Abstract
Disturbance is often touted as a management tool, as moderate disturbance is believed to enhance diversity; thus an understanding of frequent and fluctuating disturbance regimes in forests and their effects on stand structure, dominance and diversity is very crucial. Here, the effects of different disturbance regimes, along a gradient, on diversity and dominance of five Shorea robusta Gaertn. f.-dominated forests were investigated in 25 one-ha plots in Nepal. A total of 67 tree species were recorded; of which 41 species were encountered in least disturbed and 10 species in heavily disturbed forest. Significant variations among forests were observed for all measures of alpha diversity. Alpha diversity measures declined linearly along a disturbance gradient while dominance increased linearly. Relative basal area of S. robusta increased as the level of disturbance increased, which in turn produced more than two-fold higher important value index in heavily disturbed forest than the least disturbed forest. All alpha diversity measures declined in an order of three with increasing relative basal area of S. robusta. The similarity in species composition between each pair of disturbed forests was generally low (Jaccard’s similarity index < 57%), suggesting a higher Beta diversity. It can be concluded that diversity of Sal forests declines with increasing magnitude of disturbance, which in turn favors a higher dominance of S. robusta. Controlling the population of the dominant species, mainly S. robusta, is recommended to enhance diversity and to achieve multiple-use forest management objectives.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anonymous. 1994. Operational Forest Management Plan for Nawalparansi District (1995–2000). Forest Research and Survey Centre, Kathmandu.
Brown ND, Whitmore TC. 1992. Do Dipterocarp Seedlings Really Partition Tropical Rain Forest Gaps? Royal Society of London Biological Science, 335: 369–378.
Cannon CH, Peart DR, Leighton M, Kartawinata K. 1994. The structure of lowland rainforest after selective logging in West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Forest Ecology and Management, 67: 49–68.
Collins SL, Glenn SM, Gibson DJ. 1995. Experimental Analysis of Intermediate Disturbance and Initial Floristic Composition: Decoupling Cause and Effect. Ecology, 76: 486–492.
Connell JH. 1978. Diversity in tropical rain forests and coral reefs. High diversity of trees and corals is maintained only in a nonequilibrium state. Science, 199: 1302–1310.
Fulbright TE. 2004. Disturbance effects on species richness of herbaceous plants in a semi-arid habitat. Journal of Arid Environment, 58: 119–133.
Gautam KH, Devoe NN. 2006. Ecological and anthropogenic niches of sal (Shorea robusta Gaertn. f.) forest and prospects for multiple-product forest management - a review. Forestry, 79: 81–101.
Hubbell SP. 2001. The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography. Monographs in population biology 32. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Hubbell SP, Foster RB, O’Brien ST, Harms KE, Condit R, Wechsler B, Wright SJ, de Lao SL. 1999. Light-Gap Disturbances, Recruitment Limitation, and Tree Diversity in a Neotropical Forest. Science, 283: 554–557.
Jackson JK. 1994. Manual of afforestation in Nepal, second edition: Forest Research and Survey Center, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Kennard DK, Gould K, Putz FE, Fredericksen TS, Morales F. 2002. Effect of disturbance intensity on regeneration mechanisms in a tropical dry forest. Forest Ecology and Management, 162: 197–208.
Lamb D, Erskine PD, Parrotta JA. 2005. Restoration of Degraded Tropical Forest Landscapes. Science, 310: 1628–1632.
Lindenmayer DB, Franklin JF. 2002. Conserving forest biodiversity, a comprehensive multiscaled approach. Island Press, Washington DC, USA.
Nagaike T, Kamitani T, Nakashizuka T. 1999. The effect of shelterwood logging on the diversity of plant species in a beech (Fagus crenata) forest in Japan. Forest Ecology and Management, 118: 161–171.
Onaindia M, Dominguez I, Albizu I, Garbisu C, Amezaga I. 2004. Vegetation diversity and vertical structure as indicators of forest disturbance. Forest Ecology and Management, 195: 341–354.
Pande PK. 1999. Comparative vegetation analysis and sal (Shorea robusta) regeneration in relation to their disturbance magnitude in some sal forests. Tropical Ecology, 40: 51–61.
Pandey SK, Shukla RP. 2001. Regeneration strategy and plant diversity status in degraded sal forests. Current Science, 81: 95–102.
Ramirez-Marcial N, Gonzalez-Espinosa M, Williams-Linera G. 2001. Anthropogenic disturbance and tree diversity in Montane Rain Forests in Chiapas, Mexico. Forest Ecology and Management, 154: 311–326.
Sagar R, Raghubanshi AS, Singh JS. 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.
Sagar R, Singh JS. 2006. Tree density, basal area and species diversity in a disturbed dry tropical forest of northern India: implications for conservation. Environmental Conservation, 33: 256–262.
Sapkota IP, Tigabu M, Oden PC. 2009a. Species diversity and regeneration of old-growth seasonally dry Shorea robusta forests following gap formation. Journal of Forestry Research, 20: 7–14.
Sapkota IP, Tigabu M, Oden PC. 2009b. Spatial distribution, advanced regeneration and stand structure of Nepalese Sal (Shorea robusta) forests subject to disturbances of different intensities. Forest Ecology and Management, 257: 1966–1975.
Sheil D. 1999. Tropical forest diversity, environmental change and species augmentation: After the intermediate disturbance hypothesis. Journal of Vegetation Science, 10: 851–860.
Sheil D, Burslem DFRP. 2003. Disturbing hypotheses in tropical forests. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 18: 18–26.
Swamy PS, Sundarapandian SM, Chandrasekar P, Chandrasekaran S. 2000. Plant species diversity and tree population structure of a humid tropical forest in Tamil Nadu, India. Biodiversity and Conservation, 9: 1643–1669.
Tárrega R, Calvo L, Marcos E, Taboada A. 2006. Forest structure and understory diversity in Quercus pyrenaica communities with different human uses and disturbances. Forest Ecology and Management, 227: 50–58.
Timilsina N, Ross MS, Heinen JT. 2007. A community analysis of sal (Shorea robusta) forests in the western Terai of Nepal. Forest Ecology and Management, 241: 223–234.
van Gemerden BS, Olff H, Parren MPE, Bongers F. 2003. The pristine rain forest? Remnants of historical human impacts on current tree species composition and diversity. Journal of Biogeography, 30: 1381–1390.
Vetaas OR. 1997. The effect of canopy disturbance on species richness in a central Himalayan oak forest. Plant Ecology, 132: 29–38.
Webb EL, Sah RN. 2003. Structure and diversity of natural and managed sal (Shorea robusta Gaertn.f.) forest in the Terai of Nepal. Forest Ecology and Management, 176: 337–353.
Whittaker RH. 1970. Communities and Ecosystems. Macmillan, New York.
Zhu JJ, Mao ZH, Hu L, Zhang JX. 2007. Plant diversity of secondary forests in response to anthropogenic disturbance levels in montane regions of northeastern China. Journal of Forest Research, 12: 403–416.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Foundation project: The study was supported by Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sapkota, I.P., Tigabu, M. & Odén, P.C. Changes in tree species diversity and dominance across a disturbance gradient in Nepalese Sal (Shorea robusta Gaertn. f.) forests. Journal of Forestry Research 21, 25–32 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-010-0004-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-010-0004-4