Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparing the Use of Indigenous Knowledge with Classification and Ordination Techniques for Assessing the Species Composition and Structure of Vegetation in a Tropical Forest

  • ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

dentification of groups that are similar in their floristic composition and structure (habitat types) is essential for conservation and forest managers to allocate high priority areas and to designate areas for reserves, refuges, and other protected areas. In this study, the use of indigenous knowledge for the identification of habitat types in the field was compared against an ecological characterization of habitat types, including their species composition obtained by using classification and ordination techniques for a tropical landscape mosaic in a rural Mayan area of Quintana Roo, Mexico. Plant diversity data calculated from 141 sampled sites chosen randomly on a vegetation class’s thematic map obtained by multispectral satellite image classification were used for this propose. Results indicated high similarity in the categorization of vegetation types between the Mayan classification and those obtained by cluster and detrended correspondence analysis. This suggests that indigenous knowledge has a practical use and can be comparable to that obtained by using science-based methods. Finally, identification and mapping of vegetation classes (habitat types) using satellite image classification allowed us to discriminate significantly different species compositions, in such a way that they can provide a useful mechanism for interpolating diversity values over the entire landscape.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  • Alonso, L. E., A. Alonso, T. S. Schulenberg, and F. Dallmeier (eds.). 2001. Biological and social assessment of the Cordillera de Vilcabamba, Peru. RAP working paper 12 and SI/MAB series 6, Conservation International, Washington, D.C

  • Burrough, P. A., and R. A. McDonnell. 1998. Principles of Geographical Information Systems. Spatial information systems and geostatistics. Oxford University Press, 333 pp

  • Bray R. J., J. T. Curtis. 1957. An ordination of the upland forest communities of southern Wisconsin. Ecol. Monogr. 27:325–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabrera C. E., S. M. Souza, V.O. Tellez, 1982. Imagenes de la flora Quintanaroense [Quintana Roo’s vegetation Images] Centro de Investigaciones de Quintana Roo. México, 224 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell J. B. 1987. Introduction to remote sensing. The Guilford Press. New York, 550 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll S. S. 1998. Modeling abiotic indicators when obtaining spatial predictions of species richness. Environmental and Ecological Statistics 5:257–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark D. B., M. W. Palmer, D. A. Clark. 1999. Edaphic factors and the landscape-scale distributions of tropical rain forest trees. Ecology 80:2662–2675

    Google Scholar 

  • Colwell, R. K., and J. A. Coddington. 1995. Estimating terrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation. Pages 101–118 in D. L. Hawksworth (ed.), Biodiversity measurement and estimation. Royal Society: Chapman and Hall, London

  • Earth Resource Mapping Ltd. 1998. ER mapper 6.1. User guide. San Diego, California, 750 pp

  • Edwards, R. C. 1986. The human impact on the forest in Quintana, Roo, Mexico. Journal of Forestry History 30:120–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Faith D. P., P. R. Minchin, L. Belbin. 1987. Compositional dissimilarity as a robust measure of ecological distance. Vegetatio 69:57–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleck D. J., J. D. Harder. 2000. Matses Indian rainforest habitat classification and mammalian diversity in Amazonian Peru. Journal of Ethnobiology 20:1–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Flores J. S., E. U. Ucan. 1983. Nombres usados por los mayas para designar la vegetación [Names used by Mayan people to name vegetation]. Instituto Nacional Sobre Recursos Bioticos, México, 30 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • French K. 1999. Spatial variability in species composition in birds and insects. Journal of Insect Conservation 3:183–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuller R. M., G. B. Groom, S. Mugisha, P. Ipulet, D. Pomeroy, A. Katende, R. Bailey, R. Ogutu-Ohwayo. 1997. The integration of field survey and remote sensing for biodiversity assessment: a case study in the tropical forest and wetlands of Sango Bay, Uganda. Biological Conservation 86:379–391

    Google Scholar 

  • García, C. X., B. Rodríguez, and J. Chavelas. 1996. Evaluación de áreas afectadas por el huracán Gilberto e incendios forestales en Quintana Roo [Evaluation of Quintana Roo’s affected areas by Gilbert Hurricane and forest fires]. INIFAP, Mérida Yuc, 56 pp

  • Gauch H. G. 1982. Multivariate analysis in community ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 298 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Hellier A., A. C. Newton, S. Ochoa-Gaona, 1999. Use of indigenous knowledge for rapidly assessing in biodiversity: A case study from Chiapas, Mexico. Biodiversity and Conservation 8:869–889

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernandez-Stefanoni, J. L. 2004. A framework for evaluating the diversity status of trees, shrubs and vines in a tropical forest in Mexico based on landscape patterns metrics and spatial modelling with GIS. Ph.D. dissertation. Trent University, Peterborough, Ontario, Canada, 204 pp

  • Hernandez-Stefanoni J. L., R. Ponce-Hernandez. 2004. Mapping the spatial distribution of plant diversity indices in a tropical forest using multi-spectral satellite image classification and field measurements. Biodiversity and Conservation 13:2599–2621

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernandez-Xolocotzi E., E. Baltaza, S. Tacher. 1995. La milpa en Yucatan, Un sistema agricola tradicional [The “milpa” in Yucatan. A traditional agricultural-system]. Colegiode Postgraduados. México, 398 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Innes J. L., B. Koch. 1998. Forest biodiversity and its assessment by remote sensing. Global Ecology and Biogeography Letters 7:397–419

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen J. R. 2000. Remote sensing of environment: An earth resource perspective. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 544 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Jin xiu, W., L. Hongmao, H. Huabin, and G. Lei. 2004. Participatory approach for rapid assessment of plant diversity through a folk classification system in a tropical rain forest: case study in Xishuang banna, China. Conservation Biolgy 18:1139–1142

    Google Scholar 

  • Jongman R. H. G., C. J. F. Ter Braak, O. F. R. Van Tongeren. 1995. Data analysis in community and landscape ecology. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK, 299 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Kovach W. L. 2002. MVSP: A multivariate statistical package for windows ver. 3.1. Kovach Computing Services, Pentraeth, Wales, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Krebs C. J. 1989. Ecological methodology. Harper Collins, New York, 654 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Magurran A. E. 1988. Ecological diversity and its measurement. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 179 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreno C. E., G. Halffter. 2001. Spatial and temporal analysis of a, b, and g diversities of bats in a fragmented landscape. Biodiversity and Conservation 10:367–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagendra H., M. Gadgil. 1999. Satellite imagery as a tool for monitoring species diversity: An assessment. Journal of Applied Ecology 36:388–397

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer M. W., D. B. Clark, D. A. Clark. 2000. Is the number of tree species in small tropical forest plots nonrandom? Community Ecology 1:95–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peet R. K., R. G. Knox, J. S. Case, R. B. Allen. 1988. Putting things in order: The advantages of detrended correspondence analysis. American Naturalist 131:924–934

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinder L., S. Rosso. 1998. Classification and ordination of plant formations in the pantanal of Brazil. Plant Ecology 136:151–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitkanen S. 1998. The use of diversity indices to assess the diversity of vegetation in managed boreal forest. Forest Ecology and Management 112:121–137

    Google Scholar 

  • Plotking J. B., M. D. Potts, D. W. Yu, S. Bunyavejchewin, R. Condit, R. Foster, S. Hubbell, J. LaFrankie, N. Manokaran, H. S. Lee, R. Sukumar, M. A. Nowak, P. S. Ashton. 2000. Predicting species diversity in tropical forests. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 97:10850–10854

    Google Scholar 

  • Sardinero S. 2000. Classification and ordination of plant communities along an altitudinal gradient on the Presidential Range, New Hampshire, USA. Plant Ecology 148:81–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarukhan, J., and T. D. Pennington. 1998. Arboles tropicales de Mexico [Tropical trees of Mexico]. Universidad Autonoma de Mexico. Fondo de Cultura Economica, Mexico

  • Shepard, G., D. W. Yu, and B. Nelson. 2004. Ethnobotanical ground-truthing and forest diversity in the West Amazon. Pages 133–171 in L. Maffi, T. Carlson, and E. López-Zent (eds.), Ethnobotany and conservation of biocultural diversity, Advances in economic botany. New York Botanical Gardens, New York

  • Shepard G., D. W. Yu, M. Lizarralde, M. Italiano. 2001. Rain forest habitat classification among the Matsigenka of the Peruvian Amazon. Journal of Ethnobiology 21:1–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Silbaugh J. M., D. R. Betters. 1995. Quantitative biodiversity measures applied to forest management. Environmental Review 3:277–285

    Google Scholar 

  • Sneath P. H. A., R. R. Sokal. 1973. Numerical taxonomy: The principles and practice of numerical classification. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco, California, 359 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Sosa V., J. S. Flores, V. Rico-Gray, R. Lira, J. J. Ortiz. 1985a. Etnoflora Yucatense. Lista floristica y sinonimia Maya [Yucatan’s Ethno-vegetation. Floristic list and Mayan names]. Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones sobre Recursos Bioticos. Veracruz, México, 225 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Sosa V., A. Gomez-Pompa, J. S. Flores. 1985b. La flora de Yucatan [The Vegetation of Yucatan]. Ciencia y Desarrollo 60:37–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Ter Braak C. J. F., I. C. Prentice. 1988. A theory of gradient analysis. Advances in Ecological Research 18:271–317

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas V., P. Treitz, D. Jelinski, J. Miller, P. Lafleur, J. H. McCaughey. 2002. Image classification of a northern peatland complex using spectral and plant community data. Remote Sensing of Environment 84:83–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Torre-Cuadros M. A., G. A. Islebe. 2003. Traditional ecological knowledge and use of vegetation in southeastern Mexico: A case study from Solferino, Quintana Roo. Biodiversity and Conservation 12:2455–2476

    Google Scholar 

  • Torre-Cuadros M. A., N. Ross. 2003. Secondary biodiversity: local perceptions of forest habitats, the case of Solferino, Quintana Roo. Mexico. Journal of Ethnobiology 23:287–308

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. 1980. Ecosistemas de los bosques tropicales. Informe sobre el estado de los conocimientos [Tropical forest ecosystems. A state-of-knowledge report]. UNESCO/PNUMA/FAO, Rome, 772 pp

  • Voltz M., R. Webster. 1990. A comparison of kriging, cubic splines and classification for predicting soil properties from sample information. Journal of Soil Science 41:473–490

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner H. H., O. Wildi, K. C. Ewald. 2000. Additive partitioning of plant species diversity in an agricultural mosaic landscape. Landscape Ecology 15:219–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witting L., V. Loeschcke. 1995. The optimization of biodiversity conservation. Biological Conservation 71:205–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whigham D. F., I. Olmsted, E. Cabrera Cano, M. E. Harmon. 1991. The impact of hurricane Gilbert on trees, literfall and woody debris in a dry tropical forest in the north-eastern Yucatan peninsula. Biotropica 23:434–441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker R. A. 1972. Evolution and measures of species diversity. Taxon 21:213–251

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. J. Luis Hernandez-Stefanoni

    Present address: Servicio de Información Estadística Agroalimentaria y Pesquera, Av. Benjamín Franklin 146, Col. Escandon, C.P., 11800, D.F., México

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Watershed Ecosystems Graduate Program, Trent University, Peterborough, Ontario, Canada

    J. Luis Hernandez-Stefanoni & Javier Bello Pineda

  2. Facultad de Ciencias Politicas y Sociales, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico

    Gabriela Valdes-Valadez

Authors
  1. J. Luis Hernandez-Stefanoni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Javier Bello Pineda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gabriela Valdes-Valadez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Luis Hernandez-Stefanoni.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hernandez-Stefanoni, J.L., Pineda, J.B. & Valdes-Valadez, G. Comparing the Use of Indigenous Knowledge with Classification and Ordination Techniques for Assessing the Species Composition and Structure of Vegetation in a Tropical Forest. Environmental Management 37, 686–702 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-004-0371-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-004-0371-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation