Distribution and importance of some endemic <i>Astragalus</i> L. species in semi-arid environmentally sensitive areas: a case study from northern Turkey

Gül, Ebru; Dölarslan, Melda

doi:10.1590/01047760202127012559

ABSTRACT

Background:

The objective of this study was to determine the distribution of some endemic species of the genus Astragalus L. (Astragalus anthylloides Lam., Astragalus lycius Boiss. and Astragalus xylobasis var. angustus (Freyn & Sint.) Freyn & Bornm.) species, and the interaction between soil, climatic characteristics and desertification risk which affect the distribution of these species in the semi-arid environment of Çankırı, northwest Turkey. During the vegetation period in 2017, soil and plant samples were collected from 180 points. Desertification risk (DR) and environmentally sensitive area index (ESAI) were calculated for each sampling point using the desertification indicator system for Mediterranean Europe (DIS4ME).

Results:

According to the DIS4ME system in the forest areas, DR values for A. anthylloides and A. lycius were lowest with 0.49 (no desertification risk) and highest with 3.73 (moderate desertification risk), and with an average of 2.20 in the field (low desertification risk). For A. xylobasis var. angustus in grassland, the DR values ranged from a low of 5.01 to a high of 5.42. The ESAI values ranged from 1.34 to 1.50 in the forest areas where the species A. anthylloides and A. lycius were distributed, and they ranged between 1.33 and 1.47 for A. xylobasis var. angustus in the grassland areas. The results of the analysis between the DR values and Astragalus L. species changes according to the land use types and plant distribution.

Conclusion:

When the relationships between all three of these endemic species’ DR values are evaluated together, they emerged as the best plant species indicator for determining desertification status.

Keywords:
Çankırı-Yapraklı; Endemism; Astragalus L.; Soil Properties; Desertification Risk

[1] ✤ ebru@karatekin.edu.tr

Category	Indicator	Classes	Index	Method of obtaining data
Vegetation quality	Plant Cover (%)	<10	1.0	Field observations, The degree of vegetation covering the soil was determined.
		/10-40	1.8
		/>40	2.0
	Erosion Control	Low	1.0	Field observation, It has been determined to take into account the protection measures taken in the area.
		Moderate	1.3
		Low to moderate	1.6
		High	1.8
		Very High	2.0
	Fire Protection	Low	1.0	Field observation, It has been determined to take into account the protection measures taken in the area.
		Moderate	1.3
		High	1.6
		Very High	2.0
Soil quality	Soil depth (cm)	deep (>75 cm)	1.0	Field observation, it was determined using auger from sampling instruments.
		moderate (75-30 cm)	2.0
		shallow (15-30 cm)	3.0
		very shallow (<15 cm)	4.0
	Slope (%)	<6	1.0	It was determined using an inclinometer.
		6-18	1.2
		18-35	1.5
		>35	2.0
	Slope Aspect	North, NW, NE, plain	1.0	It was determined using Global Positioning System (GPS).
	Slope Aspect	South, SW, SE	2.0	It was determined using Global Positioning System (GPS).
	Drainage	well drained	1.0	It was determined considering water color and depth of groundwater (Desertlinks 2004).
		imperfectly	1.2
		poor drained	2.0
	Soil Texture	L, SCL, SL, LS, CL	1.0	Laboratory analysis, Bouyoucos hydrometer method (Gee and Bauder 1986GEE, G. W.; BAUDER, J. W. 1986. Particle-size analysis. In: KLUTE, A. Methods of soil analysis: Part 1. Physical and mineralogical methods. American Society of Agronomy and Soil Science Society of America , 1986. p. 383-411.)
		SC, SiL, SiCL	1.2
		Si, C, SiC	1.6
		S	2.0
	Parent Material	Shale, schist, basic, ultrabasic, conglomerates, unconsolidated, clays; marl (with natural veg.);	1.0	Field observation
		Limestone, marble, granite, rhyolite, ignimbrite, gneiss, siltstone, sandstone, dolomite;	1.7
		Marl, Pyroclastic.	2.0
	Rock Fragments (>6mm)	> 60	1.0	Field observation, It was determined by taking into account the area occupied by the rock fragments on the surface of the land.
		20 - 60	1.3
		< 20	2.0
Climate quality	Mean Annual precipitation	> 650	1.0	Calculated by interpolating from nearby stations.
		280-650	2.0
		< 280	4.0
	Aridity index	< 50	1.0	It was calculated from the Bagnouls-Gaussen index using the following equation. ti=is the mean air temperature for a month i in 0°C Pi= s the total precipitation for a month i in mm; ki= represents the proportion of the month during which 2ti - Pi >0.
		50 - 75	1.1
		75 - 100	1.2
		100 - 125	1.4
		125 - 150	1.8
		> 150	2.0
Management practices	Land use intensity	Low	1.0	It was determined by taking into consideration the supports received by the land owners and the state supports.
		Moderate	1.5
		High	2.0
	Policy enforcement	Low	1.0
		Moderate	1.5
High		2.0

Plant taxa	Parameters	Min	Max	Mean	SD	CV (%)	Kur.	Skew.
Aa	Plant Number	1	27.0	3.97	5.76	145.09	1.83	3.37
	Other species	0	36.0	11.21	7.49	66.82	0.97	1.14
	Plant Cover (%)	17	100	67.75	22.58	33.33	-0.71	-0.57
Al	Plant Number	1	11.0	2.07	2.65	128.02	1.28	1.00
	Other species	0	32.0	7.65	9.05	118.34	1.35	1.10
	Plant Cover (%)	3	100	43.93	25.73	58.57	0.24	-1.02
Ax	Plant Number	1	6.0	2.18	1.30	59.63	1.25	1.24
	Other species	0	74.0	25.30	20.09	79.41	0.88	0.307
	Plant Cover (%)	5	100	69.30	25.92	37.40	-0.72	-0.22

Plant taxa	Parameters	N	Min	Max	Mean	SD	CV	Kur.	Skew.
A. anthylloides and A. lycius	Sand (%)	120	12.50	55.00	34.46	9.18	26.65	-0.30	-0.30
	Clay (%)	120	23.40	61.60	41.47	8.10	19.53	0.53	0.53
	Silt (%)	120	12.50	41.80	24.07	4.83	20.07	1.18	1.18
	BD (gr.cm^-3)	120	1.12	1.41	1.26	0.07	5.20	0.22	0.22
	CaCO3 (%)	120	2.92	39.43	21.27	7.86	36.97	-0.68	-0.68
	SOM (%)	120	0.15	14.24	2.80	2.12	75.67	3.83	3.83
	pH	120	6.90	7.76	7.26	0.18	2.44	0.57	0.57
	EC (dS m^-1)	120	0.17	2.15	1.31	0.29	22.28	0.21	0.21
A. xylobasis var. angustus	Sand (%)	120	12.50	55.00	34.46	9.18	26.65	-0.30	-0.30
	Clay (%)	120	23.40	61.60	41.47	8.10	19.53	0.53	0.53
	Silt (%)	120	12.50	41.80	24.07	4.83	20.07	1.18	1.18
	BD (gr.cm^-3)	120	1.12	1.41	1.26	0.07	5.20	0.22	0.22
	CaCO₃ (%)	120	2.92	39.43	21.27	7.86	36.97	-0.68	-0.68
	SOM (%)	120	0.15	14.24	2.80	2.12	75.67	3.83	3.83
	pH	120	6.90	7.76	7.26	0.18	2.44	0.57	0.57
	EC (dS m^-1)	120	0.17	2.15	1.31	0.29	22.28	0.21	0.21

Plant taxa	Parameters	Min.	Max.	Mean	SD	Kur.	Skew.	CV
Aa and Al	DR	0.49	3.73	2.20	0.71	0.07	-0.38	32.35
Aa and Al	ESAI	1.34	1.50	1.41	0.05	0.09	-1.24	3.46
Ax	DR	5.01	5.42	5.22	0.21	0.00	-2.07	3.96
	ESAI	1.33	1.47	1.38	0.05	0.07	-1.72	3.42

Parameterv	PC	Aa	Al	Ax	OS	DR
PC	1.000	0.114	-0.090	0.274(**)	0.433(**)	0.028
Aa	0.114	1.000	-0.294(**)	-0.300(**)	-0.287(**)	-0.338(**)
Al	-0.090	-0.294(**)	1.000	-0.333(**)	-0.094	-0.354(**)
Ax	0.274(**)	-0.300(**)	-0.333(**)	1.000	0.342(**)	0.744(**)
OS	0.433(**)	-0.287(**)	-0.094	0.342(**)	1.000	0.427(**)
DR	0.028	-0.338(**)	-0.354(**)	0.744(**)	0.427(**)	1.000

Brasil

Brasil

Distribution and importance of some endemic Astragalus L. species in semi-arid environmentally sensitive areas: a case study from northern Turkey

ABSTRACT

Background:

Results:

Conclusion: