New Forests

, Volume 46, Issue 1, pp 157–165 | Cite as

Forest regeneration under Tectona grandis and Terminalia amazonia plantation stands managed for biodiversity conservation in western Panama

  • Brett T. WolfeEmail author
  • Daisy H. Dent
  • José Deago
  • Mark H. Wishnie
Short Communication


Plantations of Tectona grandis in Central America are widely perceived to suppress forest regeneration in their understories, yet few studies have tested this assumption. We surveyed the understory woody vegetation growing in 7-year-old stands of T. grandis and the native tree species Terminalia amazonia in a plantation in western Panama that was managed with both commercial timber and biodiversity conservation objectives. We predicted that if T. grandis suppressed forest regeneration then the understories of T. grandis stands would have a lower density of woody stems, smaller stems, and fewer species than stands of T. amazonia. None of our predictions were supported. Densities of woody stems were 0.56 ± 0.21 m−2 (mean ± SE) and 0.64 ± 0.10 m−2 in T. grandis and T. amazonia understories, respectively. Stem height structure was similar under both species, where stems <1 m height dominated. Understory species richness did not differ between the two species; in total, 27 and 30 woody species were sampled in T. grandis and T. amazonia stands, respectively. However, understory species composition differed between the two crop species. Overall, our results are inconsistent with the idea that T. grandis plantations suppress forest regeneration and suggest that the lack of woody vegetation in other T. grandis plantation understories may be attributable to management actions, such as understory thinning, rather than species effects of T. grandis. Further research is needed to compare T. grandis and native species for their effects on forest regeneration.


Diversity Native species Reforestation Restoration 



We thank Iliana Armién and Andreas Eke for facilitating research at the Futuro Forestal plantations, Emilio Mariscal for training, Carolina Sarmiento for help in making Fig. 1, and two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on the manuscript. This research was undertaken as part of PRORENA, a collaborative native species reforestation research project between the School of Forestry and Environmental Studies of Yale University and the Center for Tropical Forest Science at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute. Financial support for PRORENA has been provided by the Frank Levinson Donor-Advised Fund at the Peninsula Community Foundation, the Levinson Family Foundation, and the Grantham Family Foundation.


  1. ANAM (2009) Compendio Estadístico Ambiental 2004–2008. Authoridad Nacional del Ambiente, PanamaGoogle Scholar
  2. Bell TIW (1973) Erosion in the Trinidad teak plantations. Commonw For Rev 52:223–233Google Scholar
  3. Butler R, Montagnini F, Arroyo P (2008) Woody understory plant diversity in pure and mixed native tree plantations at La Selva Biological Station, Costa Rica. For Ecol Manag 255:2251–2263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carnevale NJ, Montagnini F (2002) Facilitating regeneration of secondary forests with the use of mixed and pure plantations of indigenous tree species. For Ecol Manag 163:217–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ciccarese L, Mattsson A, Pettenella D (2012) Ecosystem services from forest restoration: thinking ahead. New For 43:543–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Colwell RK (2013) EstimateS: statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples. Version 9.
  7. Cusack D, Montagnini F (2004) The role of native species plantations in recovery of understory woody diversity in degraded pasturelands of Costa Rica. For Ecol Manag 188:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Evans J, Turnbull JW (2004) Plantation forestry in the tropics. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  9. Griess VC, Knoke T (2011) Can native tree species plantations in Panama compete with teak plantations? An economic estimation. New For 41:13–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hartley MJ (2002) Rationale and methods for conserving biodiversity in plantation forests. For Ecol Manag 155:81–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Healey SP, Gara RI (2003) The effect of a teak (Tectona grandis) plantation on the establishment of native species in an abandoned pasture in Costa Rica. For Ecol Manag 176:497–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hooper E, Condit R, Legendre P (2002) Responses of 20 native tree species to reforestation strategies for abandoned farmland in Panama. Ecol Appl 12:1626–1641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jones ER, Wishnie MH, Deago J, Sautu A, Cerezo A (2004) Facilitating natural regeneration in Saccharum spontaneum (L.) grasslands within the Panama Canal Watershed: effects of tree species and tree structure on vegetation recruitment patterns. For Ecol Manag 191:171–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kuusipalo K, Adjers G, Jafarsidik Y, Antti O, Tuomela K, Risto V (1995) Restoration of natural vegetation in degraded Imperata cylindrica grassland: understory development in forest plantations. J Veg Sci 6:205–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lamb D (1998) Large-scale ecological restoration of degraded tropical forest lands: the potential role of timber plantations. Restor Ecol 6:271–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lamb D, Erskine PD, Parrotta JA (2005) Restoration on degraded tropical forest landscapes. Science 310:1628–1632PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Leopold AC, Salazar J (2008) Understory species richness during restoration of wet tropical forest in Costa Rica. Ecol Restor 26:22–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lugo AE (1992) Comparison of tropical tree plantations with secondary forests of similar age. Ecol Monogr 62:1–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Martinez-Garza C, Howe HF (2003) Restoring tropical diversity: beating the time tax on species loss. J Appl Ecol 40:423–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Montagnini F (2011) Can native tree plantations serve as catalysts of secondary succession in degraded tropical forest landscapes? In: Montagnini, Finney C (eds) Restoring degraded landscapes with native species in Latin America. Nova Science Publishers, New York, pp 3–28Google Scholar
  21. Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, Minchin PR, O’hara RB, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MHH (2013) Vegan: community ecology package version 2.0-8.
  22. Pandey D, Brown C (2000) Teak: a global overview. Unasylva 201:3–13Google Scholar
  23. Parrotta JA (1992) The role of plantation forests in rehabilitating degraded tropical ecosystems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 41:115–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Parrotta JA, Turnbull JW, Jones N (1997) Catalyzing native forest regeneration on degraded tropical lands. For Ecol Manag 99:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Powers SP, Haggar JP, Fisher RF (1997) The effect of overstory composition on woody regeneration and species richness in 7-year-old plantations in Costa Rica. For Ecol Manag 99:43–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Slocum MG, Horvitz CC (2000) Seed arrival under different genera of trees in a Neotropical pasture. Plant Ecol 149:51–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. van Breugel M, Hall JS, Craven DJ, Gregoire TG, Park A, Dent DH, Wishnie MH, Mariscal E, Deago J, Ibarra D, Cedeño N, Ashton MS (2011) Early growth and survival of 49 tropical tree species across sites differing in fertility and rainfall in Panama. For Ecol Manag 261:1580–1589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wunderle JM Jr (1997) The role of animal seed dispersal in accelerating native forests regenerating on degraded tropical lands. For Ecol Manag 99:223–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yirdaw E (2001) Diversity of naturally-regenerated native woody species in forest plantations in the Ethiopian highlands. New For 22:159–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brett T. Wolfe
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Daisy H. Dent
    • 1
    • 3
  • José Deago
    • 1
  • Mark H. Wishnie
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.Native Species Reforestation Project (PRORENA), Center for Tropical Forest ScienceSmithsonian Tropical Research InstituteAnconRepublic of Panama
  2. 2.Department of BiologyUniversity of UtahSalt Lake CityUSA
  3. 3.Biological and Environmental SciencesUniversity of StirlingStirlingUK
  4. 4.Seaview Natural Resource Consulting, LLCSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations