## 3 Results

Table 6: Statistical significance for the main effects and interaction for the stored C. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Agroforestry System** & **Production Cycle** & **C:N** \\ \hline _F. macrophylla_ + G. _sepium_ * & & 28.90 a \\ _F. macrophylla_ + G. _sepium_ * & & 28.53 a \\ _F. macrophylla_ *** & & 16.15 b \\ _F. macrophylla_ * & & 15.83 b \\ G. _sepium_ *** & & 12.73 c \\ G. _sepium_ * & & 12.71 c \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: C:N ratio obtained for the production cycles and agroforestry systems. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Agroforestry System** & **Production Cycle** & **C:N** \\ \hline _F. macrophylla_ + G. _sepium_ * & & 26.44 b \\ _F. macrophylla_ + G. _sepium_ * & & 26.81 b \\ _F. macrophylla_ *** & & 15.60 de \\ _F. macrophylla_ * & & 14.16 deigh \\ G. _sepium_ *** & & 12.51 fgh \\ _G. _sepium_ * & & 12.04 gh \\ \hline _F. macrophylla_ + G. _sepium_ *** & & 28.67 ab \\ _F. macrophylla_ + G. _sepium_ * & & 28.95 ab \\ _F. macrophylla_ *** & & 18.28 c \\ _F. macrophylla_ * & & 16.99 cd \\ G. _sepium_ *** & & 11.93 gh \\ G. _sepium_ * & & 11.38 h \\ \hline _F. macrophylla_ + G. _sepium_ *** & & 30.48 a \\ _F. macrophylla_ + G. _sepium_ * & & 30.97 a \\ _F. macrophylla_ *** & & 15.89 de \\ _F. macrophylla_ * & & 15.07 def \\ _G. _sepium_ * & & 14.71 defg \\ G. _sepium_ * & & 13.77 efgh \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* 50% fertilization; *** without fertilization. Different letters indicate significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) using the ANOVA one-way analysis followed by Tukey’s test.  
\end{table} 
Table 5: C:N ratio obtained for the interaction between the production cycles and the agroforestry systems. The analysis showed that there were highly significant statistical differences for the number of earthworms per production cycle in the two sampling seasons (rainy and dry season). Significant differences were also found between the AFS and the seasons. No interaction was found between sampling season and AFS. The number of earthworms was higher in the first cycle; it decreased by 34.4 and 29% (rainy and dry season, respectively) in the second cycle; and finally, it increased in the third cycle in both evaluation seasons (30 and 70%, respectively) (Figure 5). The highest abundance of earthworms was found in the AFS with _F. macrophulla_ without fertilization in the two assessed seasons, while the lowest amount was found in the monoculture with 50% of fertilization (Table 8). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline
**Agroforestry System** & **Production Cycle** & **Stored C** \\ \hline _F. macrophylla_ + _G. seipium_*** & & 0.63 g \\ _F. macrophylla_ + _G. seipium_* & & 0.60 g \\ _F. macrophylla_*** & & 2.10 bcde \\ _F. macrophylla_* & & 1.93 cdefg \\ _G. seipium_*** & & 0.90 cfg \\ _G. seipium_* & & 0.73 fg \\ \hline _F. macrophylla_ + _G. seipium_*** & & 3.00 abc \\ _F. macrophylla_* & & 3.23 ab \\ _F. macrophylla_*** & & 1.70 defg \\ _F. macrophylla_* & & 1.67 defg \\ _G. seipium_* & & 2.53 abcd \\ _G. seipium_*** & & 3.43 a \\ \hline _F. macrophylla_ + _G. seipium_*** & & 0.80 fg \\ _F. macrophylla_+ _G. seipium_* & & 1.13 cfg \\ _F. macrophylla_*** & & 2.50 abcd \\ _F. macrophylla_* & & 2.90 abcd \\ G. seipium_*** & & 1.83 cdefg \\ G. seipium_* & & 2.07 bcde \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: Mean values for the stored C in the different production cycles and agroforestry systems. Figure 5: Mean values of the number of earthworms determined in the agroforestry systems in the different production cycles. Different letters indicate significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) using the ANOVA one-way analysis followed by Tukey’s test. The soil nutrients that positively influenced the number of earthworms were Mn and B in the rainy season, but the last element was not statistically significant, while in the dry season they were B and Zn (Table 9). On the other hand, elements such as P, Cu, Ca, and N had a negative influence on the number of earthworms in the two evaluation seasons.