Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interactions between vegetation dynamic and edaphic factors in the Great Salt Desert of central Iran

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Journal of Arid Land Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Investigating the relationships between vegetation dynamic and edaphic factors provide management insights into factors affecting the growth and establishment of plant species and vegetation communities in saline areas. The aim of this study was to assess the spatial variability of various vegetation communities in relation to edaphic factors in the Great Salt Desert, central Iran. Fifteen vegetation communities were identified using the physiognomy-floristic method. Coverage and density of vegetation communities were determined using the transect plot method. Forty soil samples were collected from major horizons of fifteen profiles in vegetation communities, and analyzed in terms of following soil physical and chemical characteristics: soil texture, soluble Na+ concentration, sodium adsorption ratio (SAR), electrical conductivity (EC), pH, organic matter content, soluble Mg2+ and Ca2+ concentrations, carbonate and gypsum contents, and spontaneously- and mechanically-dispersible clay contents. Redundancy analysis was used to investigate the relationships between vegetation dynamic and edaphic factors. The generalized linear method (GLM) was used to find the plant species response curves against edaphic factors. Results showed that plant species responded differently to edaphic factors, in which soluble sodium concentration, EC, SAR, gypsum content and soil texture were identified as the most discriminative edaphic factors. The studied plant species were also found to have different ecological requirements and tolerance to edaphic factors, in which Tamarix aphylla and Halocnemum strobilaceum were identified as the most salt-resistant species in the region. Furthermore, the presence of Artemisia sieberi was highly related to soil sand and gypsum contents. The results implied that exploring the plant species response curves against edaphic factors can assist managers to lay out more appropriate restoration plans in similar arid areas.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbas M S, Afefe A A, Hatab E B E, et al. 2016. Vegetation-soil relationships in wadi El-Rayan protected area, western desert, Egypt. Jordan Journal of Biological Sciences, 9(2): 97–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal P, Dabi M, Kinhekar K, et al. 2020. Special adaptive features of plant species in response to salinity. In: Hasanuzzaman M, Tanveer M. Salt and Drought Stress Tolerance in Plants Signaling Networks and Adaptive Mechanisms. Switzerland: Springer, 53–76.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Allahgholi A, Asri Y. 2014. Changes in plant communities within the south east salt marshes of Orumieh Lake. Plant Ecophysiology, 5(15): 74–87. (in Persian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Apaydin Z, Kutbay H G, Ozbucak T, et al. 2009. Relationships between vegetation zonation and edaphic factors in a salt-marsh community (Black Sea Coast). Polish Journal of Ecology, 57(1): 99–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arevalo J R, Fernández-Lugo S, Reyes-Betancort J A, et al. 2017. Relationships between soil parameters and vegetation in abandoned terrace field vs. non-terraced fields in arid lands (Lanzarote, Spain): an opportunity for restoration. Acta Oecologica, 85: 77–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asrari A, Bakhshikhaniki G H, Rahmatizadeh A. 2012. Assessment of relationship between vegetation and salt soil in Qom Province. Iranian Journal of Range and Desert Research, 19(2): 264–282. (in Persian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin M P. 2005. Vegetation and environment: discontinuities and continuities. In: van der Maarel E. Vegetation Ecology. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 52–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cao Q Q, Yang B M, Li J R, et al. 2020. Characteristics of soil water and salt associated with Tamarix ramosissima communities during normal and dry periods in a semi-arid saline environment. CATENA, 193: 104661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter M R, Gregorich E G. 2008. Soil Sampling Methods of Analysis (2nd ed.). Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran W G. 1977. The estimation of sample size. In: Cochran W G. Sampling Techniques (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, 72–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czyż E A, Dexter A R. 2015. Mechanical dispersion of clay from soil into water readily-dispersed and spontaneously-dispersed clay. International Agrophysics, 29(1): 31–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Martonne E. 1926. A new climatological function: the aridity index. La Météorologie, 2: 449–458. (in French)

    Google Scholar 

  • Flowers T J, Troke P, Yeo A R. 1977. The mechanism of salt tolerance in halophytes. Annual Review of Plant Physiology, 28(1): 89–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Alcaraz M N, Jimenez-Carceles F J, Alvarez Y, et al. 2014. Gradients of soil salinity and moisture, and plant distribution, in a Mediterranean semi-arid saline watershed: a model of soil-plant relationships for contributing to the management. CATENA, 115: 150–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greig-Smith P. 1983. Quantitative Plant Ecology (3rd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hejcmanovā-Neźerková P, Hejcman M. 2006. A canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) of the vegetation-environment relationships in Sudanese savannah, Senegal. The South African Journal of Botany, 72(2): 256–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IMO. 2015. Iran Meteorological Organization Archive. [2015-09-20]. https://www.irimo.ir/eng/index.php.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kent M. 2011. Vegetation Description and Data Analysis: A Practical Approach. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khatibi R, Soltani S, Khodagholi M. 2017. Effects of climatic factors and soil salinity on the distribution of vegetation types containing Anabasis aphylla in Iran: a multivariate factor analysis. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 10(2): 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleyer M, Dray S, Bello F, et al. 2012. Assessing species and community functional responses to environmental gradients: which multivariate methods? Journal of Vegetation Science, 23(5): 805–821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koull N, Chehma A. 2016. Soil characteristics and plant distribution in saline wetlands of Oued Righ, northeastern Algeria. Journal of Arid Land, 8(6): 948–959.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magurran A E. 2004. Measuring Biological Diversity. Australia: Blackwell Science Ltd., 256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mokhtari-Asl A A F, Mesdaghi M, Akbarluo M, et al. 2008. Investigation on relationships between some soil characteristics and distribution of rangelands species (Case study: Eastern Azarbayjan-Marand Gherkhelar rangelands). Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, 15(1): 14–24. (in Persian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller-Dombois D, Ellenberg H. 1974. Aims and Methods of Vegetation Ecology. New York: Wiley & Son, 93–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park H J, Hong M G, Kim J G. 2020. Effects of soil fertility and flooding regime on the growth of Ambrosia trifida. Landscape and Ecological Engineering, 16(1): 39–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piernik A. 2012. Ecological Pattern of Inland Salt Marsh Vegetation in Central Europe. Poland: Nicolas Copernicus University Press, 229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quevedo D I, Frances F. 2008. A conceptual dynamic vegetation-soil model for arid and semiarid zones. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 12(5): 1175–1187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rengasamy P, Greene R, Ford G, et al. 1984. Identification of dispersive behaviour and the management of red-brown earths. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 22(4): 413–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sahragard H P, Chahouki M Z. 2015. An evaluation of predictive habitat models performance of plant species in Hoz-e Soltan rangelands of Qom Province. Ecological Modelling, 309: 64–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salama F, Ghani M A E, Tayeh N E. 2013. Vegetation and soil relationships in the inland wadi ecosystem of central Eastern Desert, Egypt. Turkish Journal of Botany, 37(3): 489–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salama F, Ghani M A E, Gadallah M, et al. 2016. Characteristics of desert vegetation along four transects in the arid environment of southern Egypt. Turkish Journal of Botany, 40(1): 59–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheikhzadeh A, Bashari H, Tarkesh-Esfahani M, et al. 2019. Investigation of rangeland indicator species using parametric and non-parametric methods in hilly landscapes of central Iran. Journal of Mountain Science, 16(6): 1408–1418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ter Braak C J F. 1985. Correspondence analysis of incidence and abundance data: properties in terms of a unimodal response model. Journal of Biometrics, 41(4): 859–873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ungar I A. 1967. Vegetation-soil relationships on saline soils in Northern Kansas. American Midland Naturalist, 78(1): 98–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weaver R W, Angel J S, Bottomley P S. 1994. Methods of Soil Analysis: Microbiological and Biochemical Properties. Madison: Soil Society of America, 1152.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Yang F, An F H, Ma H, et al. 2016. Variations on soil salinity and sodicity and its driving factors analysis under microtopography in different hydrological conditions. Water, 8(6): 227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang L W, Wang B C. 2016. Intraspecific interactions shift from competitive to facilitative across a low to high disturbance gradient in a salt marsh. Plant Ecology, 217(8): 959–967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Isfahan University of Technology, Iran for the financial support. We also gratefully acknowledge the field-work support of Qom Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, Iran. The authors are grateful to Mr. Mohammad-Reza MORADI for his assistance in this study and Dr. Saeid POURMANAFI for his help to provide maps. We are grateful for the reviews from the editor, Ms. Audrey HE and two anonymous reviewers, who significantly improved the quality of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Natural Resources, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, 8415683111, Iran

    Hossein Bashari, SeyedMehrdad Kazemi, Soghra Poodineh & Mostafa Tarkesh

  2. Department of Soil Science, College of Agriculture, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, 8415683111, Iran

    Mohammad R. Mosaddeghi

  3. Forests and Rangelands Research Department, Qom Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Qom, 3716184729, Iran

    SeyedMehdi Adnani

Authors
  1. Hossein Bashari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. SeyedMehrdad Kazemi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Soghra Poodineh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mohammad R. Mosaddeghi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mostafa Tarkesh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. SeyedMehdi Adnani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hossein Bashari.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bashari, H., Kazemi, S., Poodineh, S. et al. Interactions between vegetation dynamic and edaphic factors in the Great Salt Desert of central Iran. J. Arid Land 13, 123–134 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40333-021-0003-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40333-021-0003-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation