<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">OJF</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Open Journal of Forestry</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2163-0429</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ojf.2024.142010</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">OJF-132857</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Earth&amp;Environmental Sciences</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Floristic Composition, Population Structure, and Recruitment Status of Plant Species: A Case Study of Farmer-Managed Natural Regeneration Practices in Arid and Semi-Arid Lands in Kenya
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Simon</surname><given-names>Kosgei Choge</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Samson</surname><given-names>Okoth Ojunga</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Dub</surname><given-names>Isacko Dokata</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>William</surname><given-names>Kimen Chepkirui</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Justus</surname><given-names>Musau</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff4"><sup>4</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Faith</surname><given-names>Milkah Muniale</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff4"><sup>4</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Ivan</surname><given-names>Kiplagat Kiptui</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff4"><sup>4</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff3"><addr-line>Kenya Forestry Research Institute-Rift Valley Eco-Region Research Program, Londiani, Kenya</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>Kenya Forestry Research Institute-Lake Victoria Eco-Region Research Program, Kisumu, Kenya</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff4"><addr-line>CRIFSUP Project, World Vision Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Kenya Forestry Research Institute-Rift Valley Eco-Region Research Program, Marigat, Kenya</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>26</day><month>04</month><year>2024</year></pub-date><volume>14</volume><issue>02</issue><fpage>141</fpage><lpage>154</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>18,</day>	<month>January</month>	<year>2024</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>27,</day>	<month>April</month>	<year>2024</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>30,</day>	<month>April</month>	<year>2024</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial International License (CC BY-NC).http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  The technique of Farmer Managed Natural Regeneration (FMNR) is being promoted as a cost-effective approach for restoring degraded arable dry lands. Its effectiveness has been observed in many countries across the globe, where it is a traditional practice, and is now being encouraged across the African continent. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of FMNR on floristic Composition, Vegetation Structure, and Regeneration Status of woody Plant Species in the severely degraded Central Rift, Kenya. The study systematically assessed how FMNR influenced species composition, vegetation structure and regeneration status from two sample plots involved in FMNR practices. Transect lines and quadrats methods were utilized to collect data, specifically regarding the floristic composition, vegetation structure, and regeneration status of woody plant species. Quadrats and sub-quadrats of varying sizes (10 m by 10 m, 5 m by 5 m, and 1 m by 1 m) were nested along the transect lines for data collection. Furthermore, measurements of tree growth and development, including root collar diameter, diameter at breast height (D&lt;sub&gt;130&lt;/sub&gt;) and heights within the study blocks, were taken. The data was then analyzed using R-software. Results showed a marked progressive increase in numbers of trees, saplings, seedlings, shrubs and herbs in all FMNR sites and reductions in all non-FMNR sites. The study advocates for widespread promotion of the FMNR practice both as an environmental conservation and restoration strategy.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Farmer Managed Natural Regeneration</kwd><kwd> FMNR</kwd><kwd> Floristic Composition</kwd><kwd> Vegetation Structure</kwd><kwd> Regeneration</kwd><kwd> Biodiversity</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Farmer Managed Natural Regeneration (hereafter, “FMNR”) is a series of techniques that farmers employ to stimulate the growth of trees on agricultural land  (Obwocha et al., 2022) . FMNR involves selecting and protecting the strongest stems regrown from live stumps of felled trees, pruning off all other stems, and pollarding the chosen stems to grow into straight trunks  (Chomba et al., 2020;   Vergara, 1985) . Globally, 1.9 billion hectares of land are experiencing significant levels of land degradation  (Deutz et al., 2020;   Tilahun et al., 2018)  which is affecting an estimated 3.2 billion people  (Fath &amp; Fiscus, 2022) . In Africa it has been established that natural regeneration is greatly influenced by factors such as human activities  (Ojunga et al., 2019) , land degradation, and dispersal limitation  (Alan&#237;s-Rodr&#237;guez et al., 2023;   Poorter et al., 2021;   Lohbeck et al., 2020) . In Kenya, many parts of the country are vulnerable to degradation due to factors such as climate change, deforestation, overgrazing and soil erosion  (Watene et al., 2021) , the loss of fertile and productive land has a direct impact on the lives and livelihoods of millions of people who rely heavily on land  (Khalwale et al., 2018) , soils, vegetation, woodlands and forests to survive and generate income  (Watene et al., 2021;   Abdel Rahman, 2023) . Degradation affects the majority of the rural population, with repercussions such as water scarcity, food insecurity, and limited access to social services such as healthcare and education  (Gomiero, 2016;   Ngcamu &amp; Chari, 2020) . As such, there is mounting concern about the negative effects of persistent degradation. Among the notable impacts of degradation are loss of mother trees, limited or no recruitment of young plants due to deforestation, and increased disturbances—both on farms and in forests.</p><p>The increased degradation worldwide has led numerous people to participate in activities to restore degraded lands and ecosystems  (Abasse &amp; Adam, 2020) . In Africa, FMNR has been utilized to revive deteriorated agricultural lands, particularly in dryland areas  (Chomba et al., 2020) . Studies in the continent have indicated that FMNR yields various advantages such as enhanced agricultural output due to improved soil fertility  (Binam et al., 2017) , increased availability of feed for livestock, greater income for farmers, and other ecological benefits  (Chomba et al., 2020) . Therefore, establishing trees through FMNR is often considered a key approach to restoration.</p><p>Moreover, FMNR is highly encouraged to promote the conservation of biodiversity within agricultural landscapes  (Okumu et al., 2022;   Garrity &amp; Bayala, 2019) . Previous findings indicate that FMNR complements in-situ conservation efforts, connecting isolated wild habitats, serving as intermediary pathways between networks of protected areas, and protecting the soil and biodiversity  (Zinngrebe et al., 2020) . Furthermore, managed natural regeneration can contribute significantly to achieving global and national restoration goals, particularly in dryland areas. Nevertheless, according to a recent comprehensive study, there are noteworthy deficiencies in the evidence supporting FMNR, such as the inadequate comprehension of local circumstances on which its expansion has been predicated  (Kandel et al., 2022) . Thus, it is of utmost importance to urgently prioritize the avoidance, reduction, and reversal of land degradation, as well as the restoration of degraded land. This is necessary to safeguard the biodiversity and ecosystem services that are essential for life on our planet. Therefore, this study aims to assess the Floristic Composition, Vegetation Structure, and Regeneration Status of woody Plant Species of FMNR Plots, in Central Rift, Kenya.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Methodology</title><sec id="s2_1"><title>2.1. Study Area</title><p>The FMNR study plots were selected in two separate farms each measuring approximately 2 acres in Mogotio (Baringo County) and Ngoswet within the lower part of Kerio Valley (Elgeyo Marakwet County) as indicated in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>. Biodiversity assessments were carried at six-month intervals for a period of two years. The sites are farmlands situated in transition zones between high-potential and low-potential areas. The areas have hot and wet climates characterized by a mean temperature of 25˚C and an annual precipitation of 1500 - 2000 mm with a dry season between December and March. The farmland vegetation comprises a disturbed woodland with indigenous species in different stages of succession. The dominant but sparse woody indigenous plant species include Vachellia</p><p>tortilis, Balanites aegyptiaca and Acacia seyal while common shrubs are Lantana camara, Lippia japonica and Indigofera errecta. The herbaceous vegetation was dominated by Hypoestes species and a wide range of grass species such as Digitaria scalarum, D. horizontalis, Cyperus rotundus and Cynodon dactylon. The farmlands support the community and family members primarily for livestock grazing and supply of resources such as fuel wood, timber, construction poles, herbal medicine, fiber, indigenous fruits, traditional vegetables and bee forage for honey production.</p></sec><sec id="s2_2"><title>2.2. Study Design</title><p>The study employed a nested experimental approach that incorporated both transect and quadrant methods to gather information on biodiversity. Transect lines were positioned randomly throughout each sample plot nested systematically along the transect line to examine variations in woody species richness, vegetation structure and regeneration rates. Additionally, an unprotected and unmanaged control plot was selected from the surrounding area at a close proximity to each 2-acre FMNR experimental plot. Quadrats and sub-quadrats were arranged parallel to the slope of the plot at 50 m intervals in each stratum to gather information on different forms of vegetation. The quadrats and sub-quadrats included a 10 m &#215; 10 m main plot, 5 m &#215; 5 m quadrats, and 1 m &#215; 1 m sub-quadrats. The various vegetation forms recorded included mature trees, saplings, seedlings, shrubs, herbs, lianas and climbers. Plants with a diameter at breast height (DBH or D130) ≥ 2.5 cm and a height ≥ 1.5 m were considered trees  (Dokata et al., 2023) . Saplings were young woody plants with a root collar diameter &lt; 2.5 cm and a height of 50 - 150 cm  (Eyasu et al., 2020) . Seedlings were woody plants with root collar diameter (RCD) &lt; 2.5 cm and a height between 1 - 50 cm  (Eyasu et al., 2020) . Shrubs were perennial plants typically &lt; 8m tall and characterized by many stems or branches, while herbs were annual seed plants with either erect or creeping stems that lack persistent woody tissue. Lastly, grasses were low, green plants that grow naturally over much of the earth’s surface, characterized by having groups of very thin leaves that grow closely together in large numbers. All these vegetation forms in every plot were identified and recorded by local and scientific names.</p></sec><sec id="s2_3"><title>2.3. Data Collection and Data Analysis</title><p>Data on floristic composition, vegetation status and distribution (structure) and regeneration status (noting subsequent new life forms) was captured in quadrats and sub-quadrats. Data on trees were captured in the entire 10 m &#215; 10 m plot while data on saplings and shrubs were collected in the 5 m &#215; 5 m quadrats. Information on herbs and grasses was recorded in the 1 m &#215; 1 m quadrats. Additionally, the data collection process involved measuring various parameters of the vegetation, including tree height, stem diameter at 130 cm above ground level (D130) for trees and root collar diameter and height of saplings and seedlings. D130 and tree height were measured using a diameter tape and a Sunto clinometer respectively. Meanwhile, vernier calipers and grid rulers were used to measure root collar diameter and the height of saplings and seedlings respectively. Variation in species composition, stem density, basal area and regeneration rates in sample plots as indicated in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref> were analyzed using R software using inferential methods. T-test was used to analyze statistical differences in the mean of species diversity of the various vegetation life forms. The comparison of the various species diversity in both FMNR and non-FMNR plots was calculated using the Shannon-Weiner diversity index. Stem density and stand basal area for each species recorded were computed by converting the data on the number of stems per plot (10 m &#215; 10 m) and quadrats (5 m &#215; 5 m and 1 m &#215; 1 m) to hectare level.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results and Discussions</title><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Richness and Diversity of Woody and Herbaceous Species</title><p>All the FMNR plots showed a marked progressive increase in numbers of trees, saplings, seedlings, shrubs and grass in each subsequent assessment period from 2020 (baseline) to 2023 (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>). The total numbers of the woody and herbaceous species peaked in 2023 at both Mogotio (30) and Cheptebo (31) respectively. All the control plots (non-FMNR) at both sites showed highly contrasting results with massive reduction in numbers of all forms of vegetation. For example, the control plot in Mogotio showed a reduction of floristic diversity from a total of 25 species in 2020 to only 3 species in 2023, and the Cheptebo site with very little or no vegetation (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>). The species diversities of woody and non-woody plants within FMNR and non-FMNR were statistically significantly different (Trees p = 0.01 &lt; 0.05, Saplings p = 0.01 &lt; 0.05, Seedling p = 0.02 &lt; 0.05, Herbs p = 0.02 &lt; 0.05, Shrubs p = 0.02 &lt; 0.05 and Grass p = 0.01 &lt; 0.05).</p><p>Besides the vegetation population count and observed changes in diversity over the 4-year study period, Shannon-Wiener species diversity indices provide the extent to which these changes are comparatively represented across the FMNR and non-FMNR sites. The index ranges from 0 (no diversity) to a maximum of 3.5 (highest diversity) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>). The results showed that vegetation</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Species diversity of woody and non-woody species</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Site</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Plot</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Year</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Trees</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Saplings</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Seedlings</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Herbs</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Shrubs</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Grass</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Total</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >Mogotio</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >FMNR</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2020</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2021</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2022</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2023</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >30</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  ></td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >Non-FMNR</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2020</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2021</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2022</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2023</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >Cheptebo</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >FMNR</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2020</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2021</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2022</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2023</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  ></td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >Non-FMNR</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2020</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2021</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2022</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2023</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Statistics-t-test</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >t(5) = 7, p = 0.01</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >t(5) = 7, p = 0.01</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >t(5) = 5.65, p = 0.02</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >t(5) = 5, p = 0.02</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >t(5) = 5.18, p = 0.02</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >t(5) = 5.27, p = 0.01</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> A comparison of woody species Shannon-Wiener-diversity per plot in FMNR and Non-FMNR intervention sites</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Site</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Year</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Saplings DBH &lt; 10 cm</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Trees DBH &gt; 10 cm</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >FMNR</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Non-FMNR</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >FMNR</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Non-FMNR</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >Cheptebo</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2020</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.54</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2021</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.49</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.26</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2022</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.97</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2023</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.16</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.54</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="3"  >Mogotio</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2020</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.49</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.32</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2021</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.43</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.11</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2022</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.77</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2023</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.26</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.37</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Statistics-t-test</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >t(5) = 6.6461, p = 0.04</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >t(5) = 5.417, p = 0.01</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>diversity [at FMNR sites] increased with time. For example, at the start of the experiment (baseline in 2020), the diversity index ranged from 0.35 to 0.54 for both FMNR and non-FMNR sites. Over the subsequent four years, the indices for the FMNR sites gradually increased to a peak in 2023 at 2.16 for saplings and 2.54 for trees for Cheptebo and 2.26 (saplings) and 3.37 (trees) for Mogotio respectively (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>). The non-FMNR sites showed little or no diversity at all, ranging from 0 to 0.54. Furthermore, the results show a statistical significantly difference of sapling (DBH &lt; 10 cm) Shannon-Wiener-diversity between the FMNR and non-FMNR (t(5) = 6.646, p = 0.04 &lt; 0.05) and trees (t(5) = 5.417, p = 0.01 &lt; 0.05)</p><p>Results also demonstrated that certain plant Families responded to FMNR within the sites more than others. For example, four families of trees were found to be dominant across the two study sites. These are Zygophyllaceae (represented by Balanites aegyptiaca), Fabaceae (Acacias/Vachellia sp), Burseraceae (Commiphora sp) and Capparaceae (Boscia sp) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>). All of these Families are widely utilized on both domestic and commercial levels at household levels, thus underlining the socio-economic and socio-cultural importance of FMNR as a conservation and restoration practice in the arid and semi-arid landscapes (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>). As expected, the annual herbaceous vegetation was represented by the highest number of Families where a total of 14 were recorded against 6 Families of shrubs (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>). Like trees, all the herbs and shrubs recorded were found to be very useful as critical sources of livestock fodder, veterinary and human uses as herbal medicine and nutritious vegetables for human use.</p><p>Another important Family that was recorded was Poaceae (grass) where a total of 11 species were found across the two study sites (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>). Grass remains a critical pasture component for pastoral communities in ASALs hence the importance of FMNR as a practice that positively contributes to sustainable management of livestock fodder resources in these areas throughout the year.</p><table-wrap id="table3" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref></label><caption><title> Common species of woody and non-woody species within the sites of FMNR assessed</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Type</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Family</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Scientific/Abundance of quadrats (%)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Status &amp; Utilization</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="8"  >Trees</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Zygophyllaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Balanites aegyptiaca (11.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="8"  >Plants fixes nitrogen and improves the soil fertility, supporting grasses and harvest development, Medicial values, Charcoal, poles, bee fodder &amp; medicinal. (Belayneh et al., 2021, Goda et al., 2021, Hassan et al., 2019, Munishi et al, 2008) .</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Fabaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Acacia albida (7.2)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Fabaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Acacia seyal (32.3)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Fabaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Acacia hoki (17.2)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Fabaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Acacia tortilis (27.9)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Fabaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Acacia brevispica (1.2)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Burseraceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Commiphora Spp (1.4)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Capparaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Boscia mossambicensis (1.2)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="7"  >Shrubs</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Malvaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Grewia villosa (29.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="7"  >The leaves are very palatable to livestock, fodder. herbal medicine, (Etuh et al., 2021, Bhattacharjya et al., 2020, Maroyi, 2017)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Malvaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Taraxacum officinale (9.9)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Verbenaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Lantana camara (9.9)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Lamiaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Ocimum sanctum (3.3)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Zamiaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Encephalartos natalensis (31.0)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Malvaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Corchorus olitorius (13.1)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Fabaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Indigofera arrecta (3.3)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="16"  >Herbs</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Asteraceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Conzya bonariensis (2.43)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="16"  >Highly medicinal (Tan et al. 2013, Sbhatu &amp; Abraha, 2020, Ojunga et al., 2023, Assis de Andrade et al., 2023) Food, green manure, fodder. The young fresh leaves of this plant are also high in fibre and minerals (e.g., calcium and iron) needed for good health (Rehman et al., 2015, Mutie et al., 2023)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Asteraceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Notonia petraea (29.75)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Acanthaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Hypoestes phyllostachya (4.87)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Acanthaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Altenanathera sessilis (1.36)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Amaranthaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Achyranthes aspera (0.27)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Lamiace/Labiatae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Ocimum suave (2.43)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Solanaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Solanum incanum (3.18)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Commelinaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cammalina benghalensis (2.69)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Crassulaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Kalanchoe densiflora (16.9)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cyperaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Kyllinga brevifolia (0.27)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Fabaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Crotalaria retusa (0.89)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Lamiaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Leucas grandis (4.09)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Malvaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Corchorus olitorius (7.63)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Moraceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Fatou villosa (17.04)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Oxalidaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Oxalis latifolia (0.55)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Zygophyllaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Tribulus terrestris (8.07)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="10"  >Grass</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Poaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Digitaria sanguinities (11.8)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="10"  >These grass species are highly tolerant to drought and heavy grazing, soil binding, makes ground more stable but some invasive.</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Poaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cynodon dactylon (13.76)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Poaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Digitaria scalarum (0.01)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Poaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Eragrostis superba (0.01)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Poaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Eragrostis curvula (31.05)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Poaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Digitaria ciliaris (8.25)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Poaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Digitaria horizontalis (16.06)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Poaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Digitaria eriantha (7.86)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Poaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cynodon aethiopicus (7.86)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Poaceae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Heteropogon contortus (1.96)</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap></sec><sec id="s3_2"><title>3.2. Distribution and Abundance of the Various Vegetation Types under FMNR and Non-FMNR Sites</title><p>The significant increase in numbers of all forms of vegetation types recorded in FMNR sites led to high abundance per unit area. Combination of grasses and herbs at the lower canopies showed the highest percentage vegetation cover in all the FMNR sites, rising from 10.5% in 2020 (baseline) to 91% in the 4th year of assessment while the non-FMNR sites declined from 6.25% to about 2% in the same period (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>(a)). Similarly, the relative abundance of shrubs increased from 15,000 stems/ha in 2020 to 62,000 stems/ha in 2023, a four-fold increase, with non-FMNR plots decreasing from 2800 in 2020 to 1720 (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>(b)).</p><p>The positive impact of FMNR practice on the abundance of tree and sapling components was also remarkably evident. For example, the recruitment of saplings in FMNR sites increased from 3911 stems/ha in 2020 to 5833 stems/ha in 2023, with a marked decrease in control sites from 2150 stems/ha to 986 stems/ha in the same period (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>(c)). The characteristic slow growth of trees was demonstrated by the low levels of their relative abundance within the study period, increasing from 420 stems/ha in 2020 to 696 stems/ha in 2023 in FMNR sites (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>(d)). The disturbances attributed to unprotected tree resources in the control sites can explain the observed decrease from abundance</p><p>from 56 stems/ha in 2020 to 20 stems/ha, a three-fold reduction (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>(d)).</p></sec><sec id="s3_3"><title>3.3. Tree Size Class Distribution and Recruitment</title><p>Results showed that all FMNR sites generally exhibited a highly positive conservation status of the woody vegetation component over the study period as demonstrated by the distribution of height and diameter at breast height (DBH) classes in both Mogotio and Cheptebo (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>). In both growth parameters, their distribution in terms of relative densities across the various size classes was characterized by a typical inverse J-shaped graph (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>). Although both sites indicated healthy conservation status of the woody biomass, Cheptebo showed a healthier population with higher numbers of individuals at each of the DBH and height classes compared to the Mogotio site (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>).</p></sec></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Recommendation and Conclusion</title><sec id="s4_1"><title>4.1. Conclusion</title><p>The dominant trees, shrubs and herbs families across the study sites were noted as well as their place and importance in the plant succession continuum. Consequently, all FMNR sites showed a healthy and highly stable population structure and conservation status of the woody biomass component with increasing</p><p>numbers of mature trees, saplings and seedlings respectively. The reverse is true for non-FMNR sites that are often increasingly being degraded with passage of time thus making them less and less productive. Prolonged exposure of such sites leads to continued degradation thus massive losses of underground seed banks and other sources that sustains plant regeneration.</p><p>In conclusion, the comparison between FMNR sites and non-FMNR sites highlights the remarkable advantages of FMNR in fostering greater woody species diversity, regenerating species, and maintaining stable population structures, underscoring its substantial potential in combating environmental degradation.</p></sec><sec id="s4_2"><title>4.2. Recommendation</title><p>The findings of this study underscore the growing importance of Farmer-Managed Natural Regeneration (FMNR) as a critical strategy for environmental conservation and restoration. Given the evident success of FMNR sites in enhancing vegetation biomass and fostering diverse species communities, it is imperative to promote its widespread adoption within communities.</p><p>To fully capitalize on the benefits of FMNR, there is a need for extensive community outreach efforts to raise awareness about its advantages and encourage its adoption. This should include not only incentivizing more farms to embrace FMNR but also advocating for its implementation on public lands at a landscape level. Achieving widespread adoption may require reevaluating stakeholder engagement strategies within the existing FMNR framework, extending beyond private farmlands to include public spaces.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s5"><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>This work was supported by the CRIFSUP FMNR-World Vision International Project for financial support, Kenya Forest Research Institute for technical support and Community members participation especially the FMNR adopters and the farmers who are practicing FMNR on their land at Mogotio and Cheptebo.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Data Availability</title><p>The data sets used and/or analyzed in the study are available within the article.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.</p></sec><sec id="s8"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Choge, S. K., Ojunga, S. O., Dokata, D. I., Chepkirui, W. K., Musau, J., Muniale, F. M., &amp; Kiptui, I. K. (2024). Floristic Composition, Population Structure, and Recruitment Status of Plant Species: A Case Study of Farmer-Managed Natural Regeneration Practices in Arid and Semi-Arid Lands in Kenya. Open Journal of Forestry, 14, 141-154.https://doi.org/10.4236/ojf.2024.142010</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.132857-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Khalwale</surname><given-names> T.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> Langat</surname><given-names> D.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> Abuom</surname><given-names> P.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> &amp; Okoth</surname><given-names> S. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2018</year>)<article-title>. Factors Influencing Adoption of On-Farm Tree Planting in Shinyalu Sub-County, Kakamega, Kenya</article-title><source>&lt;i&gt; International Journal of Forestry and Horticulture</source><volume> 4</volume>,<fpage>&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt; &lt;/i&gt;38</fpage>-<lpage>48</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Lohbeck, M., Albers, P., Boels, L. E., Bongers, F., Morel, S., Sinclair, F., Takoutsing, B., V&amp;#229;gen, T. G., Winowiecki, L. A., &amp; Smith-Dumont, E. (2020). Drivers of Farmer-Managed Natural Regeneration in the Sahel. Lessons for Restoration. &lt;i&gt;Scientific Reports, 10&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;,&lt;/i&gt; Article No. 15038. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-70746-z</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Maroyi, A. (2017). Review of Ethnomedicinal Uses, Phytochemistry and Pharmacological Properties of &lt;i&gt;E&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;uclea natalensis&lt;/i&gt; A.DC. &lt;i&gt;Molecules&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;, &lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;22&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;,&lt;/i&gt; Article 2128. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules22122128</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Munishi, P. K. T., Philipina, F., Temu, R. P. C., et al. (2008). Tree Species Composition and Local Use in Agricultural Landscapes of West Usambaras Tanzania. &lt;i&gt;African Jou&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;r&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;nal of Ecology, 46, &lt;/i&gt;66-73. &lt;br&gt;http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2028.2008.00931.x </mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Mutie, F. M., Mbuni, Y. M., Rono, P. C., Mkala, E. M., Nzei, J. M., Phumthum, M., Hu, G. W., &amp; Wang, Q. F. (2023). Important Medicinal and Food Taxa (Orders and Families) in Kenya, Based on Three Quantitative Approaches. &lt;i&gt;Plants (Basel)&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;, &lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;12&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;, &lt;/i&gt;Article 1145. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12051145</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ngcamu, B. S., &amp; Chari, F. (2020). Drought Influences on Food Insecurity in Africa: A Systematic Literature Review. &lt;i&gt;International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;,&lt;/i&gt; Article 5897. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165897</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Obwocha, E., Muriuki, J., Alliance, G. E., Wanjira, E. O., &amp; Centre, W. A. (2022). &lt;i&gt;Farmer Managed &lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;Natural Regeneration in A Somali Context: Practitioners&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt; &lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;Manual&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt; &lt;/i&gt;</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ojunga, S. O., Langat, D. K., Owange, K., Otuoma, J., Ayaga, G., Muskiton, K. C., Wanyiri, M., &amp; Isack, M. (2023). The Medicinal Plants and Their Economic Value in Kakamega Forest Ecosystem: A Case Study of Sustainable Land/Forest Project in Western Kenya. &lt;i&gt;Journal of Medicinal Herbs and Ethnomedicine, 9, &lt;/i&gt;18-25. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.25081/jmhe.2023.v9.8193</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ojunga, S., Nyakinda, J., Okuto, E., &amp; Mullah, J. (2019). Invasive Species Population Status Modeling Using Stage Based Matrix: Mount Elgon Ecosystem. &lt;i&gt;Mathematical Theory and Modeling,&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt; 9&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;,&lt;/i&gt; 27-32. </mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Okumu, J., Langat, D., &amp; Ojung A, S. (2022). Determinants of Commercial Tree Growing among Smallholder Farmers in Nandi County, Kenya. &lt;i&gt;East African Journal of Forestry and Agroforestry, 5&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;,&lt;/i&gt; 269-285. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.37284/eajfa.5.1.939</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Poorter, L., Craven, D., Jakovac, C. C., Van der Sande, M. T., Amissah, L., Bongers, F. et al. (2021). Multidimensional Tropical Forest Recovery. &lt;i&gt;Science, 374&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;,&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt; &lt;/i&gt;1370-1376. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abh3629</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Rehman, A., Rehman, A., &amp; Ahmad, I. (2015). Antibacterial, Antifungal, and Insecticidal Potentials of Oxalis Corniculata and Its Isolated Compounds. &lt;i&gt;International Journal of Analytical Chemistry&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;, &lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;2015&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;, &lt;/i&gt;Article ID: 842468. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/842468</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sbhatu, D. B., &amp; Abraha, H. B. (2020). Preliminary Antimicrobial Profile of &lt;i&gt;Solanum i&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;n&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;canum&lt;/i&gt; L.: A Common Medicinal Plant. &lt;i&gt;Evidence-Based Complementary and Altern&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;a&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;tive Medicine, 2020,&lt;/i&gt; Article ID: 3647065. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/3647065</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tan, P. V., Mezui, C., Enow-Orock, G. E., &amp; Agbor, G. (2013). Antioxidant Capacity, Cytoprotection, and Healing Actions of the Leaf Aqueous Extract of &lt;i&gt;Ocimum suave&lt;/i&gt; in Rats Subjected to Chronic and Cold-Restraint Stress Ulcers. &lt;i&gt;Ulcers, 2013,&lt;/i&gt; Article ID: 150780. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/150780</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tilahun, M., Kumar, P., Apindi, E., Schauer, M., Libera, J., &amp; Lund, G. (2018). &lt;i&gt;The Ec&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;o&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;nomics of Lan&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;d Degradation Neutrality in Asia: Empirical Analyses and Policy Impl&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;i&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;cations for the Sustainable Development Goal&lt;/i&gt; (pp. 1-143). </mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Vergara, N. T. (1985). Agroforestry Systems&amp;#8212;A Primer. &lt;i&gt;Unasylva&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;,&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt; 37&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;,&lt;/i&gt; 22-28. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.1177/1944451610364721</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Watene, G., Yu, L., Nie, Y., Zhu, J., Ngigi, T., Nambajimana, J. D. D., &amp; Kenduiywo, B. (2021). Water Erosion Risk Assessment in the Kenya Great Rift Valley Region. &lt;i&gt;Susta&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;i&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;nability (Switzerland), 13&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;,&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt; &lt;/i&gt;Article 844. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020844</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zinngrebe, Y., Vidal, A., Gassner, A., Kumar, C., &amp; Dobie, P. (2020). &lt;i&gt;Trees on Farms as a Nature-Based&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt; Solution for Biodiversity Conservation in Agricultural Landscapes&lt;/i&gt;. ICRAF Policy Brief, No. 47.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kandel, M., Anghileri, D., Alare, R. S., Lovett, P. N., Agaba, G., Addoah, T., &amp; Schreckenberg, K. (2022). Farmers&amp;#8217; Perspectives and Context Are Key for the Success and Sustainability of Farmer-Managed Natural Regeneration (FMNR) in Northeastern Ghana. &lt;i&gt;World Development, 158,&lt;/i&gt; Article 106014. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.106014</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hassan, B. A., Glover, E. K., Luukkanen, O., Kanninen, M., &amp; Jamnadass, R. (2019). &lt;i&gt;Bo&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;s&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;wellia&lt;/i&gt; and &lt;i&gt;Commiphora&lt;/i&gt; Species as a Resource Base for Rural Livelihood Security in the Horn of Africa: A Systematic Review. &lt;i&gt;Forests, 10,&lt;/i&gt; Article 551. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.3390/f10070551</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gomiero, T. (2016). Soil Degradation, Land Scarcity and Food Security: Reviewing a Complex Challenge. &lt;i&gt;Sustainability (Switzerland), 8,&lt;/i&gt; Article 281. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.3390/su8030281</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Goda, M. M. B., Dosougi, M. A., Osman, A., &amp; Ibrahim, A. M. (2021). Ecological Situation of &lt;i&gt;Acacia &lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;tortilis&lt;/i&gt; Subspecies Raddiana. Case Study: In White Nile State, Sudan.&lt;i&gt; Journal of Agricultural Science and Food Technology&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;,&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt; 7&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;,&lt;/i&gt; 43-47. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.17352/2455-815X.000086</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Garrity, D., &amp; Bayala, J. (2019). Trees Help to Increase Crop Yields. In M. van Noordwijk (Ed.), &lt;i&gt;Sustainable&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt; Development through Trees on Farms&lt;/i&gt;:&lt;i&gt; Agroforestry in Its Fifth Decade&lt;/i&gt; (pp. 153-174). World Agroforestry (ICRAF) Southeast Asia Regional Program. &lt;br&gt;http://apps.worldagroforestry.org/downloads/publications/pdfs/bc19015.pdf </mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fath, B. D., &amp; Fiscus, D. (2022). &lt;i&gt;Foreword. Water, Land, and Forest Susceptibility and Sustainabi&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;lity: Geospatial Approaches and Modeling&lt;/i&gt;. Elsevier. </mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Eyasu, G., Tolera, M., &amp; Negash, M. (2020). Woody Species Composition, Structure, and Diversity of Homegarden Agroforestry Systems in Southern Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. &lt;i&gt;Heliyon, 6&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;,&lt;/i&gt; e05500. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05500</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Etuh, M. A., Ohemu, L. T., &amp; Pam, D. D. (2021). &lt;i&gt;Lantana camara&lt;/i&gt; Ethanolic Leaves Extracts Exhibit Anti-Aging Properties in &lt;i&gt;Drosophila melanogaster&lt;/i&gt;: Survival-Rate and Life Span Studies. &lt;i&gt;Toxicology Research (Camb)&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;, &lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;10&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;, &lt;/i&gt;79-83. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.1093/toxres/tfaa098</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Dokata, D. I., Mburu, B. K., Macharia, G. M., Choge, S. K., Ojunga, S. O., &amp; Kaudo, B. O. (2023). Distribution, Conservation Status and Effects of Threats on Relative Abundance of &lt;i&gt;Warburgia ugandensis&lt;/i&gt; Tree Species. A Case Study of Katimok Forest Reserve, Kenya. &lt;i&gt;East African Journal of Forestry and Agroforestry, 6&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;,&lt;/i&gt; 1-17. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.37284/eajfa.6.1.1044</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Deutz, A., Heal, G., Niu, R., Swanson, E., Townshend, T. et al. (2020). &lt;i&gt;Financing Nature: Closing the &lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;Global Biodiversity Financing Gap&lt;/i&gt;. The Nature Conservancy and the Cornell Atkinson Center for Sustainability, 256. &lt;br&gt;https://www.paulsoninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/FINANCING-NATURE_Full-Report_Final-with-endorsements_101420.pdf </mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Chomba, S., Sinclair, F., Savadogo, P., Bourne, M., &amp; Lohbeck, M. (2020). Opportunities and Constraints for Using Farmer Managed Natural Regeneration for Land Restoration in Sub-Saharan Africa. &lt;i&gt;Frontiers in Forests and Global Change, 3&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;, &lt;/i&gt;Article 571679. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.3389/ffgc.2020.571679</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Binam, J. N., Place, F., Djalal, A. A., &amp; Kalinganire, A. (2017). Effects of Local Institutions on the Adoption of Agroforestry Innovations: Evidence of Farmer Managed Natural Regeneration and Its Implications for Rural Livelihoods in the Sahel. &lt;i&gt;Agricultural and Food Economics, 5&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;, &lt;/i&gt;Article No. 2. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.1186/s40100-017-0072-2</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bhattacharjya, D., Adhikari, S., Biswas, A., Bhuimali, A., Ghosh, P., &amp; Saha, S. (2020). &lt;i&gt;Ocimum P&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;hytochemicals and Their Potential Impact on Human Health&lt;/i&gt;. IntechOpen. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.88555</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Belayneh, H., Gebremedhin, K. G., &amp; Egziabher, Y. G. (2021). Role of &lt;i&gt;Acacia seyal&lt;/i&gt; on Selected Soil Properties and Sorghum Growth and Yield: A Case Study of Guba Lafto District, North Wollo, Ethiopia. &lt;i&gt;International Journal of Agronomy, 2021,&lt;/i&gt; Article ID: 6666674. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6666674</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Assis de Andrade, E., Machinski, I., Terso Ventura, A. C., Barr, S. A., Pereira, A. V., Beltrame, F. L. et al. (2023). A Review of the Popular Uses, Anatomical, Chemical, and Biological Aspects of Kalanchoe (Crassulaceae): A Genus of Plants Known as &amp;#8220;Miracle Leaf&amp;#8221;. &lt;i&gt;Molecules&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;,&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt; 28&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;,&lt;/i&gt; Article 5574. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28145574</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Alan&amp;#237;s-Rodr&amp;#237;guez, E., Mart&amp;#237;nez-Adriano, C. A., Sanchez-Castillo, L., Rubio-Camacho, E. A., &amp; Valdecantos, A. (2023). Land Abandonment as Driver of Woody Vegetation Dynamics in Tamaulipan Thornscrub at Northeastern Mexico. &lt;i&gt;PeerJ&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;, 11&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;, &lt;/i&gt;e15438. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.15438</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Abdel Rahman, M. A. E. (2023). An Overview of Land Degradation, Desertification and Sustainable Land Management Using GIS and Remote Sensing Applications. &lt;i&gt;Rend&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;i&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;conti Lincei. Scienze Fisiche e Naturali&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;,&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt; 34,&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt; &lt;/i&gt;767-808. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.1007/s12210-023-01155-3</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.132857-ref36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Abasse, T., &amp; Adam, T. (2020). Diversity of Farmer-Managed Natural Woody Species and Food Security in North-Western Part of Niger. In W. Leal Filho, A. M. Azul, L. Brandli, P. G. &amp;#214;zuyar, &amp; T. Wall (Eds.), &lt;i&gt;Zero Hunger. Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable D&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;e&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;velopment Goals&lt;/i&gt; (pp. 231-240). Springer. &lt;br&gt;https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95675-6_57</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>