Wetlands Ecology and Management

, Volume 20, Issue 6, pp 539–548 | Cite as

Allometry, above-ground biomass and nutrient distribution in Ceriops decandra (Griffith) Ding Hou dominated forest types of the Sundarbans mangrove forest, Bangladesh

  • Mahmood HossainEmail author
  • Mohammad Raqibul Hasan Siddique
  • Arun Bose
  • Sharif Hasan Limon
  • Md. Rezaul Karim Chowdhury
  • Sanjoy Saha
Original Paper


The Sundarbans, the world’s largest single expanse of natural mangroves located in southern Bangladesh, is the most productive mangrove ecosystem in the world. Ceriops decandra (Griff.) Ding Hou is the dominant shrub in the strong saline zone of the Sundarbans and is mainly extracted for fuel wood, charcoal and tannin. The harvest of C. decandra has decreased by about 50 % in the Sundarbans during the last 10 years creating a major concern. This study derived allometric models of above-ground biomass and estimated of above-ground standing and harvestable biomass and nutrient stock in C. decandra in dominant forest types (C. decandra and C. decandraExcoecaria agallocha) in the Sundarbans. Allometric relationships between collar girth (CG) and biomass of plant parts (leaf, branch and stem) were tested using linear, power and logarithmic equations. The power equation was found to be most suitable. The density and the estimated total aboveground biomass of C. decandra in C. decandra and C. decandraE. agallocha forest types were 33,237 and 965 stems/ha (density) and 33.49 and 14.36 t/ha (biomass), respectively. Also, 13.56 and 6.61 t/ha of harvestable biomass were estimated, from C. decandra and C. decandraE. agallocha forest types, respectively. Nitrogen, potassium and phosphorus concentrations in the leaves, branches and stems showed significant (p < 0.05) variation. The findings of the present study will help to quantify the impact of present harvesting techniques and alteration of different silvicultural intervention like fixation of felling cycle, felling criterion, and regeneration and slash treatment.


Allometry Biomass Ceriops decandra Mangroves Nutrients Sundarbans 



We are thankful to the Ministry of Science, Information and Communication Technology, and the Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh for their special allocation research funding. We acknowledge the Sundarbans West Forest Division, Department of Forest and Forestry and Wood Technology Discipline for their logistical support and continuous cooperation. We also thank Professor Ahmed Ahsanuzzaman, Head of English Discipline, Khulna University for English editing. Ministry of Science, Information and Communication Technology, Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.


  1. Aksornkoae S, Khemnark C (1984) Nutrient cycling in mangrove forest of Thailand. In: Soepadmo E, Rao AN, Macintosh DJ (eds) Proceedings of the Asian Symposium on Mangrove Environment Research and management. University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, pp 545–557Google Scholar
  2. Allen SE (1974) Chemical analysis of ecological materials. Blackwell Scientific publication, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  3. Alongi DM, Clough BF, Robertson AI (2005) Nutrient-use efficiency in arid-zone forests of the mangroves Rhizophora stylosa and Avicennia marina. Aquat Bot 82:121–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Augusto L, Ranger J, Ponette Q, Rapp M (2000) Relationship between forest tree species, stand production and stand nutrient amount. Ann For Sci 57:313–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Binkley D (1986) Forest nutrition management. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Biswas SR, Choudhury JK (2007) Forests and forest management practices in Bangladesh: the question of sustainability. Int For Rev 9:627–640Google Scholar
  7. Causton DR, Venus JC (1981) The biometry of plant growth. Edward Arnold, LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. Chave J, Andalo C, Brown S, Cairns MA, Chambers JQ, Eamus D, Folster H, Fromard F, Higuchi N, Kira T, Lescure JP, Nelson BW, Ogawa H, Puig H, Riera B, Yamakura T (2005) Tree allometry and improved estimation of carbon stocks and balance in tropical forests. Oecologia 145:87–99PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cintron G, Schaeffer-Novelli Y (1984) Methods for studying mangrove structure. In: Snedaker SC, Snedaker JG (eds) The Mangrove ecosystem: research methods. UNESCO, Bungay, pp 91–113Google Scholar
  10. Clough BF, Scott K (1989) Allometric relationships for estimating above-ground biomass in six mangrove species. For Ecol Manag 27:117–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clough BF, Dixon P, Dalhaus O (1997) Allometric relationships for estimating biomass in multi-stemmed mangrove trees. Aust J Bot 45:1023–1031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Copper CF (1983) Carbon storage in managed forests. Can J For Res 13:155–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. FAO (2003) State of forestry in Asia and Pacific 2003- status, changes and trends. Food and Agriculture Organization, RomeGoogle Scholar
  14. Federer CA, Hornbeck JW, Tritton LM, Martin CW, Pierce RS, Smith CT (1989) Long-term depletion of calcium and other nutrients in eastern US forests. Environ Manag 13:593–601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Field C (1995) Journeys amongst Mangroves. International Society for Mangrove Ecosystems. South China Printing Co., Okinawa, p 140Google Scholar
  16. Giri C, Zhu Z, Tieszen LL, Singh A, Gillette S, Kelmelis JA (2008) Mangrove forest distributions and dynamics (1975–2005) of the tsunami-affected region of Asia. J Biogeogr 35:519–528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Giri C, Ochieng E, Tieszen LL, Zhu Z, Singh A, Loveland T, Masek J, Duke N (2010) Status and distribution of mangrove forests of the world using earth. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 1–6Google Scholar
  18. Gong WK, Ong JE (1990) Plant biomass and nutrient flux in a managed Mangrove forest in Malaysia. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 31:519–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hansen EA, Baker JB (1979) Biomass and nutrient removal in short-rotation intensively cultured plantations. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Impact of Intensive harvesting on Forest Nutrient Cycling. SUNY-ESF, Syracuse, NY, pp 130–51Google Scholar
  20. Helalsiddiqui ASM (1999) Status of the major mangrove species in the Sundarbans of Bangladesh. Indian J For 22:197–202Google Scholar
  21. Hopman P, Stewart HTL, Flinn DW (1993) Impact of harvesting on nutrient a Eucalyptus ecosystem in south eastern Australia. For Ecol Manag 59:29–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hornbeck JW, Smith CT, Martin CW, Tritton LM, Pierce RS (1990) Efects of intensive harvesting on nutrient capitals of three forest types in New England. For Ecol Manag 30:55–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Iftekhar MS, Islam MR (2004) Degradation of Bangladesh’s Sundarbans mangroves: a management issue. Int For Rev 6(2):123–135Google Scholar
  24. Johnson DW, Todd DE (1998) The effects of harvesting on long-term changes in nutrient pools in a mixed oak forest. Soil Sci Soc Am J 62:1725–1735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Johnson DW, West DC, Todd DE, Mann LK (1982) Effects of sawlog vs. whole-tree harvesting on the nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and calcium budgets of an upland mixed oak forest. Soil Sci Soc Am J 46:1304–1309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kairo JG, Bosire J, Langat J, Kirui B, Koedam N (2009) Allometry and biomass distribution in replanted mangrove plantations at Gazi Bay, Kenya. Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst 19:63–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ketterings QM, Coe R, Noordwijk MV, Amagau Y, Palm CA (2001) Reducing uncertainty in the use of allometric biomass equations for predicting above-ground tree biomass in mixed secondary forest. For Ecol Manag 146:199–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Khan MNI, Suwa R, Hagihara A (2005) Allometric relationships for estimating the aboveground phyto mass and leaf area of mangrove Kandelia candel (L.) Druce trees in the Manko Wetland, Okinawa Island, Japan. Trees 19:266–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Komiyama A, Ong JE, Poungparn S (2008) Allometry, biomass, and productivity of mangrove forests: a review. Aquat Bot 89:128–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Krishtensen E, Bouillon S, Dittmar T, Marchand C (2008) Organic carbon dynamics in mangrove ecosystems: a review. Aquat Bot 89:201–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lovelock CE, Feller IC, McKee KL, Thompson R (2005) Variation in mangrove forest structure and sediment characteristics in Bocas del Toro, Panama. Caribb J Sci 41:456–464Google Scholar
  32. Mahmood H (2007) Biological cycling of macro-nutrients (N, P, K, Ca, Mg and S) in Bruguiera parviflora dominated mangrove forest at Kuala Selangor Nature Park, Malaysia. Khulna Univ Stud 8(1):49–56Google Scholar
  33. Mahmood H, Saberi O, Japar Sidik B, Misri K (2003) Macronutrients status of seedlings, saplings and trees of Bruguiera parviflora Wight & Arn, at Kuala Selangor Nature Park Mangrove forest, Malaysia. Khulna Univ Stud 5(1):15–20Google Scholar
  34. Mahmood H, Saberi O, Japar Sidik B, Misri K, Rajagopal S (2004) Allometric relationships for estimating above and below-ground biomass of saplings and trees of Bruguiera parviflora (Wight and Arnold). Malays Appl Biol 33(1):37–45Google Scholar
  35. Mahmood H, Saberi O, Misri K, Japar Sidik B (2008) Biological cycling of micro-nutrients (Cu, Fe and Zn) in Bruguiera parviflora dominated mangrove forest at Kula Selangor Nature Park, Malaysia. Malays Appl Biol 37(1):63–68Google Scholar
  36. Matthes H, Kapetsky JM (1988) Worldwide compendium of mangrove-associated aquatic species of economic importance. FAO, Rome FAO Fishery Circular No. 814, pp 238Google Scholar
  37. Morrison IK, Foster NW (1979) Biomass and element removal by complete-tree harvesting of medium rotation forest stands. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Impact of Intensive Harvesting on Forest Nutrient Cycling. SUNY-ESF, Syracuse, NY, pp 111–9Google Scholar
  38. Ong JE, Gong WK, Wong CH, Dhanarajan G (1984) Contribution of aquatic productivity in managed mangrove ecosystem in Malaysia. In: Asian Symposium on Mangrove Environment Research and Management, pp 209–215 Google Scholar
  39. Ong JE, Gong WK, Wong CH (2004) Allometry and partitioning of the mangrove, Rhizophora apiculata. For Ecol Manag 188:395–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Peichl M, Arain MA (2007) Allometry and partitioning of above- and belowground tree biomass in an age-sequence of white pine forests. For Ecol Manag 253:68–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Putz FE, Chan HT (1986) Tree growth, dynamics, and productivity in a mature mangrove forest in Malaysia. For Ecol Manag 17:211–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Saenger P, Snedaker SC (1993) Pantropical trends in mangrove above-ground biomass and annual litterfall. Oecologia 96:293–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Santa Regina I (2000) Biomass estimation and nutrient pools in tour Quercus pyrenaica in Sierra de Gata Mountains, Salamanca, Spain. For Ecol Manag 132:127–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Siddiqi NA (2001) Mangrove forestry in Bangladesh. Institute of Forestry and Environmental Science, University of Chittagong, Chittagong, p 201Google Scholar
  45. Siddique MRH, Hossain M, Chowdhury MRK (2012) Allometric relationship for estimating above-ground biomass of Aegialitis rotundifolia Roxb. of Sundarbans mangrove forest, in Bangladesh. J For Res 23(1):23–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Smith TJ III, Whelan KRT (2006) Development of allometric relations for three mangrove species in South Florida for use in the Greater Everglades Ecosystem restoration. Wetl Ecol Manag 14:409–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Soares MLG (1997) Estudo da biomassaae′ rea de manguezais do sudeste do Brasil e ana′ lise de modelos, vol 2. PhD thesis, InstitutoOceanogra′ fico, Universidade de Sa˜ o Paulo, BrazilGoogle Scholar
  48. Soares MLG, Schaeffer-Novelli Y (2005) Above-ground biomass of mangrove species. I. Analysis of models. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 65:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Specht A, West PW (2003) Estimation of biomass and sequestered carbon on farm forest plantations in northern South Wales, Australia. Biomass Bioenergy 25:363–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sprugel DG (1983) Correcting for bias in log-transformed allometric equations. Ecology 64(1):209–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Steinke DT, Ward CJ, Rajh A (1995) Forest structure and biomass of mangroves in the Mgeni estuary, South Africa. Hydrobiologia 295:159–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Swamy SL, Kushwaha SK, Puri S (2004) Tree growth, biomass, allometry and nutrient distribution in Gmelia arborea stand grown in red lateritic soil of central India. Biomass Bioenergy 26:306–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tam NFY, Wong YS, Lan CY, Chen GZ (1995) Community structure and standing crop biomass of a mangrove forest in Futian Nature Reserve, Shenzhen, China. Hydrobiologia 295(1–3):193–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Timothy RP, Yoshiaki M, Carol ML (1984) A maual of chemical and biological methods for seawater analysis. Pergamon press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  55. Tritton LM, Martin CW, Hornbeck JW, Pierce RS (1987) Biomass and nutrient removals from commercial thinning and whole-tree clear cutting of central hardwoods. Environ Manag 11:659–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Weatherburm MW (1967) Phenol-hypochlorite reaction for determination of ammonia. Anal Chem 39(8):971–974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. White EH (1974) Whole-tree harvesting depletes soil nutrients. Can J For Res 4:530–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Woodroffe CD (1985) Studies of a mangrove basin, Tuff Crater, New Zealand: II. Comparison of volumetric and velocity—area methods of estimating tidal flux. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 20:431–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Zar JH (1996) Biostatistical analysis, 3rd edn. Prentice Hall, New JersyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mahmood Hossain
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mohammad Raqibul Hasan Siddique
    • 1
  • Arun Bose
    • 1
  • Sharif Hasan Limon
    • 1
  • Md. Rezaul Karim Chowdhury
    • 1
  • Sanjoy Saha
    • 1
  1. 1.Forestry and Wood Technology DisciplineKhulna UniversityKhulnaBangladesh

Personalised recommendations