Surveying Multipurpose Tree Species for Agroforestry Practices

In agroforestry, some trees do far more than just stand tall and provide shade. Multipurpose Tree Species (MPTS) are woody perennials deliberately grown and managed to deliver more than one significant product or service – food, fodder, fuelwood, timber, medicine, and ecological benefits – all from a single planting. Surveying these species is the essential first step in understanding what’s already available in a landscape, what communities actually use and prefer, and how these trees can be better integrated into farming systems. Without a systematic survey, valuable knowledge about local trees and their uses risks being lost, and agroforestry programmes may end up promoting species that don’t match local needs.

What are multipurpose tree species? 🔗

The term “multipurpose tree” is used almost exclusively in tropical agroforestry to describe woody species that are intentionally kept and managed for more than one preferred use, product, or service. While many of these species carry single-purpose labels – “fodder tree,” “fruit tree,” “fuelwood species” – they actually deliver a wide range of outputs simultaneously.

A neem tree (Azadirachta indica), for instance, provides timber, fuelwood, oil from its seeds, biopesticide compounds, medicinal extracts, and shade for crops – all at the same time. Similarly, Leucaena leucocephala serves as a fast-growing fodder source, green manure for soil nitrogen enrichment, and fuelwood supplier. In Tamil Nadu, farmers routinely integrate species like Borassus flabellifer, Tamarindus indica, and Acacia nilotica into their farmlands alongside crops and livestock, using them as a safety net against crop failure and environmental stress.

The key characteristics that define a good MPTS include wide adaptability to local climatic conditions, compatibility with annual and perennial crops, the ability to provide fodder and fuelwood, a deep root system that draws water and nutrients from lower soil layers, ease of propagation, and nitrogen-fixing ability in the case of leguminous species.

Why survey MPTS? 🔗

Surveying multipurpose tree species is about building a clear, evidence-based picture of what tree resources exist in a given landscape, how people use them, and which species hold the most potential for agroforestry integration. There are several specific reasons this step matters.

Documenting existing knowledge 🔗

Different community members – elders, women, herders, farmers – possess different levels and types of knowledge about local tree species. Older generations often hold deep traditional knowledge about medicinal and food uses, while younger farmers may know more about recently introduced species. Surveys capture this diverse knowledge before it is lost.

Identifying the right species for the right place 🔗

Survey data helps planners focus on species that are already proven in local conditions, rather than promoting exotic species that may not perform well. If a survey reveals that a native fruit tree is highly valued by communities but is becoming rare, conservation efforts can be directed specifically toward that species. Conversely, if a fast-growing nitrogen-fixing tree already provides excellent fodder, it can be prioritised for wider planting.

Revealing underutilised species 🔗

Surveys often uncover species with untapped commercial or ecological potential. A shrub that locals use only for emergency food during drought, for example, might have nutritional or medicinal properties worth developing further.

Supporting database development 🔗

Survey results feed into larger databases that researchers and field workers depend on. The ICRAF Multipurpose Tree and Shrub Database, for example, contains information on over 1,000 species of tropical and subtropical woody perennials, drawing on both field observations and published literature. The more recent Agroforestry Species Switchboard, launched in 2019, documents more than 26,000 plant species across 24 web-based information services that support agroforestry research globally.

Key components of an MPTS survey 🔗

An effective survey combines botanical fieldwork with community engagement. Here are the main components involved.

Species identification and botanical documentation 🔗

The foundation of any MPTS survey is accurately identifying and recording each tree species found in the survey area. This means documenting botanical names, local names (which can vary significantly between communities), and physical characteristics such as height, trunk diameter, leaf shape, flowering patterns, and fruiting seasons. Proper taxonomic classification using scientific nomenclature is critical because it prevents confusion when the same tree carries different local names across regions.

For instance, a taxonomic survey conducted in the forests of Odisha identified 501 wild and naturalised tree species across 284 genera and 80 families – ranging from well-known species like bamboo, teak, and rosewood to lesser-known but locally important species.

Documenting uses and products 🔗

Each identified species needs to be catalogued against its various uses. The common framework is sometimes called the “6Fs” of MPTs – Food, Fruit, Fodder, Fuel, Fibre, and Fertilizer. But the actual range of uses is broader and includes timber, medicine, gum, resin, tannin, dye, oil, and environmental services like soil erosion control, windbreak function, and nitrogen fixation.

For each use, surveyors record which part of the tree is used (leaves, bark, roots, seeds, fruits), how it is processed, when it is harvested, and by whom. This level of detail is important because a species that provides edible leaves year-round has a very different value proposition from one that fruits only once a year.

Recording species distribution and abundance 🔗

Surveyors map where each species grows – on farmland boundaries, scattered in crop fields, along water courses, in homegardens, or in natural forests. This spatial data helps determine which species are naturally abundant and which are becoming rare. Distribution mapping also reveals patterns: certain species may cluster in specific soil types, elevations, or rainfall zones, which tells us about their ecological preferences.

Assessing community preferences and priorities 🔗

Not all MPTS are valued equally by all community members. A livestock herder will prioritise fodder trees, while a household that cooks with wood will rank fuelwood species higher. Preference assessment captures these differences and helps design agroforestry interventions that actually meet diverse needs within a community.

Survey methods and tools 🔗

MPTS surveys draw on a combination of scientific field methods and participatory approaches. The choice of method depends on the survey’s scale, objectives, and available resources.

Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) tools 🔗

Participatory Rural Appraisal is a widely used approach that puts local communities at the centre of the data collection process. Instead of outside researchers extracting information through questionnaires, PRA enables farmers and community members to analyse and present their own knowledge. Several specific PRA tools are particularly useful for MPTS surveys:

Transect walks: A team walks across the landscape along a predetermined path, noting every tree species encountered, its location, and its uses. This gives a cross-sectional view of tree distribution across different land-use types – from homestead to cropland to grazing land to forest edge.

Matrix scoring and pairwise ranking: Community members compare tree species against each other and score them on criteria like fuelwood quality, fodder palatability, fruit yield, growth speed, and drought tolerance. In pairwise ranking, species are compared two at a time, and informants choose which they prefer and explain why. This produces a clear hierarchy of preferred species for each use category.

Seasonal calendars: These record when different tree products become available throughout the year – when fruits ripen, when leaves are most nutritious for fodder, when fuelwood is collected. Seasonal calendars highlight periods of abundance and scarcity, which is crucial for planning.

Focus group discussions: Separate groups – men, women, elders, youth – discuss their knowledge and preferences for tree species. These often reveal gender-based differences in tree use. Women, for example, may place higher value on species that provide food, medicine, and cooking fuel, while men may prioritise timber and cash-generating products.

Formal botanical surveys 🔗

Alongside participatory methods, systematic botanical surveys use plot-based sampling, where fixed-size plots are laid out across different land-use types and every tree within the plot is measured and identified. Data collected includes species name, diameter at breast height (DBH), tree height, crown width, and health condition. This produces quantitative data on species density, frequency, and dominance that can be statistically analysed.

Household questionnaires 🔗

Structured or semi-structured interviews with individual households collect data on which species each family uses, how much of each product they harvest, whether they sell any tree products, and which species they would like to plant more of. In South India, the MARAM database project used a tested questionnaire with 25 variables for geographic and socio-economic identification of farms, combined with species inventories at both macro and micro scales across six principal agro-ecological zones.

Common MPTS in agroforestry systems 🔗

While hundreds of multipurpose tree species exist worldwide, certain species appear consistently across tropical agroforestry systems due to their proven versatility and performance.

Leguminous nitrogen-fixing species 🔗

Leguminous MPTS are especially valued because they fix atmospheric nitrogen through root nodule bacteria, enriching the soil for companion crops. Leucaena leucocephala (Subabul) is one of the most widely used – it grows rapidly, produces protein-rich fodder, serves as green manure, and supplies fuelwood. Gliricidia sepium is another versatile legume that provides shade in coffee and cacao plantations across Central America and the Philippines, while also serving as a living fence and fodder source. Sesbania grandiflora and Dalbergia sissoo (Shisham) are other widely planted nitrogen-fixers.

Fruit and food trees 🔗

Moringa oleifera is among the most nutrient-dense MPTS – its leaves, pods, and seeds are all edible, and it grows well in semi-arid conditions. Tamarindus indica produces fruit used in cuisines worldwide while also providing excellent shade and durable timber. Mango (Mangifera indica), jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus), and breadfruit are other food-producing trees commonly found integrated with crops in homegarden systems.

Fuelwood and timber species 🔗

Prosopis juliflora is widely planted in arid regions for fuelwood and is also used to rehabilitate degraded and saline soils. Gmelina arborea and Tectona grandis (teak) supply quality timber alongside other products. Acacia nilotica (Desi Babool) remains a preferred choice in semi-arid India for its fuelwood, gum, and tannin.

Environmental service providers 🔗

Some species are selected primarily for their ecological functions. Paraserianthes falcataria and Moringa oleifera are used for stabilising stream banks and gullies. Windbreak species like Casuarina equisetifolia protect crops from wind damage over distances equivalent to 15-20 times the tree’s height. Hedgerow species for alley cropping – typically fast-growing legumes planted at close spacing between crop rows – are pruned regularly, and their biomass is applied as mulch to supply organic matter and nutrients.

Using survey data to optimise agroforestry design 🔗

The real value of an MPTS survey lies in how its data is applied. Survey results inform several key decisions in agroforestry planning.

Matching species to site conditions 🔗

By comparing the ecological preferences documented in the survey (soil type, rainfall, elevation, temperature range) with actual site conditions, planners can select species with the highest probability of success. The ICRAF Diagnosis and Design (D&D) methodology provides a structured framework for diagnosing land-use system needs and designing suitable agroforestry interventions based on this kind of data.

Designing species combinations 🔗

Survey data on growth rates, canopy shape, root depth, and light requirements helps in designing compatible tree-crop combinations. A tall, deep-rooted tree with a light canopy can be paired with shade-tolerant understorey crops, while a fast-growing hedgerow species can be managed alongside row crops in alley-cropping arrangements. Multistorey homegarden systems – common across South and Southeast Asia – use survey knowledge to layer species at different heights: root crops at ground level, spices and bananas at mid-level, and tall fruit or timber trees above.

Prioritising species for propagation programmes 🔗

When surveys identify species that communities highly value but that are declining in abundance, nursery and seed collection programmes can target those species. Equally, if a survey reveals widespread demand for a particular fodder tree, large-scale seedling production can be planned. The availability of planting material is often a bottleneck – genetically improved and high-yielding clones of selected MPTS can significantly enhance the adoption and success of agroforestry programmes.

Informing policy and extension 🔗

Documented survey data gives policymakers concrete evidence to support agroforestry promotion, land-use planning, and biodiversity conservation. Extension workers armed with local survey results can provide farmers with species recommendations that are backed by both scientific data and community experience, making adoption far more likely.

Challenges in MPTS surveying 🔗

Despite its importance, surveying multipurpose tree species comes with practical difficulties. Many MPTS remain understudied, with limited data available on growth rates, breeding systems, resilience to environmental stress, and response to management. Local names for the same species can vary enormously even within a small region, making identification tricky without trained botanists on the team. Seasonal variation means that a species might be in leaf during one visit and unrecognisable during another.

There’s also the challenge of ensuring community representation. If surveys only capture knowledge from male farmers or village leaders, they’ll miss the perspectives of women, pastoralists, and marginalised groups who may use trees differently. Good survey design deliberately includes separate sessions with different demographic groups to avoid this bias.

Finally, the sheer complexity of agroforestry systems – with their numerous possible combinations of species, spatial arrangements, and management timings – means that no single survey can capture everything. Surveys are best treated as a starting point that is refined over time through ongoing monitoring and community feedback.

What do you think? Are there multipurpose tree species in your local area that are widely used by communities but have never been formally documented? How might a systematic survey change the way agroforestry programmes are designed in your region?

References

1. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-75358-0_13
2. https://socialdhara.com/potential-of-multi-purpose-tree-species/
3. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00705153
4. https://www.cifor-icraf.org/publications/downloads/Publications/PDFS/B06821.pdf
5. https://www.fao.org/4/w5830e/w5830e08.htm
6. https://www.ifpindia.org/projects/agroforestry-models-south-india/
7. http://www.treesforlife.info/gmptsf/mptinaf.htm
8. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/377443349_Multipurpose_Trees_in_Agroforestry