Journal of Soils and Sediments

, Volume 19, Issue 5, pp 2153–2165 | Cite as

Trace and major element contents, microbial communities, and enzymatic activities of urban soils of Marrakech city along an anthropization gradient

  • Ahmed Naylo
  • Sofia I. Almeida Pereira
  • Leila Benidire
  • Hicham El Khalil
  • Paula M. L. Castro
  • Stéphanie Ouvrard
  • Christophe Schwartz
  • Ali BoularbahEmail author
Soils, Sec 1 • Soil Organic Matter Dynamics and Nutrient Cycling • Research Article



Due to their close proximity with the population, urban soils are extensively affected by human activities that release considerable technogenic inputs resulting in an overall soil degradation and leading to an increase of water-extractable fraction of trace elements. This work aimed to determine the influence of anthropization on trace and major element concentrations and to assess how it might also affect soil biochemical and microbiological parameters in an urban area of Marrakech city, Morocco.

Materials and methods

The work was carried out on nine topsoils located along an anthropogenic gradient from a suburban area to the city center. The percentage of technogenic fraction (TGF) (e.g., building material, plastic, wood, metallic material, bones, glass, paper, fabric) was used to quantify the degree of human interference in the different soils. Physicochemical parameters were measured: pH (in water solution), TOC (Anne method), TKN, and Olsen phosphorus. The total fraction of trace and major elements (ISO NF 11446) and their water-soluble fraction were analyzed with an ICP-OES. Enumeration of cultivable microorganisms (bacteria, fungi, actinomycetes) was conducted on culture media. Dehydrogenase, alkaline phosphatase, and urease activities were colorimetrically measured, and the structure and diversity of soil bacterial communities were determined by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) technique.

Results and discussion

In general, trace and major element concentrations showed increasing levels along the anthropogenic gradient, except for Ca, Mg, B, and Cd. However, trace element concentrations remained below the standard international limits for soils. Total numbers of microorganisms (bacteria, fungi, and actinomycetes) varied significantly among sites, with bacterial counts directly related to the anthropogenic gradient, significantly increasing from suburban area to the city center. Dehydrogenase activity decreased throughout the anthropogenic gradient, while phosphatase and urease activities varied between sites independently of the gradient. DGGE profiles showed that bacterial diversity was higher in the most anthropized soils, where their community structure seemed to be influenced by the total concentrations of Zn, As, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, and the technogenic fraction.


Overall, trace and major element concentrations and the technogenic fraction were higher with increasing levels of urbanization. Microbiological and biochemical parameters appeared significantly influenced by the anthropogenic inputs without being systematically inhibited along the anthropogenic gradient. Dehydrogenase activity decreased along the anthropization gradient, and thus may be used as a proxy to assess the effect of anthropization on soil biological functions.


Ecosystem services SUITMA’s soils Metal contamination Soil enzymes Technogenic fraction Technogenic soils 



The authors would like to thank the scientific collaboration of CBQF under the Fundação Ciência e Tecnologia (FCT) project [UID/Multi/50016/2013].

Funding information

The study is financially supported by Centre National de Recherche Scientifique et Techniques [grant no. PPR 22/2015] and by the project PhytoSudoe (SOE1/P5/E0189) - Demostração de melhorias na biodiversidade do solo, funcionalidade e serviços ambientais de locais contaminados e/ou degradados sob intervenção de fito-tecnologias dentro da região Interreg Sudoe, funded by FEDER - Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento Regional under Programa INTERREG.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

11368_2018_2221_MOESM1_ESM.docx (20 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 20 kb)


  1. Aboudrar W, Schwartz C, Benizri E, Morel JL, Boularbah A (2007) Soil microbial diversity as affected by the rhizosphere of the hyperaccumulator Thlaspicaerulescens under natural conditions. Int J Phytoremediation 9:41–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aeliona MC, Davisa HT, McDermottb S, Lawson AB (2009) Soil metal concentrations and toxicity: associations with distances to industrial facilities and implications for human health. Sci Total Environ 407:2216–2223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alef K, Nannipieri P (1995) Methods in applied soil microbiology and biochemistry. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Alekseenko V, Alekseenko A (2014) The abundances of chemical elements in urban soils. J Geochem Explor 147:245–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anne P (1945) Sur le dosage rapide du carbone organique des sols. Ann. Agr 2: 161–172Google Scholar
  6. Bae J, Ryu Y (2015) Land use and land cover changes explain spatial and temporal variations of the soil organic carbon stocks in a constructed urban park. Landsc Urban Plan 136:57–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baldwin DR, Marshall WJ (1999) Heavy metal poisoning and its laboratory investigation. Ann Clin Biochem 36(3):267–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Benidire L, Pereira S, Castro P, Boularbah A (2016) Assessment of plant growth promoting bacterial populations in the rhizosphere of metallophytes from Kettara mine Marrakech. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23(21):21751–21765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bielińska EJ, Kołodziej B, Sugier D (2013) Relationship between organic carbon content and the activity of selected enzymes in urban soils under different anthropogenic influence. J Geochem Explor 129:52–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bolton HJR, Elliott LF, Papendick RI, Bezdicek DF (1985) Soil microbial biomass and selected soil enzyme activities: effect of fertilization and cropping practices. Soil Biol Biochem 17(3):297–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boon N, De Windt W, Verstraete W, Top EM (2001) Evaluation of nested PCR-DGGE (denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis) with group-specific 16S rRNA primers for the analysis of bacterial communities from different wastewater treatment plants. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 39:101–112Google Scholar
  12. Boularbah A, Schwartz C, Bitton G, Morel JL (2006) Heavy metal contamination from mining sites in South Morocco:1. Use of a biotest to assess metal toxicity of tailings and soils. Chemosphere 63:802–810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Braun B, Böckelmann U, Grohmann E, Szewzyk U (2006) Polyphasic characterization of the bacterial community in an urban soil profile with in situ and culture-dependent methods. Appl Soil Ecol 31:267–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bullock P, Gregory P (1991) Soils in the urban environment. Scientific Publication, BlackwellCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Burghardt W, Morel JL, Zhang G-L (2015) Development of the soil research about urban, industrial, traffic, mining and military areas (SUITMA). Soil Sci Plant Nutr 61:3–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Calvarro LM, Santiago-Martin A, Gomez JQ, Gonzalez-Huecas C, Quintana JR, Vazquez A, Lafuente AL, Rodriguez-Fernandez TM, Vera RZ (2014) Biological activity in metal-contaminated calcareous agricultural soils: the role of the organic matter composition and the particle size distribution. Environ Sci Pollut Res 21(9):6176–6187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Charzyński P, Plak A, Hanaka A (2017) Influence of the soil sealing on the geoaccumulation index of heavy metals and various pollution factors. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24(5):4801–4811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Concas A, Ardau C, Cristini A, Zuddas P, Cao G (2006) Mobility of heavy metals from tailings to stream waters in a mining activity contaminated site. Chemosphere 63:244–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dai J, Becquer T, Rouiller JH, Reversat G, Bernhard-Reversat F, Lavelle P (2004) Influence of heavy metals on C and N mineralisation and microbial biomass in Zn- Pb- Cu- and Cd-contaminated soils. Appl Soil Ecol 25:99–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Davis AP, Shokouhian M, Ni S (2001) Loading estimates of lead, copper, cadmium, and zinc in urban runoff from specific sources. Chemosphere 44(5):997–1009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ding Y, Liu Y, Liu S, Li Z, Tan X, Huang X, Zeng G, Zhou L, Zheng B (2016) Biochar to improve soil fertility. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 36:36.
  22. Eivazi F, Tabatabai M (1977) Phosphatases in soils. Soil Biol Biochem 9:167–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. El Faiz M (2002) Marrakech patrimoine en péril. Actes Sud / Edit, ArlesGoogle Scholar
  24. El Khalil H, El Hamiani O, Bitton G, Ouazzani N, Boularbah A (2008a) Heavy metal contamination from mining sites in South Morocco: monitoring metal content and toxicity of soil runoff and groundwater. Environ Monit Assess 136(1–3):147–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. El Khalil H, Schwartz C, El Hamiani O, Kubiniok K, Morel JL, Boularbah A (2013) Distribution of major elements and trace metals as indicators of technosolisation of urban and suburban soils. J Soils Sediments 13:519–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. El Khalil H, Schwartz C, Elhamiani O, Kubiniok J, Morel JL, Boularbah A (2008b) Contribution of technic materials to the mobile fraction of metals in urban soils in Marrakech (Morocco). J Soils Sediments 1:17–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. El Khalil H, Schwartz C, Elhamiani O, Sirguey C, Kubiniok J, Boularbah A (2016) How physical alteration of technic materials affects mobility and phytoavailabilty of metals in urban soils? Chemosphere 152:407–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Farrell M, Griffith GW, Hobbs PJ, Perkins WT, Jones DL (2010) Microbial diversity and activity are increased by compost amendment of metal-contaminated soil. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 71:94–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Filip Z (2002) International approach to assessing soil quality by ecologically-related biological parameters. Agric Ecosyst Environ 88:169–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gadd G (1992) Metals and microorganisms: a problem of definition. FEMS Microbiol Lett 100:197–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gevorgyan GA, Ghazaryan KA, Movsesyan HS, Zhamharyan HG (2017) Human health risk assessment of heavy metal pollution in soils around Kapan mining area, Armenia. Electron J Nat Sci 2:29–33Google Scholar
  32. Gil-Sotres F, Trasar-Cepeda C, Leiros MC, Seoane S (2005) Different approaches to evaluating soil quality using biochemical properties. Soil Biol Biochem 37:877–887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Godefroid S, Monbaliu D, Koedam N (2007) The role of soil and microclimatic variables in the distribution patterns of urban wasteland flora in Brussels Belgium. Landsc. Urban Plan 80:45–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gülser F, Erdoğan E (2008) The effects of heavy metal pollution on enzyme activities and basal soil respiration of roadside soils. Environ Monit Assess 145:127–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Gu Y, Wang P, Kong CH (2009) Urease, invertase, dehydrogenase and polyphenoloxidase activities in paddy soils influenced by allelopathic rice variety. Eur J Soil Biol 45:436–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hafeez F, Spor A, Breuil MC, Schwartz C, Martin-Laurent F, Philippot L (2012) Distribution of bacteria and nitrogen-cycling microbial communities along constructed technosol depth-profiles. J Hazard Mater 15:231–232 88–97Google Scholar
  37. Hagmann DF, Goodey NM, Mathieu C, Evans J, Aronson M, Gallagher F, Krumins JA (2015) Effect of metal contamination on microbial enzymatic activity in soil. Soil Biol Biochem 91:291–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Haut-commissariat au plan (2014) Ressensement général de la population et de l’habitat-2014. Accessed 30 March 2017
  39. Hayat S, Ahmad I, Azam ZM, Ahmad A, Inam A, Samiullah (2002) Effect of long-term application of oil refinery wastewater on soil health with special reference to microbiological characteristics. Bioresour Technol 84:159–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hu B, Jia X, Hu J, Xu D, Xia F, Li Y (2017) Assessment of heavy metal pollution and health risks in the soil-plant-human system in the Yangtze River Delta, China. Int J Environ Res Public Health 14:1–18Google Scholar
  41. Hulisz P, Charzyński P, Greinert A (2018) Urban soil resources of medium-sized cities in Poland: a comparative case study of Toruń and Zielona Góra. J Soils Sediments 18(2):358–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ita RE, Anwana ED (2017) Geochemical assessment of heavy metal contamination in rural and urban wetlands in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. NY Sci J 10(11):43–51 ISSN 1554–0200 (print); ISSN 2375-723X (online)Google Scholar
  43. IUSS Working Group WRB (2015) World Reference Base for Soil Resources 2014, Update 2015. International soil classification system for naming soils and creating legends for soil maps. World Soil Resources Reports No. 106. FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  44. Jim CY (1998) Soil characteristics and management in an urban park in Hong Kong. J Environ Manag 22(5):683–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Joimel S, Cortet J, Jolivet C, Saby N, Chenot ED, Branchu P, Consalès JN, Lefort C, Morel JL, Schwartz C (2016) Physico-chemical characteristics of topsoil for contrasted forest, agricultural, urban and industrial land uses in France. Sci Total Environ 545–546:40–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Joimel S, Schwartz C, Hedde M, Kiyota S, Henning Krogh P, Nahmani J, Pérès G, Vergnes A, Cortet J (2017) Urban and industrial land uses have a higher soil biological quality than expected fromphysicochemical quality. Sci Total Environ 584-585:614–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kabata-Pendias A (2011) Trace elements in soils and plants. CRC Press, FloridaGoogle Scholar
  48. Klose S, Makeschin F (2004) Chemical properties of forest soils along a fly-ash deposition gradient in eastern Germany. Eur J Forest Res 123:3–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Laidlaw MAS, Filippelli GM (2008) Resuspension of urban soils as a persistent source of lead poisoning in children: a review and new directions. Appl Geochem 23:2021–2039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lalande R, Gagnon B, Royer I (2009) Impact of natural or industrial liming materials on soil properties and microbial activity. Can J Soil Sci 89:209–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lane DJ (1991) 16S/23S sequencing. In: Stackebrandt E, Goodfellow M (eds) Nucleic acid techniques in bacterial systematics. Wiley, Chichester, pp 171–204Google Scholar
  52. Levin MJ, Kim KHJ, Morel JL, Burghardt W, Charzynski P, Shaw RK, IUSS Working Group SUITMA (2017) Soils within Cities. Schweizerbart Science Publishers, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  53. Li T, Meng L, Herman U, Lu Z, Crittenden J (2015) A survey of soil enzyme activities along major roads in Beijing:the implications for traffic corridor green space management. Int J Environ Res Public Health 12:12475–12488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lorenz K, Preston CM, Kandeler E (2006) Soil organic matter in urban soils. Estimation of elemental carbon by thermal oxidation and characterization of organic matter by solid-state 13C nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy. Geoderma 130:312–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lovett GM, Traynor MM, Pouyat RV, Carreiro MM, Zhu WG, Baxter JW (2000) Atmospheric deposition to oak forests along an urban-rural gradient. Environ Sci Technol 34:4294–4300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Luo XS, Ding J, Bo X, Wang YJ, Li HB, Yu S (2012) Incorporating bioaccessibility into human health risk assessments of heavy metals in urban park soils. Sci Total Environ 424:88–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Magiera T, Strzyszcz Z, Rachwal M (2007) Mapping particulate pollution loads using soil magnetometry in urban forests in the upper Silesia industrial region Poland. For Ecol Manag 248:36–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Margesin R, Płaza GA, Kasenbacher S (2011) Characterization of bacterial communities at heavy-metal-contaminated sites. Chemosphere 82:1583–1588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Meuser H (2010) Contaminated urban soils. Environmental pollution, vol 18. springer, NetherlandsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Minnikova T, Denisova T, Mandzhieva S, Kolesnikov S, Minkina T, Chaplygin V, Burachevskaya MV, Sushkova SN, Bauer TV (2017) Assessing the effect of heavy metals from the Novocherkassk power station emissions on the biological activity of soils in the adjacent areas. J Geochem Explor 174:70–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Moreira H, Marques APGC, Franco AR, Rangel AOSS, Castro PML (2014) Phytomanagement of cd-contaminated soils using maize (Zea mays L.) assisted by plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Environ Sci Pollut Res 21:9742–9753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Morel JL, Schwartz C, Florentin L, Kimpe C (2005) Urban soils. In: Hillel D (ed) Encyclopedia of Soils in the Environment, Elsevier Ltd. Academic Press, London, pp 202–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Morel JL, Chenu C, Lorenz K (2015) Ecosystem services provided by soils of urban, industrial, traffic, mining, and military areas (SUITMAs). J Soils Sediments 15:1659–1666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Muller G (1969) Index of geoaccumulation in sediments of the Rhine River. J Geol 2:109–118Google Scholar
  65. Muyzer G, De Waal EC, Uiterlinden AG (1993) Profiling of complex microbial populations by denaturating gradient gel electrophoresis analysis of polymerase chain reaction amplified genes coding for 16S rRNA. Appl Environ Microbiol 59:695–700Google Scholar
  66. Nannoni F, Rossi S, Protano G (2014) Soil properties and metal accumulation by earthworms in the Siena urban area (Italy). Appl Soil Ecol 77:9–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Newbound M, Mccarthy MA, Lebel T (2010) Fungi and the urban environment: a review. Landsc Urban Plan 96:138–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Oliveira A, Pampulha ME (2006) Effects of long-term heavy metal contamination on soil microbial characteristics. J Biosci Bioeng 102:157–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Papa S, Bartoli G, Pellegrino A, Fioretto A (2010) Microbial activities and trace element contents in an urban soil. Environ Monit Assess 165:193–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Pan J, Yu L (2011) Effects of Cd or/and Pb on soil enzyme activities and microbial community sructure. Ecol Eng 37:1889–1894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Pereira SIA, Castro PML (2014) Phosphate-solubilizing rhizobacteria enhance Zea mays growth in agricultural P-deficient soils. Ecol Eng 73:526–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Pouyat RV, Szlavecz K, Yesilonis ID, Groffman PM, Schwarz K (2010) Chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of urban soils. In: Aitkenhead-Peterson J, Volder A (eds) Urban ecosystem ecology, agronomy monographs 55. Madison, pp 119–152Google Scholar
  73. Pouyat RV, Yesilonis ID, Golubiewski NE (2009) A comparison of soil organic carbon stocks between residential turf grass and native soil. Urban Ecosyst 12:45–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Raciti SM, Pouyat RV, Fahey TJ, Pickett ST, Groffman PM, Jenkins JC, Cadenasso ML (2011) Accumulation of carbon and nitrogen in residential soils with different land-use histories. Ecosystems 14:287–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Rauch JN, Pacyna JM (2009) Earth’s global Ag, Al, Cr, Cu, Fe, Ni, Pb, and Zn cycles. Global Biogeochem CY 23(2):1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Salazar S, Sánchez L, Alvarez J, Valverde A, Galindo P, Igual JM, Peix A, SantaRegina I (2011) Correlation among soil enzyme activities under different forest system management practices. Ecol Eng 37:1123–1131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Seto KC, Fragkias M, Güneralp B, Reilly MK (2011) A meta-analysis of global urban land expansion. PLoS One 6(8):e23777. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Stefanowicz AM, Kapusta P, Szarek-Łukaszewska G, Grodzińska K, Niklińska M, Vogt RD (2012) Soil fertility and plant diversity enhance microbial performance in metal-polluted soils. Sci Total Environ 439:211–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Tabatabai MA, Bremner JM (1972) Assay of urease activity in soils. Soil Biol Biochem 4:479–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Tabatabai MA, Bremner JM (1969) Use of p-nitrophenyl phosphate for assay of soil phosphatase activity. Soil Biol Biochem 1:301–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Thalmann A (1968) Zur Methodik der Bestimmung der Dehydrogenaseaktivitat im Boden mittels Triphenyltetrazoliumchlorid (TTC). In: Alef K, Nannipieri P (eds) Methods in Applied Soil Microbiology and Biochemistry. Academic Press, London, pp 228–230Google Scholar
  82. United Nations (2014) Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2014 Revision, Highlights (ST/ESA/SER.A/352)Google Scholar
  83. Utobo EB, Tewari L (2015) Soil enzymes as bioindicators of soil ecosystem status. Appl Ecol Environ Res 13(1):147–169Google Scholar
  84. Wang M, Markert B, Shen W, Chen W, Peng C, Ouyang Z (2011) Microbial biomass carbon and enzyme activities of urban soils in Beijing. Environ Sci Pollut Res 18:958–967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Wang H, Marshall CW, Cheng M, Xu H, Li H, Yang X, Zheng T (2017) Changes in land use driven by urbanization impact nitrogen cycling and the microbial community composition in soils. Sci Rep 7:44049. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Wilbaux Q (2001) La médina de Marrakech Formation des espaces urbains d'une ancienne capitale de Maroc. L'Harmattan, ParisGoogle Scholar
  87. Wolińska A, Stępniewska Z (2012) Dehydrogenase activity in the soil environment, dehydrogenases, Canuto RA (ed). InTech.
  88. Yang JL, Zhang GL (2015) Formation, characteristics and eco-environmental implications of urban soils—a review. Soil Sci Plant Nutr 61:30–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Yesilonis ID, Pouyat RV, Neerchal NK (2008) Spatial distribution of metals in soils in Baltimore, Maryland: role of native parent material, proximity to major roads, housing age and screening guidelines. Environ Pollut 156(3):723–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Yuangen Y, Campbell C, Clark L, Cameron C, Paterson E (2006) Microbial indicators of heavy metal contamination in urban and rural soils. Chemosphere 63:1942–1952CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Xu HJ, Li S, Su JQ, Nie S, Gibson V, Li H, Zhu YZ (2014) Does urbanization shape bacterial community composition in urban park soils? A case study in 16 representative Chinese cities based on the pyrosequencing method. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 87:182–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ahmed Naylo
    • 1
    • 2
  • Sofia I. Almeida Pereira
    • 3
  • Leila Benidire
    • 1
  • Hicham El Khalil
    • 1
  • Paula M. L. Castro
    • 3
  • Stéphanie Ouvrard
    • 2
  • Christophe Schwartz
    • 2
  • Ali Boularbah
    • 1
    • 4
    Email author
  1. 1.Faculté des Sciences et Techniques Marrakech, Laboratoire Aliments, Environnement et SantéUniversité Cadi-AyyadMarrakeshMorocco
  2. 2.INRA, Laboratoire Sols et EnvironnementUniversité de LorraineNancyFrance
  3. 3.Centro de Biotecnologia e Química Fina (CBQF), Laboratório Associado, Escola Superior de BiotecnologiaUniversidade Católica PortuguesaPortoPortugal
  4. 4.AgrobioSciences ProgramUniversité Mohammed VI Polytechnique (UM6P)Ben GuerirMorocco

Personalised recommendations