Geoderma 189–190 (2012) 186–198

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Geoderma
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/geoderma

Farmer knowledge of the relationships among soil macrofauna, soil quality and tree
species in a smallholder agroforestry system of western Honduras
N. Pauli a, b, c,⁎, E. Barrios b, d, A.J. Conacher a, T. Oberthür e
a
School of Earth and Environment (M004), University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley 6009, Western Australia, Australia
b
Tropical Soil Biology and Fertility Institute, Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT), Apartado Aéreo 6713, Cali, Colombia
c
Land Use Project, Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT), Apartado Aéreo 6713, Cali, Colombia
d
World Agroforestry Centre, P.O. Box 30677, Nairobi, Kenya
e
International Plant Nutrition Institute, Southeast Asia Program, 11960 Penang, c/o World Fish Center, Malaysia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Efforts to increase above- and below-ground biodiversity in farming systems require greater understanding
Received 13 September 2011 of how farmers develop and use their knowledge of biodiversity, ecological processes and soil quality. The
Received in revised form 11 May 2012 goal of this research was to assess the extent to which farmers have incorporated their observations of native
Accepted 16 May 2012
species and ecological processes into farm management practices in a hillside agroforestry system of western
Available online 18 August 2012
Honduras. The system incorporates slash-and-mulch of native vegetation (rather than slash-and-burn culti-
Keywords:
vation, which was widely practiced in the area before 1990), and the retention of trees within cropping fields.
Local knowledge Information on farmer knowledge was elicited primarily through semi-structured interviews with 20
Hybrid knowledge farmers. Farmers interviewed distinguish several local soil types on the basis of soil texture, colour, structure
Bioindicators and stone content, with each soil type having varying suitability for the major crops grown in the district
Ethnopedology (maize, beans, sorghum and pasture). The most highly valued tree species are those that fulfil multiple eco-
Agroforestry nomic and agricultural functions, including having a positive influence on soil quality through decomposi-
Central America tion, nutrient cycling, and provision of soil cover. In particular, species with small, fine leaves that gave
dappled shade (rather than solid shade) and decomposed rapidly were preferred. Farmers named 16 com-
monly recognised, distinct soil macrofauna taxa. The most detailed knowledge on the relationship between
soil fauna and soil quality was held on taxa considered to have either beneficial or harmful effects on farming
activities, such as earthworms and beetle larvae. Farmers had complex understanding of the influence of fire
on soils, vegetation, crop yield and soil biota over various lengths of time, which may have been gained
through a combination of first-hand experience, interaction with agricultural extension workers, and infor-
mation gained from other farmers. It is likely that local ecological knowledge of the effect of different species
on soil quality, the interactions among species, and the role of vegetation in maintaining agricultural produc-
tivity and landscape integrity, is an important component of the adoption and success of the agroforestry
system.
© 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction farmers for defining soil type and quality (Barrera-Bassols and Zinck,
2003; Joshi et al., 2004). However, there have been relatively few
Soil quality is of great concern to farmers, particularly resource-poor studies of the importance of biological indicators of soil quality to small-
smallholder farmers who rely to a large degree on the biological holder farmers.
productivity of soil for their livelihoods. Smallholder farmers around Above- and below-ground biodiversity are closely tied to
the world have developed a plethora of detailed local soil classifications, aspects of soil quality, making it possible to use the presence,
based on years of observations and which are informed by a variety of absence and abundance of species as bioindicators of soil quality
soil quality indicators (Barrios and Trejo, 2003; Pawluk et al., 1992; (Barrios, 2007). Soil macrofauna are often described as ‘ecosystem
Talawar and Rhoades, 1998; WinklerPrins and Barrera-Bassols, 2004). engineers’ for their role in affecting soil structure and the distri-
Soil colour and soil texture are the principal characteristics used by bution of organic matter and habitats (Jones et al., 1994; Lavelle
et al., 1997). The relationships between plant litter quality, soil
organic matter content, nutrient cycling and microbial activity
⁎ Corresponding author at: School of Earth and Environment (M004), University of
Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley 6009, Western Australia, Australia.
are well-documented. In turn, there are complex relationships
Tel.: + 61 8 6488 3546; fax: + 61 8 6488 1037. between above- and below-ground biodiversity. Plants have been
E-mail address: [email protected] (N. Pauli). proposed as the ‘primary architects of below-ground biodiversity’

0016-7061/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2012.05.027
 N. Pauli et al. / Geoderma 189–190 (2012) 186–198 187

(Stein and Ettema, 2003, p.40) due to their influence on soil and Galluzzi et al., 2010). In agricultural systems that incorporate relative-
litter fauna habitat. ly high levels of above-ground biodiversity, farmer knowledge of eco-
Biological indicators can be very important to farmers in assessing logical processes and interactions can be key factors influencing the
soil health, land capability, or whether fallow areas are ready to culti- success of the management system. Understanding how farmers de-
vate (Barrios et al., 2006; Birmingham, 2003; Mairura et al., 2007; velop and use their knowledge of biodiversity and soil health could
Murage et al., 2000; Nguyen Dai Trung et al., 2008; Saïdou et al., be useful in other geographic areas where farmers are being encour-
2008). For example, a study of smallholder farmers' indicators of aged to incorporate greater above-ground biodiversity into the agri-
soil quality in the central highlands of Kenya showed that they reg- cultural system.
arded the presence of earthworms and beetle larvae as indicators of
productive land (Murage et al., 2000), and farmers in West African 2. Methods
forest areas use changes in termite community structure to indicate
the fertility status of fallow areas (Black and Okwakol, 1997). Farmers 2.1. Study area
can also have detailed knowledge of plant indicators of soil quality
and the effects of different tree species on soil properties (Barrios The field research took place in the zone surrounding the village of
and Trejo, 2003; Joshi et al., 2004; Oberthür et al., 2004; Quansah et Candelaria, in southern Lempira Department in western Honduras
al., 2001; WinklerPrins and Barrios, 2007). On the Orinoco floodplains (Fig. 1). Lempira is one of the least economically developed depart-
of Venezuela, farmers use plant species as an indicator of sites that ments of Honduras (Ruben and Clercx, 2003), due to its rugged topog-
would be favourable or unfavourable for the establishment of new raphy, lack of infrastructure and remoteness from the rest of the
cropping fields (Barrios and Trejo, 2003). country. Three-quarters of the rural population of southern Lempira
The process by which people observe biological interactions and are smallholder and subsistence farmers growing maize (Zea mays L.),
ecological processes, and incorporate these observations into natural sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench—local landrace referred to as
resource management and their worldview, has been referred to as maicillo) and bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) crops, often on steeply sloping
the ‘knowledge-practice-belief’ complex (Barrera-Bassols and Toledo, plots of land. Total farm sizes in the region are small; 80% of farms are
2005; Berkes, 1999). ‘Hybrid knowledge’ can be understood as the fu- less than five hectares (Welchez et al., 2008).
sion of ‘traditional’ ecological knowledge and new ‘technical’ knowl- Most of the population of southern Lempira department is of
edge gained from sources external to the community, such as mixed descent from the indigenous Lenca people and Spanish colo-
agronomists or scientists (Barrios et al., 2006). Understanding how nists, who arrived in the area in the early 16th century. In more re-
farmers incorporate new information into land management is particu- mote highland areas to the north of the study area, the Lenca have
larly important in areas where new, alternative methods of farming are maintained a distinct ethnic identity, although they had lost their na-
promoted by community groups and authorities. The integration of tra- tive language by the 1970s (Brady, 2001, 2009). The settlement forms
ditional knowledge and scientific knowledge can lead to insights into of the study area reflect the mix of Lenca and Spanish heritage; the
sustainable management and reduce risks associated with farming dif- larger pueblos (such as Candelaria) are laid out in grid formation
ficult, marginal environments (Altieri, 1995; Barrera-Bassols et al., with a central square, while the smaller outlying aldeas (see Fig. 2)
2009; Barrios and Trejo, 2003; Oberthür et al., 2004). are indigenous settlement forms, with more dispersed housing
The purpose of this study was to assess the extent to which (Brady, 2001). Little has been written about the agricultural practices
farmers have incorporated their observations of native species and of the Lenca. However, there is evidence to suggest that trees form a
ecological processes into farm management practices in an environ- central component of the Lenca cultural landscape, through incorpo-
mentally heterogeneous, hillside agroforestry system. Specifically, ration into farming fields, living fence posts, home gardens, farm bor-
we sought to: a) explore farmer perceptions of key environmental ders and as shade trees (Brady, 2001).
variables of soil type, native trees and shrubs, and soil macrofauna; Prior to 1990, the majority of farmers in the region surrounding
b) determine whether farmers draw associations between soil quali- Candelaria used slash-and-burn techniques to convert secondary for-
ty, crop growth and particular suites of plant and animal species, est to crop land, with fields cropped for 1 or 2 years and then left fal-
using trees and soil macrofauna as potential biological indicators; low. In the early 1990s, the southern Lempira region was facing
and c) identify whether farmers note the ecological impact of farm serious problems of accelerated soil erosion and other forms of land
management practices, using fire for land clearing as an example, degradation, as well as scarcity of forest and associated tree materials,
and the extent to which this might influence their decisions and low crop yields, malnutrition and increasing population (Ayarza et al.,
views on land management. 2005; Ruben and Clercx, 2003). A rural development project was
The research presented here took place in an area of western Hon- established, headed by the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the
duras where smallholders have made considerable changes to their United Nations (FAO) and supported by the Honduran and Dutch
farming techniques since the early 1990s, with the support of agricul- governments. An FAO field office was established in Candelaria. A col-
tural extension agencies and practitioners. One of the biggest changes laborative effort between local farmers and agricultural extension of-
was the abandonment of traditional slash-and-burn techniques to ficers, supported by the local government, led to the emergence of a
prepare cropping fields, in response to concerns over land degrada- new farming system that eliminated burning and incorporated the
tion. Today, farmers prepare fields using slash-and-mulch of native use of green manures, dispersed trees, contour planting, improved
vegetation, and maintain permanent soil cover through a mixture of crop varieties, mineral fertilizers and synthetic herbicides. Recent
pruned vegetation applied as mulch, crop residues, litterfall, shrubs plot trials have indicated that the new system generates almost
and groundcover plants. There are relatively high levels of biodiversi- twice the yield of maize (at around 1.6 t ha − 1) compared with ‘tradi-
ty within cropping fields, with free-growing and coppiced trees dis- tional’ slash and burn farming (approximately 0.9 t ha − 1) (Castro et
persed throughout the field. At least 70 distinct species of trees and al., 2009).
shrubs have been recorded from cultivated and fallow areas in the In the municipality of Candelaria, the new agroforestry system is
district (Pauli, 2008), many of which are used by farmers for fire- the dominant land use in a mosaic landscape of cultivated plots of
wood, timber, mulch, shade, fruit, medicine and fencing. varying ages, pastures, newly slashed fields, fallow, secondary forest,
Incorporating greater biodiversity within agricultural systems has human settlements and drainage lines (Fig. 3). Trees and shrubs that
been proposed as a means of increasing agroecosystem resilience in were previously killed by fire are now retained as free-growing spec-
the face of climate change and other pressures, as well as improving imens or as coppiced, low (b1.5 m) shrubs dispersed throughout the
food security, soil quality and productivity (e.g. Altieri, 1999; cultivated areas. Trees occupy an important place within the farming
188 N. Pauli et al. / Geoderma 189–190 (2012) 186–198

Fig. 1. Location of study area.

system and have multiple uses, including provision of building mate- 2004, and a further ten in August 2005. Nineteen of the farmers
rials, firewood, shade, fruit, and as a source of mulch (Hellin et al., were male. The interviewee was the person in the household who
1999). The new suite of land management practices is known as the held primary responsibility for the sowing, harvesting and sale of sta-
‘Quesungual Slash-and-Mulch Agroforestry System’ (QSMAS) after ple crops on the householder's land; this responsibility traditionally
the small village where the practices were first documented falls to men within the study area, with women traditionally under-
(Welchez et al., 2008). Around 6000 farmers in the Lempira region taking roles including collecting firewood and preparing foodstuffs
are thought to practice QSMAS (Ayarza et al., 2010). Farmers in the from harvested crops. It is possible that women were under-
area typically refer to areas under maize cultivation as milpa, a gener- represented in the sample; there are no comprehensive data available
ic term also used in other parts of Central America to refer to a range on the percentage of female-headed and male-headed agricultural
of maize-based farming systems. households in the study area, and there remains the possibility that
extension workers (all of whom were male) were less likely to inter-
2.2. Data collection act with female-headed households. Of the farmers interviewed, 18
had ownership over the land they farmed under local tenure arrange-
The principal technique used to elicit information was semi- ments, and two were farming rented parcels of land. Farm sizes
structured individual interviews with local farmers (Barrios et al., (based on estimates given by interviewed farmers) ranged from
2001). Additional information to contextualise and supplement the 0.5 ha to 23 ha, with a median area of 4 ha. All farmers surveyed
information from interviews was gathered from knowledge-sharing had maize crops, with a median area under maize cultivation of
workshops, participant observation, farm walks and related projects 2 ha. Fifteen of the interviewed farmers were also cultivating beans
led by Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT) in the at the time interviews took place. Of the 16 farmers who reported
study area. Study participants were recruited from across the neigh- having land in fallow or under forest, an average of 48% of the total
bouring municipalities of Candelaria and Gualcinse, including the farm area was not cultivated at the time of the interview. Ten farmers
aldeas (hamlets) of Camapara, Portillo Flor, El Obrajito, La Pinte, San had sown pasture crops, and two farmers reported additional crops
Lorenzo, Azacualpa and Quesungual (Fig. 2). including rice, coffee, vegetables and fruits.
Detailed, semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 20 Interviews were conducted in Spanish. Where appropriate, ques-
farmers. Many of the participants had previously worked with the tions were asked in an open-ended manner. During the interview, a
lead author or with other CIAT scientists. Additional farmers were local agricultural extension officer took notes on the conversation
recruited by FAO and/or CIAT field staff during the weekly market and clarified anything that was not well understood by the farmer
day in Candelaria, or during other activities in outlying areas. A repre- or by the interviewer. Farmers were asked to explain colloquialisms,
sentative sample of participants was sought, spanning different geo- ambiguous terms, and the characteristics of each soil type, soil ani-
graphic localities and a range of farm sizes. The link between mal, tree species or other component of the farming system that
farmers and extension workers was important, in order to undertake they described. At the beginning of each interview, farmers were
interviews in an environment of confidence and trust. All the inter- asked to orally describe the characteristics of the local soil types
views were undertaken in farmers’ homes. that occurred on their land, as a broad base from which to build a
Interview questions covered local soil types, bioindicators of soil more detailed understanding of farmer perceptions of biological in-
quality, perceptions of tree species and soil macrofauna, and the influ- fluences on soil quality. At the end of each interview, the interviewer
ence of fire and other management practices on the farming system and extension officer reviewed the discussion, and the notes were an-
and broader landscape. Ten farmers were interviewed in October notated with additional information as necessary. Six farmers also
 N. Pauli et al. / Geoderma 189–190 (2012) 186–198 189

N To Gualcinse
600 700 San Marcos
1000
500
Mora
W E
800 1100
900 900 La Hacienda
S San Marcos
Cerique CANDELARIA
400 Quesungual
800
700

300 600

1000
700
900
Guacal Portillo Flor
800 800
La Pinte
700
600
700

Azacualpa La Arada
Los Planes Camapara 600

500 500

El Obrajito
400 400

Gualmuraca

San Francisco
3
300 San Jose 600

500

Celilac
400
300
MAPULACA Pichigual
200
Kilometres 200
1 0 1 2 3 4 5
100

KEY Watercourse
Aldea (hamlet) included in study
400 Topographic contour line and
Other aldea height in metres ASL

Pueblo (village) Main access road (unsealed)

Fig. 2. Locations of aldeas from which workshop and interview participants were drawn in the area surrounding the village of Candelaria, southern Lempira department.

volunteered to give a tour of their farms. During these tours, farmers a hardpan layer at shallow depth, and were pale or yellow in colour,
pointed out features of interest and additional notes were taken to shallow, sandier and drier than other soil types, and not good for
supplement information from interviews. growing maize. Other named soil types included tierra calichosa
Quantitative data analysis comprised summary and descriptive (soil with many small stones), tierra arenosa (sandy soil), tierra
statistics. For the relevant questions in the semi-structured inter- arcillosa (clay soil), and tierra colorada (dark, loamy topsoil blending
views, farmers' answers were categorised, and the number of re- into a red or yellow-coloured clay-rich horizon below 15–20 cm).
sponses falling into each category was compared with the total For cultivation, soils were distinguished by the ease with which
number of farmers interviewed. Farmers' answers to questions relat- they could be managed (‘hard’ or ‘stony’ soils were more difficult to
ing to soil macrofauna were used to create a diagram that reflected farm), perceived fertility, or moisture content (some soils ‘dried out’
local perceptions of soil macrofauna and ecological interactions that easily, whereas others ‘retained moisture’). The majority of the
involved soil macrofauna. Farmers' responses to questions related to farmers interviewed associated the different soil types with different
the effect of tree species on farming activities were categorised and soil quality for growing crops, particularly maize. Tierra negra was
presented in tabular form. Farmers’ comments on the effects of fire generally regarded as the best soil type for growing maize and most
on agriculture and the landscape were summarised in graphical other crops (including sorghum, rice, beans and coffee). Other soil
form, and categorised by the authors in terms of agroecosystem com- types were noted as having varying suitability for the two major
ponent (soil, crops, vegetation and soil biota) and timescale (from im- crops of maize and beans. Four farmers noted that talpetate and
mediate, through the first 2 years of cropping, to long-term effects sometimes calichosa soils were suitable for growing bean crops, as
over several years). beans have shallow root systems and prefer well-drained, drier
soils. The poorest, most compacted soils were often planted with pas-
ture for livestock.
3. Results

3.1. Distinguishing characteristics of local soil types 3.2. Perceptions and values attached to tree species

Local soil types were generally distinguished using a combination The 20 farmers interviewed named 36 tree species as having a
of soil colour, soil texture and stoniness. The most commonly named particular impact on soil quality, crop growth or farming activities
soil type, which occurred in the fields of 15 of the 20 farmers inter- (Table 2). There did not appear to be any substantial relationship be-
viewed, was tierra negra (black soil) (Table 1). Tierra negra soils tween the number of trees named by individual farmers and total
were dark in colour, ‘loose’, friable, easy to manage, loamy in texture, farm size, the area under staple crop cultivation, or the proportion
and retained moisture better than other soil types. Talpetate soils had of land in fallow (Fig. 4). There was substantial concordance among
190 N. Pauli et al. / Geoderma 189–190 (2012) 186–198

Fig. 3. Photographs of the mosaic landscape characteristic of the study area. Image A shows a view across a typical small watershed. The landscape is heavily dissected with steep
slopes. In the foreground is a small pasture field, separated from a maize plot in the middle ground by a gully containing small shrubs and trees. In the background, maize grows on
the partially cleared lower slopes of the hillside, with secondary forest on the upper hillside. A small area of cleared land, probably pasture, is visible on the upper hillside in the
background. Image B demonstrates the distribution of houses within a patchwork of fields. Arrows denote the site of homesteads, just visible as rooftiles. The houses are nestled
within a mosaic of maize fields, pasture, recently fallowed land, and forest. In the middle ground, small patches of recently cleared land are visible, as is a local transportation
route that cuts across the upper part of the hillside. In the background, marked by the line of clouds, is the valley of the Rio Mocal, a major tributary of the Rio Lempa. The Rio
Lempa is an important source of freshwater for El Salvador to the south.

farmers in terms of the most-favoured and least-favoured tree spe- intercepted rainfall into powerful streams of water. Leaves that decayed
cies. When asked to explain why particular kinds of trees were slowly were thought to increase the time taken to return nutrients to
favoured within the farming system, farmers named a diverse range the soil through decomposition.
of tree attributes (Table 2). These included leaf and canopy character- Five of the six most commonly named favoured tree species (i.e.,
istics (such as leaf quality, leaf size, and shade quality), timber charac- guachipilín, laurel, madreado, carao, silimera (Caesalpiniaceae: Poeppigia
teristics (such as growth habit, growth rate, and firewood quality), procera C.Presl.) and guanacaste (Mimosaceae: Enterolobium cyclocarpum
and the perceived relationships with soil quality and crop growth (in- (Jacq.) Griseb.) were also leguminous species, many of which can fix
cluding the effect on crop growth, potential use as a bioindicator, and atmospheric nitrogen through a symbiotic relationship with rhizobia
association with invertebrates). in root nodules (although root nodulation is uncommon in most
Leaf characteristics were commonly cited as properties that indicat- Caesalpiniaceae species). One farmer, who had extensive interaction
ed whether a tree species was considered beneficial or detrimental to with FAO staff, stated that the good trees were all leguminous species,
farming activities (Table 2). Trees with small, fine leaves that gave dap- while another farmer noted that ‘all the trees with [seed] pods have a
pled shade and decomposed rapidly were preferred; examples included very good effect on crop growth’.
madreado (Papilionaceae: Gliricidia sepium (Jacq.) Walp.), carao Some of the interviewed farmers used the presence of certain spe-
(Caesalpiniaceae: Cassia grandis L.f.), laurel (Boraginaceae: Cordia cies of trees and other plants as indicators of whether fields are likely
alliodora (Ruiz & Pav.) Oken), and guachipilín (Papilionaceae: Diphysa to be good for cropping (Table 2). Examples of species that farmers
americana (Mill.) M.Sousa). Trees with large, slowly decaying leaves believe prefer to grow in better quality soil included guanacaste,
were not favoured. Large leaves were thought to damage young seed- madreado, carao and guachipilín. Some species used as bioindicators
lings either directly (through litterfall) or indirectly by concentrating of fertile soil (such as guarumo, Cecropiaceae: Cecropia peltata L.)
 N. Pauli et al. / Geoderma 189–190 (2012) 186–198 191

Table 1
The most common soil types named by farmers in the Candelaria district during semi-structured interviews, together with key characteristics.

Local soil type Texture, Colour Other soil Location Moisture Crop
stoniness properties retention suitability

Tierra negra (black)

Synonyms: Loam Black, dark-coloured Porous, friable, Often on Retains Best soil type for maize,
▪ pura (pure) 'soft' lower moisture good for all other crops
▪ franca (loam) slopes or well
▪ frondosa (lush) flat areas
▪ buena (good)
▪ fertil (fertile)

Tierra talpetatosa (hardpan)

Synonyms: Variable, can have stones Yellow, white, pale- Hardpan layer at Often on Variable Good for beans, but not
coloured shallow depth upper for maize
slopes
▪talpujo, talpetate
(hardpan)

Tierra arcillosa (clay)

Synonyms: Clay Orange, brown Not specified Often on Soil can Good for rice and beans,
▪ barrialosa (muddy) lower dry out maize grows more
slopes slowly
Tierra calichosa (small stones)
Synonyms: Variable, can be loamy, with many small stones Variable Often shallow Often on Soil can Good for beans or
▪ pedregosa (rocky) soil depth upper dry out pasture
slopes and easily
hilltops
Tierra colorada (coloured)
Synonyms: Clay, not many stones Dark-coloured Can have a 'soft' Variable Retains Not identified as best for
▪ negra y colorada (black, surface layer above hardpan layer at moisture any crop; most crops
coloured) reddish or yellowish depth in can be grown with
▪ café-amarilla (brown-yellow) subsoil summer fertiliser

Tierra arenosa (sandy)

Sandy loam Brown Susceptible to Variable Water Can be good for maize,
erosion and infiltrates although leaching is a
leaching with easily problem
heavy rain

The soil types in the table above were named by at least four of 20 farmers interviewed. All farmers interviewed recognised between two and four distinct soil types on land that
they farmed.

were removed from cropping fields as they were considered detri- Earthworms (phylum: Annelida, subclass: Oligochaeta) were
mental to crop growth (for example, guarumo is thought to attract in- named by all 20 farmers. Sixteen farmers regarded earthworms as hav-
sect pests and has large leaves that can damage crop seedlings ing a beneficial effect on farming activities. The most common reason
through litterfall; see Table 2). Two of the species that were consid- given (13 farmers) was that earthworms improve soil structure and
ered indicators of poor quality soil (chaparro, Dilleniaceae: Curatella soil porosity. Earthworms were also noted to ‘fertilise’ the soil and de-
americana L., and sirín de pava, Melastomataceae: Miconia argentea compose organic matter (five farmers). One farmer had experimented
(Sw.) DC.) were also among the least favoured tree species for inclu- with applying earthworm casts to fertilise young coffee plants, and be-
sion in cropping fields due to their large, slowly decaying leaves and lieved the casts to be ‘very good abono [fertiliser]’. Four farmers thought
poor quality firewood. that earthworms had no effect on farming activities or soil quality.
Pontoscolex corethrurus is the most abundant earthworm species in
the study area (Fonte et al., 2010). This pantropical species is probably
3.3. Perceptions and values attached to soil macrofauna exotic to the area (Lapied and Lavelle, 2003).
White grubs (a type of scarab beetle larvae; Order: Coleoptera) were
During semi-structured interviews, the 20 farmers named 16 com- named by all farmers, with 16 farmers believing that white grubs had a
monly recognised, distinct soil macrofauna taxa. The average number purely detrimental effect on farming activities. The other four farmers
of soil macrofauna taxa named by all farmers was 6.6± 1.9 taxa thought that white grubs had at least some beneficial quality due to
(range: 3 to 10 taxa per farmer). There were no clear relationships be- their use as indicators of sites of high soil fertility. The main negative ef-
tween the number of soil fauna taxa named by individual farmers and fect of white grubs was that they eat the maize roots (18 farmers). The
total farm size, the area under staple crop cultivation, or the proportion degree of impact of white grubs seems to depend on a number of envi-
of land in fallow (Fig. 4). Fig. 5 presents all taxa mentioned by three or ronmental factors. One farmer mentioned that white grubs are not a
more farmers, together with the perceived effects of these taxa on as- problem in ‘new earth’ that has been sown with maize for the first
pects of the farming system. Fig. 5 illustrates a variety of observations time. Another said that white grubs are more of a problem in hard or
made by farmers about the direct effects of selected soil macrofauna eroded soils, particularly on upper slope areas. Two farmers said that
on crops, timber and soil properties, and indicates that some farmers where the soil is moist and there is a lot of decomposing organic matter,
recognised ecological interactions (such as predator/prey interactions). the white grubs do not have such a bad effect on their crops. None of the
Quantitative sampling of the soil macrofauna indicated that the study farmers interviewed used agrichemicals to control white grubs, and in-
area supports a functionally diverse and relatively abundant soil fauna stead used crop rotation, application of ash and reliance upon natural
(Pauli et al., 2011); no data are available on the proportion of species predators to control numbers, accepting the loss of a certain proportion
that are native or exotic to the study area. of their crop to pest damage.
192 N. Pauli et al. / Geoderma 189–190 (2012) 186–198

Table 2
Indigenous tree species named by 20 farmers during semi-structured interviews as having an effect on farming activities and/or soil quality.

Property Preferred attributes and Less favoured attributes Explanation

example species and example species

Leaf and canopy characteristics

Leaf quality Rapid decomposition. Slow decomposition. Mulch is an important component of the agroecosystem. Leaves that decompose
▪ madreado (7) (Papilionaceae: ▪ chaparro (4) (Dilleniaceae: more rapidly are generally thought to be better for soil quality and crop growth,
Gliricidia sepium (Jacq.) Walp.) Curatella americana L.) and to present less risk of fungal disease. However, some farmers recognise that
▪ carao (5) (Caesalpiniaceae: Cassia ▪ copinol (2) (Caesalpiniacea e: leaves that breakdown more slowly help to retain soil moisture.
grandis L.f.) Hymenaea courbaril L.)
▪ guachipi lín (5) (Papilionaceae: ▪ guayabo (2) (Myrtaceae: Psidium
Diphysa americana (Mill.) M.Sousa) guajava L.)
▪ laurel (5) (Boraginaceae: Cordia ▪ sirín de pava (2)
alliodora (Ruiz & Pav.) Oken) (Melastomataceae: Miconia
argentea Lam.)
▪ guanacaste (4) (Mimosaceae:
Enterolobium cyclocarpum (Jacq.)
Griseb)
Shade quality Dappled shade; tall trunk. Solid shade; short trunk. Shade management is a crucial component of the farming system. Farmers balance
▪ laurel (5) ▪ sirín de pava (2) the benefits of shade (retaining soil moisture for crops) with the costs (reduced
▪ caoba (3) (Meliaceae: Swietenia ▪ chaparro (1) light for crops). Trees with dappled shade are better than those with more solid
humilis Zucc.) shade that block all light. Trees with tall trunks are preferred over short trees,
▪ carao (3) because the shade moves around during the day and therefore blocks less light to
▪ frijolillo (3) (Mimosaceae sp.) individual plants.
▪ guachipilín (3)
▪ guanacaste (2)
Leaf size Small, fine leaves. Large, heavy, thick leaves. Small leaves are less likely to damage crop seedlings if they fall to the ground, and
▪ frijolillo (2) ▪ chaparro (4) tend to decompose faster. When it rains, water droplets running off small leaves do
▪ madreado (2) ▪ jagua (3) (Rubiaceae: Genipa not damage crops as much as streams of water running off larger leaves.
americana L.)
▪ silimera (2) (Caesalpiniaceae: ▪ hoja blanca (2) (Malvaceae:
Poeppigia procera C.Presl.)) Luehea candida (Moç. & Sessé ex
DC.) Mart.)
Timber characteristics
Timber quality Strong, straight; tall, fast-growing. Weak, soft. Timber is important as a building material and as a source of income.
and growth ▪ laurel (5) ▪ guarumo (1) (Cecropiaceae:
habit Cecropia peltata L.)
▪ silimera (4)
▪ guanacaste (2)
Firewood Good quality firewood Poor quality firewood Firewood (leña) is the main method of cooking food in the region. Each species is
▪ carao (1) ▪ chaparro (2) recognised as having particular attributes regarding quantity and quality of smoke,
▪ frijolillo (1) ▪ guarumo (2) and length of burning time (Ferreira et al., 2006).
▪ laurel (1)

Perceived relationship with soil quality and crop growth

Effect on crop Crops grow well around tree⁎. Crops turn yellow; crop growth is Some trees are thought to have a direct negative effect on plant growth. Farmers
growth stunted recognise that the overall effect of trees on soil quality and crop growth is also
▪ carao (4) ▪ laurel (2) related to many of the other variables in this list.
▪ guanacaste (3) ▪ iscanal (1) (Mimosaceae: Acacia
picachensis Brandagee)
▪ madreado (3) ▪ madreado (1)
▪ laurel (2)
▪ leguminous trees (2)
Soil quality Tree prefers to grow in better Tree grows in poor quality soil Some farmers use the presence of certain plants to indicate whether fields and
bioindicator quality soil⁎. fallow areas are likely to be good for cropping. Other plant indicators include
▪ guanacaste (3) ▪ chaparro (3) species of herbs, grasses and ferns (not identified).
▪ madreado (3) ▪ sirín depava (2)
▪ carao (2)
▪ guachipilín (2)
▪ tall trees (general) (2)
Associated Repels insect pests Attracts insect pests Some trees in the region are associated with white grubs or with particularly
invertebrates ▪ madreado (1) ▪ iscanal (2) ferocious ants, both of which are thought to damage crops.
▪ guarumo (1)
▪ laurel (1)

The 20 interviewed farmers named 36 different species of trees as having a particular impact on soil quality or farming activities. Species shown above were named by at least three
farmers. The number in brackets after the local common name of the species refers to the number of farmers who named each species. Where three or more different species were
named by farmers, only the top three ranking species are shown.
Notes
⁎
‘Effect on crop growth’ and ‘soil quality bioindicator’ are listed here as separate qualities of tree species, even though there is the obvious potential for overlap between the two sets of
species. However, there are some trees that are thought of as bioindicators of good quality soil and which are not perceived to have a positive effect on crop growth (e.g. guarumo
(Cecropiaceae: Cecropia peltata L.), and other tree species that are thought to have a positive effect on crops, but which may not be used as a bioindicator. Note that laurel and
madreado were named by different farmers as having both positive and negative effects on crop growth.
 N. Pauli et al. / Geoderma 189–190 (2012) 186–198 193

A) Farm characteristics and tree species mentioned

14 14 14
No. of tree species

No. of tree species

No. of tree species

12 12 12
10 10 10
mentioned

mentioned

mentioned
8 8 8
6 6 6
4 4 4
2 2 2
0 0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Total farm area (ha) Area under maize & beans (ha) Proportion of land fallow

B) Farm characteristics and soil fauna taxa mentioned

12 12 12

No. of soil fauna taxa

No. of soil fauna taxa

No. of soil fauna taxa

10 10 10

mentioned
mentioned

8 mentioned 8 8

6 6 6

4 4 4

2 2 2

0 0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Total farm area (ha) Area under maize & beans (ha) Proportion of land fallow

Fig. 4. Comparison of farm characteristics with the number of tree species and soil fauna taxa mentioned by farmers during semi-structured interviews. Areas and derived values
(proportion of land under fallow) are estimates based on farmer-nominated values. Maize and beans are the staple food crops of the region. Area values given by farmers were in
local units (manzana), which is approximately 0.7 ha in the study area. Tree species were those nominated by farmers as having a particular effect on soil quality, crop growth or
farming activities. Farmers were asked to name soil-dwelling fauna taxa that they had observed during agricultural activities.

Ants (Order: Hymenoptera) were mentioned by 19 farmers, and sites of decomposition) and a high general abundance of all soil
leaf-cutter ants (genus Atta) by 13 farmers. Farmers in the area differ- fauna (indicating uncompacted, porous soil).
entiate between ‘hormigas’ (ants) and ‘zompopos’ (leaf-cutter ants). For each of the named soil macrofauna taxa, each farmer was
Opinions on the effects of ants (i.e., hormigas) were divided. Six asked to describe where these taxa were most likely to be found.
farmers noted that ants attacked and killed crop pests such as cater- Farmers had the most detailed knowledge of the distribution of earth-
pillars and beetle larvae. A small number of farmers had observed worms and white grubs, with all farmers holding opinions about
ants eating crop seed and maize cobs. Many farmers noted that ants where to find these invertebrates. For earthworms, farmers’ re-
were a nuisance because of painful or annoying bites (not illustrated sponses included reference to topography, soil organic matter, tree
in Fig. 5). Perceptions of leaf-cutter ants were mixed. Nine farmers properties, soil moisture and soil texture (Table 3). Thirteen farmers
believed that leaf-cutter ants improved soil quality, through the said that topography influenced earthworm distribution, with greater
mounds of refuse outside the entrance to their nests. A small number abundance in flat areas and valleys, and 10 farmers had noted more
of farmers distributed this material around maize plants and high earthworms in areas with abundant organic matter. Similar associa-
value crops. Leaf-cutter ants are a pest in maize crops, with 11 tions among environmental variables and abundance were given for
farmers noting that leaf-cutter ants damaged maize leaves. white grubs. Farmers recognised that many of the nominated envi-
Termites (Order: Isoptera) were mentioned by 19 of the 20 ronmental influences were strongly related (such as soil moisture
farmers interviewed. Almost all those interviewed thought that ter- and topography, or soil organic matter and soil fertility).
mites had only negative effects on farming activities. Ten farmers Farmers were asked specifically whether they had noticed any re-
said that termites ate maize grains once the plants were doubled lationships between trees and soil macrofauna. Of the 20 farmers
over for drying. Two farmers stated that they did not believe termites interviewed, 14 thought that trees had an influence on soil fauna dis-
had any negative effects on the maize crop. Five farmers believed that tribution. Five farmers said that all tree species attract soil
termites damaged timber and wood in crop plots. Most of these macrofauna, due to the increased shade and soil moisture beneath
farmers noted that the termites attacked only dry wood or diseased trees, and eight farmers said that particular tree species were associ-
plants, and were not found in green wood or healthy trees. No ated with increased soil macrofauna abundance. Three farmers said
farmers indicated that termitaria were used for agricultural purposes. that particular tree species repel soil fauna, either due to competition
In the study area, field observations and sampling (as reported in from fierce ants that nest in those trees, or due to particular proper-
Pauli et al., 2011) suggest that most termite species are subterranean ties of the tree species. One farmer noted that madreado disperses a
or arboreal nesting species, with none producing significant termite strong liquid that repels insects, and that this liquid can be used as
mounds. a natural insecticide.
Earthworms and white grubs were the two soil macrofauna taxa
most commonly cited as bioindicators of soil quality. Fourteen of 3.4. Environmental impact of using fire for land clearing
the 20 farmers interviewed believed that earthworms were associat-
ed with areas of better soil quality, and 13 farmers made the same as- With few exceptions, farmers were very animated when discussing
sociation between white grubs and soil quality. Other taxa mentioned the use of burning as a method of land preparation. Of the 20 farmers
by farmers as indicative of fertile soil included leaf-cutter ants (due to interviewed, 18 had at one time used fire to prepare land for farming.
the refuse from their nests), other species of ants (as indicators of The 18 farmers had stopped using fire on their land between 8 and
194 N. Pauli et al. / Geoderma 189–190 (2012) 186–198

Slug
Timber Caterpillar Armyworm Babosa
Madera Gusano Cojollero (Gastropoda)
(Lepidoptera) (Coleoptera)

Termite Bean
Comegén Frijol
(Isoptera)
Maize (Phaseolus vulgaris)
Maíz
(Zea mays)
Aphid
Pulgón
(Homoptera:
Aphidoidea)
White grub
Gallinaciega,
Earthworm orontoco
Lombriz (Coleoptera:
(Oligochaeta) Scarabaeiodea)

Ant
Key Hormiga
(Hymenoptera) Sorghum
Invertebrate
Maicillo
Component of farming system
(Sorghum landrace)
Improves soil structure, soil Leaf-cutter
porosity, water infiltration ant
Fertilises soil, decomposes Zompopo
organic matter (Hymenoptera:
Attacks crop pests Atta spp.)
Eats crop roots Soil Coffee
Eats crop leaves Tierra, suelo Café
Eats maize cobs (Coffea sp.)
Eats maize stem, collar
Eats seed
Eats timber

Fig. 5. Illustration of farmer perceptions of the direct effects of invertebrate taxa on components of the farming system, gained during semi-structured interviews. Responses were
given by 20 farmers, who were asked to name invertebrate taxa that lived in and on the soil in their farm, and the direct effects that these taxa had on soil quality and farming
activities. Indirect effects, such as the perceived benefit provided by earthworms to crops as a result of their influence on soil structure, are not shown. Taxa are named using com-
mon name in English (in bold), local name in Spanish (italics) and taxonomic classification (in brackets). Plant species names are given as genus and species. Invertebrates classi-
fications are given as orders, with the following exceptions: Gastropoda (class), Oligochaeta (subclass); Scarabaeoidea and Aphidoidea (superfamily); and Atta spp. (genus). The
size of the oval is proportionate to the number of farmers who named that taxon (n = 20: earthworm, white grub; n = 19: ant, termite; n = 13: leaf‐cutter ant; n = 8: slug;
n = 6: aphid, armyworms n = 5: caterpillar. Not illustrated: n = 2: spider (araña, order Araneae), millipedes (centavito, class Diplopoda), grasshopper (chapulín, order Othoptera),
earwig (tijereta, order Dermaptera), tick (ácaro, subclass Acari), stinkbug (chincha, order Hemiptera), sucking bug (picudo, order Hemiptera). The width of the arrow is in proportion
to the number of farmers that identified the interaction. The narrowest line represents n = 1, and the broadest line represents n = 18.

25 years prior to the interview. The minimum timeframe corresponds with wood. One farmer commented that ‘there was no leña (firewood)
to the year (1998) in which burning was banned by the municipality for 10 years…it had to be collected from other places’. Some farmers
of Candelaria, with the imposition of a substantial fine for non- noted that trees were slower to regenerate in secondary forest follow-
compliance. Fifteen farmers ceased burning prior to the introduction ing fire. Many of the interviewed farmers showed a sense of pride that
of the penalty. today their district is very ‘green’ and that people ‘look after’ the trees,
Farmers' descriptions of the effects of fire on four components of the compared with other parts of the country.
agroecosystem (crops, soil, vegetation and soil biota) are illustrated in Following a direct question on the impact of fire on soil fauna, 14 of
Fig. 6. Most of the interviewed farmers practised burning to eliminate the 18 farmers who had used fire to clear land said that the fire killed all
weeds, and/or to give a good harvest. Herbicides and fertilisers were the animals above and below the soil surface, while two farmers said
not widely available when slash-and-burn farming was practised, al- that soil animals survived the fire by burrowing deep into the soil pro-
though they are commonplace today. While many farmers commented file. Two farmers noted that the density of soil animals was lower
that the crop was typically good in the first year after slash-and-burn of than today in parcels that had been burnt, due to the fact that burnt
secondary forest, yields were greatly reduced in the second year. Some land became compacted and dry.
farmers commented that maize could only be grown for 1 year before
leaving the land to fallow for at least 6 years, while others cropped the 4. Discussion
same parcel for 2 years. The most common reason given for the drop-
off in productivity was the loss of topsoil through soil erosion following 4.1. The role of biological indicators and ecological knowledge in farm
rainfall, which left the soil surface hard (‘like cement’) and difficult to management
cultivate (crops are typically sown by hand in the district, with no till-
age), particularly following repeated burning. Other factors included In addition to physical features such as soil colour and texture, the
rapid loss in soil moisture content during periods without rain, and de- interviewed farmers practising Quesungual agroforestry also use bio-
pletion of soil nutrients and soil organic matter. logical features, particularly plant species, as indicators of soil quality
A further negative impact of fire was the dearth of firewood and and potential crop yield. Trees are considered not only as bioindicators,
good quality timber for construction and sale, as trees and shrubs but also as integral components of the farming system whose presence
were damaged or killed by fire. All cooking in the district is done on can improve conditions for crop growth, as well as provide numerous
hornillas or open-air ovens with a metal hotplate, which are fuelled additional economic and ecological benefits. Studies from other areas
 N. Pauli et al. / Geoderma 189–190 (2012) 186–198 195

Table 3
Environmental influences on the distribution of earthworms identified by farmers in semi-structured interviews.

Environmental influence More favourable Less favourable condition No. of farmers

condition

Topography Flat areas; valleys Steep slopes; hilltops 13

Organic material Abundant decomposing mulch and/or manure Sparse decomposing mulch and/or manure 10
Trees and shade Under trees; near guarumo, guanacaste, mango trees; shady areas Away from trees; sunny areas 8
Soil moisture Humid soil Dry soil 8
Soil type, texture ‘Soft’ soil; tierra negra soil Compacted soil; talpetate 6
Soil fertility status Fertile areas (for cropping) Less fertile areas 5
Crop type Maize; coffee Pasture 4
Soil depth Deep topsoil Shallow topsoil 2

The categories in the table were extracted from farmers' replies to an open-ended question about where earthworms were most likely to be found within their farm. ‘More
favourable condition’ refers to higher likelihood that earthworms will be found in a particular area than in areas that represent the ‘less favourable condition’. Farmers recognised
that many of the environmental influences were strongly related and were not independent (such as soil moisture and topography).
Twenty farmers were interviewed; ‘No. of farmers’ refers to the number of people who identified each environmental influence. Most farmers interviewed nominated more than
one environmental variable as an influence on the distribution of earthworms.
Scientific names for tree species named in Spanish are as follows: guarumo = Cecropia peltata L. (Cecropiaceae); guanacaste = Enterolobium cyclocarpum (Jacq.) Griseb
(Mimosaceae); mango = Mangifera indica L. (Anacardiaceae).
Tierra negra (‘black soil’) is a local soil type that is widely considered the best soil type for maize; talpetate is a local soil description that refers to a shallow hardpan layer, widely
considered to be of lower soil quality for growing maize than tierra negra. Refer to Table 1 for further detail.

of rural, hillside Honduras have also emphasised the importance at- steep slopes. Farmers in the study area typically do not cultivate or
tached to trees by farmers (Barrance et al., 2003; Brady, 2001; Gordon plant saplings, but instead rely on ‘selective’ natural regeneration:
et al., 2003). This may be partly due to the historic shortage of timber some species are allowed to grow unimpeded, whilst other seedlings
and firewood in the zone during the time of slash-and-burn farming, and saplings are removed at an early stage of growth. The question of
mentioned by many farmers during interviews. It may also be due to why farmers favour regeneration over planting, and whether it is a de-
cultural preferences for trees and well-vegetated landscapes inherited liberate means of mimicking ecological processes and/or a means of re-
from Lenca forebears (Brady, 2001), or due to the influence of agricul- ducing labour costs, is worthy of further research.
tural extension work carried out in the district in the last two decades. The results of the study suggest that the farmers recognised the
Soil macrofauna, particularly earthworms and scarab beetle larvae, tradeoffs inherent in a biodiverse agroforestry system, and the impor-
were also relatively important as indicators of soil quality for the tance of conserving ecological processes and interactions. Some farmers
farmers interviewed, echoing findings from other tropical areas explicitly acknowledged that removal of particular suites of plants or
(Ericksen and Ardon, 2003; Morales and Perfecto, 2000; Murage et al., animals could have unforeseen effects, providing a parallel with ‘scien-
2000). Earthworms and scarab beetle larvae are large in size compared tific’ ecological concepts. Biting ants might be a nuisance to farmers, but
with other soil fauna, so it could be argued that farmers have developed they also helped to control pests. Leaf-cutter ants could inflict consider-
greater awareness of these animals simply because of their relatively able damage to individual plants, but their activities could increase soil
high visibility. However, much less visible ants and termites and their organic matter in particular areas of the farm. The large, tough leaves of
ecological roles in the agroecosystem were also noted by almost all some plants might take a long time to decompose, but they also provide
farmers interviewed. Earthworms and scarab beetle larvae are rarely long-lasting soil cover that helps retain soil moisture. Similar observa-
observed at the soil surface, and are most often encountered by digging. tions among smallholder farmers have been reported from Guatemala
We propose that farmers have developed more detailed knowledge of (Morales and Perfecto, 2000), Honduras (Bentley and Rodríguez,
earthworms and scarab larvae not just because of their size, but because 2001), Nepal (Gurung, 2003) and Cameroon (Birang et al., 2003),
of their association with agricultural activities and aspects of soil quali- among many other places.
ty. Other studies have also found that farmers tend to view soil Farmers' responses to the impact of fire as a method of land prep-
macrofauna from a similarly utilitarian point of view, with most de- aration indicated complex understanding of the influence of fire on
tailed knowledge held for ‘helpful’ taxa and ‘harmful’ taxa (Sillitoe, soils, vegetation, crops and soil biota, as well as the cumulative im-
1995; Morales and Perfecto, 2000; Bentley and Rodríguez, 2001). pacts of fire over time. Many farmers’ responses to the effect of fire
None of the interviewed farmers reported potentially detrimental ef- on soils, vegetation and crop yield were markedly similar. Important-
fects of earthworms on soil structure, such as those reported by Barros ly, it is unclear the extent to which the farmers’ understanding of the
et al. (2004) for high densities of Pontoscolex corethrurus in abandoned environmental impacts of fire has come from outside sources, and
pastures. how much has been learnt from direct experience. The fact that
Farmer preferences for tree species were often at odds with the many of the interviewed farmers ceased burning voluntarily well be-
abundance of these species in farmed plots. The number of ‘preferred’ fore the enforcement of a regulation prohibiting burning may indicate
tree species (36 species named by 20 farmers) was around half of the that they recognised that slash-and-burn farming was no longer sus-
total number of species commonly found within agroforestry plots. Fur- tainable within the district, and were willing to trial new techniques
ther, some of the most commonly named preferred species were typi- without the need for punitive measures.
cally rare (b1% of total individuals) in surveyed agroforestry plots (e.g. The ‘knowledge-practice-belief’ (or ‘kosmos-corpus-praxis’) com-
carao, madreado, guanacaste), while some of the least preferred species plex as a way of framing local knowledge (Barrera-Bassols and
were relatively abundant (>5% of all individuals) (e.g. chaparro, sirín de Toledo, 2005; Berkes, 1999) is pertinent to the study area, given
pava) (Pauli, 2008). A study of overstorey species in shade coffee sys- that a substantial body of ecological knowledge is required to suc-
tems in Chiapas, Mexico found similar results; the authors concluded cessfully manage the new farming system. Many of the interviewed
that farmers include less valuable species due to their contribution to farmers held relatively detailed knowledge on tree properties and
ecosystem function and their role in ecological succession (Soto-Pinto their associated relevance to soil quality, through decomposition, nu-
et al., 2007). The interviewed farmers from the Candelaria region may trient cycling and reduction of soil erosion. However, knowledge of
also use the same reasoning, particularly given the importance of soil macrofauna species was much more variable, with some farmers
rapid regeneration by pioneering species to reduce soil erosion from having made detailed observations, and a small number using this
196 N. Pauli et al. / Geoderma 189–190 (2012) 186–198

Effects on native Effects on crops

After second year
vegetation of cropping
No harvest or very
poor harvest in
Second year third year
Slower or
of cropping
Firewood had to be
reduced collected from Poor harvest in
regeneration elsewhere second year
of trees First year
of cropping Sometimes
Firewood Good second year
scarce harvest in harvest
first year sufficient
Good quality timber Immediately
scarce or absent - trees after slash and burn Had to wait six
damaged or dead of secondary forest Fertiliser lost to eight years to
to erosion harvest again
Many trees died Slash
or were damaged converted to
nutrients for Crops dried
Weedy grass
crops out without
appears, hard
Weeds killed rain
to eradicate
All slashed
vegetation burnt
Soil animals Soil organic
burrowed to Soil lost humidity,
matter burnt
survive fire dried out rapidly

No soil cover
Soil fertility Soil organic
Some soil fauna Many soil matter lost,
reappeared after Subsoil reduced
animals killed depleted
burrowing deep by fire heating, tree
roots burnt
Soil eroded,
washed away
Earth became
with the rain
Soil fauna tired, stopped
numbers producing
reduced, fewer Soil structure
Reduced soil earthworms affected by lack
fauna, as soil very Soil surface
of soil fauna
hard and dry very hard, very
difficult to
work

Effects on soil biota Effects on soil

Fig. 6. Schematic illustration of farmers' perceptions of the short- to medium-term consequences of slash-and-burn agriculture. The graphic displays a summary of 18 farmers' re-
sponses to open‐ended interview questions on the effects of using fire to prepare land for farming. Responses in bold were articulated by five or more farmers. Responses were
categorised into agroecosystem components of crops, soil, vegetation and soil biota by the authors. Concentric circles indicate approximate time periods at which impacts are visible
(immediate, first year of cropping, second year of cropping, and after second year of cropping), based on farmer responses.

knowledge to guide management practices at a fine scale. In contrast, quality. These linkages have been well-documented in the scientific lit-
knowledge of tree species has been incorporated into management erature, but are difficult to observe in the field, particularly given that
practices across the study region. Strong community support for pen- soil is an opaque medium. Further, many of the impacts of repeated
alties for burning and the expressions of pride shown by some resi- burning nominated by farmers correspond with empirical data. Given
dents in the greenness of the Candelaria region may indicate that that farmers in this region have received extension advice for many
the new farming system is now seen as integral to the way of life in years (noting that all interviewed farmers were known personally by
the region, which could be seen as analogous to the ‘belief’ aspect of extension workers), it is likely that farmers’ knowledge builds on both
local ecological knowledge (Berkes et al., 2000). In future research, indigenous and external sources of experience. In the context of com-
it would be interesting to note whether community support for the munity volunteers for restoration programmes, Reid et al. (2011) note
farming system is underlain by cultural or historical preferences for that scientific information received by non-scientists is embraced and
forested landscapes, or is based more strongly on the results seen in put to practical use only after it has been tested and made locally mean-
the last two decades in terms of crop yields, food security, and other ingful. In further research, it would be valuable to delve further into the
social, economic and environmental factors. issues of how local farmers have made extension advice locally mean-
ingful, and which kinds of information have not translated well to the
4.2. Local knowledge and transferable knowledge local context.
Based on the relatively rapid transformation of a social-ecological
The ‘Quesungual Slash-and-Mulch-Agroforestry-System’ (QSMAS) landscape characterised by food insecurity and environmental degrada-
is based on indigenous farming methods, augmented with input from tion into one where reports indicated improved crop yield, vegetation
external actors such as extension workers from FAO. As such, it provides cover and social well-being, QSMAS techniques have been touted as po-
a good example of hybrid knowledge: the synthesis of traditional and tentially transferrable to regions in other countries with similar physio-
technical knowledge. Farmers interviewed for this research understood graphic and socioeconomic characteristics (Welchez et al., 2008).
many of the linkages between soil fauna activity, soil structure, and soil Successful shrub and tree management is a key part of the system,
 N. Pauli et al. / Geoderma 189–190 (2012) 186–198 197

requiring farmers to have a substantial knowledge base of the charac- links to local socio-economic systems, and cultural beliefs and prac-
teristics of each species in the system. Species composition will vary be- tices. There is significant potential for both farmers and researchers
tween potentially suitable locations (such as other regions of Central to deepen their understanding of agroecosystem function by
and South America, Sub-Saharan Africa and upland southeast Asia), as utilising both frames of reference. This could include in-depth con-
will farmer preferences for particular plant traits. Despite this variation, sultation with farmers prior to commencing biophysical research,
it may be possible to use attributes related to functional characteristics to understand how farmers view short-term and long-term changes
of trees as a starting point to identify the best local species to incorpo- in the system, and to identify questions held by farmers on relation-
rate within a QSMAS-like agroforestry system in other geographic ships among system components. The delivery of technical informa-
areas. Alternatively, discussing plant trait preferences with farmers in tion collected by researchers could then be targeted to aspects of
other areas and combining this with scientific knowledge of local spe- agroecosystem function that are of greatest concern to farmers.
cies could be useful in identifying the most appropriate species for
local versions of the agroforestry system.
4.4. Conclusions
4.3. Implications for further research
The combination of farmers' shared experiences and information
imparted from external sources has led to the development of a sub-
The interviewed farmers from the Candelaria region use biological
stantial body of local ecological knowledge regarding the attributes
indicators as part of a suite of methods used to assess soil quality, crop
and management of biological resources (particularly trees and shrubs)
productivity and other economic values of farmed land. Although the
within the agricultural system. For the 20 farmers interviewed, knowl-
number of farmers interviewed was relatively small, the interview sub-
edge of the relationships between soil quality and biological processes
jects represented a range of smallholdings in the district, and there was
tended to be more detailed for above-ground biodiversity than for
a consistently detailed level of knowledge expressed by farmers partic-
below-ground biodiversity; a similar ‘bias’ towards more complete
ularly in relation to soil types and preferred tree species. However,
knowledge of above-ground species than below-ground species is
questions remain as to how or whether farmers use their knowledge
seen in the scientific literature detailing estimates of the number of
of biological indicators of soil health at a fine scale to modify manage-
known and undescribed terrestrial species (Barrios, 2007; Mora et al.,
ment practices. Do farmers in this region vary the application rate of fer-
2011). The interviewed farmers have clearly identified key functional
tiliser within cropped areas, based on tree species composition or
attributes of plant species and their roles in the farming system, and
abundance of earthworms? If so, what evidence is there to suggest
use biological information as indicators of soil quality and potential
that these indicators accurately reflect potential crop yield? Is it possible
crop growth. However, the extent to which farmers modify within-
to develop and trial a local set of biological indicators of soil quality
plot crop management according to information from bioindicators re-
based on collective knowledge, and would farmers find this useful for
mains a question for further research.
improving farm management?
The transformation of the landscape around Candelaria has occurred
A second set of questions involves the extent to which farmers ac-
in a relatively short period of time, raising the prospect that similar
tively use knowledge of ecological processes in managing biodiversity
changes could be implemented in regions facing similar challenges.
within farms. Given that some tree species are deemed more valuable
Local ecological knowledge is an important part of the system, making
to farming operations than others, does species composition reflect
it a challenge to ‘transfer’ the system to other geographic areas. Some
farmer preferences at the landscape scale? If not, why do farmers
principles could be transferred, such as identifying potentially suitable
choose not to actively manage species composition to select for the
overstorey species based on preferred plant attributes. Farmers’ obser-
most economically valuable tree species? Are farmers interested in cul-
vations on the effects of repeated fire on ecological processes could
tivating and planting valuable tree species within farmed plots, or does
also be used as a framework for discussion with farmers in other
this run counter to cultural practices and beliefs, or entail a significant
areas. The success of the Quesungual Slash-and-Mulch Agroforestry
labour investment? While many farmers acknowledged the beneficial
System may be partially attributed to a synthesis of local and ‘expert’
influence of earthworms and other soil fauna on soil structure, there
knowledge on best farming practices. Further research on the condi-
was scarce mention of management practices aimed at deliberately in-
tions that supported and encouraged the hybridisation of knowledge
creasing the abundance of earthworms within farms. Likewise, very few
and transfer of these practices by farmer networks throughout the dis-
farmers actively controlled serious pest taxa such as white grub larvae.
trict would make a valuable contribution to agricultural development
Do these factors reflect farmers' attitudes towards mimicking ecological
research and practice.
processes, an ambivalence towards manipulating invertebrate num-
bers, or lack of information and resources? Increasing our understand-
ing of these issues would aid in the management of relatively novel Acknowledgements
biodiverse agroforestry systems in the study area and elsewhere.
The research was part of a broader programme of research on the Special thanks are due to the farmers of the Candelaria district
underlying reasons for the widespread, successful adoption of inno- for participating in the study, sharing their knowledge, and invit-
vative agricultural practices in the study area. Introduction of new ing us into their homes. The authors are grateful to: Edwin Gar-
techniques to smallholder growers has been trialled in countless lo- cía, Jesús Leonel Martínez, Daniel Vásquez and Odvin Ayala for
calities, but there are often significant social, cultural, economic and their contributions to the interviews and fieldwork in Candelaria;
technical barriers to the adoption of these innovations (Douthwaite Marco Tulio Trejo for advice and assistance with workshops on
and Keatinge, 2001; Fujisaka, 1994; Shiferaw et al., 2009). Biophys- local knowledge; Juan Guillermo Cobo for assistance with pilot in-
ical research in the study area has focussed on identifying how com- terviews; José María Bonilla for assistance during the workshop;
ponents of the agroecosystem function, and understanding the links Joshua Ramisch and the late Sam Fujisaka for constructive com-
between components. Interview results show that growers may ments on interview questions; Zoila Avila for identification of
take a different approach, managing their farm as a whole system. plant species; and the alcaldía of Candelaria for the use of their
For example, farmers' observations on links between components facilities; and two anonymous reviewers for constructive com-
of the agroecosystem of interest to researchers (e.g., links between ments on an earlier version of this manuscript. Financial support
above- and below-ground biodiversity) were sometimes limited in was provided by Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical
depth, but their explanations of how the system functioned as a (CIAT), the School of Earth and Environment at the University of
whole under the influence of fire were rich in detail, with clear Western Australia, and an Australian Postgraduate Award to the
198 N. Pauli et al. / Geoderma 189–190 (2012) 186–198

first author. CIAT Honduras and FAO Honduras provided valuable Platform for Agrobiodiversity Research. Outcomes of an Expert Workshop, 14-16
2010, Rome, Italy.
logistical support in the field. Gordon, J., Hawthorne, W., Sandoval, G., Barrance, A., 2003. Trees and farming in the
dry zone of southern Honduras II: the potential for tree diversity conservation.
References Agroforestry Systems 59, 107–117.
Gurung, A.B., 2003. Insects - a mistake in God's creation? Tharu farmers' perception
Altieri, M.A., 1995. Traditional Agriculture. In: Altieri, M.A. (Ed.), Agroecology: The and knowledge of insects: a case study of Gobardiha Village Development
Science of Sustainable Agriculture. Westview Press, Boulder, pp. 107–145. Committee: Dang-Deukhuri, Nepal. Agriculture and Human Values 20, 337–370.
Altieri, M.A., 1999. The ecological role of biodiversity in agroecosystems. Agriculture, Hellin, J., Welchez, L.A., Cherrett, I., 1999. The Quezungual System: an indigenous
Ecosystems and Environment 74, 19–31. agroforestry system from Western Honduras. Agroforestry Systems 46, 229–237.
Ayarza, M., Welchez, L., Navarro, E., Flores, G., 2005. Sistema Agroforestal Quesungual: Jones, C.G., Lawton, J.H., Shachak, M., 1994. Organisms as ecosystem engineers.
Factores que influyeron en su adopción por los pequeños productores de ladera de Oikos 69, 373–386.
la región de Lempira Sur de Honduras. Boletín Técnico No 1 MIS (Consorcio para el Joshi, L., Shrestha, P.K., Moss, C., Sinclair, F.L., 2004. Locally derived knowledge of soil
manejo integrado de los suelos fragiles de Centroamérica), Tegucigalpa. fertility and its emerging role in integrated natural resource management. In:
Ayarza, M., Huber-Sannwald, E., Herrick, J.E., Reynolds, J.F., Garcia-Barrios, L., Welchez, van Noordwijk, M., Cadisch, G., Ong, C. (Eds.), Below-Ground Interactions in
L.A., Lentes, P., Pavon, J., Morales, J., Alvarado, A., Pinedo, M., Baquera, N., Zelaya, S., Tropical Agroecosystems. CABI Publishing, Oxford, pp. 17–39.
Pineda, R., Amezquita, E., Trejo, M., 2010. Changing human-ecological relationships Lavelle, P., Bignell, D., Lepage, M., Walters, V., Roger, P., Ineson, P., Heal, O., Dhillion, S.,
and drivers using the Quesungual agroforestry system in western Honduras. Re- 1997. Soil function in a changing world: the role of invertebrate ecosystem
newable Agriculture and Food Systems 25, 219–227. engineers. European Journal of Soil Biology 33, 159–193.
Barrance, A., Flores, L., Padilla, E., Gordon, J., Schreckenberg, K., 2003. Trees and farming Mairura, F.S., Mugendi, D.N., Mwanke, J.I., Ramisch, J.J., Mbugua, P.K., Chianu, J.N., 2007.
in the dry zone of Honduras I: Campesino tree husbandry practices. Agroforestry Integrating scientific and farmers' evaluation of soil quality indicators in Central
Systems 59, 97–106. Kenya. Geoderma 139, 134–143.
Barrera-Bassols, N., Toledo, V., 2005. Ethnoecology of the Yucatec Maya: symbolism, knowl- Mora, C., Tittensor, P., Adl, S., Simpson, A.G.B., Worm, B., 2011. How many species are
edge and management of natural resources. Journal of Latin American Geography 4, there on Earth and in the ocean? PLoS Biology 9, e1001127.
9–41. Morales, H., Perfecto, I., 2000. Traditional knowledge and pest management in the
Barrera-Bassols, N., Zinck, J., 2003. Ethnopedology: a worldwide view on the soil Guatemalan highlands. Agriculture and Human Values 17, 49–63.
knowledge of local people. Geoderma 111, 171–195. Murage, E.W., Karanja, N.K., Smithson, P.C., Woomer, P.L., 2000. Diagnostic indicators of
Barrera-Bassols, N., Zinck, J.A., van Ranst, E., 2009. Participatory soil survey: expe- soil quality in productive and non-productive smallholders' fields of Kenya's Central
rience in working with a Mesoamerican indigenous community. Soil Use and Highlands. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 79, 1–8.
Management 25, 43–56. Nguyen Dai Trung, Verdoodt, A., Dusar, M., Van, Tran Tan, Van Ranst, E., 2008.
Barrios, E., 2007. Soil biota, ecosystem services and land productivity. Ecological Evaluating ethnopedological knowledge systems for classifying soil quality: a
Economics 64, 269–285. case study in Bo Hamlet with Muong People of Northern Vietnam. Geographical
Barrios, E., Trejo, M., 2003. Implications of local soil knowledge for integrated soil Research 46, 27–38.
management in Latin America. Geoderma 111, 217–231. Oberthür, T., Barrios, E., Cook, S., Usma, H., Escobar, G., 2004. Increasing the relevance of
Barrios, E., Bekunda, M., Delve, R., Esilaba, A., Mowo, J., 2001. Identifying and classifying scientific information in complex hillside environments through understanding of
local indicators of soil quality. Eastern Africa version. Methodologies for decision local soil management and agronomic uncertainty. Soil Use and Management 20,
making in natural resource management. CIAT-SWNM-TSBF-AHI. 212 pp. 23–31.
Barrios, E., Delve, R., Bekunda, M., Mowo, J., Agunda, J., Ramisch, J., Trejo, M., Thomas, R., Pauli, N., 2008. Environmental influences on the spatial and temporal distribution of
2006. Indicators of soil quality: a South–South development of a methodological soil macrofauna in a smallholder agriforestry system of western Honduras. PhD
guide for linking local and technical knowledge. Geoderma 135, 248–259. thesis, University of Western Australia, Perth, 338 pp.
Barros, E., Grimaldi, M., Sarrazin, M., Chauvel, A., Mitha, D., Desjardins, T., Lavelle, P., Pauli, N., Barrios, E., Conacher, A.J., Oberthür, T., 2011. Soil macrofauna in agricultural
2004. Soil physical degradation and changes in macrofaunal communities in Cen- landscapes dominated by the Quesungual Slash-and-Mulch Agroforestry System,
tral Amazon. Applied Soil Ecology 26, 157–168. western Honduras. Applied Soil Ecology 47, 119–132.
Bentley, J.W., Rodríguez, G., 2001. Honduran folk entomology. Current Anthropology Pawluk, R.R., Sandor, J.A., Tabor, J.A., 1992. The role of indigenous soil knowledge in
42, 285–301. agricultural development. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 47, 298–302.
Berkes, F., 1999. Sacred Ecology: Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Resource Quansah, C., Dreschel, P., Yirenkyi, B., Asante-Mensah, S., 2001. Farmers' perceptions
Management. Taylor and Francis, Philadelphia and London, 219 pp. and management of soil organic matter—a case study from West Africa. Nutrient
Berkes, F., Colding, J., Folke, C., 2000. Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as Cycling in Agroecosystems 61, 205–213.
adaptive management. Ecological Applications 10, 1251–1262. Reid, K.A., Williams, K.J.H., Paine, M.S., 2011. Hybrid knowledge: place, practice and
Birang, M., Hauser, S., Amougou, D.L., 2003. Farmers' perception of the effects of knowing in a volunteer ecological restoration project. Ecology and Society 16, 19.
earthworms on soil fertility and crop performance in southern Cameroon. Ruben, R., Clercx, L., 2003. Rural finance, poverty alleviation and sustainable land use:
Pedobiologia 47, 819–824. the role of credit for the adoption of agroforestry systems in Occidental Honduras.
Birmingham, D.M., 2003. Local knowledge of soils: the case of contrast in Côte Journal of Microfinance 5, 1–24.
d'Ivoire. Geoderma 111, 481–502. Saïdou, A., Kossou, D., Brussaard, L., Richards, P., Kuyper, T.W., 2008. Earthworm
Black, H., Okwakol, M., 1997. Agricultural intensification, soil biodiversity and activities in cassava and egusi melon fields in the transitional zone of Benin:
agroecosystem function in the tropics: the role of termites. Applied Soil linking farmers' perceptions with field studies. Wageningen Journal of Life
Ecology 6, 37–53. Sciences 56, 123–135.
Brady, S., 2001. The function of Guachipilin, Diphysa robinioides, in the Lenca landscape. Shiferaw, B.A., Okello, J., Reddy, R.V., 2009. Adoption and adaptation of natural resource
Journal of Ethnobiology 21, 39–52. management innovations in smallholder agriculture: reflections on key lessons
Brady, S., 2009. Revisiting a Honduran landscape described by Robert West: An and best practices. Environment, Development and Sustainability 11, 601–619.
experiment in repeat geography. Journal of Latin American Geography 8, 7–27. Sillitoe, P., 1995. Ethnoscientific observations on entomology and mycology in the
Castro, A., River, M., Ferreira, O., Pavón, J., García, E., Amézquita, E., Ayarza, M., Barrios, southern highlands of Papua New Guinea. Science in New Guinea 21, 3–26.
E., Rondón, M., Pauli, N., Baltodaon, M.E., Mendoz, B., Welches, Baltodano, B., Soto-Pinto, L., Villalvazo-López, V., Jímenez-Ferrer, G., Ramírez-Marcial, N., Montoya, G.,
Wélchez, L.A., Rao, I.M., 2009. Quesungual slash and mulch agroforestry system Sinclair, F.L., 2007. The role of local knowledge in determining shade composition of
(QSMAS): Improving crop water productivity, food security and resource quality multistrata coffee systems in Chiapas, Mexico. Biodiversity and Conservation 16,
in the sub-humid tropics. Project completion report (PN15), Challenge Program 419–436.
on Water and Food. http://www.waterandfood.org/page/PN15 [Accessed 5 Stein, A., Ettema, C.H., 2003. An overview of spatial sampling procedures and experimental
August 2011]. design of spatial studies for ecosystem comparisons. Agriculture, Ecosystems and
Douthwaite, B., Keatinge, J.D.H., 2001. Why promising technologies fail: the neglected Environment 94, 31–47.
role of user innovation during adoption. Research Policy 30, 819–836. Talawar, S., Rhoades, R., 1998. Scientific and local classification and management of
Ericksen, P.J., Ardon, M., 2003. Similarities and differences between farmer and soils. Agriculture and Human Values 15, 3–14.
scientist views on soil quality issues in central Honduras. Geoderma 111, 233–248. Welchez, L.A., Ayarza, M., Amezquita, E., Barrios, E., Rondon, M., Castro, A., Rivera, M.,
Ferreira, O., Rondón, M., Hurtado, M.P., 2006. Firewood use in rural and urban Pavon, J., Ferreira, O., Valladares, D., Sanchez, N., Rao, I.M., 2008. No-burn agricul-
communities in Candelaria, Lempira, Honduras. Tropical Soil Biology and Fertility tural zones in Honduran hillsides: better harvests, air quality, and water availabil-
Institute of CIAT Annual Report 2006, 147–149. ity by way of improved land management. Sustainable Land Management
Fonte, S.J., Barrios, E., Six, J., 2010. Earthworms, soil fertility and aggregate-associated Sourcebook. The World Bank, Agriculture and Rural Development, Washington,
soil organic matter dynamics in the Quesungual agroforestry system. Geoderma DC, pp. 78–82.
155, 320–328. WinklerPrins, A.M., Barrera-Bassols, N., 2004. Latin American ethnopedology: a vision
Fujisaka, S., 1994. Learning from six reasons why farmers do not adopt innovations of its past, present and future. Agriculture and Human Values 21, 139–156.
intended to improve sustainability of upland agriculture. Agricultural Systems WinklerPrins, A.M., Barrios, E., 2007. Ethnopedology along the Amazon and Orinoco
46, 409–425. Rivers: a convergence of knowledge and practice. Revista Geográfica 142, 111–129.
Galluzzi, G., van Duijvendijk, C., Collette, L., Azzu, N., Hodgkin, T., 2010. Biodiversity for
Food and Agriculture: Contributing to food security and sustainability in a
changing world. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations and the