Hostname: page-component-5b777bbd6c-skqgd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-26T02:52:15.642Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Litter production and nutrient return in fodder bank systems in the sub-humid tropics of Mexico

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 June 2025

Armando Escobedo-Cabrera
Affiliation:
Instituto Tecnológico de la Zona Maya, Tecnológico Nacional de México, Othón P. Blanco, Quintana Roo, México
Fernando Casanova-Lugo*
Affiliation:
Instituto Tecnológico de la Zona Maya, Tecnológico Nacional de México, Othón P. Blanco, Quintana Roo, México
Deb R. Aryal
Affiliation:
CONACYT – Facultad de Ciencias Agronómicas, Universidad Autónoma de Chiapas, Villaflores, Chiapas, México
William R. Cetzal-Ix
Affiliation:
Instituto Tecnológico de Chiná, Tecnológico Nacional de México, Chiná, Campeche, México
Gilberto Villanueva-López
Affiliation:
El Colegio de la Frontera Sur, Villahermosa, Tabasco, México
Iván Oros-Ortega
Affiliation:
Instituto Tecnológico de la Zona Maya, Tecnológico Nacional de México, Othón P. Blanco, Quintana Roo, México
Pablo J. Ramírez-Barajas
Affiliation:
Instituto Tecnológico de la Zona Maya, Tecnológico Nacional de México, Othón P. Blanco, Quintana Roo, México
Luis A. Lara-Pérez
Affiliation:
Instituto Tecnológico de la Zona Maya, Tecnológico Nacional de México, Othón P. Blanco, Quintana Roo, México
Noel A. González-Valdivia
Affiliation:
Instituto Tecnológico de Chiná, Tecnológico Nacional de México, Chiná, Campeche, México
*
Corresponding author: Fernando Casanova-Lugo; Email: fkzanov@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Integrating trees and shrubs into agroecosystems increases soil nutrients and organic matter, which helps in the recovery of degraded tropical soils. However, selecting the most appropriate tree and shrub species as sources of nutrients and organic matter requires knowledge of their productive potential. The study aimed to evaluate litter productivity and nutrient input to the soil of three tropical silvopastoral fodder bank species. Litter input from Tithonia diversifolia, Leucaena leucocephala, and Moringa oleifera was quantified monthly for one year. We found that the litterfall amount was greatest (p < 0.05) from T. diversifolia (1.81 t ha–1 yr–1) compared to L. leucocephala (1.26 t ha–1 yr–1) and M. oleifera (118 t ha–1 yr–1). Indeed, T. diversifolia had a greater (p < 0.05) input of biomass from leaves (1.36 t ha–1 yr–1) compared to L. leucocephala (0.901 t ha–1 yr–1) and M. oleifera (0.869 t ha–1 yr–1). The highest biomass input (p < 0.05) occurred in September to the three species, T. diversifolia (0.516 t ha–1), L. leucocephala (0.243 t ha–1), and M. oleifera (0.233 t ha–1), and the lowest biomass input occurred in March. Furthermore, the greatest annual input of carbon (0.687 t ha–1 yr–1), nitrogen (0.030 t ha–1 yr–1), and phosphorus (0.006 t ha–1 yr–1) to the soil originated from T. diversifolia. Our study showed that T. diversifolia had the greatest capacity to produce biomass that potentially can reintroduce nutrients and contribute to the recovery process of degraded soil due to its high litter productivity, besides, a combination of these three species also improves soil nutrients in fodder banks when do not hauling forage for livestock, contributing to sustainability of system.

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that no alterations are made and the original article is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained prior to any commercial use and/or adaptation of the article.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press

Introduction

In general, silvopastoral systems (SPS) such as live fences, dispersed trees in pastures, tree-alley pastures have the potential to mitigate climate change and conserve biodiversity by increasing carbon sequestration, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, enhancing nutrient cycling, preventing soil erosion and compaction, and increasing biodiversity (Montagnini et al., Reference Montagnini, Ibrahim and Murgueitio2013; Villanueva-López et al., Reference Villanueva-López, Lara-Perez, Oros-Ortega, Ramírez-Barajas, Casanova-Lugo, Ramos-Reyes and Aryal2019; Mahmud et al., Reference Mahmud, Raj and Jhariya2021; Aryal et al., Reference Aryal, Morales-Ruiz, López-Cruz, Tondopó-Marroquín, Lara-Nucamendi, Jiménez-Trujillo, Pérez-Sánchez, Betanzos-Simon, Casasola-Coto, Martínez-Salinas, Sepúlveda-López, Ramírez-Díaz, La O Arias, Guevara-Hernández, Pinto-Ruiz and Ibrahim2022). Fodder bank systems (FBS), a type of SPS, consists of establishing shrubs or trees in high densities to feed animals in the dry season and for biomass transfer from green manure to provide an input of nutrients into soils (Nair et al., Reference Nair, Nair, Kumar and Haile2009; George et al., Reference George, Gregory, Robinson, Buresh and Jama2001; Franzel et al., Reference Franzel, Carsan, Lukuyu, Sinja and Wambugu2014).

To maximise economic yields in livestock and crop production, fodder species must have desirable characteristics such as high productivity, in terms of biomass, under repeated cutting or grazing, high crude protein, accumulation of large amounts of nutrients, ands well as high tolerance to adverse biotic or abiotic (George et al., Reference George, Gregory, Robinson, Buresh and Jama2001; Franzel et al., Reference Franzel, Carsan, Lukuyu, Sinja and Wambugu2014). This strategy has proved to increase cattle and crop productivity and has gained considerable importance in Africa and increasing interest in Latin America (Montagnini et al., Reference Montagnini, Ibrahim and Murgueitio2013; Franzel et al., Reference Franzel, Carsan, Lukuyu, Sinja and Wambugu2014; Aryal et al., Reference Aryal, De Jong, Ochoa-Gaona, Mendoza-Vega and Esparza-Olguin2015; Aryal et al., Reference Aryal, Morales-Ruiz, López-Cruz, Tondopó-Marroquín, Lara-Nucamendi, Jiménez-Trujillo, Pérez-Sánchez, Betanzos-Simon, Casasola-Coto, Martínez-Salinas, Sepúlveda-López, Ramírez-Díaz, La O Arias, Guevara-Hernández, Pinto-Ruiz and Ibrahim2022; González-Abraham et al., Reference González-Abraham, Flores-Santana, Rodríguez-Ramírez, Olguin-Alvarez, Flores-Martínez, Torres Rojo, Bocco-Verdinelli, Fernández-Calleros and McCord2023); however, FBS has received little attention from the ecosystem services provided in the production systems and the ecological dynamic of fodder species (Aryal et al., Reference Aryal, Morales-Ruiz, López-Cruz, Tondopó-Marroquín, Lara-Nucamendi, Jiménez-Trujillo, Pérez-Sánchez, Betanzos-Simon, Casasola-Coto, Martínez-Salinas, Sepúlveda-López, Ramírez-Díaz, La O Arias, Guevara-Hernández, Pinto-Ruiz and Ibrahim2022; Casanova-Lugo et al., Reference Casanova-Lugo, Petit-Aldana, Solorio-Sánchez, Ramírez-Avilés, Ward, Villanueva-López and Aryal2018), where the synchronisation of nutrient release and their assimilation by plants are of great importance to net primary production and can contribute to maintain organic matter (Hernández-Ramos et al., Reference Hernández-Ramos, Valdez-Lazalde, Ángeles-Pérez, de los Santos-Posadas, Hernández-Ramos, Peduzzi and Carrero2017; Souza et al., Reference Souza, Veloso, Espírito-Santo, Silva, Sánchez-Azofeifa, Souza e Brito and Fernandes2019; Verma et al., Reference Verma, Kumar, Soni, Pawar, Pradhan, Tanwar and Kumar2021).

Studies of leaf litter production and the dynamic release of nutrients in FBS include a few studies on areas with a specific soil characteristic in monoculture and mix fodder banks (Casanova-Lugo et al., Reference Casanova-Lugo, Petit-Aldana, Solorio-Sánchez, Parsons and Ramírez-Avilés2014, Reference Casanova-Lugo, Petit-Aldana, Solorio-Sánchez, Ramírez-Avilés, Ward, Villanueva-López and Aryal2018; Ramos-Trejo et al., Reference Ramos-Trejo, Canul-Solís, Alvarado-Canché, Castillo-Sánchez, Sandoval-Gío, Campos-Navarrete and Casanova-Lugo2020; Petit-Aldana et al., Reference Petit-Aldana, Casanova-Lugo, Solorio-Sánchez and Ramírez-Avilés2011). In Mexico, litterfall dynamics and biomass production, decomposition, and carbon stocks biomass have been only studied in five woody species in FBS: tree non-legume species (Guazuma ulmifolia Lam., Moringa oleifera Lam., and Morus alba L.) and two legume species (Gliricidia sepium (Jacq.) Kunth ex Walp. and Leucaena leucocephala (Lam.) de Wit) (Petit-Aldana et al., Reference Petit-Aldana, Casanova-Lugo, Solorio-Sánchez and Ramírez-Avilés2011; Casanova-Lugo et al., Reference Casanova-Lugo, Petit-Aldana, Solorio-Sánchez, Parsons and Ramírez-Avilés2014, Reference Casanova-Lugo, Petit-Aldana, Solorio-Sánchez, Ramírez-Avilés, Ward, Villanueva-López and Aryal2018; Ramos-Trejo et al., Reference Ramos-Trejo, Canul-Solís, Alvarado-Canché, Castillo-Sánchez, Sandoval-Gío, Campos-Navarrete and Casanova-Lugo2020). Tithonia diversifolia (Hemsl.) A. Gray have gained considerable interest because it is a growth-fast species with high decomposition rates, with a high concentration of phosphorus, nitrogen, and magnesium (Sánchez et al., Reference Sánchez, Crespo and Hernández2007; Bonilla et al., Reference Bonilla, Belisario-Roncallo and García2008; Partey, Reference Partey2011; Petit-Aldana et al., Reference Petit-Aldana, Casanova-Lugo, Solorio-Sánchez and Ramírez-Avilés2011; Casanova-Lugo et al., Reference Casanova-Lugo, Petit-Aldana, Solorio-Sánchez, Parsons and Ramírez-Avilés2014).

In undisturbed ecosystems, leaf litter represents 80% of the total nutrients returned to the soil (Santa-Regina and Tarazona, Reference Santa-Regina and Tarazona2001); this is especially relevant in the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico, where soils have inherently low fertility (Bautista, Reference Bautista2021; Fragoso-Servón et al., Reference Fragoso-Servón, Pereira Corona, Bautista Zúñiga and Zapata Buenfil2017). Despite the main objective of FBS is significant extracting activities of green biomass, they can contribute to carbon stock biomass, and with adequate management, could increase soil aggregates and organic carbon in the subsoil, wider spacing less intensive pruning, and significant litterfall dynamic that contribute to nutrient cycling and maintain fertility (Petit-Aldana et al., Reference Petit-Aldana, Casanova-Lugo, Solorio-Sánchez and Ramírez-Avilés2011; Casanova-Lugo et al., Reference Casanova-Lugo, Petit-Aldana, Solorio-Sánchez, Ramírez-Avilés, Ward, Villanueva-López and Aryal2018; Fungo et al., Reference Fungo, Buyinza, Sekatuba, Nansereko, Ongodia, Kwaga, Mudondo, Eryau, Akelem, Musinguzi and Agaba2020); which provides a habitat for functional diversity associated with decomposition (Marmolejo et al., Reference Marmolejo, Cantú and Gutiérrez2013; Zhang et al., Reference Zhang, Huang, An, Zeng, Wang, Bai and Huang2023).

The litterfall in FBS soils occurs in a brief lapse of time, between pruning and leaf regrowth, and is the main input of carbon and nutrients that remain after continually moving biomass harvested to feed livestock or as green manure to crop production. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the potential return of nutrients to the soil of natural litterfall and the litter dynamics in pure fodder banks of T. diversifolia, compared with L. leucocephala and M. oleifera, the most common species used in SPS of south-eastern Mexico. The findings of this study will contribute to understanding valuable insights for sustainable agricultural practices in the sub-humid tropics of Mexico.

Materials and methods

Study site

This study was conducted at the facilities of the Instituto Tecnológico de la Zona Maya, located 21.5 kilometres from the Chetumal-Escárcega highway, in the municipality of Othon P. Blanco in Quintana Roo, Mexico, from March to October 2019. The study site is located at the geographical coordinates 21° 51’ N and 89° 41’ W and presents a warm sub-humid climate (Aw1), with rains in the summer and part of the winter (García, Reference García1988). Its elevation is 15 m.a.s.l., and the topography is flat. The soil of the study site is Gleysol, according to the World Reference Base classification of soil resources (IUSS Working Group, 2022). During the experimental period, the maximum temperature ranged from 32.1 to 37.2 °C, while the minimum temperature ranged from 11.1 to 25.6 °C. The annual precipitation was 998 mm; however, from January to July, the lowest monthly rainfall was reported, ranging from 11.7 to 63.1 mm, and the highest rainfall was during the period from August to December in a range of 64.2 to 279.6 mm, with September being the month with the highest rainfall (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Maximum and minimum air temperatures and rainfall at the study site. Data were taken from the weather station at the Instituto Tecnológico de la Zona Maya in January to December 2019.

Experimental plots and management

The site has a history of agricultural use. In mid-2016, we established three fodder banks of T. diversifolia, L. leucocephala, and M. oleifera (onwards Tithonia, Leucaena, and Moringa) in an area of 0.6 ha, with a planting arrangement of 0.5 m between plants and 2.0 m between rows, corresponding to a planting density of 10 000 individuals per hectare and with east-to-west orientation. The fodder banks were managed with cut-and-carry practices. That is, the plants were harvested manually every three months at 60 cm from the soil surface and under rain-fed conditions. Weed control was carried out manually and without the application of herbicides. At the end of December 2018, a standardisation cut was made in the three FBS. Subsequently, for every three months, the bushes were pruned during March, June, September, and December.

Litterfall quantification

In each fodder bank, 10 litter traps (replicas) were placed randomly, with 30 traps in total (experimental units). The traps consisted of 1.0 m2 (1.0 × 1.0 m) PVC squares, covered with a 2.0–mm–separated carbon-fibre mesh and were placed on the edge of the rows of woody plants at an approximate height of 0.30 m from the surface to allow water drainage and aeration of the material (Petit-Aldana et al., Reference Petit-Aldana, Casanova-Lugo, Solorio-Sánchez and Ramírez-Avilés2011). Litter production was collected fortnightly for one year (January–December 2019), giving a total of 24 collections per treatment.

The litter samples were transported to the laboratory, where they were separated into leaves and branches grouped by each month of collection. It should be noted that, for the present study, the reproductive structures were discarded since only minute quantities of them were collected, due to the pruning applied to the experimental plots. The samples were dried in a forced air circulation oven at 60 ºC until constant weight. The monthly litter deposition data were extrapolated to units per hectare (t ha–1); additionally, the accumulated litter deposition during the year was calculated (t ha–1 yr–1).

Chemical analysis

All the samples were ground to a particle size of 1.0 mm, and then the carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) contents were determined by the dry combustion method with a PerkinElmer 2400 Series II Elemental Analyzer (PerkinElmer Inc., Massachusetts, USA). Phosphorus (P) content was determined using a PerkinElmer LAMBDA 850 UV/Vis Spectrophotometer at 880 nm (PerkinElmer Inc., Massachusetts, USA). In addition, the C:N ratio was estimated for the litter produced by each of the species studied.

Nutrient return

The nutrient return to the soil (t ha–1) was quantified by multiplying the monthly production of litter and the average fraction of each nutrient of each species: carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus (% C, N, and P). In addition, the accumulated (annual) deposition of each nutrient (t ha–1 yr–1) for all species was determined.

Data analysis

The data were subjected to a two-way analysis of variance, where the effects of the sampling date, the species, and the interaction between both factors were analysed (Steel and Torrie, Reference Steel and Torrie1980). In addition, Tukey’s multiple comparison test was performed to determine the differences in cumulative deposition and chemical composition among species. Using Pearson’s correlation, the relationship between monthly environmental variables (i.e., temperature and rainfall) and litter deposition and the return of carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus to the soil was analysed. To test the assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variances of each component of the litter and the chemical composition, the data were subjected to Shapiro–Wilk and Levene´s tests before submitting them to an analysis of variance (Steel and Torrie, Reference Steel and Torrie1980). All statistical analyses were performed with the Statistica© package version 8.0 (StatSoft Inc., 2007).

Results

Litter production (deposition)

There was a significant interaction between the different forage banks and the sampling months on the deposition of leaves, branches, and total litter (Figure 2). Litter production was relatively similar for the three species throughout the months, and they increased the production of leaves and branches in September. However, Tithonia showed the maximum record in that month (0.368 and 0.148 t ha–1, respectively), and September was, in general, the maximum new leaf growth month throughout the year (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Monthly production of litter and its components: leaves and branches of Tithonia diversifolia, Leucaena leucocephala, and Moringa oleifera in fodder bank systems of southern Quintana Roo, Mexico. Means ± Standard error.

Regarding the total litter, a similar productive behaviour was observed throughout the year for the three species, and Tithonia reached the highest deposition in September (0.516 t ha–1). On the contrary, Leucaena and Moringa were consistently less productive throughout the observation period, and both species registered their minimum values in March and May (Figure 2).

On the other hand, Tithonia showed a greater accumulated deposition of leaves and total litter, with values of 1.365 and 1.81 t ha–1 yr–1, respectively, compared to the other species (Figure 3a–c). In the case of branch deposition, Tithonia and Leucaena presented the greatest values (0.445 and 0.356 t ha–1 yr–1, respectively), although the latter was like that of Moringa (Figure 3b). In addition to the above, for all the species, the leaves represented between 71.7 and 75.4% of the total litter, while the branches only represented between 24.6 and 28.3% (Figure 3d).

Figure 3. Deposition of leaves (a), branches (b), total (c), and the percentage of litter components (d) of Tithonia diversifolia, Leucaena leucocephala, and Moringa oleifera in fodder bank systems of southern Quintana Roo, Mexico; means ± standard error labelled by different letters are significantly different according to Tukey’s statistic (p < 0.05).

Chemical composition

The chemical composition of the litter showed significant differences between species (Table 1). In this regard, Leucaena had the highest contents of carbon and nitrogen (40.3 and 1.8%), compared to the other species. In contrast, Moringa and Tithonia had the highest phosphorus content (0.43 and 0.35%), compared to Leucaena (0.08%). However, the latter showed the lowest C:N ratio (22.07) compared to Moringa and Tithonia with values of 25.46 and 23.28 (Table 1).

Table 1. Average content of carbon (C), nitrogen (N), and phosphorus (P); the C:N ratio of Tithonia diversifolia, Leucaena leucocephala, and Moringa oleifera litter in fodder bank systems FBS of southern Quintana Roo, Mexico

Means followed by different letters indicate significant differences according to Tukey’s statistic (p ≤ 0.05). SE, standard error.

Nutrient return to the soil

The carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus return through litter was different depending on the sampling months and the type of fodder banks, with a significant interaction between them (Figure 4). The nutrient deposits followed the same pattern observed in the litter deposition curve of the three FBS. All the species increased their contribution in September, and the fodder bank of Tithonia in that month had the highest observed deposition of carbon (0.197 t ha–1), nitrogen (0.0087 t ha–1), and phosphorus (0.0018 t ha–1). Likewise, the lowest contribution for all species occurred in March, when the Moringa fodder bank recorded the lowest carbon and nitrogen depositions, while the lowest phosphorus contribution was detected in Leucaena (0.0004 t ha–1).

Figure 4. Monthly deposition of carbon (C), nitrogen (N), and phosphorus (P), from Tithonia diversifolia, Leucaena leucocephala, and Moringa oleifera litter in fodder bank systems of southern Quintana Roo, Mexico. Means ± Standard error.

In addition, the fodder bank of Tithonia cumulatively deposited a greater amount (p < 0.05) of carbon (0.687 t ha–1 yr–1), nitrogen (0.30 t ha–1 yr–1), and phosphorus (0.006 t ha–1 yr–1) in the soil, compared to Leucaena and Moringa (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Accumulated deposition of carbon (C), nitrogen (N), and phosphorus (P), from Tithonia diversifolia, Leucaena leucocephala, and Moringa oleifera litter in fodder bank systems of southern Quintana Roo, Mexico; means ± standard error labelled by different letters are significantly different according to Tukey’s statistic (p < 0.05).

Relationship between environmental variables and litter deposition

On the other hand, the Pearson correlation analysis showed that the monthly rainfall during the experimental period was positively related to the litter deposition of Leucaena (r = 0.88, p < 0.001), Moringa (r = 0.87, p < 0.001), and Tithonia (r = 0.83, p < 0.001). However, the maximum and minimum temperatures did not show any correlation (p > 0.05) with the monthly litter deposition (Table 2).

Table 2. Pearson correlation analysis between environmental variables and monthly litter deposition (kg ha–1), of Tithonia diversifolia, Leucaena leucocephala, and Moringa oleifera in fodder bank systems of southern Quintana Roo, Mexico

***, p < 0.001; NS, not-significant (p > 0.05).

Discussion

Litter production

The greatest litter deposition in the months of maximum rainfall (September and October) in the fodder bank of Leucaena, Moringa, and Tithonia, coincided with the monthly dynamics of litter deposition of perennial and deciduous species in plantations and tropical agroforestry systems (Pennington and Sarukhán, Reference Pennington and Sarukhán2005; Kumar, Reference Kumar, Batish, Kohli, Jose and Singh2008; Rivera-Vázquez et al., Reference Rivera-Vázquez, Soto-Pinto, Núñez-Colín, De Jong, Hernández-Rivera and Ordóñez-Díaz2013). However, it is contrary to the behaviour of the predominant vegetation in the region (medium and low sub-evergreen and deciduous forest), where the greatest deposition of leaf litter occurs in March and April, the driest months of the year (Miranda and Hernández, Reference Miranda and Hernández1963; Aryal et al., Reference Aryal, De Jong, Ochoa-Gaona, Mendoza-Vega and Esparza-Olguin2015; García-Domínguez et al., Reference García-Domínguez, Cámara-Cabrales, Van Der Wal and Martínez-Sánchez2020), due to the deciduous tree species that make up the natural vegetation (Miranda and Hernández, Reference Miranda and Hernández1963; Pennington and Sarukhán, Reference Pennington and Sarukhán2005; García-Domínguez et al., Reference García-Domínguez, Cámara-Cabrales, Van Der Wal and Martínez-Sánchez2020). The greater litter production in September could also be directly related to its tolerance to pruning, domestication status, and regrowth capacity during rainy months (Lugo et al., Reference Lugo, Molina, Gonzáles, Gonzáles and Sánchez2012). In addition, the plants of the three species respond favourability to humidity and management practices (prunes), indicating that the optimal conditions for the growth of these species are met in this period (Castillo-Mestre et al., Reference Castillo-Mestre, Betancourt-Bagué, Toral-Pérez and Iglesias-Gómez2016; Vargas-Velázquez et al., Reference Vargas-Velázquez, Pérez-Hernández, López-Ortiz, Castillo, Cruz and Jarillo2022).

Other studies have also reported that factors such as harvest age and height influence biomass production and the quality of forage plants (Gallego-Castro et al., Reference Gallego-Castro, Mahecha-Ledesma and Ángulo-Arizala2017; Guatusmal-Gelpud et al., Reference Guatusmal-Gelpud, Escobar-Pachajoa, Meneses-Buitrago, Cardona-Iglesias and Castro-Rincón2020). For example, Partey (Reference Partey2011), Guatusmal-Gelpud et al. (Reference Guatusmal-Gelpud, Escobar-Pachajoa, Meneses-Buitrago, Cardona-Iglesias and Castro-Rincón2020), and Gallego-Castro et al. (Reference Gallego-Castro, Mahecha-Ledesma and Ángulo-Arizala2017) found higher biomass production by Tithonia at 80 days after cutting and at 50–60 cm of height; they also showed a trend of higher production at older plant ages.

In particular, the biomass deposition results obtained for Tithonia in this research were lower than those reported by Gallego-Castro et al. (Reference Gallego-Castro, Mahecha-Ledesma and Ángulo-Arizala2017) of 19 t ha–1 yr–1, Guatusmal-Gelpud et al. (Reference Guatusmal-Gelpud, Escobar-Pachajoa, Meneses-Buitrago, Cardona-Iglesias and Castro-Rincón2020) of 30.6 t ha–1 yr–1, and Vargas-Velázquez et al. (Reference Vargas-Velázquez, Pérez-Hernández, López-Ortiz, Castillo, Cruz and Jarillo2022) who reported 9 t ha–1 yr–1. Regarding Leucaena, Sánchez et al. (Reference Sánchez, Crespo and Hernández2007) in tropical SPS, in Matanzas, Cuba, found that the litter production of this species reached 9.1 t ha–1 yr–1, which widely exceeded the production obtained in the present study. However, it does coincide with the 0.978 t ha–1 yr–1 produced in another SPS of Leucaena in the same country (Alonso et al., Reference Alonso, Ruiz, Febles and Achan2003). Such differences could be related to the age of the plants in the FBS, which were six years old for this study. According to Gallego-Castro et al. (Reference Gallego-Castro, Mahecha-Ledesma and Ángulo-Arizala2017), Guatusmal-Gelpud et al. (Reference Guatusmal-Gelpud, Escobar-Pachajoa, Meneses-Buitrago, Cardona-Iglesias and Castro-Rincón2020), and Vargas-Velázquez et al. (Reference Vargas-Velázquez, Pérez-Hernández, López-Ortiz, Castillo, Cruz and Jarillo2022), the leaf–stem ratio decreases as the plants grow because plants accumulate more stems or branches as a support structure, although this may vary depending on the climatic conditions. Petit-Aldana et al. (Reference Petit-Aldana, Casanova-Lugo, Solorio-Sánchez and Ramírez-Avilés2011) affirmed that the annual production of litter in FBS of Moringa and Leucaena was variable and reached up to 1.0 t ha–1 yr–1, which was like what we found in the present study. Despite the above, these findings showed that these species could become an optimal option to have forage for animal feeding throughout the year, particularly during the dry season when the availability of additional food is very limited.

Regarding the proportion of leaves (71.7–75.4%) and branches (24.6–28.3%) in the litter, the values found in this study were like those reported by Santa-Regina and Tarazona (Reference Santa-Regina and Tarazona2001) in various agroecosystems, which comprised between 50 and 80% of the total litter components. Although other studies (González-Rodríguez et al., Reference González-Rodríguez, Domínguez-Gómez, Cantú-Silva, Gómez-Meza, Ramírez-Lozano, Pando-Moreno and Fernández2011; Domínguez, Reference Domínguez2009; López et al., Reference López, González, Ramírez, Cantó, Gómez, Pando and Estrada2013; García-Domínguez et al., Reference García-Domínguez, Cámara-Cabrales, Van Der Wal and Martínez-Sánchez2020) have reported proportions of 40–86% in natural ecosystems, showing that FBS produce important amounts of organic matter to the soil, in a way like natural forests. These findings may be related to the harvesting height of the plant for this study of 60 cm, which allowed a greater number of stems to remain and consequently, a greater number of buds that become stems to give way to the production of leaves (Guatusmal-Gelpud et al., Reference Guatusmal-Gelpud, Escobar-Pachajoa, Meneses-Buitrago, Cardona-Iglesias and Castro-Rincón2020). Other studies (Ella et al., Reference Ella, Blair and Stür1991; Stür et al., Reference Stür, Shelton, Gutteridge, Gutteridgeand and Shelton1994) have also reported that older plants have a greater number of ramifications due to a greater number of buds and reserves, allowing more regrowth, regardless of the remaining leaves on the plants after cutting.

Concerning the effect of pruning on litter production, no significant decrease was observed, except in March, which could be related to the strongest period of drought in the study region. However, the phenological patterns of the plants were modified; so, the number and weight of reproductive structures (flowers, fruits, and seeds) were too small to be considered in the composition of the litter. Likewise, Harmand et al. (Reference Harmand, Forkong, Bernhard–Reversat and Puig2004) and Petit-Aldana et al. (Reference Petit-Aldana, Casanova-Lugo, Solorio-Sánchez and Ramírez-Avilés2011) found that the management of the system influences litter production, where periodic pruning decreases the deposition of litter dumped on the ground by up to 40% compared to trees without pruning. This is because the carbohydrate reserves are reallocated after pruning, and the plant invests more resources in producing new branches and leaves, altering the growth patterns of the plant (Casanova-Lugo et al., Reference Casanova-Lugo, Caamal, Petit, Solorio and Castillo2010). In addition to the above, our findings could indicate that the three evaluated species have a high range of adaptation to the edaphoclimatic conditions of the study region, great capacity to recover nutrients from the soil and low demand for inputs for their cultivation that potentiate their forage yields during the year.

Chemical composition

The differences in the chemical composition of the evaluated species are attributable to their intrinsic characteristics and their environmental interaction (Petit-Aldana et al., Reference Petit-Aldana, Casanova-Lugo, Solorio-Sánchez and Ramírez-Avilés2011). For example, Leucaena, as a legume, can associate symbiotically with N-fixing bacteria of the genus Rhizobium. In addition to increasing this nutrient, it reduces the contribution of phosphorus, which is used in nodulation and consumed by the bacterial symbiont. In addition, this species has a pivoting and dense root system, which facilitates its regrowth, a greater resprouting of aboveground forage biomass, and higher carbon and nitrogen contents (Casanova-Lugo et al., Reference Casanova-Lugo, Caamal, Petit, Solorio and Castillo2010).

In the case of Tithonia, it is part of the early pioneer flora of the study area, presents great adaptation as a fodder bank and is a great litter contributor, which corresponds to its Mesoamerican origin and its productivity in different soil and climate conditions (González-Castillo et al., Reference González-Castillo, Hahn von-Hessberg and Narváez-Solarte2014). This species has been described as having a low carbon content but a high phosphorus content (Lezcano et al., Reference Lezcano, Soca, Ojeda, Roque, Fontes, Montejo, Santana, Martínez and Cubillas2012; Guatusmal-Gelpud et al., Reference Guatusmal-Gelpud, Escobar-Pachajoa, Meneses-Buitrago, Cardona-Iglesias and Castro-Rincón2020) as found in this study. This is due to its dense and superficial root system, with the ability to explore and capture the greatest amount of nutrients that are translocated in the humus accumulation zone to the formation of deciduous aerial structures. These, in turn, can easily be humified by the sequential action of the macro-, meso-, and micro-fauna of the soil, compared to other woody species. Due to these qualities, the species has been pointed out as a soil improver due to its excellent biomass yields, its high nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium content and its rapid decomposition capacity in the soil (Crespo et al., Reference Crespo, Ruiz and Álvarez2011). Other studies (Gallego-Castro et al., Reference Gallego-Castro, Mahecha-Ledesma and Ángulo-Arizala2017; Cardona-Iglesias et al., Reference Cardona-Iglesias, Mahecha-Ledesma and Angulo-Arizala2017) in SPS have also reported values of 0.27% and 0.35% phosphorus, respectively, like what was found in this study. These values can be considered high compared to other species used in animal feed (Mahecha and Rosales, Reference Mahecha and Rosales2005).

Moringa oleifera showed slightly lower nitrogen contents than the other two species. These results coincide with reports that it is surpassed by legumes such as Gliricidia sepium and Piscidia piscipula (L.) Sarg.; however, it stands out as an extractor of deep nutrients from the soil and as a reserve of water and nutrients (Casanova-Lugo et al., Reference Casanova-Lugo, Cetzal-Ix, Díaz-Echeverría, Chay-Canul, Oros-Ortega, Piñeiro-Vázquez and González-Valdivia2019). In dry areas, Moringa promotes interactions with mycorrhizal fungi, such as Rhizoglomus (Glomus) intraradices (N.C. Schenck & G.S. Sm.) Sieverd., G.A. Silva & Oehl, and Sclerocystis (Glomus) sinuosum Gerd. & B.K. Bakshi, which favour the acquisition of water and phosphorus from the soil (Oros-Ortega et al., Reference Oros-Ortega, Lara-Pérez, Casanova-Lugo, Díaz-Echeverría, Villanueva-López, Ramírez-Barajas, Cetzal-Ix, Varma, Tripathi and Prasad2020); therefore, being exotic, inoculation should be considered to improve production efficiency in tropical SPS.

In general, organic materials with nitrogen concentrations greater than 20 mg·g–1 are of high quality, although lignin and polyphenol contents must also be considered. Phosphorus contents higher than 2.5 mg·g–1 can also be considered of high quality (Petit-Aldana et al., Reference Petit-Aldana, Casanova-Lugo, Solorio-Sánchez and Ramírez-Avilés2011). The results of this study show the importance of combining the three species in FBS, to achieve the contribution of carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus through the incorporation of litter to the soil and thus contribute to its fertility and the ecological dynamics of the SPS.

The physical and structural characteristics of the plant species (i.e., leaf area, the moisture content in the leaves), as well as the phenology and even the taxonomic affinity of the species (family to which it belongs), could explain the monthly variations and leaf composition chemistry (Sánchez-Silva et al., Reference Sánchez-Silva, De Jong, Aryal, Huerta-Lwanga and Mendoza-Vega2018). Given that the forage banks were subjected to frequent pruning for their use (i.e., every three months), removing 70–80% of the foliage, management could influence the productive attributes of litter depending on the characteristics inherent to the crop species, but they were not analysed in this study, which could limit its scope.

Nutrient return to the soil

The values obtained coincide with what was reported by Jha and Prasad-Mohapatra (Reference Jha and Prasad-Mohapatra2010), who point out that in Leucaena plantations they obtained values ranging from 0.0023 to 0.0762 t ha–1 yr–1 nitrogen and from 0.0018 to 0.0514 t ha–1 yr–1 phosphorus. In tropical forage banks, Petit-Aldana et al. (Reference Petit-Aldana, Casanova-Lugo, Solorio-Sánchez and Ramírez-Avilés2011) reported contributions of carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus of 0.0124, 0.0010, and 0.00004 t ha–1·yr–1 for Moringa and 0.4344, 0.0210, and 0.0010 t ha–1·yr–1 for Leucaena, respectively. The above shows the important contribution of these production systems, considering that the soils of the region are poor in these nutrients, due to their karstic origin, with calcium carbonate contents (CaCO3) greater than 70% (Cabadas et al., Reference Cabadas, Solleiro, Sedov, Pi and Alcalá2010). Furthermore, in the case of phosphorus, it is known that the main sources of this element in terrestrial ecosystems come from the transport of dust from Africa, marine sediments, and volcanic remains, among other sources (Cabadas et al., Reference Cabadas, Solleiro, Sedov, Pi and Alcalá2010; Estrada-Medina et al., Reference Estrada-Medina, Jiménez-Osornio, Álvarez-Rivera and Barrientos-Medina2019). Therefore, the use of species such as Tithonia and Moringa can contribute to the deposition of phosphorus, which is essential for soil fertility. However, the scientific literature regarding the nutrient contribution of Tithonia in the modality of FBS is still scarce. Despite the above, these findings show potential application; even in moderate contributions of nutrients, from the integration of species such as Tithonia, Moringa, and Leucaena, in FBS, compared to natural ecosystems (Aryal et al., Reference Aryal, De Jong, Ochoa-Gaona, Mendoza-Vega and Esparza-Olguin2015). Likewise, they showed the potential to promote more efficient nutrient recycling due to the high quality of the litter and thus promote the strategic recovery of degraded areas, as mentioned by Sileshi et al. (Reference Sileshi, Mafongoya and Nath2020) and Williams-Linera et al. (Reference Williams-Linera, Bonilla-Moheno, López-Barrera and Tolome2021).

Relationship between environmental variables and litter deposition

In the present study, a positive and statistically significant association was observed between the monthly litter production of the species and the precipitation, probably due to a foliage renewal process preceded by the rains or maximum precipitation, as pointed out by Bonilla et al. (Reference Bonilla, Belisario-Roncallo and García2008). Indeed, it agrees with what was reported by Petit-Aldana et al. (Reference Petit-Aldana, Casanova-Lugo, Solorio-Sánchez and Ramírez-Avilés2011), who pointed out that the highest litter production in FBS in Yucatan, Mexico, occurred in the periods of highest rainfall, just when the greatest decomposition occurs due to relative humidity and the greatest presence of arthropods and earthworms (Bonilla et al., Reference Bonilla, Belisario-Roncallo and García2008).

Despite the above, our results are inconsistent with what was reported by Sánchez et al. (Reference Sánchez, Crespo and Hernández2007, Reference Sánchez, Lama and Suantunce2008), who did not find a significant correlation between litter production and precipitation, which depends on the caducifolious character of species studied, where the highest litter production values occurred during the natural fall of the leaves that occurs at the end of the year, where temperatures and humidity are low. Likewise, our findings are also distinct from what was reported by Sánchez et al. (Reference Sánchez, Lama and Suantunce2008), who pointed out that precipitation and temperature appear as the most decisive climatic variables in the production and decomposition of litter. This is because they influence both the development of vegetation and the activities of microorganisms, which are fundamental factors in soil formation. Furthermore, these differences could be directly related to the management, prevailing climatic conditions at the site, and the specific response of the three species.

Conclusion

Litter production showed a similar trend in the three species evaluated during the study period, with an increase in September. Tithonia diversifolia was the most productive species and showed the highest contributions of carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus under the fodder bank silvopastoral design. Regarding the return of carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus, all species followed the same trend observed in the litter deposition curve which showed that both measures can work like a correlated variable.

Finally, it can be considered that the potential biomass yield and the contribution of nutrients to the soil shown by the three species gave them a high productive potential in tropical regions. Therefore, in the future, studying the combination of Tithonia, Leucaena, and Moringa for the complementary effects, could compensate for or reinforce the reintegration of nutrients to the soil in agroecosystems that include trees and/or shrubs as fodder banks. Moreover, our results suggest that leaving the remains of the forage bank on the ground like cycling nutrients can be an alternative for managing soil fertility instead of hauling forage for livestock. This can be a viable alternative to produce food and ecosystem services because these species can sustainably enhance soil fertility and animal production without agrochemical adds and subsequent contamination.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Tecnológico Nacional de México for financial support throughout this project (No. 14328.22-P and 1129.21-P). We are also grateful to the Consejo Nacional de Humanidades, Ciencias y Tecnologías for financing infrastructures project (No. 316492) to carry out field and laboratory works and obtain a M. Sc. degree (of the first author) in Sustainable Agroecosystems.

Competing interests

The authors state that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

Alonso, J., Ruiz, T., Febles, G. and Achan, G. (2003) Comparación de métodos de poda en un sistema silvopastoril Leucaena guinea. Revista Cubana de Ciencia Agrícola 37, 433444.Google Scholar
Aryal, D.R., De Jong, B.H., Ochoa-Gaona, S., Mendoza-Vega, J. and Esparza-Olguin, L. (2015) Successional and seasonal variation in litterfall and associated nutrient transfer in semi-evergreen tropical forests of SE Mexico. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 103, 4560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aryal, D.R., Morales-Ruiz, D.E., López-Cruz, S., Tondopó-Marroquín, C.N., Lara-Nucamendi, A., Jiménez-Trujillo, J.A., Pérez-Sánchez, E., Betanzos-Simon, J.E., Casasola-Coto, F., Martínez-Salinas, A., Sepúlveda-López, C.J., Ramírez-Díaz, R., La O Arias, M.A., Guevara-Hernández, F., Pinto-Ruiz, R., and Ibrahim, M. (2022) Silvopastoral systems and remnant forests enhance carbon storage in livestock-dominated landscapes in Mexico. Scientific Reports 12, 16769. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-21089-4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bautista, F. (2021) Clasificación de suelos de la península de Yucatán. In Los Territorios Kársticos de la Península de Yucatán: Caracterización, Manejo y Riesgos. Ciudad de México: Asociación Mexicana de Estudios sobre el Karst, pp. 2538.Google Scholar
Bonilla, R., Belisario-Roncallo, J.J. and García, T. (2008) Producción y descomposición de la hojarasca en bosques nativos y de Leucaena sp., en Codazzi, Cesar. Ciencia y Tecnología Agropecuaria 9, 511. https://doi.org/10.21930/rcta.vol9_num2_art:113 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cabadas, H.V., Solleiro, E., Sedov, S., Pi, T. and Alcalá, J.R. (2010) The complex genesis of red soils in Peninsula de Yucatan, Mexico: mineralogical, micromorphological and geochemical proxies. Eurasian Soil Science 43, 14391457. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1064229310130041 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardona-Iglesias, J., Mahecha-Ledesma, L. and Angulo-Arizala, J. (2017) Efecto sobre la fermentación in vitro de mezclas de Tithonia diversifolia, Cenchrus clandestinum y grasas poliinsaturadas. Agronomía Mesoamericana 28, 405426. https://doi.org/10.15517/ma.v28i2.25697 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casanova-Lugo, F., Caamal, M.J., Petit, A.J., Solorio, S.F. and Castillo, C.J. (2010) Acumulación de carbono en la biomasa de Leucaena leucocephala y Guazuma ulmifolia asociadas y en monocultivo. Revista Forestal Venezolana 54, 4550.Google Scholar
Casanova-Lugo, F., Petit-Aldana, J., Solorio-Sánchez, F.J., Parsons, D. and Ramírez-Avilés, L. (2014) Forage yield and quality of Leucaena leucocephala and Guazuma ulmifolia in mixed and pure fodder banks systems in Yucatán, México. Agroforestry Systems 8, 2939. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-013-9652-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casanova-Lugo, F., Petit-Aldana, J., Solorio-Sánchez, F., Ramírez-Avilés, L., Ward, S.E., Villanueva-López, G. and Aryal, D.R. (2018) Carbon stocks in biomass and soils of woody species fodder banks in the dry tropics of Mexico. Soil Use and Management 34, 500509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casanova-Lugo, F., Cetzal-Ix, W., Díaz-Echeverría, V.F., Chay-Canul, A.J., Oros-Ortega, I., Piñeiro-Vázquez, A.T. and González-Valdivia, N.A. (2019) Moringa oleifera Lam. (Moringaceae): árbol exótico con gran potencial para la ganadería ecológica en el trópico. Agroproductividad 11, 100105.Google Scholar
Castillo-Mestre, R., Betancourt-Bagué, T., Toral-Pérez, O.C. and Iglesias-Gómez, J.M. (2016) Influencia de diferentes marcos de plantación en el establecimiento y la producción de Tithonia diversifolia . Pastos Forrajes 39, 8993.Google Scholar
Crespo, G., Ruiz, T.E. and Álvarez, J. (2011) Efecto del abono verde de Tithonia (T. diversifolia) en el establecimiento y producción de forraje de P. purpureum cv. Cuba CT-169 y en algunas propiedades del suelo. Revista Cubana de Ciencia Agrícola 45, 7982.Google Scholar
Domínguez, G.T. (2009) Deposición de Hojarasca y Retorno Potencial de Nutrimentos en Diferentes Comunidades de Vegetación. Linares, NL, México: Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, p. 133.Google Scholar
Ella, A., Blair, G.J. and Stür, W.W. (1991) Effect of age of forage tree legumes at the first cutting on subsequent production. Tropical Grasslands 25, 275280.Google Scholar
Estrada-Medina, H., Jiménez-Osornio, J.J., Álvarez-Rivera, O. and Barrientos-Medina, R.C. (2019) El karst de Yucatán: su origen, morfología y biología. Acta Universitaria 29, e2292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fragoso-Servón, P., Pereira Corona, A., Bautista Zúñiga, F. and Zapata Buenfil, G.D.J. (2017) Digital soil map of Quintana Roo, Mexico. Journal of Maps 13, 449456. https://doi.org/10.1080/17445647.2017.1328317 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franzel, S., Carsan, S., Lukuyu, B., Sinja, J. and Wambugu, C. (2014) Fodder trees for improving livestock productivity and smallholder livelihoods in Africa. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 6, 98103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2013.11.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fungo, B., Buyinza, J., Sekatuba, J., Nansereko, S., Ongodia, G., Kwaga, P., Mudondo, S., Eryau, K., Akelem, R., Musinguzi, P. and Agaba, H. (2020) Forage biomass and soil aggregate carbon under fodder banks with contrasting management regimes. Agroforestry Systems 94, 10231035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
George, T.S., Gregory, P.J., Robinson, J.S., Buresh, R.J. and Jama, B.A. (2001) Tithonia diversifolia: variations in leaf nutrient concentration and implications for biomass transfer. Agroforestry Systems 52, 199205. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011896705132 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallego-Castro, L., Mahecha-Ledesma, L. and Ángulo-Arizala, J. (2017) Calidad nutricional de Tithonia diversifolia Hemsl. A Gray bajo tres sistemas de siembra en el trópico alto. Agronomía Mesoamericana 28, 213222. https://doi.org/10.15517/am.v28i1.21671 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
García, E. (1988) Modificaciones al Sistema de Clasificación Climática de Köppen. Ciudad de México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), p. 217.Google Scholar
García-Domínguez, A., Cámara-Cabrales, L.C., Van Der Wal, J.C. and Martínez-Sánchez, J.L. (2020) Producción y tasa de descomposición de hojarasca en acahuales de Tabasco, México. Madera y Bosques 26, e2611694. https://doi.org/10.21829/myb.2020.2611694 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
González-Abraham, C., Flores-Santana, C., Rodríguez-Ramírez, S., Olguin-Alvarez, M., Flores-Martínez, A., Torres Rojo, J.M., Bocco-Verdinelli, G., Fernández-Calleros, C.A. and McCord, G.C. (2023) Long-term pathways analysis to assess the feasibility of sustainable land-use and food systems in Mexico. Sustainability Science 18, 469484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-022-01243-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
González-Castillo, J.C., Hahn von-Hessberg, C.M. and Narváez-Solarte, W. (2014) Características botánicas de Tithonia diversifolia (Asterales: Asteraceae) y su uso en la alimentación animal. Boletín Científico Centro de Museos Museo de Historia Natural 18, 4558.Google Scholar
González-Rodríguez, H., Domínguez-Gómez, T.G., Cantú-Silva, I., Gómez-Meza, M.V., Ramírez-Lozano, R.G., Pando-Moreno, M. and Fernández, C.J. (2011) Litterfall deposition and leaf litter nutrient return in different locations at Northeastern Mexico. Plant Ecology 212, 17471757. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-011-9952-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guatusmal-Gelpud, C., Escobar-Pachajoa, L.D., Meneses-Buitrago, D.H., Cardona-Iglesias, J.L. and Castro-Rincón, E. (2020) Producción y calidad de Tithonia diversifolia y Sambucus nigra en trópico altoandino colombiano. Agronomía Mesoamericana 31, 192208. https://doi.org/10.15517/am.v31i1.36677 Google Scholar
Harmand, J.M., Forkong, N.C., Bernhard–Reversat, F. and Puig, H. (2004) Aboveground and belowground biomass, productivity and nutrient accumulation in tree improved fallows in the dry tropics of Cameroon. Forest Ecology and Management 188, 249265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2003.07.026 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernández-Ramos, A., Valdez-Lazalde, J.R., Ángeles-Pérez, G., de los Santos-Posadas, H.M., Hernández-Ramos, J., Peduzzi, A. and Carrero, O. (2017) Productividad primaria neta aérea en plantaciones comerciales de Eucalyptus urophylla S. T. Blake en Huimanguillo, Tabasco, México. Agrociencia 51, 343358.Google Scholar
IUSS Working Group WRB. (2022) World Reference Base for Soil Resources. International Soil Classification System for Naming Soils and Creating Legends for Soil Maps, 4th Edn. Vienna, Austria: International Union of Soil Sciences (IUSS), p. 234.Google Scholar
Jha, P. and Prasad-Mohapatra, K. (2010) Leaf litterfall, fine root production and turnover in four major tree species of the semi–arid region of India. Plant and Soil 326, 481491. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-009-0027-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, B.M. (2008) Litter dynamics in plantation and agroforestry systems of the tropics - a review of observations and methods. In Batish, D.R., Kohli, R.K., Jose, S. and Singh, H.P (eds.), Ecological Basis of Agroforestry. London: C.R.C Press, pp. 181216.Google Scholar
Lezcano, Y., Soca, M., Ojeda, F., Roque, E., Fontes, D., Montejo, I.L., Santana, H., Martínez, J. and Cubillas, N. (2012) Caracterización bromatológica de Tithonia diversifolia (Hemsl.) A. Gray en dos etapas de su ciclo fisiológico. Pastos y Forrajes 35, 275288.Google Scholar
López, H.J.M., González, R.H., Ramírez, L.R.G., Cantó, S.I., Gómez, M.M.V., Pando, M.M. and Estrada, C.A.E. (2013) Producción de hojarasca y retorno potencial de nutrientes en tres sitios del estado de Nuevo León, México. Polibotánica 35, 4164.Google Scholar
Lugo, M., Molina, F., Gonzáles, I., Gonzáles, J. and Sánchez, E. (2012) Efecto de la altura y frecuencia de corte sobre la producción de materia seca y proteína bruta de Tithonia diversifolia . Zootecnia Tropical 30, 317325.Google Scholar
Mahecha, E. and Rosales, M. (2005) Valor nutricional del follaje de botón de oro (Tithonia diversifolia (Helmsl.) Gray, en la producción animal en el trópico. Livestock Research for Rural Development 17, 1.Google Scholar
Mahmud, A.A., Raj, A. and Jhariya, M.K. (2021) Agroforestry systems in the tropics: a critical review. Agricultural and Biological Research 37, 8387.Google Scholar
Marmolejo, M.J.G., Cantú, A.C.M. and Gutiérrez, S.M.A. (2013) Degradación de la hojarasca en sitios con vegetación primaria y secundaria del matorral espinoso Tamaulipeco. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Forestales 4, 174181. https://doi.org/10.29298/rmcf.v4i17.430 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miranda, F. and Hernández, X.E. (1963) The types of vegetation of Mexico and their classification. Botanical Science 28, 29179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montagnini, F., Ibrahim, M. and Murgueitio, E. (2013) Silvopastoral systems and climate change mitigation in Latin America. Bois et Forêts des Tropiques 316, 316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nair, P.R., Nair, V.D., Kumar, B.M. and Haile, S.G. (2009) Soil carbon sequestration in tropical agroforestry systems: a feasibility appraisal. Environmental Science & Policy 12, 10991111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2009.01.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oros-Ortega, I., Lara-Pérez, L.A., Casanova-Lugo, F., Díaz-Echeverría, V.F., Villanueva-López, G., Ramírez-Barajas, P.J. and Cetzal-Ix, W. (2020) Diversity and importance of the relationship between arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and nitrogen-fixing bacteria in tropical agroforestry systems in Mexico. In Varma, A., Tripathi, S. and Prasad, R. (eds.), Plant Microbe Symbiosis. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
Partey, S. (2011) Effect of pruning frequency and pruning height on the biomass production of Tithonia diversifolia (Hemsl) A. Gray. Agroforestry Systems 83, 181187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-010-9367-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pennington, T.D. and Sarukhán, J. (2005) Árboles Tropicales de México. Manual Para la Identificación de las Principales Especies, 3rd Edn. Ciudad de México: Ediciones científicas universitarias, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, p. 523.Google Scholar
Petit-Aldana, J., Casanova-Lugo, F., Solorio-Sánchez, J., and Ramírez-Avilés, L. (2011) Producción y calidad de hojarasca en bancos de forraje puros y mixtos en Yucatán, México. Revista Chapingo Serie Ciencias Forestales y del Ambiente 17, 165178. https://doi.org/10.5154/r.rchscfa.2010.09.066 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramos-Trejo, O.S., Canul-Solís, J.R., Alvarado-Canché, A.D.R., Castillo-Sánchez, L.E., Sandoval-Gío, J.J., Campos-Navarrete, M.J. and Casanova-Lugo, F. (2020) Growth, forage yield and quality of Morus alba L. and Gliricidia sepium (Jacq.) Walp. in mixed and pure fodder bank systems in Yucatan, México. Agroforestry Systems 94, 151157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-019-00378-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rivera-Vázquez, R., Soto-Pinto, L., Núñez-Colín, C.A., De Jong, B., Hernández-Rivera, M. and Ordóñez-Díaz, J.A. (2013) Producción y tasa de descomposición de hojarasca en Acahuales de selva caducifolia en Chiapas. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Forestales 4, 2030. https://doi.org/10.29298/rmcf.v4i20.367 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sánchez, C.S., Crespo, L.G. and Hernández, C.M. (2007) Acumulación y descomposición de la hojarasca en un pastizal de Panicum maximum y en un sistema silvopastoril de Panicum maximum y Leucaena leucocephala . Pastos y Forrajes 30, 357371.Google Scholar
Sánchez, C., Lama, D. and Suantunce, P. (2008) Hojas caídas y aporte de nutrientes de diez especies forestales tropicales. Ciencia y Tecnología 1, 7378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sánchez-Silva, S., De Jong, B.H., Aryal, D.R., Huerta-Lwanga, E. and Mendoza-Vega, J. (2018) Trends in leaf traits, litter dynamics and associated nutrient cycling along a secondary successional chronosequence of semi-evergreen tropical forest in South-Eastern Mexico. Journal of Tropical Ecology 34, 364377. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26563739 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santa-Regina, I. and Tarazona, T. (2001) Organic matter and nitrogen dynamics in a mature forest of common beech in the Sierra de la Demanda, Spain. Annals of Forest Science 58, 301314. https://doi.org/10.1051/forest:2001128 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sileshi, G.W., Mafongoya, P.L. and Nath, A.J. (2020) Agroforestry Systems for improving nutrient recycling and soil fertility on degraded lands. In Agroforestry for Degraded Landscapes. Singapore: Springer, pp. 225253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Souza, S.R., Veloso, M.D.M., Espírito-Santo, M.M., Silva, J.O., Sánchez-Azofeifa, A., Souza e Brito, B.G. and Fernandes, G.W. (2019) Litterfall dynamics along a successional gradient in a Brazilian tropical dry forest. Forest Ecosystems 6, 35 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40663-019-0194-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
StatSoft Inc. (2007) STATISTICA (Data Analysis Software System), Version 8.0. Cary, NC, USA: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
Steel, R.G.D. and Torrie, J.H. (1980) Principles and Procedures of Statistics. A Biometrical Approach, 2nd Edn. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.Google Scholar
Stür, W., Shelton, H. and Gutteridge, R. (1994) Defoliation management of forage tree legumes. In Gutteridgeand, R.C. and Shelton, H.M. (eds.), Forage Tree Legumes in Tropical Agriculture. Wallingford, GBR: CAB International, pp. 158167.Google Scholar
Vargas-Velázquez, V.T., Pérez-Hernández, P., López-Ortiz, S., Castillo, G.E., Cruz, L.C. and Jarillo, R.J. (2022) Producción y calidad nutritiva de Tithonia diversifolia (Hemsl.) A. Grey en tres épocas del año y su efecto en la preferencia por ovinos Pelibuey. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Pecuarias 13, 240257 https://doi.org/10.22319/rmcp.v13i1.5906 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verma, A., Kumar, P., Soni, M.L., Pawar, N., Pradhan, U., Tanwar, S.P.S. and Kumar, S. (2021) Litter production and litter dynamics in different agroforestry systems in the arid western region of India. Biological Agriculture & Horticulture 38, 4060. https://doi.org/10.1080/01448765.2021.1971110 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Villanueva-López, G., Lara-Perez, L.A., Oros-Ortega, I., Ramírez-Barajas, P.J., Casanova-Lugo, F., Ramos-Reyes, R. and Aryal, D.R. (2019) Diversity of soil macro-arthropods correlates to the richness of plant species in traditional agroforestry systems in the humid tropics of Mexico. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 286, 106658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2019.106658 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams-Linera, G., Bonilla-Moheno, M., López-Barrera, F. and Tolome, J. (2021) Litterfall, vegetation structure and tree composition as indicators of functional recovery in passive and active tropical cloud forest restoration. Forest Ecology and Management 493, 119260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119260 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, H., Huang, Y., An, S., Zeng, Q., Wang, B., Bai, X. and Huang, Q. (2023) Decay stages and meteorological factors affect microbial community during leaf litter in situ decomposition. Soil Ecology Letters 5, 220160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42832-022-0160-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Figure 1. Maximum and minimum air temperatures and rainfall at the study site. Data were taken from the weather station at the Instituto Tecnológico de la Zona Maya in January to December 2019.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Monthly production of litter and its components: leaves and branches of Tithonia diversifolia, Leucaena leucocephala, and Moringa oleifera in fodder bank systems of southern Quintana Roo, Mexico. Means ± Standard error.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Deposition of leaves (a), branches (b), total (c), and the percentage of litter components (d) of Tithonia diversifolia, Leucaena leucocephala, and Moringa oleifera in fodder bank systems of southern Quintana Roo, Mexico; means ± standard error labelled by different letters are significantly different according to Tukey’s statistic (p < 0.05).

Figure 3

Table 1. Average content of carbon (C), nitrogen (N), and phosphorus (P); the C:N ratio of Tithonia diversifolia, Leucaena leucocephala, and Moringa oleifera litter in fodder bank systems FBS of southern Quintana Roo, Mexico

Figure 4

Figure 4. Monthly deposition of carbon (C), nitrogen (N), and phosphorus (P), from Tithonia diversifolia, Leucaena leucocephala, and Moringa oleifera litter in fodder bank systems of southern Quintana Roo, Mexico. Means ± Standard error.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Accumulated deposition of carbon (C), nitrogen (N), and phosphorus (P), from Tithonia diversifolia, Leucaena leucocephala, and Moringa oleifera litter in fodder bank systems of southern Quintana Roo, Mexico; means ± standard error labelled by different letters are significantly different according to Tukey’s statistic (p < 0.05).

Figure 6

Table 2. Pearson correlation analysis between environmental variables and monthly litter deposition (kg ha–1), of Tithonia diversifolia, Leucaena leucocephala, and Moringa oleifera in fodder bank systems of southern Quintana Roo, Mexico