This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier.

The attached
copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
and sharing with colleagues.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.elsevier.com/copyright
 Author's personal copy

Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 140 (2011) 430–440

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/agee

Species richness and aboveground carbon stocks in the homegardens of central

Kerala, India
B. Mohan Kumar ∗
College of Forestry, Kerala Agricultural University, KAU P.O., Thrissur, Kerala 680656, India

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

Article history: Tropical homegardens with high agrobiodiversity have high potential for carbon (C) sequestration, espe-
Received 27 October 2010 cially under changing environments. Floristic diversity, richness, and aboveground C stocks and how size
Received in revised form 8 January 2011 of homegardens influence agrobiodiversity and C sequestration potential were assessed in the Kerala
Accepted 10 January 2011
homegardens. A total of 839 homegardens in 28 panchayaths (lowest unit of local self-government) of
Available online 1 February 2011
Thrissur, Palakkad, and Malappuram districts were surveyed through a stratified random process. Infor-
mation was gathered on holding size, floristic composition, plant height, and girth at breast height (GBH)
Keywords:
of all trees and shrubs (>20 cm GBH). Aboveground C stocks of trees were computed using allometric
Agrobiodiversity
Biomass equations
relationships, assuming C as 50% of biomass. The homegardens were also classified into small (<0.4 ha),
Carbon sequestration medium (0.4–1.2 ha), and large (>1.2 ha). In total, 473 species were recorded, of which 208 were trees
Homegarden size (>20 cm GBH), 86 shrubs, and 179 herbs. Simpson’s floristic diversity index (0.64, 0.41, and 0.46 for a
Species richness subset of small, medium, and large homegardens, respectively), species richness, and tree density (per
hectare) were highest for small-sized holdings. Large-sized homegardens, however, had more stems per
garden. Average aboveground standing stocks of C ranged from 16 to 36 Mg ha−1 , with small homegar-
dens having higher C stocks on unit area basis than large- and medium-sized ones. Implicit in this is the
potential for C sequestration and agrobiodiversity conservation, especially by small homegardens.
© 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Erosion of farmland biodiversity is one of the most serious prob-
lems in ecosystem management today (Benton, 2007). Agricultural
intensification in the past has decimated many traditional land use
systems, which customarily preserved landraces and cultivars, as
well as rare and endangered species. Decline in landscape diversity
also resulted in reduced on-farm availability of green manure, fod-
der, and firewood resources and increased dependence on adjacent
forests for these resources (Kumar and Takeuchi, 2009). Although
land use changes in the recent past have altered the species compo-
sition in tropical ecosystems, the complex micro-zonal pattern of
certain traditional land use systems such as tropical homegardens,
have the potential to maintain high species richness and diversity
(Kumar and Nair, 2004).
Land use changes have also contributed substantially to the ris-
ing concentration of CO2 in the earth’s atmosphere. The current
average annual increase is about 1.5 ␮L L−1 (1.5 ppm), with a pre-
dicted doubling of the pre-industrial concentrations by the end of
∗ Present address: GEODE, University of Toulouse Le Mirail, Maison de la
Recherche, 5 Allee Anotonio Machado, 3158, Toulouse Cedex 9, France.
Tel.: +91 4872370050; fax: +91 4872371040; mobile: +33 602 305639.
E-mail address: bmkumar.kau@gmail.com
the 21st century (IPCC, 2001). The importance of lowering atmo-
spheric levels of CO2 to ameliorate the global climatic changes,
therefore, cannot be overstated. Expanding the size of the global
terrestrial sink is one strategy for mitigation of CO2 build-up in the
atmosphere. Under the Kyoto Protocol’s Article 3.3, A & R (afforesta-
tion and reforestation) with agroforestry as a part of it has been
recognized as an option for mitigating greenhouse gases. As a result,
there is now increasing awareness on agroforesty’s potential for
carbon (C) sequestration (Nair et al., 2009, 2010).
While most agroforestry systems (e.g., multipurpose trees, sil-
vopasture, and energy plantations) have great potential for C
sequestration, homegardens are unique in this respect. They not
only sequester C in biomass and soil, but also reduce fossil-fuel
burning by promoting woodfuel production, and conserve agro-
biodiversity (Kumar and Nair, 2004). In addition, they help in the
conservation of C stocks in existing natural forests by alleviat-
ing the pressure on these areas (Kumar, 2006). Moreover, there
is no complete removal of biomass from the homegardens, signi-
fying the permanence of these systems. The homegarden system,
thus, is remarkably resilient, which is an added advantage, con-
sidering that lack of stability or permanence of the C sequestered
is a major concern in C sequestration projects (UNFCCC, 2007).
More than half of the C assimilated by woody perennials in this
system is also transported belowground via root growth and
organic matter turnover processes (e.g., fine root dynamics, rhi-

0167-8809/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.agee.2011.01.006
 Author's personal copy
B.M. Kumar / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 140 (2011) 430–440
Fig. 1. Map of Kerala (India) showing the three study districts of Thrissur, Palakkad,
and Malappuram (shaded region).
zodeposition, and litter dynamics), augmenting the soil organic
carbon (SOC) pool (Kumar, 2006).
Greater agrobiodiversity of homegardens also may ensure
longer term stability of C storage in fluctuating environments
(Henry et al., 2009), apart from augmenting biomass production
potential (Kumar, 2006). The forest-like structure and composi-
tion of the homegardens (Kumar and Nair, 2004) and the specific
management practices that tend to enhance nutrient cycling and
increase SOC (Montagnini, 2006) are particularly relevant in this
respect. Homegarden size and survival strategies of the gardeners
are other determinants of biomass (Kumar et al., 1994) and soil C
(Saha et al., 2010) pools. However, precise quantitative estimates
on the potential of tropical homegardens to sequester atmospheric
CO2 are scarce (Kumar, 2006; Saha et al., 2009, 2010). Species
diversity of tropical homegardens is also quite variable (Kumar
and Nair, 2004) depending on the geographical location, size of
the garden, gardeners’ socioeconomic status, and managerial inter-
ventions. Hence, a field study was conducted in central Kerala
to evaluate the floristic elements of tropical homegardens, assess
their aboveground C stocks, and examine how holding size impacts
aboveground C sequestration in the studied homegardens of Kerala.
2. Materials and methods
The study sites were located in central Kerala, India
(Fig. 1). Three districts namely, Thrissur (10◦ 10 –10◦ 46 N and
431
76◦ 55 –77◦ 05 E), Palakkad (10◦ 21 –11◦ 14 N and 76◦ 02 –76◦ 54 E)
and Malappuram (10–12◦ N and 75–77◦ E) were chosen considering
proximity to Western Ghats, one of the biodiversity hotspots of the
world (Nayar, 2010), and where homegardens constitute a predom-
inant land use activity (Kumar and Nair, 2004; Kumar and Takeuchi,
2009). Surveys were conducted from September 2004 to November
2006. The predominant soil types, number of households, and other
details of the selected panchayaths are described in Kumar et al.
(2005) and Kumar (2008). The methodology involved a two-stage
stratified random sampling in which about 10% of the panchay-
aths (lowest form of local self-government) in these districts were
randomly selected (KSLUB, 1995), i.e., 10 each of the 99 panchay-
aths in Thrissur and 94 panchayaths in Malappuram, and eight of
the 89 panchayaths of Palakkad were chosen (total sampled area
335.14 ha). This sampling intensity was thought to provide a cost-
effective approach to describe the homegarden diversity. It is also
more than the 5% sampling intensity recommended by Boyd et al.
(1981). Furthermore, a 10% sampling intensity at the first stage level
is generally adopted in forest resource assessments (FRA, 2000).
In the first stage of the survey, a reconnaissance of the 28 ran-
domly selected panchayaths was performed to identify the land use
pattern and the presence or absence of certain species (e.g., bam-
boos (Bambusa bambos (L.) Voss)) in the gardens. This was followed
by a more detailed survey in which ∼30 households per panchay-
ath were randomly selected (a total of 839 holdings). All common
herbs, shrubs, and trees were recorded in the field and speci-
mens of the less familiar species were collected for identification
by comparisons with collections at the College of Forestry, Vel-
lanikkara, following the nomenclature of Sasidharan and Sivarajan
(1996). Major uses of plants as indicated by the respondents and
as reported in the literature (e.g., CSIR, 1948–1956; Kumar et al.,
1994; Muraleedharan et al., 2005) were also noted. All scattered
trees and shrubs (>20 cm girth at breast height) on the homestead
and borders were enumerated by measuring their height and girth
at breast height (GBH) using a clinometer and tape respectively,
except for palms and rubber (Hevea brasiliensis H.B.K. M.-Arg.). For
palms other than coconut (Cocos nucifera L.), mean height corre-
sponding to 10 trees (wherever available), and the frequency of
occurrence were recorded. For coconut palms, age as reported by
the garden owner and the number of palms were recorded. For rub-
ber trees also, the average girth at breast height of 10 trees and the
number of trees were noted. The GBH of all bamboo clumps in the
selected homegardens was measured after removing the overhang-
ing thorns. Information on holding size and other socioeconomic
parameters were gathered through a questionnaire survey.
2.1. Computations and statistical analysis of the data
Tree biomass was computed using the following equations (cal-
culated for each individual tree and then summed up).
• All dicot trees: Y = exp{−2.134 + 2.530 × ln(D)} where Y = biomass
per tree in kg, exp = exponential function, D = diameter at
breast height in cm. This equation predicts the trunk and
canopy biomass of moist (1500–4000 mm rainfall) forest trees
(D < 80 cm) with reasonable precision (R2 = 0.97) and has become
a standard approach (FAO, 2004).
• Coconut palms: Y = 5.5209x + 89.355 (R2 = 0.89 Y = dry weight, kg;
x = tree age, years; Kumar and Russell, unpublished data).
• All other palm trees (areca palm or Areca catechu L., palmyra palm
or Borassus flabellifer L., etc.): Y = 4.5 + 7.7H where Y = biomass, kg
and H = stem height (m) (Brown, 1997).
• Bamboo (Bambusa spp.): ln Y = 4.437 + 2.576 ln(DBH) where Y is
the total dry weight (kg) and DBH is clump diameter at breast
height (m) (Kumar et al., 2005).
 Author's personal copy

432 B.M. Kumar / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 140 (2011) 430–440

Table 1
Number of species present and aboveground carbon stocks of trees (>20 cm girth at breast height) in the homegardens of selected 28 panchayaths of central Kerala, India.

Panchayath District Number of species C stocks (Mg ha−1 )a

Herbs Shrubs Trees Total Mean Std. error

Athirappilly Thrissur 101 56 90 247 16.91 1.26

Avinissery Thrissur 91 51 85 227 16.31 0.77
Edarikkode Malappuram 120 61 136 317 35.76 1.31
Edavanna Malappuram 122 60 146 328 32.29 1.72
Kadangode Thrissur 99 57 97 253 16.96 0.74
Kalikavu Malappuram 117 67 124 308 28.42 1.73
Kandanassery Thrissur 95 47 82 224 16.57 0.82
Keezhattur Malappuram 119 70 130 319 35.16 2.05
Kottayi Palakkad 96 46 128 270 19.97 1.09
Kulukkallur Palakkad 106 49 137 292 19.45 1.01
Mullassery Thrissur 71 41 66 178 23.89 1.18
Mundur Palakkad 103 50 115 268 26.62 1.59
Muthalamada Palakkad 102 52 127 281 23.64 1.40
Nenmanikkara Thrissur 54 35 66 155 21.67 0.74
Padiyur Thrissur 115 69 75 259 25.23 1.83
Perumbadappu Malappuram 116 68 124 308 22.04 1.11
Peruvemba Palakkad 93 56 121 270 23.51 0.96
Poyya Thrissur 52 32 71 155 23.27 1.59
Punnayurkkulam Thrissur 59 39 77 175 23.77 1.56
Sreekrishnapuram Palakkad 103 52 127 282 23.40 0.94
Tanur Malappuram 114 58 128 300 26.80 1.56
Thirumittacode Palakkad 101 48 135 284 18.01 1.93
Thiruvilwamala Thrissur 64 39 76 179 20.68 1.29
Urungattiri Malappuram 119 69 129 311 33.37 1.99
Vadakkancheri Palakkad 92 50 88 230 23.09 2.18
Vattamkulam Malappuram 115 63 121 299 24.39 1.5
Veliancode Malappuram 125 65 129 318 30.05 1.82
Vettathur Malappuram 116 66 120 302 29.81 1.77

Mean 99 54 109 262 24.32

−8
a
Based on biomass stock estimates: 50% total biomass stock; probability level at which panchayaths differ = 3.58741 × 10 ; probability level at which holding sizes
differ = 0.00012398.

Aboveground C stocks of trees were computed on the basis
of area of homegarden, which included the area used for herba-
ceous crop production (often in association with trees) and the
portions used for residential purposes. Although reported as C
sequestration potential, the values are based on biomass stock esti-
mates: 50% total biomass stock was taken as C stock. The sampled
homegardens (panchayath-wise) were also classified based on size
into small (<0.4 ha), medium (0.4–1.2 ha), and large (>1.2 ha). In
total, there were 284 small, 330 medium, and 225 large home-
gardens. Panchayath-wise mean carbon stocks for small, medium,
and large gardens were analyzed using two-factor ANOVA in MS-
Excel. Herb and shrub C stocks were, however, not included in
this assuming that their contribution to the total C stocks is rela-
tively small, compared to that of the trees. Indeed, the multi-tiered
canopy architecture of tropical homegardens (Kumar and Nair,
2004) seldom allows substantial understorey growth, besides the
shade tolerant understorey crops when grown are also regularly
harvested by the homegardeners. In mixed species experimental
systems in Palakkad district, however, the understorey herbage
mass ranged from 0.31 to 6.16 Mg ha−1 (Kumar et al., 2001), imply-
ing profound variability in this respect.
Data from a subset of three panchayaths with high floristic rich-
ness (number of species), one each in the three sampled districts
(Edavanna in Malappuram, Kulukkallur in Palakkad and Padiyur
in Thrissur),
 were used for computing Simpson’s diversity index
(D = 1 − p2i , where D is the diversity index, pi is the proportion
of individuals in the ith species: Simpson, 1949) and for elucidat-
ing garden size vs. species richness relationships. Species richness
or accumulation (number of woody species as well as herbaceous
species present) and stocking levels (number of stems per garden)
of woody perennial species (>20 cm girth at breast height) were
deduced from the homegarden survey data and density of woody
perennial species calculated by dividing number of such stems per
garden by its size. To evaluate the interrelationships between floris-
tic richness and garden size, data on the number of herbs, shrubs,
and trees (unit area basis and absolute values) from the subset of
selected panchayaths were regressed on size of homegardens in
MS-Excel.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Species spectrum
There was tremendous variability in the number of taxa present
in the homesteads. Aggregate number of species per panchay-
ath ranged from 155 to 319 (52–125 herbs, 32–70 shrubs, and
66–146 trees: Table 1). Altogether 463 species were recorded from
all selected panchayaths in the three selected districts, of which
208 were trees (GBH > 20 cm), 86 shrubs, and 169 herbs (Appendix
1). Coconut palms constituted the predominant tree component
of the homegardens, as observed by Kumar et al. (1994). Bam-
boos were present in 2.23–7.4% of the homegardens (Kumar et al.,
2005; Kumar, 2008) and many other multipurpose trees and shrubs
were also present in the homegardens (Appendix 1). Although the
present list of 208 trees and 86 shrubs (total of 294 for woody
species) is substantially greater than the earlier inventories (Nair
and Sreedharan, 1986; Kumar et al., 1994: 30–127 arboreal species),
it is comparable to the inventories of arboreal species available from
other parts of the world. For instance, 301 trees and shrubs were
reported from the Mayan homegardens of Yucatan, Mexico (Rico-
Gray et al., 1991). Many herbaceous components were also noted in
our study locations. The total tally of herbs, shrubs, and trees (463),
however, was much lower than that of 602 species in Javanese agro-
forests (Karyono, 1990) but higher than the species counts reported
for North-eastern Thailand (230: Black et al., 1996), Western Kenya
(253: Backes, 2001), Zaire (272: Mpoyi et al., 1994), and Nicaragua
(324: Méndez et al., 2001). A summary of the homegarden species
 Author's personal copy

B.M. Kumar / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 140 (2011) 430–440 433

Table 2
Diversity, richness, and stocking level of woody perennial species (>20 cm girth at breast height) in the small-, medium-, and large-sized homegardens of three selected
panchayaths in central Kerala, India.

Panchayath Simpson’s index (D)a Species richness (number of woody Stocking (number of stems of all
species/garden) woody species per garden)

S M L S M L S M L

Edavanna 0.50 (0.032) 0.32 (0.028) 0.44 (0.056) 14 (0.5) 14 (0.3) 15 (0.4) 66 (8.3) 241 (34.5) 428 (50.3)
Kulukkallur 0.76 (0.034) 0.55 (0.032) 0.55 (0.029) 14 (0.9) 20 (0.7) 22 (0.4) 54 (19.1) 153 (16.4) 217 (15.2)
Padiyur 0.67 (0.027) 0.35 (0.056) 0.38 (0.052) 6 (0.3) 8 (0.5) 9 (0.5) 18 (1.9) 137 (19.7) 295 (25.7)

Mean 0.64 0.41 0.46 11 14 15 46 177 313

a
Woody perennial species (>20 cm girth at breast height); S = small (<0.4 ha), M = medium (0.4–1.2 ha), and L = large (>1.2 ha); values in parentheses are standard errors.

300 0.46, respectively. In a previous study covering 252 homegardens

throughout the state of Kerala, Kumar et al. (1994) also reported
Small Medium Large All
similar values and trends for woody perennial Simpson’s diversity
Mean number of species/panchayath

250
200
150
100
50
0
Herbs Shrubs Trees
Fig. 2. Average number of herbs, shrubs, and tree species per panchayath in the small
(<0.4 ha), medium (0.4–1.2 ha), and large (>1.2 ha) homegardens of central Kerala,
India. Error bars indicate standard errors.
inventory from diverse parts of the world is available in Kumar and
Nair (2004). Many homegarden floristic elements also had multi-
ple uses such as timber, fuelwood, fodder, medicines, gums, resins,
latex and the like (Appendix 1), denoting the rationale for their
inclusion/retention by the homegardeners.
Floristic richness decreased in the order of medium-, small-, and
large-sized holdings (Fig. 2). The aggregate number of species was
145, 173, and 138, respectively, for the small-, medium-, and large-
sized gardens in the three districts. Woody perennials accounted
for a considerable proportion of the floristic spectrum in all hold-
ing size categories. For example, there were 26–87 tree species
and 17–45 shrubs per panchayath for small gardens, 32–114 trees
and 20–56 shrubs for the medium category, and 36–103 trees and
10–54 shrubs for large gardens. The number of herbs per panchay-
ath for the small, medium, and large holding size categories was
20–77, 20–102, and 17–75, respectively.
As can be seen from Table 2, Simpson’s diversity indexes for
woody taxa were highest for small gardens (0.64). The corre-
sponding values for medium and large gardens were 0.41 and
indexes (0.606, 0.441, and 0.459, respectively, for small, medium,
and large holdings). The number of woody species per garden
(6–15) and stocking levels (total number of stems per garden:
18–428), however, were greater in the sampled large gardens, com-
pared with small- and medium-sized ones (Table 2).
There were nonetheless far more trees in the small gardens
on a unit area basis (Table 3). Mean density of dicot MPTs in the
small homegardens equaled 71 trees ha−1 , while that of medium
and large ones were 26 and 16, respectively. The corresponding fig-
ures for all woody perennials (dicot MPTs + palms + bamboo) were
194, 214, and 150, of which coconut and areca palms constituted
the predominant species in all holding size classes. This two-way
Total comparison of tree stocking (whole garden basis: Table 2) and tree
density (unit area basis: Table 3) allows to highlight the differen-
tial garden management strategies adopted by owners of variously
sized gardens. The small homegardeners in particular adopt denser
planting and more intensive management compared to medium
and large ones.
The small homegardens not only had higher density of woody
taxa, but also showed greater accumulation of other species. Con-
sistent with this, species richness (herbs + shrubs + trees) reflecting
species accumulation on a unit area basis followed a negative expo-
nential trend with increasing size of homegardens (Fig. 3). Absolute
number of species, however, increased as the size increased, albeit
modestly. Data from three selected panchayaths with high floristic
richness only are presented in Fig. 3. But other panchayaths also
exhibited a similar pattern (data not presented). Overall, species
richness vs. homegarden size relationships conformed to a general
pattern of small- and medium-sized homegardens having greater
accumulation of all species on a unit land area than the large
ones. Mean number of herbs + shrubs + trees (±standard error) per
hectare were: 137.6 ± 5.65, 39.3 ± 1.38, and 19.3 ± 1.27, respec-
tively, for small, medium, and large homegardens.
Implicit in the high floristic richness of the relatively small-
and medium-sized gardens is the potential of these gardens to
serve as repositories of species/genetic diversity. This indicates
the tendency of these homegardeners to grow a wide spectrum

Table 3
Density of woody perennial species (>20 cm girth at breast height) in small-, medium-, and large-sized homegardens in three selected panchayaths of central Kerala, India.

Panchayath Gardens Density (mean number of woody perennials per hectare)

sampled (n)
Small Medium Large

Dicots All Dicots All Dicots All

Edavanna 30 65 (4.05) 262 (27.00) 27 (1.47) 277 (40.12) 19 (0.97) 168 (8.88)
Kulukkallur 30 83 (7.54) 160 (14.83) 33 (3.81) 158 (11.34) 21 (1.27) 143 (11.34)
Padiyur 30 66 (6.84) 155 (14.51) 19 (1.87) 206 (28.76) 9 (0.42) 138 (12.12)

Mean 71 192 26 214 16 150

Values in parentheses are standard errors, All = dicots + palms + bamboos. Small ≤ 0.4 ha, medium = 0.4–1.2 ha, and large ≥ 1.2 ha.
 Author's personal copy

434 B.M. Kumar / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 140 (2011) 430–440

250 Edavanna 250 Kulukkallur 250 Padiyur

y = 39.519x-0.786
y = 32.445x-0.966 R² = 0.9432 y = 25.299x-0.844
200 R² = 0.9973 200 200 R² = 0.9814
Number of species

Number of species
Number os species
Total species
150 Total species 150 Species/ha 150
Species/ha Total species
Species/ha
100 100 y = 12.776x + 26.073 100
y = 1.4956x + 30.744 R² = 0.5362
R² = 0.2823 y = 4.6273x + 19.231
50 50 50 R² = 0.5088

0 0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Homegarden size (ha) Homegarden size (ha) Homegarden size (ha)

Fig. 3. Species richness (herbs + shrubs + trees) vs. size of homegardens in three selected thaluks with highest species richness in Malappuram (Edavanna), Palakkad
(Kulukkallur), and Thrissur (Padiyur) districts of central Kerala, India.

of woody perennials and herbaceous species, which form com- The C stock estimates are considered approximations of the C
plementary associations and ensure efficient utilization of site sequestration potential (CSP) (Saha et al., 2009). Therefore, it is rea-
resources (Kumar, 2006). Increased tree and plant density (stock- sonable to deduce that increasing plant species richness increases
ing) as well as diversity may be strategies particularly of the smaller CSP of the homegardens. In general, homegardens resemble young
farmers to ensure higher availability of multiple products on the secondary forests in structure and biomass accumulation and may
farm itself. be considered as a human-made forest kept in a permanent early
With regard to the size class distribution of individuals, most successional state with considerable productive potential (Kumar
tree species were represented in all size classes suggesting that and Nair, 2004). Homegardens that mimic the structure and diver-
homegardens are dynamic as well as sustainable land use systems sity of mature evergreen forest formations represent the second
(data not presented). Kumar et al. (1994), however, reported that highest biomass CSPs, after the mature forests (Kumar, 2006). The
the diameter structure of Kerala homegardens represents a slightly multi-layered woody perennial dominated homegarden systems
skewed distribution, having the highest frequency in the 20–30 cm of central Kerala, however, demonstrated considerable variability,
classes. Implicit in the skewed distribution is perhaps the intensive although no predictable pattern was discernible among the pan-
management practices adopted by the farmers such as controlled chayaths. Heterogeneous species mixes, differences in site quality,
regeneration and/or spaced planting along with harvesting of trees holding size, and stand management practices may account for such
as soon as they attain certain dimensions. variability, signifying that each homegarden is a unique entity, as
reported earlier (e.g., Kumar and Nair, 2004).
3.2. Standing stocks of carbon in the homegardens
3.3. Carbon credits and ecosystem services from the
Notwithstanding the variability among gardens (floristic ele- multifunctional homegardens
ments, size, and management) and assuming that homegardens
are “steady-state systems” (Kumar and Nair, 2004), an attempt was It is now widely recognized that sink-related clean development
made to compute the aboveground C stocks of homegarden trees mechanism (CDM) projects can promote sustainable development
(>20 cm GBH). Average aboveground standing stocks of C ranged and resilience of the smallholder production systems (UNFCCC,
from 16 to 36 Mg ha−1 with standard error values in the range 2004). Sink-related CDM projects could also represent financial
of 0.74–2.18 (Table 1). Variability among the panchayaths in this inflows especially for developing countries (Nair et al., 2010). Car-
respect (p < 0.0001) may be because of differences in garden com- bon trading is also rapidly expanding, now that the World Bank and
position, site characteristics, management practices, and holding other multilateral institutions have established funds to facilitate
sizes in different physiographic zones such as midlands, highlands the establishment of CDM projects. Carbon storage through agro-
and coastal plains of Kerala. The average stocks presently reported forestry being less costly (approximately $1–69 Mg−1 C, median
are also lower than that of Javanese and Sumatran homegardens
(35.3–58.6 Mg ha−1 : Jensen, 1993; Roshetko et al., 2002), as well
30
as mature (>35-year old) agroforests (101 Mg ha−1 ) and secondary
Carbon stock (Mg C ha–1)

forests of Sumatra (86 Mg ha−1 ) but higher than that of the young 25
(9-year old) Sumatran agroforests (14 Mg ha−1 : Roshetko et al., 20
2002). Woodlots in Palakkad district, Kerala, India, also showed C
stocks in the range of 7.8–163.2 Mg ha−1 , implying that profound 15
species-related variations are possible in this respect (Kumar et al., 10
1998; Nair et al., 2009).
5
Size of gardens was a major factor affecting C stocks per unit
area (p < 0.001) and it decreased in the order small > medium > large 0
(Fig. 4). Saha et al. (2009) reported similar results for soil organic Small Medium Large
carbon stocks in the homegardens of Thrissur, Kerala. In that study, Homegarden size class categories
smaller gardens (>0.4 ha) with generally higher species density,
Fig. 4. Aboveground carbon stocks of trees (>20 cm GBH) in small (<0.4 ha), medium
richness, and diversity compared with larger (<0.4 ha) gardens had (0.4–1.2 ha), and large (>1.2 ha) sized homegardens of central Kerala, India. Error
higher SOC per unit volume of soil. bars indicate standard errors.
 Author's personal copy

B.M. Kumar / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 140 (2011) 430–440 435

$13 Mg−1 C) than through other CO2 mitigating options (Albrecht
and Kandji, 2003) and monoculture plantations (Kumar, 2006), the
tropical homegardens have special significance in this respect. As
explained, homegardens sequester C by increasing C stocks. Con-
servation of agrobiodiversity is yet another advantage and the
production of timber and non-timber products offsets the pres-
sure on natural forests for these goods and services. Payments for
C sequestration through homegardening would also promote local
incomes. Homegardening thus not only meets the conditions of a
CDM project but also provides a win–win strategy for involving the
small-scale farmers in climate change mitigation and adaptation
initiatives and agrobiodiversity conservation.
Although a number of CDM projects have been initiated as pilot
Appendix 1.
Plant species found in the homegardens of central Kerala,
India (Uses: 1. Timber, 2. Food & beverages, 3. Fodder, 4.
Fuel/Charcoal, 5. Green manure, 6. Nitrogen-fixer, 7. Fibre/flosses,
8. Glues/resins/chemicals, 9. Latex, 10. Dyes, 11. Spices, 12.
Apiculture/sericulture/lac culture, 13. Oil (essential/fatty), 14.
Cleaning/polishing agents, 15. Religious, 16. Medicinal, 17. Toxins
(poisons/repellents), 18. Paper/pulp, 19. Matchwood, 20. Tannin,
21. Waxes, 22. Ornamental, and 23. Other uses).
Botanical name Local name Uses

activities around the globe, in alliance with non-governmental or Trees

development agencies, none of these as of date, are on tropical Acacia auriculiformis A. Wattle 1, 4, 6, 18, 20
Cunn. ex Benth.
homegardens, implying that the potential of homegardens as a
Acacia catechu Willd. Karingali, Cutch 1, 2, 3, 4, 16
strategy for carbon sequestration has not yet been fully recognized, tree
let alone exploited (Kumar, 2006). Yet, the homegarden system Acacia mangium Willd. Mangium 1, 4
offers considerable scope to improve biomass accumulation and Acacia nilotica (L) Del. Babul 1, 4, 16, 20
economic efficiency. The potential of these multifunctional systems Adenanthera pavonina L. Manjadi 1, 10, 13, 16
Aegle marmelos (L.) Corr. Koovalam 3, 4, 16
for ecosystem services such as enriching the soil organic matter sta-
Ailanthus excelsa Roxb. Peemaram 1, 3, 4, 8, 16
tus and maintaining species diversity in the managed ecosystems Ailanthus triphysa (Dennst.) Matti 1, 4, 8, 17, 19
also cannot be underestimated. Alston.
Albizia amara (Roxb.) Boiv. Nenmenivaka 4, 16
Albizia chinensis (Osb.) Ponthanvaka 1, 4, 16, 17
Merr.
4. Conclusions and limitations
Albizia lebbeck (L.) Willd. Vaka 1, 3, 4, 5, 12
Albizia odoratissima (L. f.) Kunnivaka, 1, 3, 4, 6, 13, 18, 20
Loss of biodiversity and rising levels of atmospheric CO2 levels Benth. Pulivaka
are two major environmental challenges facing the world today. Albizia procera (Roxb.) Vellavaka 1, 6, 8, 13, 16, 18, 20
Revival of traditional land use systems such as tropical home- Benth.
Alstonia scholaris (L.) R. Br. Pala 1, 16
gardens has the potential to move agrobiodiversity conservation Alstonia venenata R.Br. Theeppala 16
and climate change mitigation one step forward. The most impor- Anacardium occidentale L. Cashew tree 2, 4, 8, 13
tant structural attribute of homegardens is the great diversity of Annona muricata L. Soursop 2, 16
herbs, shrubs, vines, trees, other perennials, which may be a conse- Annona reticulata L. Custard-apple 2, 4, 16
Annona squamosa L. Sweet-sop 2, 4, 16
quence of the interplay of several socioeconomic and biophysical
Anogeissus latifolia (Roxb. Axlewood 1, 4, 8, 16
processes. Overall, this study showed that floristic richness of the ex DC.) Wall. ex Guill. &
Kerala homegardens is quite substantial, which is consistent with Perr.
the previous reports. Structural characteristics of homegardens Araucaria heterophylla Xmas tree 1, 16, 22
such as size of the garden are a major determinant of species rich- (Salisb.) Franco
Areca catechu L. Areca palm 1, 16, 23
ness, tree stocking, and CSP. Species richness on total homegarden Artocarpus communis J. R. & Breadfruit 1, 2, 23
area basis increased as the size of the gardens increased, but the G. Frost.
number of species per unit area declined. Aboveground C stock also Artocarpus heterophyllus Jack tree 1, 2, 3, 4
co-varied with garden size, with small homegardens having higher Lamk.
Artocarpus hirsuta Lam. Ayani, anjili 1, 3
values than medium- and large-sized holdings. Soil C sequestration
Averrhoa bilimbi L. Irumbanpuli 2, 16
potential of such systems also may be correspondingly high. Higher Averrhoa carambola L. Starfruit 2, 16
species richness (woody perennials) may ensure greater stability of Azadirachta indica Adr. Juss. Neem 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 12, 13, 16, 17, 20
the soil organic matter fractions soil, especially at lower soil depths. Bambusa bambos (L.) Voss. Bamboo 1, 2, 18, 23
However, our data are inadequate to make firm conclusions in this Bambusa vulgaris Wendl. ex Yellow bamboo 1, 2, 18, 22, 23
Nees
regard. Yet another limitation of the study is the use of generalized Bauhinia acuminata L. Vellamandaram 2, 4, 16, 22
biomass equations to predict aboveground C stocks of dicot trees. Bauhinia malabarica Roxb. Butterfly tree 7, 16, 20
Although species-specific local biomass prediction models would Bauhinia purpurea L. Mandaram 2, 16, 22
have improved the precision of these estimates, for a vast major- Bauhinia tomentosa L. Manjamandaram 16, 22
Bauhinia variegata L. Purple mandaram 2, 16, 22
ity of homegarden tree species, such equations are not available.
Bombax ceiba L. Silk cotton tree 1, 7, 19
Nevertheless, in a broader context, these results have implica- Bombax insigne Wall. Parapoola 1, 7
tions on the role of traditional smallholder tree-based production Borassus flabellifer L. Palmyra palm 1, 2, 23
systems in greenhouse mitigation through vegetation and soil C Bridelia retusa (L.) Spreng. Mullankaini 1, 4, 20
storage. Butea monosperma (Lam.) Plashu 1, 4, 6, 8, 12, 13, 16, 20, 21
Taub.
Caesalpinia coriaria Willd. Dividivi 2, 16, 22
Caesalpinia pulcherrima L. Rajamalli 22
Acknowledgements Caesalpinia sappan L. Pathimukam, 1, 2, 16, 22
Sappanwood
This research has been financed in part by a grant made by the Callistemon citrinus (Curtis) Bottlebrush 22, 23
Skeels.
Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi under the AP
Calophyllum austro-indicum Kattupunna 16
Cess Fund Schemes. K.G. Sudheesh and G. Rajesh assisted in the Kosterm.
fieldwork and compilation of data. The cooperation of the survey
participants is also gratefully acknowledged.
 Author's personal copy

436 B.M. Kumar / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 140 (2011) 430–440

Botanical name Local name Uses Botanical name Local name Uses

Calophyllum inophyllum L. Punna 1, 13 Holarrhena pubescens Kudakappala 1, 16

Cananga odorata (Lam.) ylang-ylang 1, 13, 16 (Buch.-Ham.) Wall. ex
Hook. f. & Thoms. Don.
Carallia brachiata (Lour.) Vallabam 1, 4, 16 Holigarna arnottiana Hk.f. Cheru 8, 16, 19
Merr. Holoptelea integrifolia Aaval 4
Careya arborea Roxb. Pezhu 1, 16, 23 (Roxb.) Planch.
Carica papaya L. Papaya 4, 16, 17 Hopea parviflora Bedd. Kampakam 1
Caryota urens L. Chundapana 1, 3, 7 Hydnocarpus alpina Wight. Marotti 1, 8, 13, 23
Cassia fistula L. Kanikonna 1, 4, 5, 8, 10, 13, 16, 20 Hydnocarpus pentandra Neerootti 13, 16
Cassia roxburghii DC. Purple cassia 1, 2, 22 (Buch.-Ham.) Oken.
Casuarina equisetifolia J.R. & Casuarina 1, 4, 6, 10, 18, 20, 21 Knema attenuate (Wall ex Chorapathiri 8, 16
G. Forst. Hook. f & Thoms.) Warb.
Ceiba pentandra (L.) Gaertn. Kapok 7, 23 Lagerstroemia flos-reginae Manimaruthu 22
Cerbera odollam Gaertn. Sea mango, 4, 17 Retz.
Odollum Lagerstroemia microcarpa Venteak 1
Chrysophyllum cainito L. Star apple 2 Wt.
Cinnamomum malabatrum Vayana 11, 16 Lagerstroemia parviflora Chenengi 1, 2, 4
(Burm. f.) Blume Roxb.
Cinnamomum zeylanicum Cinnamon 11, 16 Lagerstroemia speciosa (L.) Poomaruthu 22
Blume Pers.
Citrus aurantium L. Vadukappuli 2, 16 Lannea coromandelica Kara 1, 3, 4, 5, 16, 18, 20
Citrus maxima (Burm.) Pummelo 2 (Houtt.) Merr.
Merr. Leucaena leucocephala Subabul 3, 4
Citrus medica L. Ganapathinarakam 2, 16 (Lamk.) de Wit.
Citrus sp. Narakam 2 Macaranga peltata (Roxb.) Vatta 1, 3, 4
Cleistanthus collinus (Roxb.) Odugu 1, 8, 16 M.-A.
Benth. Madhuca longifolia L. Mahua 1, 2, 16, 23
Cocos nucifera L. Coconut 1, 2, 4, 7 Mallotus philippensis (Lam.) Chenkolli 4
Coffea spp. Coffee 1, 2, 4 M.-A.
Commiphora caudata Kilimaram 16, 23 Mangifera indica L. Mango tree 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 12
(Wight & Arn.) Engl. Manihot glaziovii Müll.-Arg Ceara rubber 9
Corypha umbraculifera L. Kudapana 16, 23 Manilkara zapota (L.) van Sapota 2
Crataeva magna (Lour.) DC. Neermadhalam 16 Royen.
Cullenia exarillata Robyns. Vediplavu 1, 23 Melia dubia Cav. Malaveppu 8, 16
Dalbergia lanceolaria L. f. Pachilamaram 8, 16 Melicope lunu-ankenda Nashakam 1, 8, 16
Dalbergia sissoides DC. Malabar blackwood 1, 16 (Gaertn.) T. Harley
Delonix regia (Boj.) Rafin. Poomaram 4, 6, 12 Memecylon molestum (Cl.) Memecylon 4, 10
Dillenia pentagyna Roxb. Vazhapunna 4, 16 Cogn.
Diospyros buxifolia (Bl.) Malamuringa 1, 8, 16 Michelia champaca L. Chempakam 1, 22
Heirn. Miliusa tomentosa (Roxb.) Kanakaitha 1, 16, 23
Diospyros ebenum J.König Ebony 1, 16 Sinclair
ex Retz. Mimusops elengi L. Elengi 10, 13, 16, 20
Dipterocarpus bourdillonii Karanjali 1, 8 Morinda pubescens J.E. Manjanatthi 16
Brand. Smith
Dipterocarpus indicus Bedd. Ennamara 1, 16 Moringa oleifera Lamk. Drumstick 2, 16
Elaeocarpus serratus L. Badhraksham 1, 8, 16 Morus alba L. Mullberry 1, 3, 7, 12, 13, 16, 18
Elaeocarpus tectorius Ebony 1, 2 Muntingia calabra L. Birds’ cherry 2
(Lour.) Poir. Murraya koenigii Spreng. Curry leaf 1, 2, 13, 16
Erythrina indica Lamk. Mullumurikku 1, 3, 6, 18 Myristica fragrans Houtt. Nutmeg 2, 13, 16
Erythrina variegata L. Indian coral tree 16, 23 Nephelium lappaceum L. Rambutan 2
Eucalyptus tereticornis Sm. Eucalyptus 1, 3, 13, 18 Olea dioica Roxb. Edana 16
Excoecaria agallocha L. Komatty 1, 17, 19 Oroxylum indicum (L.) Palakappayyani 1, 16
Ficus hispida L. & Wt. Parakam 16 Benth. ex Kurz.
Ficus callosa Willd. Kadaplavu 1, 9 Pajanelia rheedii Wight. Azhanda, Payyani 1, 4, 16
Ficus elastica (Roxb.) King Indian rubber tree 23 Paraserianthes falcataria (L.) Peelivaka 1, 3, 4, 18, 19
Ficus exasperata Vahl. Therakam 1, 14 Fosberg
Ficus racemosa L. Athi 2, 16 Pavetta indica L. Pavetta 3, 4, 16
Ficus religiosa L. Peepal 15, 16 Peltophorum pterocarpum Copper pod tree 1, 20
Ficus tinctoria var. Ithi 15, 16 (DC.) Baker ex Heyne
parasitica Willd. Persea americana Mill. Butterfruit 2, 8, 16
Flacourtia inermis Roxb. Lovi-lovi 2 Persea macarantha (Nees.) Kulamavu 1, 19
Flacourtia montana Grah. Charalpazham 2, 23 Kosterm.
Garcinia gummi-gutta (L.) Kudampuli 2, 13 Phyllanthus acidus (L.) Star gooseberry 2, 16
Robs. Skeels.
Garcinia mangostana L. Mangosteen 2 Phyllanthus emblica L. Indian gooseberry 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 16, 20
Garcinia morella (Gaertn.) Chikiri 8, 16 Pimenta dioica (L.) Merr. Allspice 11, 13, 16
Desv. Pithecellobium dulce (Roxb.) Kodukkapuli 16, 23
Garuga pinnata Roxb. Annakkara 2, 3, 16 Benth.
Gliricidia sepium (Jack.) Seemakkonna 1, 3, 4, 5, 12 Plumeria rubra L. Pagoda tree 22
Kunth. ex Walp. Polyalthia longifolia Mast tree 16, 22
Gmelina arborea Roxb. Kumizhu 1, 4, 8 (Sonner.) Thw.
Grevillea robusta A. Cunn. Silver oak 1, 23 Polyscias acuminata (Wt.) Chempaka 4, 5, 16
Grewia glabra Blume Kallayini 1 Seem.
Grewia tiliifolia Vahl. Chadachi, unnam 1, 3 Pongamia pinnata (L.) Ungu 1, 3, 4, 13
Haldina cordifolia (Roxb.) Manjakadambu 1, 16, 20 Pierre.
Rids. Pouteria campechiana Eggfruit 2, 16
Hevea brasiliensis H.B.K. Rubber 1, 4, 9 (Kunth.) Baehni.
M.-Arg. Psidium guajava L. Guava 2, 16
 Author's personal copy

B.M. Kumar / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 140 (2011) 430–440 437

Botanical name Local name Uses Botanical name Local name Uses

Pterocarpus marsupium Venga 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 16 Abelmoschus moschatus Kasthurivenda 13, 16

Roxb. Medik.
Pterocarpus santalinus L. Red sanders 1, 16, 20 Abutilon indicum L. Indian mallow 16
Quassia indica (Gaertn.) Karinjatta 1, 8, 16 Acacia caesia (L.) Willd. Incha 14, 16
Nooteb. Allamanda cathartica L. Golden trumpet 8, 16
Samanea saman (Jacq.) Raintree 1, 4, 5 Alstonia venenata R.Br. Analivegham 16
Merr. Amorphophallus Elephant yam 2, 16
Santalum album L. Sandal 1, 3, 13, 16 paeoniifolius (Dennst.)
Sapindus trifoliatus L. Soapnut tree 14, 16 Nichols.
Saraca asoca (Roxb.) de. Asokam 15, 16 Aristolochia indica L. Garudankolli 16
Wilde Bougainvillea spectabilis Bougainvillea 22
Schleichera oleosa (Lour.) Kusum tree 1, 4, 10, 12, 13, 18, 20 Willd.
Oken. Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp. Red gram 2, 16
Semecarpus anacardium L. Marking nut tree 1, 4, 13, 16 Calotropis gigantea (L.) R. Erukku 16
Senna siamea (Lam.) Irwin Yellow cassia 2, 16, 22 Br.
& Barn. Calycopteris floribunda Lam. Pullanji 16
Spathodea campanulata DC. African tulip tree 2, 16, 22 Canthium coromandelicum Kaara -
Spondias indica L. Kattambazham 2, 16 (Burm. f.) Alston.
Spondias pinnata (L. f.) Ambazham 2, 18, 19 Carissa carandas L. Karonda 2, 16
Kurz. Citrus aurantifolia Cherunarakam 2, 16
Sterculia guttata Roxb. ex Peenari, Kavalam 1, 7 (Christm.) Swing.
DC. Citrus limon (L.) Burm. f. Lemon 2, 16
Stereospermum colais (B.-H. Pathiri 16 Clerodendron serratum (L.) Cheruteku 16
ex Dillw.) Mabb. Moon
Streblus asper Lour. Paruvaparakam 8, 16 Clerodendron viscosum Peruku 16
Strychnos nux-vomica L. Kanjiram 1, 16, 17 Vent.
Swietenia macrophylla King. Big leaf mahagony 1 Clerodendrum thomsoniae Bleeding heart vine 16
Swietenia mahogany (L.) West Indian 1, 16 Balf.
Jacq. mahogany Cochlospermum religiosum Butter cup tree 16
Syzygium jambos (L.) Rose chamba 2, 16 (L.) Alston.
Alston. Codiaeum variegatum (L.) Croton 22
Syzygium aqueum (Burm. f.) Water apple 2, 16 Blume
Alst. Cordyline terminalis (L.) Goodluck plant 22
Syzygium aromaticum (L.) Clove 11 Kunth.
Merr. & Perry Croton tiglium L. Croton-oil plant 16
Syzygium cumini (L.) Skeels. Njaval 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, 13, 16, 18, 20 Cycas circinalis L. Cycas 8, 16
Syzygium laetum Venjavel 8, 16 Cycas siamensis Miq. queen sago 2, 22
(Buch.-Ham.) Gandhi Dalbergia horrid (Dennst.) Anamullu 16
Syzygium malaccense (L.) M. Malayan chamba 2 Mabb.
& P. Datura metel L. Ummam 16
Tabernaemontana heyneana Kambipala 16 Datura stramonium L. Vellaummam 16
Wall. Desmodium motorium Thozhukanni, 16
Talipariti tiliaceum L. Veliparuthi 7, 23 (Houtt.) Merril. Ramanamapacha
Tamarindus indica L. Tamarind 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, 12, 14 Duranta erecta L. Golden dewdrop 22, 23
Tecoma stans Jurr. Tree kolambi 22 Eugenia uniflora L. Surinam cherry 13, 22
Tectona grandis L. f. Teak 1, 4, 13, 20 Euphorbia antiquorum L. Chathurakkalli 16, 22
Terminalia bellirica Thanni 1, 4, 16, 19 Euphorbia nivulia Elakalli 16
(Gaertn.) Roxb. Buch.-Ham.
Terminalia catappa L. Indian almond 1, 4, 5, 12, 13, 16, 20 Euphorbia tirucalli L. Thriukalli 16, 22
Terminalia chebula Retz. Kadukka 1, 4, 16 Flemingia macrophylla Kamatty 3, 4, 5
Terminalia elliptica Willd. Indian laurel 1, 16 (Willd.) Prain ex Merr.
Terminalia paniculata Roth. Pullamaruthu 1, 4 Gardenia angusta (L.) Merr. Gandharajan 22
Terminalia tomentosa (DC) Karimaruthu 1 Glycosmis pentaphylla Banal 16
W. & A. (Retz.) DC.
Theobroma cacao L. Cacao 2 Heliconia humilis (Aubl.) Alangharavazha 22
Thespesia populnea (L.) Poovarasu, 1, 3, 4, 10 Jacq.
Soland. ex Correa. Seelanthi Heliconia psittacorum L. Ornamental vazha 22
Toona ciliata Roem. Madhagirivembu 1, 3, 4, 16 Helicteres isora L. Edampiri valampiri 16
Trema orientalis L. BIume Amathhali 4 Hibiscus acetosella Welw. Pulivenda 2
Trewia polycarpa Benth. Pambarakumbil 1, 4, 13, 18 ex Hiern.
Vateria indica L. Malabar white pine 1, 8, 16 Hibiscus mutabilis L. Changing rose 22
Vateria macrocarpa Gupta Vellapine 1, 23 Hibiscus rosa-sinensis L. Shoe flower 22
Vatica chinensis L. Adakkapine 1, 8, 23 Indigofera tinctoria L. Neela amari 8, 16
Vitex altissima L. Mayilellu 1, 10, 16 Ixora coccinea L. Thechi, chethy 16, 22
Vitex negundo L. Karinochi 8, 16, 23 Ixora finlaysoniana Wall. ex Vellathechi 16, 22
Wrightia tinctoria (Roxb.) R. Dandhapala 5, 16 G. Don.
Br. Jatropha curcas L. Kattavanakku 13
Xanthophyllum arnottianum Mottal 4, 16 Justicia adhatoda L. Adalodakam 16
Wt. Justicia beddomei (Clarke) Cheriya 16
Xylia xylocarpa (Roxb.) Irumullu 1, 16 Ben. adalodakam
Taub. Justicia gendarussa Burm. f. Vathamkolli, 16
Zanthoxylum rhetsa (Roxb.) Mullilam 1, 11, 16 Odichukuthi
DC. Lantana camara L. Lantana 16, 22
Unidentified – 4 numbers Lawsonia inermis L. Henna 8, 16, 22
Malpighia punicifolia L. West Indian cherry 2, 22
Shrubs
Manihot esculenta Crantz Cassava 2, 8
Bixa orellana L. Anatto 10
Mimosa diplotricha Anathottavadi 5, 22
Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Okra 2
C.Wright ex Sauv.
Moench.
 Author's personal copy

438 B.M. Kumar / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 140 (2011) 430–440

Botanical name Local name Uses Botanical name Local name Uses

Murraya paniculata (L.) Orange jasmine 2, 16 Chromolaena odorata (L.) Communist pacha 8, 16
Jack. King & Robins.
Musa AAB ‘Nendran’ Nendravazha 2 Cissus quadrangularis L. Changalam 16
Musa paradisiaca L. Kadali vazha 2, 16 paranda
Musa spp. Vazha 2 Citrullus lanatus (Thunb.) Water melon 2
Mussaenda frondosa L. Vellilam 16, 22 Mansf.
Mussaenda philippica A. Musenda 16, 22 Clitoria ternata L. Shankupuspham 16, 22
Rich. Coccinea grandis L. Koval, Little gourd 2
Nerium oleander L. Ornamental arali 22 Coix lacryma-jobi L. Malamani 2, 16
Nyctanthus arbor-tristis L. Parijatham, 16, 22 Colocasia esculenta (L.) Taro 2
Pavizhamalli Schott.
Ochlandra travancorica Reed bamboo 1 Costus pictus D. Don Insulin plant 16
Benth. ex Gam. Costus speciosus (Koen.) Sm. Channa koova 16
Palmae sp. Ornamental palm 22 Crossandra Red 22, 23
Pandanus canaranus Warb. Thazha kaitha 16, 23 infundibuliformis (L.) kanakambaram
Pandanus odoratissimus L. f. Screwpine plant 16, 23 Nees.
Phoenix dactylifera L. Date palm 2 Crotalaria retusa L. Kilukki 3, 5, 6, 16
Phoenix sylvestris Roxb. Silver date palm 2, 22 Cucumis melo L. Oriental pickling 2
Phyllanthus reticulates Poir. Neeroli 8, 16 melon
Punica granatum L. Mathalanarakam 2, 16 Cucumis sativus L. Cucumber 2
Quisqualis indica L. Rangoon creeper 22 Cucurbita moschata Duch. Pumpkin 2
Ricinus communis L. Castor 8, 16 ex Poir.
Rosa spp. Rose 8, 22 Curculigo orchioides Gaertn. Nilapana 16
Senna tora L. Thakara 5, 16 Curcuma amada Roxb. Mango ginger 11, 16
Sesbania grandiflora (L.) Agathi 2, 3, 5 Curcuma aromatica Salisb. Kasthurimanjal 8, 16
Poir. Curcuma longa L. Turmeric 2, 8, 11, 16
Solanum melongena L. Eggplant 2 Curcuma pseudomontana J. Kattumanjal 16
Solanum violaceum L. Putharichunda 16 Grah.
Solanum virginianum L. Kandakarivazhudhana 16 Cuscuta reflexa Roxb. Dodder 16
Tabernaemontana alba Mill. Nandhyar vattam 16, 22 Cyathula prostrata (L.) Cherukadaladi 16
Tabernaemontana Crape jasmine 16, 22 Blume
divaricata (L.) R.Br. ex Cyclea peltata (Lam.) Hook. Padakizhangu 2, 16
Roem. f. & Thoms.
Thevetia peruviana (Pers) K. Manja arali 16, 22 Cymbopogon flexuosus Lemongrass 13, 16, 22
Schum. (Nees ex Steud.) Wats.
Unidentified – 3 numbers Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. Karuka 16, 23
Cyperus rotundus L. Nutgrass 16
Herbs
Dendranthema grandiflora Jamanthi 22
Abrus precatorius L. Kunnikkuru 16
Tzvelev.
Achyranthes aspera L. Kadaladi 16
Dendrophthoe falcata (L. f.) Loranthus 16
Acorus calamus L. Vayambu 16
Etting.
Adenosma indianum (Lour.) Kasithumba 16
Desmodium triflorum (L.) Nilamparanda 16
Merr.
DC.
Aerva lanata (L.) Juss. ex Cherula 16
Dioscorea alata L. Greater yam 2, 16
Schult.
Dioscorea esculenta (Lour.) Lesser yam 2, 16
Ageratum conyzoides L. Goat weed 16
Burkill.
Aloe vera (L.) Burm. f. Kattarvazha 16
Dioscorea hispida Dennst. Podikizhangu 16
Alpinia calcarata Roscoe Chittaratha 16
Dioscorea oppositifolia L. Chinese yam 2, 16, 22
Amaranthus spinosus L. Spiny amaranth 16
Dioscorea spicata L. Kawala 16
Amaranthus viridis L. Slender amaranth 16
Drynaria quercifolia (L.) J. Pannal (tree fern) 16
Ananas comosus (L.) Merr. Pineapple 2
Smith
Andrographis paniculata Kiriyathu 16
Eclipta alba (L.) Hassk. Kanjunni 16
(Burm. f.) Nees.
Eclipta prostrate L. Kayyonni 16
Anthurium spp. Flamingo flower 22
Elephantopus scaber L. Elephant Foot 16
Asparagus plumosus Bak. Asparagus fern 16
Elettaria cardamomum (L.) Small cardamom 11, 16
Asparagus racemosus Willd. Asparagus 2, 16
Maton Engl.
Bacopa monnieri L. Bramhi 16
Emilia sonchifolia (L.) DC. Muyalcheviyan 16
Barleria cristata L. Crested Philippine 16
Epiphyllum stenopetalum Nishagandhi 16
violet
(C.F.F) Britton & Rose
Barleria prionitis L. Porcupine flower 16
Epipremnum pinnatum (L.) Moneyplant 22
Begonia spp. Bigonnia 16
Engl.
Benincasa hispida (Thunb.) Ash gourd 2
Eupatorium triplinerve Vahl. Ayyapana 16
Cogn.
Euphorbia hirta L. Hirta 16
Biophytum sensitivum (L.) Mukkutti 16
Evolvulus alsinoides (L.) L. Vishnukranthi 16
DC.
Gloriosa superba L. Menthonni 16
Boerhaavia diffusa L. Thazhuthama 16
Gnetum edule (Willd.) Gnetum 2, 16
Caladium cucullatum Elephant ear 22
Blume
(Lour.) Pers.
Gomphrena globosa L. Vadamalli 22
Canavalia gladiata (Jacq.) Swordbean 2
Gymnema sylvestre (Retz.) Chakkarakolli 16
DC.
R. Br. ex Schult.
Canna edulis Ker-Gawl. Canna 22
Gynandropsis gynandra (L.) Caravalla 16
Capsicum annuum L. Chilli 2
Briq.
Cardiospermum Uzhinja 16
Hemerocallis alba Andrews Lily 22
halicacabum L.
Hemidesmus indicus (L.) R. Naruneendi 16
Catharanthus roseus (L.) G. Nithyakalyani 16
Br.
Don.
Hemigraphis alternata Red ivy 22
Centella asiatica (L.) Urb. Muthil 16
(Burm. f.) T. Ander.
Chlorophytum borivilianum Safed musli 16
Hibiscus hispidissimus Panachikam 16
L.
A.Chev.
 Author's personal copy

B.M. Kumar / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 140 (2011) 430–440 439

Botanical name Local name Uses Botanical name Local name Uses

Ichnocarpus fruitescens (L.) Sarsaparilla 16 Solanum americanum Mill. American 16

R. Br. Nightshade
Impatiens balsamina L. Balsam 22 Solenostemon rotundifolius Coleus 2, 16
Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam. Sweet potato 2 (Poir.) JK Mort.
Ipomoea marginata (Desr.) Thiruthali 16 Sphaeranthus indicus L. Mundi 16
Verdc. Sphenoclea zeylanica Chicken spike 2
Ipomoea quamoclit L. Cypress vine 22 Gaertn.
Jasminum grandiflorum L. Pichakam 16, 22 Spilanthes acmella (L.) Toothache plant 16
Jasminum sambac L. Mulla 22 Murr.
Kaempferia galanga L. Kacholam 16 Stachytarpheta indica (L.) Indian snakeweed 16
Kaempferia rotunda L. Chengazhi- 16 Vahl.
nirkizhangu Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni Stevia 16
Kalanchoe pinnata (Lam.) Air plant 22 Streptogyna crinita P. Karimkurinji 2, 16, 22
Pers. Beauv.
Kyllinga nemoralis (J.R. Peemuthanga 16 Tagetes erecta L. Marigold 16, 22
Forst. & G. Forst.) Dandy Tephrosia candida (Roxb.) Thottappayar 5
ex Hutch. DC.
Lablab purpureus (L.) Sweet. Dolichos bean 2 Tiliacora accuminata (Lam.) Vallikanjiram 16
Leucas aspera (Willd.) Thumba 16 Hook. f. & Thoms.
Spreng. Tinospora cordifolia (Willd.) Chitttamrithu 16
Lilium wallichianum Schult. Lilly 3, 22 Hook. f. & Thoms.
f. Tragia involucrate L. Climbing nettle 16
Limnophila aromatica Merr. Rice paddy herb 22 Trichosanthes cucumerina L. Snake gourd 2
Luffa acutangula (L.) Roxb. Ridge gourd 2, 16 Trichosanthes lobata Roxb. Wild snake gourd 16
Luffa cylindrica (Linn.) M. Smooth gourd 2, 16 Trichosanthes tricuspidata Indrian 16
Roem. Lour.
Lycopersicon esculentum Tomato 22 Tridax procumbens L. Tridax daisy 16
Mill. Tylophora indica (Burm. f.) Indian ipecac 16
Macrotyloma uniflorum Horsegram 2 Merrill.
(Lam.) Verdc. Vanda tessellata (Roxb.) Vanda Orchid 16, 22
Maranta arundinacea L. Arrowroot 2, 16 Hook ex Don
Mentha piperita L. Peppermint 8, 16 Vanilla planifolia Andr. Vanilla 8
Mimosa pudica L. Touch-me-not 16 Vernonia cinerea (L.) Less. Poovankurunnil 16
Mirabilis jalapa L. Nalumanipoo 22 Vetiveria zizanioides (L.) Vetiver 13, 16, 22
Momordica charantia L. Bittergourd 2, 16 Nash.
Momordica dioica Roxb. Kattupavelam 16 Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp. Cowpea
Monochoria vaginalis Karimkovalam 16 Xanthosoma sagittifolium Arrowleaf 2
(Burm. f.) Presl. (L.) Schott. elephant’s ear
Mucuna pruriens (L.) DC. Naikkaruna 16 Zingiber officinale Roscoe Ginger 2, 11, 16
Naregamia alata Wight & Nilanarakam 16 Zinnia spp. Zinnia 22
Arn. Unidentified – 2 numbers
Ocimum americanum L. Katturamathulasi 16
Ocimum basilicum L. Ramathulasi 15, 16
Ocimum gratissimum L. Kattuthulasi 16
Ocimum scharicum Guerke Karpurathulasi 15, 16 References
Ocimum tenuiflorum L. Krishnathulasi 15, 16
Opuntia spp. Cactus 22 Albrecht, A., Kandji, S.T., 2003. Carbon sequestration in tropical agroforestry systems.
Orchids Orchid 22 Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 99, 15–27.
Orthosiphon aristatus (Bl.) Cat’s whisker 16 Backes, M.M., 2001. The role of indigenous trees for the conservation of biocultural
Miq. diversity in traditional agroforestry land use systems: The Bungoma case study.
Oxalis corniculata L. Puliyorila 16 Agroforest. Syst. 52, 119–132.
Benton, T.G., 2007. Managing farming’s footprint on biodiversity. Science 315,
Panicum maximum Jacq. Guinea grass 3
341–342.
Passiflora edulis Sims. Passionfruit 2
Black, G.M., Somnasang, P., Thamathawan, S., Newman, J.M., 1996. Cultivating con-
Passiflora foetida L. Poochapazham 16
tinuity and creating change: women’s homegarden practices in north-eastern
Phyllanthus amarus Schum. Kizharnelli 16 Thailand. Multi-cultural considerations from cropping to consumption. Agric.
& Thonn. Hum. Values 13, 3–11.
Physalis angulata L. Wild gooseberry 16 Boyd, H.K., Westfall, R., Stasch, S.F., 1981. Marketing Research, Texts and Cases.
Piper betle L. Vettila 13, 23 Richard D. Illinois, p. 813.
Piper longum L. Thippali 16 Brown, S., 1997. Estimating Biomass and Biomass Change of Tropical Forests: A
Piper nigrum L. Black pepper 2, 11, 16 Primer. A Forest Resources Assessment Publication, FAO Forestry Paper 134.
Plectranthus amboinicus Panikoorka 16 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.
(Lour.) Spreng. Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), 1948–1956. Wealth of India:
Plumbago indica L. Koduveli 16 Raw Materials, vols. 1–4. Publications and Information Directorate, CSIR, New
Psophocarpus Winged bean 2 Delhi, India.
tetragonolobus (L.) DC. FAO, 2004. Assessing Carbon Stocks and Modelling Win–Win Scenarios of Carbon
Sequestration through Land-Use Changes. Food and Agriculture Organization of
Rauolfia serpentina (L.) Sarpagandhi, 16
the United Nations, Rome, p. 156.
Benth. ex Kurz. Amalpori
FRA, 2000. Rationale and Methodology for Global Forest Survey. FAO - For-
Rauvolfia tetraphylla L. Pambukolli 16 est Resources Assessment WP 32. Food and Agricultural Organization,
Ruta chalepensis L. Arootha 16 Rome (accessed 17 October 2010) http://www.fao.org/docrep/007/ad664e/
Saccharum officinarum L. Sugarcane 2 ad664e05.htm.
Scoparia dulcis L. Kallurukki 16 Henry, M., Tittonell, P., Manlay, R.J., Bernoux, M., Albrecht, A., Vanlauwe, B., 2009.
Selaginella sp. Sanjeevani 16 Biodiversity, carbon stocks and sequestration potential in aboveground biomass
Senna auriculata L. Kozhinjil 16 in smallholder farming systems of western Kenya. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 129
Sesamum laciniatum Klein Kaduku 8, 16 (1–3), 238–252.
ex Willd. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2001. IPCC Third Assessment
Sida cordifolia L. Kurumthotti 16 Report – Climate Change 2001. The Scientific Basis: Summary for Policymakers
Sida rhombifolia L. ssp. Indian hemp, 16 and Technical Summary, Geneva, p. 98.
retusa (L.) Borss. Anakurumthotti Jensen, M., 1993. Soil conditions, vegetation structure and biomass of a Javanese
homegarden. Agroforest. Syst. 24, 171–186.
 Author's personal copy
440 B.M. Kumar / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 140 (2011) 430–440
Karyono, 1990. Homegardens in Java; their structure and function. In: Tropical
Homegardens. United Nations University Press, Tokyo, pp. 138–146.
Kerala State Land Use Board (KSLUB), 1995. Land Resources of Kerala State, Thiru-
vananthapuram, Kerala, p. 209.
Kumar, B.M., 2006. Carbon sequestration potential of tropical homegardens. In:
Kumar, B.M., Nair, P.K.R. (Eds.), Tropical Homegardens: A Time-Tested Exam-
ple of Sustainable Agroforestry. Advances in Agroforestry 3. Springer, The
Netherlands, pp. 185–204.
Kumar, B.M., 2008. Standing stock of thorny bamboo [Bambusa bambos (L.) Voss] in
the homegardens of Palakkad and Malappuram districts in Kerala. J. Trop. Agric.
46 (1–2), 32–37.
Kumar, B.M., Nair, P.K.R., 2004. The enigma of tropical homegardens. Agroforest.
Syst. 61, 135–152.
Kumar, B.M., Takeuchi, K., 2009. Agroforestry in the Western Ghats of peninsular
India and the Satoyama landscapes of Japan: a comparison of two sustainable
land use systems. Sust. Sci. 4, 215–232.
Kumar, B.M., George, S.J., Chinnamani, S., 1994. Diversity, structure and standing
stock of wood in the homegardens of Kerala in peninsular India. Agroforest.
Syst. 25, 243–262.
Kumar, B.M., George, S.J., Suresh, T.K., 2001. Fodder grass productivity and soil fertil-
ity changes under four grass + tree associations in Kerala, India. Agroforest. Syst.
52, 91–106.
Kumar, B.M., Sudheesh, K.G., Rajesh, G., 2005. Standing stock of thorny bamboo
[Bambusa bambos (L.) Voss] in the homegardens of Thrissur, Kerala. J. Trop. Agric.
43, 61–66.
Kumar, B.M., George, S.J., Jamaludheen, V., Suresh, T.K., 1998. Comparison of biomass
production, tree allometry and nutrient use efficiency of multipurpose trees
grown in wood lot and silvopastoral experiments in Kerala, India. For. Ecol.
Manage. 112, 145–163.
Méndez, V.E., Lok, R., Somarriba, E., 2001. Interdisciplinary analysis of homegar-
dens in Nicaragua: micro-zonation, plant use and socioeconomic importance.
Agroforest. Syst. 51, 85–96.
Montagnini, F., 2006. Homegardens of Mesoamerica: biodiversity, food security,
and nutrient management. In: Kumar, B.M., Nair, P.K.R. (Eds.), Tropical Home-
gardens: A Time-Tested Example of Sustainable Agroforestry. Advances in
Agroforestry 3. Springer, The Netherlands, pp. 61–84.
Mpoyi, K., Lukebakio, N., Kapende, K., Paulus, J., 1994. Inventaire de la flore domes-
tique des parcelles d’habitation. Cas de Kinshasa (Zaire). Rev. Med. Pharm. Afr.
8, 55–66.
Muraleedharan, P.K., Sasidharan, N., Kumar, B.M., Sreenivasan, M.A., Seethalakshmi,
K.K., 2005. Non-wood forest products in the Western Ghats of Kerala, India:
floristic attributes, extraction, regeneration and prospects for sustainable use. J.
Trop. For. Sci. 17 (2), 243–257.
Nair, M.A., Sreedharan, C., 1986. Agroforestry farming systems in the homesteads of
Kerala, Southern India. Agroforest. Syst. 4, 339–363.
Nair, P.K.R., Kumar, B.M., Nair, V.D., 2009. Agroforestry as a strategy for carbon
sequestration. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 172, 10–23.
Nair, P.K.R., Nair, V.D., Kumar, B.M., Showalter, J.M., 2010. Carbon sequestration in
agroforestry systems. Adv. Agron. 108, 237–307.
Nayar, N.M., 2010. Agrobiodiversity in a biodiversity hotspot: Kerala State, India. Its
origin and status. Genet. Resour. Crop Evol., doi:10.1007/s10722-010-9555-7
(Published online 23 June 2010).
Rico-Gray, V., Chemas, A., Mandujano, S., 1991. Uses of tropical deciduous forest
species by the Yucatecan Maya. Agroforest. Syst. 14, 149–161.
Roshetko, M., Delaney, M., Hairiah, K., Purnomosidhi, P., 2002. Carbon stocks
in Indonesian homegarden systems: can smallholder systems be tar-
geted for increased carbon storage? Am. J. Altern. Agric. 17, 125–
137.
Saha, S., Nair, P.K.R., Nair, V.D., Kumar, B.M., 2009. Soil carbon stock in relation
to plant diversity of homegardens in Kerala, India. Agroforest. Syst. 76, 53–
65.
Saha, S., Nair, P.K.R., Nair, V.D., Kumar, B.M., 2010. Carbon storage in relation to soil
size-fractions under some tropical tree-based land-use systems. Plant Soil 328,
433–446.
Sasidharan, N., Sivarajan, V.V., 1996. Flowering Plants of Thrissur Forests. Scientific
Publishers, Jodhpur, p. 289.
Simpson, E.H., 1949. Measurement of diversity. Nature 163, 688–1688.
UNFCCC, 2004. Simplified Modalities and Procedures for Small-Scale Clean
Development Mechanism Project Activities. http://cdm.unfccc.int/
pac/Reference/Documents/AnnexII/English/annexII.pdf, accessed 5 Jan.
2011.
UNFCCC, 2007. Report on the Second Workshop on Reducing Emissions from
Deforestation in developing countries. Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Tech-
nological Advice. Item 5 of the Provisional Agenda: Reducing Emissions from
Deforestation in Developing Countries , Twenty-sixth session, Bonn, May
7–18, 2007, p. 18 (accessed 15 October 2010) http://www.rainforestcoalition.
org/documents/UNFCCCSBSTA200703.pdf.