Skip to main content

Plant diversity and distribution in urban domestic gardens and apartments in Bangalore, India

Abstract

Although urban domestic gardens hold great significance for biodiversity support in cities, these habitats have been relatively insufficiently studied, especially in developing country contexts. This paper assesses the composition, diversity, density and distribution of plant vegetation in urban domestic gardens in the rapidly expanding south Indian city of Bangalore. Overall species diversity is high, with 1,668 trees from 91 species, as well as 192 species of herbs and shrubs encountered from a total sample of 328 urban single domestic gardens and shared apartment gardens distributed across the city. The majority of species were uncommon, found in less than 5 % of all sampled locations. A high proportion of about 30 % of all species had uses as food or as spices, medicinal properties, and/or religious significance. In general, large shared apartment gardens and single domestic gardens had a greater number of trees with larger size, and greater tree and herb/shrub diversity compared to small shared apartment gardens and small to moderate sized single domestic gardens. Shared apartment gardens tended to harbor relatively distinct sets of species, especially trees, palms and plants with largely ornamental significance, while single domestic gardens contained a greater proportion of flowering and medicinal plants used in daily worship, as well as fruit bearing and spice bearing plants and trees. Residents observed a wide range of other animal and insect species in their gardens, but also indicated a decrease in wildlife biodiversity over time. The majority of residents observed some cultural practices associated with feeding of urban wildlife and insects including the provision of rice and water for birds, and of sugar for ants. The results of this research provide a comprehensive description of plant diversity and distribution in single domestic gardens and shared apartment gardens of different sizes, which can be very important for citizen groups, planners and administrators working towards urban planting and greening in the south Indian city of Bangalore. They also supplement the extremely limited information currently available on urban domestic gardens outside of cities in the west.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

References

  1. Albuquerque UP, Andrade LHC, Caballero J (2005) Structure and floristics of homegardens in Northeastern Brazil. J Arid Environ 62:491–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aminzadeh B, Khansefid M (2010) A case study of urban ecological networks and a sustainable city: Tehran’s metropolitan area. Urban Ecosyst 13:23–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Blanckaert I, Swennen RL, Flores MP, López RR, Saade L (2004) Floristic composition, plant uses and management practices in homegardens of San Rafael Coxcátlan Valley of Tehuacán-Cuicatlán, Mexico. J Arid Environ 57:39–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bolund P, Hunhammar S (1999) Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecol Econ 29:293–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Botkin DB, Beveridge CE (1997) Cities as environments. Urban Ecosyst 1:3–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chamberlain DE, Gough S, Vaughan H, Vickery JA, Appleton GF (2007) Determinants of bird species richness in public green spaces: capsule bird species richness showed consistent positive correlations with site area and rough grass. Bird Study 54:87–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chiesura A (2004) The role of urban parks for the sustainable city. Landsc Urban Plan 68:129–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cilliers S, Siebert S, Davoren E, Lubbe R (2011) Social aspects of urban ecology in developing countries, with an emphasis on urban domestic gardens. In M. Richter, E. Weiland (Eds.), Applied urban ecology: A global framework. Wiley-Blackwell, Chennai, India

  9. Colding J, Lundberg J, Folke C (2006) Incorporating green-area user groups in urban ecosystem management. Ambio 35:237–244

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Daniels GD, Kirkpatrick JB (2006a) Comparing the characteristics of front and back domestic gardens in Hobart, Tasmania, Australia. Landsc Urban Plan 78:344–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Daniels GD, Kirkpatrick JB (2006b) Does variation in garden characteristics influence the conservation of birds in suburbia? Biol Conserv 133:326–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Davies ZG, Fuller RA, Loram A, Irvine KN, Sims V, Gaston KJ (2009) A national scale inventory of resource provision for biodiversity within domestic gardens. Biol Conserv 142:761–771

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Doody BJ, Sullivan JJ, Meurk CD, Stewart GH, Perkins HC (2010) Urban realities: the contribution of residential gardens to the conservation of urban forest remnants. Biodivers Conserv 19:1385–1400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. D’Souza R, Nagendra H (2011) Changes in public commons as a consequence of urbanization: the Agara lake in Bangalore, India. Environ Manage 47:840–850

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dufrene M, Legendre P (1997) Species assemblages and indicator species: the need for a flexible asymmetrical approach. Ecol Monogr 67:345–366

    Google Scholar 

  16. Dunn RR, Gavin MC, Sanchez MC, Solomon JN (2006) The pigeon paradox: dependence of global conservation on urban nature. Conserv Biol 20:1814–1816

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Fernández-Juricic E, Jokimäki J (2001) A habitat island approach to conserving birds in urban landscapes: case studies from southern and northern Europe. Biodivers Conserv 10:2023–2043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Fuller RA, Warren PH, Armsworth PR, Barbosa O, Gaston KJ (2008) Garden bird feeding predicts the structure of urban avian assemblages. Divers Distrib 14:131–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Galluzzi G, Eyzaguirre P, Negri V (2010) Home gardens: neglected hotspots of agro-biodiversity and cultural diversity. Biodivers Conserv 19:3635–3654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Goddard MA, Dougill AJ, Benton TG (2010) Scaling up from gardens: biodiversity conservation in urban environments. Trends Ecol Evol 25:90–98

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Gonzalez-Garcia A, Sal AG (2008) Private urban greenspaces or ‘Patios’ as a key element in the urban ecology of tropical central America. Hum Ecol 36:291–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kabir ME, Webb EL (2008) Can homegardens conserve biodiversity in Bangladesh? Biotropica 40:95–103

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kendall D, Williams NSG, Williams KJH (2011) A cultivated environment: exploring the global distribution of plants in gardens, parks and streetscapes. Urban Ecosyst. doi:10.1007/s11252-011-0215-2

  24. Khera N, Mehta V, Sabata BC (2009) Interrelationships of birds and habitat features in urban greenspaces in Delhi, India. Urban For Urban Green 8:187–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kirkpatrick JB, Daniels GD, Zagorski T (2007) Explaining variation in front gardens between suburbs of Hobart, Tasmania, Australia. Landsc Urban Plan 79:314–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kirkpatrick J, Daniels G, Davison A (2009) An antipodean test of spatial contagion in front garden character. Landsc Urban Plan 93:103–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kurz T, Baudains C (2010) Biodiversity in the front yard: an investigation of landscape preference in a domestic urban context. Environ Behav, published online November 7 2011, doi:10.1177/0013916510385542

  28. Lerman SB, Warren PS (2011) The conservation value of residential yards: linking birds and people. Ecol Appl 21:1327–1339

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Loram A, Tratalos J, Warren PH, Gaston KJ (2007) Urban domestic gardens (X): the extent and structure of the resource in five major cities. Landsc Ecol 22:601–615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Lubbe CS, Siebert SJ, Cilliers SS (2010) Political legacy of South Africa affects the plant diversity patterns of urban domestic gardens along a socio-economic gradient. Sci Res Essays 5:2900–2910

    Google Scholar 

  31. Luck GW, Smallbone LT, O’Brien R (2009) Socio-economics and vegetation change in urban ecosystems: patterns in space and time. Ecosyst 12:604–620

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Mathieu R, Freeman C, Aryal J (2007) Mapping private gardens in urban areas using object-oriented techniques and very high-resolution satellite imagery. Landsc Urban Plan 81:179–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. McKinney ML (2006) Urbanization as a major cause of biotic homogenization. Biol Conserv 127:247–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Nagendra H (2010) Maps, lakes and citizens. Sem India 613:19–23

    Google Scholar 

  35. Nagendra H, Gopal D (2010) Street trees in Bangalore: density, diversity, composition and distribution. Urban For Urban Green 9:129–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Nagendra H, Gopal D (2011) Tree diversity, distribution, history and change in urban parks. Urban Ecosyst 14:211–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Nair J (2005) The promise of the metropolis: Bangalore’s twentieth century. Oxford University Press, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  38. Oleyar MD, Greve AI, Withey JC, Bjorn AM (2008) An integrated approach to evaluating urban forest functionality. Urban Ecosyst 11:289–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Singh VS, Pandey DN, Chaudhry P (2010) Urban forests and open green spaces: lessons for Jaipur, Rajasthan, India. RSPCB Occasional Paper No. 1/2010, Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board, Rajasthan, India. http://210.212.99.115/rpcb/RSPCB-OP-1-2010.pdf. Accessed on 23 February 2010

  40. Smith RM, Thompson K, Hodgson JG, Warren PH, Gaston KJ (2006a) Urban domestic gardens (IX): composition and richness of the vascular plant flora, and implications for native biodiversity. Biol Conserv 129:312–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Smith RM, Warren PH, Thompson K, Gaston KJ (2006b) Urban domestic gardens (VI): environmental correlates of invertebrate species richness. Biodivers Conserv 15:2415–2438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Smith RM, Gaston KJ, Warren PH, Thompson K (2006c) Urban domestic gardens (VIII): environmental correlates of invertebrate abundance. Biodivers Conserv 15:2515–2545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1981) Introduction to biostatistics, 2nd edn. Island Press, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  44. Sperling CD, Lortie CJ (2010) The importance of urban backgardens on plant and invertebrate recruitment: a field microcosm experiment. Urban Ecosyst 13:223–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Sudhira HS, Ramachandra TV, Subrahmanya MHB (2007) City profile Bangalore. Cities 24:379–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Troy AR, Grove JM, O’Neil-Dunne JPM, Cadenasso ML, Pickett STA (2007) Predicting opportunities for greening and patterns of vegetation on private urban lands. Environ Manag 40:394–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a grant from the Stockholm Resilience Center, and a Ramanujan Fellowship from the Department of Science and Technology, Government of India to HN. We thank Prakhar Arora for assistance with field sampling.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Harini Nagendra.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jaganmohan, M., Vailshery, L.S., Gopal, D. et al. Plant diversity and distribution in urban domestic gardens and apartments in Bangalore, India. Urban Ecosyst 15, 911–925 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-012-0244-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Cities
  • Green spaces
  • India
  • Urban biodiversity
  • Urban ecology