International Journal of Scientific Research in Environmental Sciences, 2(12), pp.

449-456, 2014
Available online at http://www.ijsrpub.com/ijsres
ISSN: 2322-4983; 2014; Author(s) retain the copyright of this article
http://dx.doi.org/10.12983/ijsres-2014-p0449-0456

Full Length Research Paper

Effects of Contour Furrow on Ecological Indices of Range Health Using Landscape
Function Analysis (Case study: Ghick Sheikha Rangeland, Jiroft, Iran)
Mahdieh Ebrahimi1*, Mohadese Arab2
1

Assistant Professor, Department of Range and Watershed Management, University of Zabol, Iran
M.Sc of Range management, Department of Range and Watershed Management, Faculty of Water and Soil, University of
Zabol, Iran
*Corresponding Author, Email: maebrahimi2007@uoz.ac.ir

Received 16 October 2014; Accepted 27 November 2014

Abstract. Restoration practices have important impact on soil surface and functional characteristic of rangelands. So, for the
sustainable utilization of the rangelands, these changes should be recognized and managed. The present study was conducted to
recognize the effects of contour furrow on ecological indices of rangeland health in Ghick Sheikha contour furrow (Jiroft)
using landscape function analysis. A free contour furrow (as control) was also selected to compare the effects of contour
furrow on soil factors and vegetation cover. In this method, 11 soil parameters were assessed to recognize three functional
properties, including stability, infiltration and nutrient cycling (using analysis of landscape function software) and, paired t-test
was used to compare the performance indicators in the control and contour furrow. However the number of patches was more
in the control treatment, the results showed that in the contour furrow area, the length of ecological components (patches) was
more than in the control treatment. Three health indicators in the contour furrow were more than in the control treatment and
there was a significant difference between two areas (p 0.05). In addition, regression model analyses between two areas
suggested that the parameters of litter movement, soil surface resistance to erosion, soil surface roughness, and erosion in
contour furrow and soil surface roughness, litter cover and soil surface resistance to erosion in the control area had respectively
the biggest share among the rangeland health indicators. Generally, the present study suggested effectiveness of contour furrow
compared to the control.
Keywords: Contour furrow, ecological indices, landscape function analysis, rangeland health

natural ones; however, if these changes go over the

habitat's protective threshold, they are to destroy the
rangeland (Sabeti, 1975). Range management is based
on the ecologic principles and management
evaluations of rangelands are mainly based on
structural ones which are conducted quantitatively
concerning production, canopy cover p, plant density
and composition while not paying attention to health
evaluation models which apply modern methods
(Ahmadi et al., 2009).
Every range ecosystem is consisted of various
ecologic patches with different functions and
functional and structural properties of fertile parts
which can be used to interpret the management roles
in the rangelands are to be altered due to corrective
actions (Heshmati et al., 2010).
In order to investigate the effects of corrective
actions on rangeland restoration, their functions
should be assessed and ecologic processes have to be
considered for the recognition of functions. Studies
have shown that the determination of primary

1. INTRODUCTION
In Iran, rangelands are of the highest extent regarding
the other natural ecosystems (Mogaddam, 2006) and
most of the rangelands have encountered the changes
in vegetation trend and conditions as well as soil
erosion resulting in the reduction of plant and
livestock production due to incorrect management and
exploitation (Azarnivand and Zare Chahoki., 2012).
Rangelands having native vegetation and natural
potential are managed as a natural ecosystem.
Considering ecology, the recognition of fundamental
ecologic concepts and the evaluation of ecosystem
play significant roles in recognizing the ecosystems'
structure and function. Changing the ecologic
concepts and assumptions is more likely to alter the
range evaluation (Abedi and Arzani, 2004). The
Dynamic ecosystem is changed because of
environmental disturbances so that the sustainable
exploitation will be possible when these changes are
identified. Some changes are regarded as ecosystems'

449

Ebrahimi and Arab

Effects of Contour Furrow on Ecological Indices of Range Health Using Landscape Function Analysis (Case study:
Ghick Sheikha Rangeland, Jiroft, Iran)

ecologic processes is difficult and costly due to the

complexity of processes and internal relations.
Therefore, three properties of ecologic processes
including range soil stability, nutrient cycle and
hydrological range conditions are of significant
importance to evaluate the range management and
planning. In this respect, landscape function analysis
is presented (Tongway and Hindley, 2004) in order to
assess the effects of corrective and management
actions on rangelands based on functional and
structural properties using eleven soil surface indices
and three functional features involving stability (soil
ability to resist against the erosive elements and its
reversibility after the occurrence of disturbances),
permeability (water retention rate in soil for plants)
and nutrient cycle ( reversibility rate of organic
matters into soil).
Evaluating the habitats' potentials using soil
surface properties, it has been reported that these
indices can be regarded as suitable elements for
determining the habitat potentials and plant
composition (Rezaei and Arzani, 2007). Also, for
evaluating the soil surface properties to specify the
range conditions, the efficiency of landscape function
analysis was studied and compared to six-factors and
four-factors methods and it has been found that
landscape function analysis is of more accuracy and
efficiency (Ghelichnia et al., 2008). Evaluating the
effects of corrective actions on the rangelands of
Amari Sarchah in Birjand (Iran) using landscape
function analysis, it was reported that the corrective
actions including disclosure and construction of a
crescent pond led to the improvement of functional
properties (Yari et al., 2012).
This paper aims to evaluate the effects of contour
furrow on three functional properties such as stability,
permeability and nutrient cycle in Gick Sheikha
rangelands in Anbarabad region, Jiroft city, Iran using
landscape function analysis method; in other words,
Has contour furrow improved the mentioned
functional indices in the studied rangeland?

2.2. Methodology
A field operation was done during the flowering stage
of dominant plant species. After conducting primary
investigations, sampling was performed along linear
transects by a randomized systematic method
according to previous range plans and field visits.
Thus, three 100 m transects were established by the
intervals of 100 m. In each transect, patches having
the existing vegetation were selected and afterwards, 5
replicates of patches and inter patches with bare soil
were randomly chosen. Then, the length and width of
ecologic patch and the length of inter patches in
transects have been recorded. In order to compare the
impacts of contour furrow on soil and vegetation
factors by the means of landscape functional analysis,
a control treatment (without contour furrow operation)
has been considered along the desired region.
In each region, soil surface indices were
investigated in order to study the soil stability,
permeability and nutrient cycle. These indices include
soil conservation, litter cover, cryptogam cover, crust
crunching, erosion type and intensity, sedimentations,
soil surface nature, surface resist to disturb, vegetation
indices of perennial species, soil surface roughness,
soil texture, permeability and nutrient cycle. Then,
they were calculated by the sum of indices' scores.
Statistical data analysis was performed using Excel
software of landscape function analysis.
Contour furrow and control treatment were
compared by T-test. In addition, multiple linear
regression has been applied using SPPSS.18 in order
to specify the best indices which affect the range
health.
3. RESULTS
3.1. Ecologic patches characteristics in contour
furrow and control treatments
Quantitative characteristics and ecologic indices of
contour furrow and control treatments indicate that in
the studied region, the mean length of ecologic
patches is 0.93 m whereas it is given as 0.52 m for the
control treatment. Number of patches was 22 and 6 for
the control and contour furrow treatments,
respectively. Patch area index (mean area divided by
total number of patches) has been computed as 0.05
and 0.016 for contour furrow and control treatments,
respectively. Specificity index demonstrating the
landscape potential and capability was given as 1 for
both treatments (Table 1).

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1. The study area
The rangeland under examination with the area of
3047 ha is located in 60 km of Jiroft city, Kerman
province, Iran, between 28 24 northern latitude and
58 3 eastern longitude (Fig. 1). The average height
of the area is 900 meter of sea surface level with an
annual average precipitation of 137.8 mm, and
maximum and minimum average temperature of 25.35
and 15C respectively.

450

International Journal of Scientific Research in Environmental Sciences, 2(12), pp. 449-456, 2014

Fig. 1: The Study Area

the indices in contour furrow treatment showed that

three indices of stability, permeability and nutrient
cycle are higher than those for control treatment on
the basis of number of area of patches.
Results of t test indicate that there is a significant
difference between the functional indices of two
regions (p<0.05) so that three desired indices in
furrow contour treatment are more than control one.
In general, results of two desired regions show that
range health indices in furrow contour treatment are
averagely higher than control one.

3.2. Comparison of functional indices in ecologic

patch of contour furrow and control treatments
In furrow contour treatment (Table 2), patches
functional indices were of higher values with respect
to the number and area of patches in the ecosystem as
compared to the control treatment; patches stability
values were 52.20 and 32.05%, nutrient cycle percent
was 14.47 and 10.73 and permeability percent was
estimated 22.90 and 19.65 for contour furrow and
control treatments, respectively. Therefore, studying

Table 1: Characteristics of ecologic patches in contour furrow area and control treatment

*Values within a column followed by different letters indicate significant differences. Mean values are reported with SE (Standard Error)

2.70. Permeability index which is regarded as one of

functional properties is in relation to litter cover and
soil surface resistance against erosion. Other ecologic
indices such as basal area, soil surface roughness,
surface resist to humidity and soil texture were
removed from the regression model.
Nutrient cycle index involves basal area, litter
cover, soil surface roughness and cryptogams cover.
Based on the existing regression model, two elements
of litter cover and soil surface roughness affected this
index and was directly related to nutrient cycle. As

3.3. Most important effective range health indices

in contour furrow and control treatments
Considering table 3, there is a positive relationship
between erosion intensity and surface resistance
concerning the corrective actions of furrow contour
treatment and stability index with regard to regression
model; stability percent is added by 1.2 due to low
and moderate erosion intensities when ecologic index
of erosion intensity is increased by 1. Enhancing the
surface resistance, soil stability percent is increased by

451

Ebrahimi and Arab

Effects of Contour Furrow on Ecological Indices of Range Health Using Landscape Function Analysis (Case study:
Ghick Sheikha Rangeland, Jiroft, Iran)

litter cover and soil surface roughness increase by 1,

nutrient cycle percent is increased by 5.96 and 1.66,
respectively.
Based on table 3, corrective actions of contour
furrow and control treatments and regression models
of three desired indices, among 11 studied indices,
stability has a relationship with litter cover and soil
surface resistance in such a manner that it is directly
related to litter cover. As litter cover increases by 1,
stability percent is increased by 0.30. Soil surface
resistance has a negative relationship with stability.
As soil surface resistance increases by 1, stability is
decreased by 1.80%.
Considering permeability index and six factors
including basal area, litter cover, surface roughness,
stability test against humidity, soil texture and soil

surface resistance against erosion, only two factors of

litter cover and soil surface resistance affected this
index while having a positive direct relationship. As
litter cover increases by 1, permeability is increased
by 1.80%. As soil surface resistance percent against
erosion increases by 1, permeability is increased by
2.35%.
Considering nutrient cycle index and four factors
of basal area, litter cover, cryptogams and soil surface
roughness, only two factors of litter cover and soil
surface roughness were examined and basal area and
cryptogams cover with negative relationships were
ignored. As litter cover increases by 1, permeability
percent is decreased by 2.80. As soil surface
roughness increases by 1, permeability percent is
decreased by 12.50.

Table 2: Means of the LFA indices in patches in contour furrow area and control treatment

Table 3: Most important effective range health indices in contour furrow area and control treatments

*S= Stability, E= Erosion, Sr= Surface Resist to disturb, I= Infiltration, N= Nutrient cycling status, Lc=Litter cover; Ss= Soil Surface Roughness

has positive correlations with cryptogams cover, litter

decomposition and surface resistance while it is of a
negative correlation with surface roughness.
Maximum correlation of permeability was calculated
as 99% with cryptogams cover. Similar results have
been achieved for nutrient cycle in such a manner that
this index has positive correlations with basal area,
litter decomposition and surface roughness. Maximum

3.4. Correlation coefficients among functional

indices
Based on table 4, stability index has negative
correlations with litter cover, erosion, sedimentation
and cryptogams while it is positively correlated with
crust crunching and surface resistance. Maximum
correlation coefficient of this index was given as 99%
for sedimentation and crust crunching. Permeability

452

International Journal of Scientific Research in Environmental Sciences, 2(12), pp. 449-456, 2014

correlation coefficient as 94% was given for litter

decomposition.
Based on table 4, stability index is of positive
correlations with litter cover, erosion and
sedimentation while having a negative correlation
with surface resistance. Maximum correlation
coefficient of this index was obtained as 99% for

surface resistance. Permeability index is correlated

with cryptogams cover, surface roughness and surface
resistance with maximum correlation coefficient as
97%. Minimum correlation coefficient was given for
soil texture. Maximum correlation coefficient was
calculated as 82% for litter decomposition.

Table 4: Correlation coefficients among three function indices and effective factors in contour furrow area and control
treatment

energy movement and materials' cycle using several

simple indices (Toranjzar et al., 2009). Investigating
the effects of grazing on range health, it has been
observed that in the regions with less grazing, soil
properties are of better mean values while in the
regions with inappropriate management, over grazing
and range plowing, range conditions are not healthy
(Tongway and Hindley, 2004).
Results show that range management affects the
ecologic range properties directly which are
dependent on vegetation and soil characteristics and
alters the ecological indices of Gick Sheikha
rangeland. Contour furrow landscape along with the
grazing management is of higher average than the
control treatment regarding the studied indices
showing that corrective actions led to the relative
improvement of rangeland. However, control
treatment which was not managed correctly has lower
averages as compared to furrow contour treatment

4. DISCUSSION
Destructive range elements are the excessive presence
of livestock and over grazing so that management
measures lead to the changes in soil surface properties
and range functional features. In the studied regions,
contour furrow treatment along with the grazing
management resulted in the changes of soil surface
properties and range functional features in such a
manner that these indices were reduced in control
treatment as compared to contour furrow treatment
having the grazing management. Rangelands involve
a variety of natural resources extensively. As a result,
it is necessary to evaluate rangelands in order to
achieve the sustainable and long-term exploitations
and make decisions on the range changes. Range
function studies make the judgments possible on the
impacts of corrective and management actions on
primary ecosystem processes such as water cycle,

453

Ebrahimi and Arab

Effects of Contour Furrow on Ecological Indices of Range Health Using Landscape Function Analysis (Case study:
Ghick Sheikha Rangeland, Jiroft, Iran)

with corrective actions; namely, contour furrow one is

of better health.
In fact, plant species affect the range conditions
through creating suitable environmental conditions
and contour furrow treatment has the highest
functional properties and appropriate range health
concerning stability, permeability and nutrient cycle
due to the existence of more ecologic patches as
compared to control treatment. In contour furrow
landscape, patches have the highest stability percent
because of extensive canopy cover.
As a result of soil compaction because of trampling
and the decreases of roughness and vegetation,
permeability is more likely to be reduced. On the
other hand, the removal of cryptogams cover and
reduction of vegetation and litter decrease the nutrient
cycle value. Also, the increase of soil roughness,
permeability is highly to be increased (Bridge et al.,
1983). Eroded matter percent and various forms of
erosion in contour furrow treatment are significantly
less than control treatment indicating better conditions
of stability, permeability and nutrient cycle. Studying
the effects of different corrective actions on soil
surface indices, it has been reported that eroded matter
percent is increased by the intensification of grazing
so that soil roughness is reduced by the increase in
grazing; consequently, vegetation and litter cover are
decreased (Arzani et al., 2007; Ghoddousi et al.,
2006).
In contour furrow treatment, such parameters as
litter cover, soil surface resistance against erosion and
erosion intensity have the highest shares in the
regression model and litter cover is of direct
relationships with nutrient cycle and permeability.
Surface roughness and nutrient cycle are directly
related because the decrease of roughness leads to low
reservation of nutrients at the soil surface. In contour
furrow region, since the region has soil surface
roughness, nutrient cycle is enhanced due to the
effects of litter decomposition (Heshmati et al., 2008).
Roughness at the soil surface decelerates the
intensity of outputs and accelerates the permeability
while creating a safe environment for the aggregation
of seeds and litter (Heshmati et al., 2008). It can
enhance the vegetation in contour furrow region as
compared to the control one. On the other hand, soil
surface properties affect the range features directly so
that such factors as plant species, vegetative form and
vegetation are influenced. Plants including small
bushes, grasses and trees create an environment with
microclimate which is more moderate than the
external environment in summer and winter and plays
crucial roles in stabilizing soil and avoiding the
erosion (Sabeti, 1975).
In control region, surface roughness, litter cover
and soil surface resistance to disturb have the highest

shares in the regression model. Soil surface resistance

against erosion is negative which decreases the
stability value. Given soil surface resistance that is put
in the class of relatively hard, this region's stability is
decreased by 1.8%. Permeability is influenced by two
factors of litter and soil surface resistance while
having direct positive relationships due to soil texture
since soil texture of his region is not hard so that it has
high permeability.
5. CONCLUSION
Generally, landscape function analysis is introduced
as a suitable and simple method which assesses the
impacts of management measures on the basis of
functional and structural characteristics. In this paper,
the effects of contour furrow operation were
compared with control one; however, to investigate
the partial impacts of one management activity or a
grazing program, a monitoring plan can be designed
in order to study the qualitative and quantitative
variations of species functions and interpret the
destruction trend and range correction by the help of
these species and patches.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Authors express their thanks to department of range
and watershed management, University of Zabol for
providing necessary facilities to undertake this study.
REFERENCES
Abedi M, Arzani H (2004). Determination rangeland
health attribute by ecological indicators, a new
viewpoint in Range Assessment. Iranian
Journal of Range and Forest, 56: 24-56.
Ahmadi Z, Heshmati Gh A, Abedi M (2009).
Investigation the improvement operations
affection on ecological indexes of rangeland
health (Jahan Nama Garden, Golestan
province). Iranian Journal of Range and Desert
Reseach, 16 (1): 55-65.
Arzani H, Abedi M, Shahryari E, Ghorbani M (2007).
Investigation of soil surface indicators and
rangeland functional attributes by grazing
intensity and land cultivation (case study:
Orazan Taleghan). Iranian Journal of Range and
Desert Research, 14 (1): 68-79.
Azarnivand H, Zare Chahoki MA (2012). Range
Improvement. University of Tehran Press.
Tehran, Iran.
Bridge BJ, Mott JJ, Winter WH, Hartigan RJ (1983).
Improvement in soil structure resulting from
sown pastures on degraded areas in the dry
savanna woodlands of northern Australia
Australian. Soil Res., 21(1): 83 90.

454

International Journal of Scientific Research in Environmental Sciences, 2(12), pp. 449-456, 2014

Briske DD, Fuhlendruf SD, Smeins EF (2003).

Vegetation dynamics on rangelands: a critique
of the current paradigms. Journal of Appl.
Ecology, 40: 601614.
Ghelichnia H, Heshmati GA, Chaichi MR (2008). The
compare of assessment rangeland condition
with soil properties method and 4 factors
method in shrublands of Golestan National
Park.
Iranian
Journal
of
Watershed
Management
Research
(Pajouhesh
&
Sazandegi), 78: 41-50.
Ghoddousi J, Tavakoli M, Khalkhali SA, Soltani MJ
(2006). Assessing effect of rangeland exclusion
on control and reduction of soil erosion rate and
sediment yield. Iranian Journal of Watershed
Management
Research
(Pajouhesh
&
Sazandegi), 73: 136-142.
Heshmati GA, Naseri K, Ghanbarian G (2008).
Landscape function analysis: procedures for
monitoring and assessing landscape, Mshhad
Jahad Daneshgahi press, Mshhad, Iran.
Heshmati GA, Azimi MS, Ashouri P (2010).
Assessment of Structural Characteristics of
Fertilized Patch in Rangeland Ecosystems
(Case Study: Ghareh Ghir and Maraveh Tapeh
Rangelands of Golestan Province). Iranian
Journal of Range and Watershed Management,
63(3): 319-329.
Mogaddam
MR
(2006).
Range
and
Rangemanagement. 3rd edition, University of
Tehran press, Tehran, Iran.

Noy-Meir I (1973). Desert ecosystems: environment

and producers. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst.,
4:25-51.
Rezaei SA, Arzani H (2007). The use of soil surface
attributes in rangelands capability assessment.
Iranian Journal of Range and Desert Reseach,
14 (2):232-248.
Sabeti HA (1975). Relation between plant and
environment (synecology). Dehkhoda press,
Tehran, Iran.
SRM Task Group (Society for Range Management
Task Groups on Unity in Concept and
Terminology Committee, Society for Range
Management) (1995). New concepts for
assessment of rangeland condition. Journal of
range manage., 48: 271- 282.
Tongway DJ, Hindley NL (2004). Landscape
Function Analysis: a system for monitoring
rangeland function. Afr J Range Forage Sci.,
21: 41-45.
Toranjzar H, Abedi M, Ahmadi A, Ahmadi Z (2009).
Assessment of rangeland condition (health) in
Meyghan desert of Arak. Journal of Rangeland.,
3(2): 259-271.
Yari R, Tavili A, Zare S (2012). Investigation on soil
surface indicators and rangeland functional
attributes by Landscape Function Analysis
(LFA) (Case study: Sarchah Amari Birjand).
Iranian Journal of Range and Desert Reseach,
18 (4): 624-633.

455

Ebrahimi and Arab

Effects of Contour Furrow on Ecological Indices of Range Health Using Landscape Function Analysis (Case study:
Ghick Sheikha Rangeland, Jiroft, Iran)

Dr. Mahdieh Ebrahimi, is an assistant professor in Department of Range and Watershed

management, University of Zabol, Iran. She obtained M.Sc. and Ph. D degrees in Range
management from University of Tehran, Iran in 2006 and 2011 respectively. She has published
books, national and international research papers. Her field of interest includes Range
management and phytoremediation.

Mohadese Arab obtained a Bachelor of Science Degree in Range and watershed management in
2010 and Master of Science Degree in Range management in 2012 from University of Zabol,
Iran. She works with University of Bahonar, Kerman, Iran as a Research Officer at the
Department of Natural Resources. Her current research is focuses on range and watershed
management. To date, she has published several scientific articles related to reclamation of
rangelands.

456