Hu C. Huang J. Li T. Lei J. (2022). Forests and forestry in support of sustainable development goals (SDGs): a bibliometric analysis. Forests13:1960. doi: 10.3390/f13111960

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 106

  Ma Q. Wang X. Mo B. Liu Z. Zhang Y. Zong W. et al . (2025). Knowledge map-based analysis of carbon sequestration research dynamics in forest and grass systems: a bibliometric analysis. Atmos.16:474. doi: 10.3390/atmos16040474

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 107

  Maestre F. T. Cortina J. (2004). Are Pinus halepensis plantations useful as a restoration tool in semiarid Mediterranean areas?For. Ecol. Manag.198, 303–317. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2004.05.040

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 108

  Mapuru M. J. Xulu S. Gebreslasie M. (2023). Remote sensing applications in monitoring poplars: a review. Forests14:2301. doi: 10.3390/f14122301

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 109

  Marcu N. Budeanu M. Apostol E. N. Radu G. R. (2020). Valuation of the economic benefits from using genetically improved forest reproductive materials in afforestation. Forests11:382. doi: 10.3390/f11040382

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 110

  Marin M. Clinciu I. Tudose N. C. Ungurean C. Mihalache A. L. Mărțoiu N. E. et al . (2022). Assessment of seasonal surface runoff under climate and land use change scenarios for a small forested watershed: upper Tarlung watershed (Romania). Water14:2860. doi: 10.3390/w14182860

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 111

  Marin M. Tudose N. C. Ungurean C. Mihalache A. L. (2024). Application of life cycle assessment for torrent control structures: a review. Land13:1956. doi: 10.3390/land13111956

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 112

  Markewitz D. Sartori F. Craft C. (2002). Soil change and carbon storage in longleaf pine stands planted on marginal agricultural lands. Ecol. Appl.12, 1276–1285. doi: 10.1890/1051-0761(2002)012[1276:SCACSI]2.0.CO;2

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 113

  Martín-Peinado F. J. Navarro F. B. Jiménez M. N. Sierra M. Martínez F. J. Romero-Freire A. et al . (2016). Long-term effects of pine plantations on soil quality in southern Spain. Land Degrad. Dev.27, 1709–1720. doi: 10.1002/ldr.2566

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 114

  McIntire C. D. Cunliffe A. M. Boschetti F. Litvak M. E. (2022). Allometric relationships for predicting aboveground biomass, sapwood, and leaf area of two-needle piñon pine (Pinus edulis) amid open-grown conditions in Central New Mexico. For. Sci.68, 152–161. doi: 10.1093/forsci/fxac001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 115

  Mechergui K. Naghmouchi S. Altamimi A. S. Jaouadi W. (2022). Evaluation of biomass, carbon storage capability, agroforestry interest of Pinus pinea L. and management practices to increase carbon stocks: a review. Cerne27:e-102938.

  • Google Scholar

• 116

  Meyer P. Nagel R. Feldmann E. (2021). Limited sink but large storage: biomass dynamics in naturally developing beech (Fagus sylvatica) and oak (Quercus robur, Quercus petraea) forests of North-Western Germany. J. Ecol.109, 3602–3616. doi: 10.1111/1365-2745.13740

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 117

  Microsoft . (2024). Microsoft excel. Available online at: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/excel?legRedir=true&CorrelationId=3bb60ab0-fe13-41a4-812b-2627667cf346/ (accessed August 28, 2024)

  • Google Scholar

• 118

  Mihalache A. L. Marin M. Davidescu Ș. O. Ungurean C. Adorjani A. Tudose N. C. et al . (2020). Physical status of torrent control structures in Romania. Environ. Eng. Manag. J.19, 861–872.

  • Google Scholar

• 119

  Mi'raj D. A. Ulev S. (2024). A bibliometric review of Islamic economics and finance bibliometric papers: an overview of the future of Islamic economics and finance. Qual. Res. Financ. Mark.16, 993–1035. doi: 10.1108/QRFM-03-2023-0068

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 120

  Mohan K. C. Mason E. G. Bown H. E. (2020). Linking above-ground biomass production to below-ground carbon fluxes across stocking, clone, fertilization, and understory elimination in Pinus radiata D. Don plantations, New Zealand. For. Ecol. Manag.477:118469. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118469

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 121

  Mondal A. Khare D. Kundu S. (2016). Impact assessment of climate change on future soil erosion and SOC loss. Nat. Hazards82, 1515–1539. doi: 10.1007/s11069-016-2255-7

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 122

  Moscatelli M. C. Bonifacio E. Chiti T. Cudlín P. Dinca L. Gömöryová E. et al . (2017). Soil properties as indicators of treeline dynamics in relation to anthropogenic pressure and climate change. Clim. Res.73, 73–84. doi: 10.3354/cr01478

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 123

  Mujuru L. Gotora T. Velthorst E. J. Nyamangara J. Hoosbeek M. R. (2014). Soil carbon and nitrogen sequestration over an age sequence of Pinus patula plantations in Zimbabwean eastern highlands. For. Ecol. Manag.313, 254–265. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2013.11.024

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 124

  Mullan D. (2013). Soil erosion under the impacts of future climate change: assessing the statistical significance of future changes and the potential on-site and off-site problems. Catena109, 234–246. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2013.06.001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 125

  Murariu G. Dinca L. Tudose N. Crisan V. Georgescu L. Munteanu D. et al . (2021). Structural characteristics of the main resinous stands from southern Carpathians, Romania. Forests12:1029. doi: 10.3390/f12081029

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 126

  Murphy B. A. Rollinson C. R. Dietze M. C. Staudhammer C. L. VonHedemann N. R. Schultz C. A. et al . (2025). Insights into nature-based climate solutions: managing forests for climate resilience and carbon stability. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci.130:e2024JG008391. doi: 10.1029/2024JG008391

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 127

  Mustățea M. Clius M. Tudose N. C. Cheval S. (2022). An enhanced Machado index of naturalness. Catena212:106091ISSN 0341-8162,. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2022.106091

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 128

  Navarrete-Poyatos M. A. Navarro-Cerrillo R. M. Lara-Gómez M. A. Duque-Lazo J. Varo M. D. L. A. Palacios Rodriguez G. (2019). Assessment of the carbon stock in pine plantations in southern Spain through ALS data and K-nearest neighbor algorithm based models. Geosciences9:442. doi: 10.3390/geosciences9100442

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 129

  Navarro-Cerrillo R. M. Ruiz-Gómez F. J. Camarero J. J. Castillo V. Barberá G. G. Palacios-Rodríguez G. et al . (2022). Long-term carbon sequestration in pine forests under different silvicultural and climatic regimes in Spain. Forests13:450. doi: 10.3390/f13030450

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 130

  Nearing M. A. Pruski F. F. O’neal M. R. (2004). Expected climate change impacts on soil erosion rates: a review: conservation implications of climate change. J. Soil Water Conserv.59, 43–50. doi: 10.1080/00224561.2004.12435709

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 131

  Nicolescu V. N. Hernea C. Bakti B. Keser Z. Antal B. Rédei K. (2018). Black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia L.) as a multi-purpose tree species in Hungary and Romania: a review. J. For. Res.29, 1449–1463. doi: 10.1007/s11676-018-0637-8

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 132

  Nunes L. Patrício M. Tomé J. Tomé M. (2010). Carbon and nutrient stocks in even-aged maritime pine stands from Portugal. Forest Syst.19, 434–448. doi: 10.5424/fs/20101903-10129

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 133

  Olmedo G. F. Guevara M. Gilabert H. Montes C. R. Arellano E. C. Barría-Knopf B. et al . (2020). Baseline of carbon stocks in Pinus radiata and Eucalyptus spp. plantations of Chile. Forests11:1063. doi: 10.3390/f11101063

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 134

  Oluwajuwon T. V. Chazdon R. L. Ota L. Gregorio N. Herbohn J. (2024). Bibliometric and literature synthesis on assisted natural regeneration: an evidence base for forest and landscape restoration in the tropics. Front. For. Glob. Change7:1412075. doi: 10.3389/ffgc.2024.1412075

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 135

  Onan A. Korukoğlu V. Bulut H. (2016). Ensemble of keyword extraction methods and classifiers in text classification. Expert Syst. Appl.57, 232–247. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2016.03.009

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 136

  Oprică R. Tudose N. C. Davidescu S. O. Zup M. Marin M. Comanici A. N. et al . (2022). Gender inequalities in Transylvania's largest peri-urban forest usage. Ann. For. Res.65, 57–69. doi: 10.15287/afr.2022.2757

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 137

  Ouimet R. Tremblay S. Perie C. Pregent G. (2007). Ecosystem carbon accumulation following fallow farmland afforestation with red pine in southern Quebec. Can. J. For. Res.37, 1118–1133. doi: 10.1139/X06-297

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 138

  Ozdemir E. Oral H. V. Akburak S. Makineci E. Yilmaz E. (2013). Carbon and nitrogen accumulation in forest floor and surface soil under different geographic origins of maritime pine (Pinus pinaster Aiton.) plantations. Forest Systems22, 214–221. doi: 10.5424/fs/2013222-03441

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 139

  Panagopoulos T. Hatzistathis A. (1995). Early growth of Pinus nigra and Robinia pseudoacacia stands: contributions to soil genesis and landscape improvement on lignite spoils in Ptolemaida. Landsc. Urban Plan.32, 19–29. doi: 10.1016/0169-2046(94)00186-7

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 140

  Parrotta J. A. Turnbull J. W. Jones N. (1997). Catalyzing native forest regeneration on degraded tropical lands. For. Ecol. Manag.99, 1–7. doi: 10.1016/S0378-1127(97)00119-2

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 141

  Pausas J. G. Bladé C. Valdecantos A. Seva J. P. Fuentes D. Alloza J. A. et al . (2004). Pines and oaks in the restoration of Mediterranean landscapes of Spain: new perspectives for an old practice: a review. Plant Ecol.171, 209–220. doi: 10.1023/B:VEGE.0000029381.63336.20

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 142

  Pérez-Rodríguez R. Marques M. J. Bienes R. (2007). Use of dendrochronological method in Pinus halepensis to estimate the soil erosion in the south east of Madrid (Spain). Sci. Total Environ.378, 156–160. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2007.01.048

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 143

  Pietrzykowski M. Daniels W. L. (2014). Estimation of carbon sequestration by pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) ecosystems developed on reforested post-mining sites in Poland on differing mine soil substrates. Ecol. Eng.73, 209–218. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2014.09.080

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 144

  Pimentel D. Harvey C. Resosudarmo P. Sinclair K. Kurz D. McNair M. et al . (1995). Environmental and economic costs of soil erosion and conservation benefits. Science267, 1117–1123. doi: 10.1126/science.267.5201.1117

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 145

  Pohjola J. Valsta L. (2007). Carbon credits and management of scots pine and Norway spruce stands in Finland. Forest Policy Econ.9, 789–798. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2007.02.005

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 146

  Powers M. D. Kolka R. K. Bradford J. B. Palik B. J. Fraver S. Jurgensen M. F. (2012). Carbon stocks across a chronosequence of thinned and unmanaged red pine (Pinus resinosa) stands. Ecol. Appl.22, 1297–1307. doi: 10.1890/11-0411.1

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 147

  Quiroz Dahik C. Crespo P. Stimm B. Mosandl R. Cueva J. Hildebrandt P. et al . (2021). Impacts of pine plantations on carbon stocks of Páramo sites in southern Ecuador. Carbon Balance Manag.16, 1–15. doi: 10.1186/s13021-021-00188-4

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 148

  Ramírez-Valiente J. A. Solé-Medina A. Pyhäjärvi T. Savolainen O. Heer K. Opgenoorth L. et al . (2021). Adaptive responses to temperature and precipitation variation at the early-life stages of Pinus sylvestris. New Phytol.232, 1632–1647. doi: 10.1111/nph.17678

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 149

  Razafindrabe B. H. He B. Inoue S. Ezaki T. Shaw R. (2010). The role of forest stand density in controlling soil erosion: implications to sediment-related disasters in Japan. Environ. Monit. Assess.160, 337–354. doi: 10.1007/s10661-008-0699-2

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 150

  Rezgui F. Mouillot F. Semmar N. Zribi L. Khaldi A. Nasr Z. et al . (2024). Assessment of Pinus halepensis forests’ vulnerability using the temporal dynamics of carbon stocks and fire traits in Tunisia. Fire7:204. doi: 10.3390/fire7060204

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 151

  Rios-Carrasco E. D. L. Hoogh R. D. Návar J. (2009). Projections of carbon stocks in sites reforested with pinyon pine species in northeastern Mexico. Arid Land Res. Manag.23, 342–358. doi: 10.1080/15324980903231884

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 152

  Rodríguez de Prado D. Vázquez Veloso A. Quian Y. F. Ruano I. Bravo F. Herrero de Aza C. (2023). Can mixed forests sequester more CO₂ than pure forests in future climate scenarios? A case study of Pinus sylvestris combinations in Spain. Eur. J. Forest Res.142, 91–105. doi: 10.1007/s10342-022-01507-y

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 153

  Rothstein D. E. Yermakov Z. Buell A. L. (2004). Loss and recovery of ecosystem carbon pools following stand-replacing wildfire in Michigan jack pine forests. Can. J. For. Res.34, 1908–1918. doi: 10.1139/x04-063

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 154

  Ruiz-Jaen M. C. Aide T. M. (2005). Restoration success: how is it being measured?Restor. Ecol.13, 569–577. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-100X.2005.00072.x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 155

  Ruiz-Peinado R. Bravo-Oviedo A. López-Senespleda E. Montero G. del Río M. (2013). Do thinnings influence biomass and soil carbon stocks in Mediterranean maritime pinewoods?Eur. J. Forest Res.132, 253–262. doi: 10.1007/s10342-012-0672-z

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 156

  Ruiz-Peinado R. Bravo-Oviedo A. Montero G. del Río M. (2016). Carbon stocks in a scots pine afforestation under different thinning intensities management. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change21, 1059–1072. doi: 10.1007/s11027-015-9677-5

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 157

  Samuelson L. J. Stokes T. A. Butnor J. R. Johnsen K. H. Gonzalez-Benecke C. A. Martin T. A. et al . (2017). Ecosystem carbon density and allocation across a chronosequence of longleaf pine forests. Ecol. Appl.27, 244–259. doi: 10.1002/eap.1439

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 158

  Santillán-Fernández A. Vásquez-Bautista N. Pelcastre-Ruiz L. M. Ortigoza-García C. A. Padilla-Herrera E. Tadeo-Noble A. E. et al . (2023). Bibliometric analysis of forestry research in Mexico published by Mexican journals. Forests14:648. doi: 10.3390/f14030648

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 159

  Sauer T. J. Cambardella C. A. Brandle J. R. (2007). Soil carbon and tree litter dynamics in a red cedar–scotch pine shelterbelt. Agrofor. Syst.71, 163–174. doi: 10.1007/s10457-007-9072-7

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 160

  Semwal R. L. Nautiyal S. Maikhuri R. K. Rao K. S. Saxena K. G. (2013). Growth and carbon stocks of multipurpose tree species plantations in degraded lands in central Himalaya, India. For. Ecol. Manag.310, 450–459. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2013.08.023

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 161

  Settineri G. Mallamaci C. Mitrović M. Sidari M. Muscolo A. (2018). Effects of different thinning intensities on soil carbon storage in Pinus laricio forest of Apennine South Italy. Eur. J. Forest Res.137, 131–141. doi: 10.1007/s10342-017-1077-9

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 162

  Shen X. Liu B. Zhou D. (2015). Effects of grassland degradation on air and soil temperature in Songnen plain of Northeast China. Curr. Sci.108, 2098–2101. doi: 10.18520/cs/v109/i11/2098-2101

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 163

  Silvestru-Grigore C. V. Dinulică F. Spârchez G. Hălălișan A. F. Dincă L. C. Enescu R. E. et al . (2018). Radial growth behavior of pines on Romanian degraded lands. Forests9:213. doi: 10.3390/f9040213

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 164

  Silvestru-Grigore C. V. Spârchez G. Dinulică F. (2016). Starea de sănătate a arboretelor de pin instalate pe terenuri degradate din Subcarpații Buzăului. Rev. Pădur.131, 7–18.

  • Google Scholar

• 165

  Simons N. K. Felipe-Lucia M. R. Schall P. Ammer C. Bauhus J. Blüthgen N. et al . (2021). National forest inventories capture the multifunctionality of managed forests in Germany. Forest Ecosystems8, 1–19. doi: 10.1186/s40663-021-00314-4

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 166

  Siqing B. Meng S. Liu L. Zhou G. Yu J. Xu Z. et al . (2022). Additive allometric equations to improve aboveground biomass estimation for Mongolian pine plantations in mu us Sandy land, Inner Mongolia, China. Forests13:1672. doi: 10.3390/f13101672

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 167

  Șofletea N. Curtu L. (2007). Dendrologie. Brasov, Romania: Editura Universității Transilvania, 177–179.

  • Google Scholar

• 168

  Spîrchez G. C. Lunguleasa A. (2016). Wood biomass, an important source of renewable energy. AGIR Bull.1, 40–42.

  • Google Scholar

• 169

  Springer K. Manning P. Boesing A. L. Ammer C. Fiore-Donno A. M. Fischer M. et al . (2024). Identifying the stand properties that support both high biodiversity and carbon storage in German forests. For. Ecol. Manag.572:122328. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2024.122328

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 170

  Sullivan A. (2022). Bridging the divide between rural and urban community-based forestry: a bibliometric review. Forest Policy Econ.144:102826. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102826

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 171

  Tamas J. (2003). The history of Austrian pine plantations in Hungary. Acta Bot. Croat.62, 147–158.

  • Google Scholar

• 172

  Thanasis G. Zagas T. Tsitsoni T. Ganatsas P. Papapetrou P. . (2007). Stand development and structural analysis of planted Pinus nigra stands in northern Greece. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Environmental, Management, Engineering, Planning and Economics, Skiathos, June 24–28, 507–514.

  • Google Scholar

• 173

  Thomas R. Q. Brooks E. B. Jersild A. L. Ward E. J. Wynne R. H. Albaugh T. J. et al . (2017). Leveraging 35 years of Pinus taeda research in the southeastern US to constrain forest carbon cycle predictions: regional data assimilation using ecosystem experiments. Göttingen, Germany: Copernicus Publications.

  • Google Scholar

• 174

  Torres I. Moreno J. M. Morales-Molino C. Arianoutsou M. (2021). “Ecosystem services provided by pine forests” in Pines and their mixed forest ecosystems in the Mediterranean Basin (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 617–629.

  • Google Scholar

• 175

  Traci C. Untaru E. (1986). Development and improvement and consolidation effect of forest plantations on degraded lands in experimental areas Seria II-a. Bucharest, Romania: ICAS, Propaganda Tehnică Agricolă Publishing House, 70.

  • Google Scholar

• 176

  Tudor C. Constandache C. Popovici L. Ivan V. Badea O. N. (2023). Health state and behaviour of pine stands on degraded lands in the Vrancea Subcarpathians. Rev. Silvic. Cineget.53, 41–47.

  • Google Scholar

• 177

  Tudose N. C. Cheval S. Ungurean C. Broekman A. Sanchez-Plaza A. Cremades R. et al . (2022). Climate services for sustainable resource management: the water-energy-land nexus in the Tarlung River basin (Romania). Land Use Policy119:6221. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106221

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 178

  Tudose N. C. Marin M. Cheval S. Mitter H. Broekman A. Sanchez-Plaza A. et al . (2023a). Challenges and opportunities of knowledge co-creation for the water-energy-land nexus. Clim. Serv.30:100340. doi: 10.1016/j.cliser.2023.100340

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 179

  Tudose N. C. Petritan I. C. Toiu F. L. Petritan A.-M. Marin M. (2023b). Relation between topography and gap characteristics in a mixed sessile oak–beech old-growth forest. Forests14:188. doi: 10.3390/f14020188

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 180

  Untaru E. Constandache C. Roșu C. (2008). “The effects of forest plantations installed on eroded and sliding lands, related to their evolution in time” in Silvologie eds. V. Giurgiu and I. Clinciu. vol. 6 (Bucharest, Romania: Academia Română Publishing House), 137–168.

  • Google Scholar

• 181

  Uri N. D. (2001). The environmental implications of soil erosion in the United States. Environ. Monit. Assess.66, 293–312. doi: 10.1023/A:1006333329653

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 182

  Uri V. Kukumägi M. Aosaar J. Varik M. Becker H. Aun K. et al . (2022). The dynamics of the carbon storage and fluxes in scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) chronosequence. Sci. Total Environ.817:152973. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.152973

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 183

  Usuga J. C. L. Toro J. A. R. Alzate M. V. R. Tapias Á. D. J. L. (2010). Estimation of biomass and carbon stocks in plants, soil and forest floor in different tropical forests. For. Ecol. Manag.260, 1906–1913. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2010.09.029

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 184

  Valerio Hernández L. A. Campos Vanegas W. A. Cruz Tórrez L. E. Peña Ortiz J. A. Vargas-Larreta B. (2024). Improving volume and biomass equations for Pinus oocarpa in Nicaragua. Forests15:309. doi: 10.3390/f15020309

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 185

  Vallauri D. R. Aronson J. Barbero M. (2002). An analysis of forest restoration 120 years after reforestation on badlands in the southwestern Alps. Restor. Ecol.10, 16–26. doi: 10.1046/j.1526-100X.2002.10102.x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 186

  Vallet P. Meredieu C. Seynave I. Bélouard T. Dhôte J. F. (2009). Species substitution for carbon storage: sessile oak versus Corsican pine in France as a case study. For. Ecol. Manag.257, 1314–1323. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2008.11.034

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 187

  Vasile D. Petritan A.-M. Tudose N. C. Toiu F. L. Scarlatescu V. Petritan I. C. (2017). Structure and spatial distribution of dead wood in two temperate old-growth mixed European beech forests. Not. Bot. Horti Agrobot. Cluj-Napoca45, 639–645. doi: 10.15835/nbha45210829

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 188

  Veloso M. G. Dieckow J. Zanatta J. A. Bayer C. Higa R. C. Brevilieri R. C. et al . (2018). Reforestation with loblolly pine can restore the initial soil carbon stock relative to a subtropical natural forest after 30 years. Eur. J. Forest Res.137, 593–604. doi: 10.1007/s10342-018-1127-y

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 189

  Vicente E. Vilagrosa A. Ruiz-Yanetti S. Manrique-Alba À. González-Sanchís M. Moutahir H. et al . (2018). Water balance of Mediterranean Quercus ilex L. and Pinus halepensis mill. forests in semiarid climates: a review in a climate change context. Forests9:426. doi: 10.3390/f9070426

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 190

  Villar-Salvador P. (2016). Restoration of Spanish pine plantations: a main challenge for the 21st century. Refor1, 53–66.

  • Google Scholar

• 191

  Vlad R. Constandache C. Dinca L. Tudose N. C. Sidor C. G. Popovici L. et al . (2019). Influence of climatic, site and stand characteristics on some structural parameters of scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) forests situated on degraded lands from East Romania. Range Manag. Agrofor.40, 40–48.

  • Google Scholar

• 192

  Voltas J. Lucabaugh D. Chambel M. R. Ferrio J. P. (2015). Intraspecific variation in the use of water sources by the circum-Mediterranean conifer Pinus halepensis. New Phytol.208, 1031–1041. doi: 10.1111/nph.13505

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 193

  VOS Viewer . (2010). Available online at: https://www.vosviewer.com/ (accessed August 23, 2024)

  • Google Scholar

• 194

  Wang W. Peng C. Kneeshaw D. D. Larocque G. R. Lei X. Zhu Q. et al . (2013). Modeling the effects of varied forest management regimes on carbon dynamics in jack pine stands under climate change. Can. J. For. Res.43, 469–479. doi: 10.1139/cjfr-2012-0320

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 195

  Wang W. Peng C. Kneeshaw D. D. Larocque G. R. Song X. Zhou X. (2012). Quantifying the effects of climate change and harvesting on carbon dynamics of boreal aspen and jack pine forests using the TRIPLEX-management model. For. Ecol. Manag.281, 152–162. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2012.06.028

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 196

  Wang Y. Wang H. Xu M. Ma Z. Wang Z. L. (2015). Soil organic carbon stocks and CO2 effluxes of native and exotic pine plantations in subtropical China. Catena128, 167–173. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2015.02.003

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 197

  Wang C. Zhang G. Chen S. Wan Y. (2024). Effect of straw incorporation on controlling runoff and soil erosion in cropland with different land degradation degrees. Land Degrad. Dev.35, 717–731. doi: 10.1002/ldr.4947

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 198

  Wasserman T. N. Waltz A. E. Roccaforte J. P. Springer J. D. Crouse J. E. (2022). Natural regeneration responses to thinning and burning treatments in ponderosa pine forests and implications for restoration. J. For. Res.33, 741–753. doi: 10.1007/s11676-021-01404-x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 199

  Web of Science . (2024). Available online at: https://www.webofscience.com/WOS/ (accessed September 29, 2024)

  • Google Scholar

• 200

  Węgiel A. Polowy K. (2020). Aboveground carbon content and storage in mature scots pine stands of different densities. Forests11:240. doi: 10.3390/f11020240

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 201

  World Flora Online . (2024). Available online at: https://wfoplantlist.org/ (accessed December 22, 2024)

  • Google Scholar

• 202

  Woś B. Pająk M. Pietrzykowski M. (2022). Soil organic carbon pools and associated soil chemical properties under two pine species (Pinus sylvestris L. and Pinus nigra Arn.) introduced on reclaimed sandy soils. Forests13:328. doi: 10.3390/f13020328

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 203

  Wu J. Chen Y. Yang W. Leng H. Wen Q. Li M. et al . (2025). Spatiotemporal dynamics and driving factors of arbor forest carbon stocks in Yunnan Province, China (2016–2020). Forests16:1076. doi: 10.3390/f16071076

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 204

  Wu C. Yang Y. Yue T. (2024). Review of the current status and development trend of global forest carbon storage research based on bibliometrics. Forests15:1498. doi: 10.3390/f15091498

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 205

  Xu K. Chang C. T. Tian Q. Zeng H. Xie J. (2019). Recovery of forest carbon density and carbon storage in a soil-degraded landscape in southeastern China. Eur. J. Forest Res.138, 397–413. doi: 10.1007/s10342-019-01177-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 206

  Yardibi F. Kang K. S. Özbey A. A. Bilir N. (2024). Bibliometric analysis of trends and future directions of research and development of seed orchards. Forests15:953. doi: 10.3390/f15060953

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 207

  You Y. Huang X. Zhu H. Liu S. Liang H. Wen Y. et al . (2018). Positive interactions between Pinus massoniana and Castanopsis hystrix species in the uneven-aged mixed plantations can produce more ecosystem carbon in subtropical China. For. Ecol. Manag.410, 193–200. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2017.08.025

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 208

  Yu H. Song W. (2023). Research progress on the impact of land use change on soil carbon sequestration. Land12:213. doi: 10.3390/land12010213

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 209

  Zhang J. Fiddler G. O. Young D. H. Shestak C. Carlson R. (2021). Allometry of tree biomass and carbon partitioning in ponderosa pine plantations grown under diverse conditions. For. Ecol. Manag.497:119526. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119526

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 210

  Zhang Y. Zeng D. H. Lei Z. Li X. Lin G. (2023). Microbial properties determine dynamics of topsoil organic carbon stocks and fractions along an age-sequence of Mongolian pine plantations. Plant Soil483, 441–457. doi: 10.1007/s11104-022-05757-y

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 211

  Zhao X. Chen F. Seim A. Hu M. Akkemik Ü. Kopabayeva A. et al . (2024). Global warming leads to growth increase in Pinus sylvestris in the Kazakh steppe. For. Ecol. Manag.553:121635. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2023.121635

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 212

  Zhao J. Kang F. Wang L. Yu X. Zhao W. Song X. et al . (2014). Patterns of biomass and carbon distribution across a chronosequence of Chinese pine (Pinus tabulaeformis) forests. PLoS One9:e94966. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0094966

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 213

  Zhao R. Li J. Liu S. Zhang J. Duan Y. (2023). Predicting carbon storage jointly by foliage and soil parameters in Pinus pumila stands along an elevation gradient in great Khingan. Sustainability15:11226. doi: 10.3390/su151411226

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar