Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T18:25:43.044Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Vegetation patterns and species-filtering effects of soil in secondary succession in a tropical dry forest in central Myanmar

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 January 2016

Bo Sann ,
Mamoru Kanzaki  and
Seiichi Ohta
Bo Sann*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture, Kyoto University, Kyoto, 606–8502, Japan
Mamoru Kanzaki
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture, Kyoto University, Kyoto, 606–8502, Japan
Seiichi Ohta
Affiliation:
Japan International Forestry Promotion and Cooperation Centre, Tokyo, 112-0004, Japan
*
1Corresponding author. Email: bosan2007@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

We studied the vegetation and soil properties of a dry forest that had once been disturbed in central Myanmar using 30 quadrats (20 × 20 m) established in 2012. For 30 species, the overall density was 706 individuals ha−1, and the basal area was 2.92 m2 ha−1. The forest was a mosaic of six community types, each of which was dominated by a single species. Dominant species that were capable of resprouting accounted for 47–78% of the total density and 56–83% of the basal area of the communities. We related seven soil properties to the vegetation patterns using canonical correspondence analysis (CCA). The CCA results highlighted remarkable associations of species such as Acacia catechu, Dalbergia paniculata, Terminalia oliveri and Millettia multiflora with soil texture. Acacia inopinata was associated with a high soil pH (i.e. 9–10), and Terminalia tomentosa was associated with soil hardness. Our results indicate that secondary succession of a dry forest is not initially led by pioneer species, but instead, by superior competitors capable of resprouting, and that species distributions are primarily determined by the filtering effects of edaphic conditions. We believe that the dry-forest species retain their soil–species relationships despite heavy disturbances.

Keywords

canonical correspondence analysisedaphic factorslocally dominant speciesrecoveryresproutingspecies assemblages
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Tropical Ecology , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , March 2016 , pp. 116 - 124
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

LITERATURE CITED

BULLOCK, S. H., MOONEY, H. A. & MEDINA, E. (eds). 1995. Seasonally dry tropical forests. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 450 pp.Google Scholar
DAVIS, J. H. 1964. The forests of Burma. University of Florida, Florida. 23 pp.Google Scholar
DIRZO, R., YOUNG, H. S., MOONEY, H. A. & CEBALLOS, G. (eds). 2011. Seasonally dry tropical forests: ecology and conservation. Island Press, Washington. 392 pp.Google Scholar
DZGD (DRY ZONE GREENING DEPARTMENT). 2010. Inspection report on the plantations established from 1997–98 to 2009–10 in the central dry zone of Myanmar. Ministry of Environmental Conservation and Forestry, Myanmar, Nay Pyi Taw. 239 pp.Google Scholar
FD (FOREST DEPARTMENT). 2011. Forestry in Myanmar. Ministry of Environmental Conservation and Forestry, Myanmar, Nay Pyi Taw. 50 pp.Google Scholar
GENTRY, A. H. 1988. Changes in plant community diversity and floristic composition on environmental and geographical gradients. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 75:1–34.Google Scholar
GONZALEZ, O. J. & ZAK, D. R. 1994. Geostatistical analysis of soil properties in a secondary tropical dry forest, St. Lucia, West Indies. Plant and Soil 163:45–54.Google Scholar
GONZALEZ, O. J. & ZAK, D. R. 1996. Tropical dry forests of St. Lucia, West Indies: vegetation and soil properties. Biotropica 28:618–626.Google Scholar
GUARIGUATA, M. R., CHAZDON, R. L., DENSLOW, J. S., DUPUY, J. M. & ANDERSON, L. 1997. Structure and floristics of secondary and old-growth forest stands in lowland Costa Rica. Plant Ecology 132:107–120.Google Scholar
HELTSHE, J. F. & FORRESTER, N. E. 1983. Estimating species richness using the jack-knife procedure. Biometrics 39:1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HOLDRIDGE, L. R. 1967. Life zone ecology. Tropical Science Center, San Jose, Costa Rica. 149 pp.Google Scholar
IMBERT, D. & PORTECOP, J. 2008. Hurricane disturbance and forest resilience: assessing structural vs. functional changes in a Caribbean dry forest. Forest Ecology and Management 255:3494–3501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
JANZEN, D. H. 1988. Tropical dry forests: the most endangered major tropical ecosystem. Pp. 130–137 in Wilson, E. O. (ed.). Biodiversity. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
JHA, C. S. & SINGH, J. S. 1990. Composition and dynamics of dry tropical forest in relation to soil texture. Journal of Vegetation Science 1:609–614.Google Scholar
JOSEPH, S., REDDY, C. S., PATTANAIK, C. & SUDHAKAR, S. 2008. Distribution of plant communities along climatic and topographic gradients in Mudumalai Wildlife Sanctuary (southern India). Biological Letters 45:20–33.Google Scholar
JUO, A. S. R. & FRANZLUEBBERS, K. 2003. Tropical soils: properties and management for sustainable agriculture. Oxford University Press, New York. 304 pp.Google Scholar
KENNARD, D. K. 2002. Secondary forest succession in a tropical dry forest: patterns of development across a 50-year chronosequence in lowland Bolivia. Journal of Tropical Ecology 18:53–66.Google Scholar
KLUTE, A. (ed.). 1986. Methods of Soil Analysis (Part 1). Soil Science Society of America (SSSA), Madison. 1188 pp.Google Scholar
KRESS, W. J., DEFILIPPS, R. A., FARR, E. & KYI, D. Y. Y. 2003. A checklist of the trees, shrubs, herbs and climbers of Myanmar. National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC. 590 pp.Google Scholar
LEBRIJA-TREJOS, E., BONGERS, F., PÉREZ-GARCÍA, E. A. & MEAVE, J. A. 2008. Successional change and resilience of a very dry tropical deciduous forest following shifting agriculture. Biotropica 40:422–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LÉVESQUE, M., MCLAREN, K. P. & MCDONALD, M. A. 2011. Recovery and dynamics of a primary tropical dry forest in Jamaica, 10 years after human disturbance. Forest Ecology and Management 262:817–826.Google Scholar
LLORET, F., CASANOVAS, C. & PEÑUELAS, J. 1999. Seedling survival of Mediterranean shrubland species in relation to root:shoot ratio, seed size and water and nitrogen use. Functional Ecology 13:210–216.Google Scholar
MCCUNE, B. & GRACE, J. B. 2002. Analysis of ecological communities. MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach. 300 pp.Google Scholar
MURATA, N., OHTA, S., ISHIDA, A., KANZAKI, M., WACHIRINRAT, C., ARTCHAWAKOM, T. & SASE, H. 2009. Comparison of soil depths between evergreen and deciduous forests as a determinant of their distribution, northeast Thailand. Journal of Forest Research 14:212–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MURPHY, P. G. & LUGO, A. E. 1986a. Ecology of tropical dry forest. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 17:67–88.Google Scholar
MURPHY, P. G. & LUGO, A. E. 1986b. Structure and biomass of a subtropical dry forest in Puerto Rico. Biotropica 18:89–96.Google Scholar
OHNUKI, Y., KIMHEAN, C., SHINOMIYA, Y. & TORIYAMA, J. 2008. Distribution and characteristics of soil thickness and effects upon water storage in forested areas of Cambodia. Hydrological Processes 22:1272–1280.Google Scholar
PALMER, M. W. 1990. The estimation of species richness by extrapolation. Ecology 71:1195–1198.Google Scholar
RAGHUBANSHI, A. S., SAGAR, R. & SINGH, J. S. 2003. Tree species composition, dispersion and diversity along a disturbance gradient in a dry tropical forest region of India. Forest Ecology and Management 186:61–71.Google Scholar
RAMADE, F. 1981. Ecology of natural resources. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Chichester. 322 pp.Google Scholar
RATNAM, J., BOND, W. J., FENSHAM, R. J., HOFFMANN, W. A., ARCHIBALD, S., LEHMANN, C. E. R. & SANKARAN, M. 2011. When is a “forest” a savanna, and why does it matter? Global Ecology and Biogeography 20:653–660.Google Scholar
SALDARRIAGA, J. G., WEST, D. C., THARP, M. L. & UHL, C. 1988. Long-term chronosequence of forest succession in the upper Rio Negro of Colombia and Venezuela. Journal of Ecology 76:938–958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SANCHEZ-AZOFEIFA, G. A., KALACSKA, M., CALVO-ALVARADO, J. C., QUESADA, M., RIVARD, B. & JANZEN, D. H. 2004. Species composition, similarity and diversity in three successional stages of a seasonally dry tropical forest. Forest Ecology and Management 200:227–247.Google Scholar
SPARKS, D. L., PAGE, A. L., HELMKE, P. A. & LOEPPERT, R. H. (eds). 1996. Methods of Soil Analysis (Part 3). Soil Science Society of America (SSSA), Madison. 1390 pp.Google Scholar
VAN BREUGEL, M., BONGERS, F. & MARTÍNEZ-RAMOS, M. 2007. Species dynamics during early secondary forest succession: recruitment, mortality and species turnover. Biotropica 39:610–619.Google Scholar
WHITE, D. A. & HOOD, C. S. 2004. Vegetation patterns and environmental gradients in tropical dry forests of the northern Yucatan Peninsula. Journal of Vegetation Science 15:151–160.Google Scholar