ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Soil Sci.
Sec. Soil Management
Assessment and Evaluation of Soil Ecosystem Services in Forest and Adjacent Cultivated Lands in Nkanu East Microclimate Watershed, Southeastern Nigeria
Provisionally accepted- 1Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Enugu, Nigeria
- 2Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Agbani, Enugu, Nigeria
- 3Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Agbani Enugu State, Nigeria
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Land-use conversion from tropical forests to agriculture represents one of the most widespread environmental transformations globally, with profound implications for soil ecosystem services. In West Africa, extensive forest conversion has led to soil degradation and loss of critical ecosystem services. This study quantified land-use change impacts on soil ecosystem services using static Soil Function Assessment (SFA) in the Nkanu East watershed, southeastern Nigeria. Sixteen soil profile pits were excavated to 1.5 m depth across four communities underlain by contrasting parent materials (Ajali Formation and Awgu Shale). Eight soil quality indicators—texture, organic carbon, pH, bulk density, hydromorphic stage, stone content, profile depth, and horizon depth—were measured, scored using nonlinear sufficiency functions, and integrated into a Soil Ecosystem Service Function Index (SESFI). Statistical analysis employed ANOVA with effect sizes (Cohen's d, partial η²) and bootstrap-derived 95% confidence intervals. Forest soils significantly outperformed cultivated soils across indicators: organic carbon (2.51 ± 0.13% vs. 2.01 ± 0.11%; Cohen's d = 2.18, p < 0.001), pH (6.0 ± 0.08 vs. 5.4 ± 0.10; Cohen's d = 2.12, p < 0.001), and bulk density (1.32 ± 0.03 vs. 1.45 ± 0.04 g cm⁻³; Cohen's d = 1.85, p < 0.001). These differences yielded a 24-fold SESFI difference (forest: 0.259 ± 0.024 vs. cultivated: 0.011 ± 0.003; Cohen's d = 3.45, p < 0.001; partial η² = 0.89), representing 96% multifunctionality loss. Forest soils showed 40–60% higher infiltration capacity, superior nutrient cycling, and enhanced carbon sequestration. All degradation is attributable to management impacts—tillage-induced compaction, organic matter depletion, and acidification—rather than inherent limitations. The magnitude of ecosystem service loss underscores critical needs for forest conservation and soil rehabilitation. Integrated management approaches, including organic matter enrichment (5–10 Mg ha⁻¹ yr⁻¹), conservation tillage, and agroforestry, are projected, based on SESFI sufficiency-curve behaviour and published long-term trials in comparable tropical systems, to restore on the order of ~15–20% of the lost SESFI within a decade. This trajectory represents a model-based projection rather than a measured outcome at this site and requires validation through longitudinal monitoring. The standardized SFA methodology enables cross-regional comparisons and supports land-use planning for tropical watersheds.
Keywords: land-use change, Nigeria, SESFI, soil ecosystem services, Soil multifunctionality, Sustainable intensification, Tropical watershed, West Africa
Received: 23 Oct 2025; Accepted: 26 Jan 2026.
Copyright: © 2026 Anikwe, Obidike-Ugwu, Dan-Chukwu and Ikengannyia. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Martin A.N Anikwe
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
