Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Plant diversity at Chilapatta reserve forest of Terai Duars in sub-humid tropical foothills of Indian eastern Himalayas

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Forestry Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

From March 2007 to March 2009 we quantified plant diversity at Chilapatta Reserve Forest in Terai Duars in the Indian eastern Himalayas. We sampled stratified random nested quadrats. Species richness was 311, representing 167 genera and 81 families. The species diversity index and concentration of dominance of the forest were 2.20 and 0.0072, respectively. Shannon-Wiener index and evenness indices were 4.77 and 1.44, respectively. The Importance Value Index (IVI) of species ranged from 0.13 to 37.94. The estimated diversity indices indicated heterogeneity of the forest in its composition, structure, function and dynamics. Rich forest plant diversity supports the need for continued conservation of tropical forests.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anonymous. 2001. 4 th Working Plan for the Forests of Cooch Behar district and Jalpaiguri district (Part) Comprising Cooch Behar Forest Division and Cooch Behar S. F. Division. Volume I, 2000-01 to 2009-10. Darjeeling: Divisional Forest Officer, Working Plans (North) Division, p.180.

  • Anonymous. 2010a. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010: Main Report. FAO Forestry Paper 163. Rome, Italy, p.340.

  • Anonymous. 2010b. Metrological Annual Report. Tobacco Regional Research Centre, Dinhata, Cooch Behar (West Bengal). p.53.

  • Anonymous. 2011. State of the World’s Forest. Rome: FAO, p.163.

  • Ashton PS. 1964. A quantitative phytosociological techniques applied to tropical mixed rainforest vegetation. Malaysia Forestry, 27: 304–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee SK, Nath S, Banerjee SP. 1986. Phytosociology and soil characteristics of forests in eastern Himalayas. Indian Journal Tropical Agriculture, 4: 116–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw CJA, Sodhi NS, Brook BW. 2009. Tropical turmoil: a biodiversity tragedy in progress. Front Ecol Environ, 7: 79–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell DG, Stone IL, Rosas AJr. 1992. A comparison of phytosociology and dynamics of three flood plains (Varzea) forests of known age, Rio Jurua, Western Brazilian Amazon. Bot J Linn Soc, 108: 213–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Champion HG, Seth SK. 1968. A Revised Survey of the Forest Types of India. New Delhi: Manager of Publications, p.404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chauhan SK, Gupta N, Ritu Yadav S, Chauhan R. 2009. Biomass and carbon allocation in different parts of agroforestry tree species. Indian Forester, 135: 981–993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cintron G, Novelli YS. 1984. Methods for studying mangrove structure. In: The Mangrove Ecosystem Research Methods (Eds. Snedaker, C. and Snedaker, G.), UNICSO. 251p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dash PK, Mohapatra PP, Rao YG. 2009. Diversity and distribution pattern of tree species in Niyamgiri hill ranges, Orissa, India. Indian Forester, 135: 927–942.

    Google Scholar 

  • Devi LS, Yadava PS. 2009. Aboveground biomass and net primary production of semi-evergreen tropical forest of Manipur, north-eastern India. Journal of Forestry Research, 20: 151–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira LV, Prance GT. 1998. Species richness and floristic composition in four hectares in the Jau National Park in upland forests in Central Amazonian. Biodiversity Conservation, 7: 1349–1364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galav PK, Katewa SS, Chaudhary BL, Jain A. 2005. Phytosociological studies on the grassland community of southern Aravalli hills of Rajasthan. Indian Forester, 131: 493–952.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner TA, Barlow J, Chazdon R, Ewers RM, Harvey CA, Peres CA, Sodhi NS. 2009. Prospects for tropical forest biodiversity in a human-modified world. Ecology Letters, 12: 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gentry AH. 1990. Floristic similarities and differences between southern Central America and Upper and Central Amazonia. In: Gentry, A. H. (ed.), Four Neotropical rainforests. New Haven, USA: Yale University Press, pp. 141–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartshorn GS. 1990. An overview of Neotropical forest dynamics. In: Gentry, A. H. (ed.), Four neotropical rainforests. New Haven, USA: Yale University Press, pp. 585–599.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamir SA, Pandey HN. 2002. Status of biodiversity in the sacred groves of Jaintia hills, Meghalaya. Indian Forester, 128: 738–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kareiva P, Watts S, McDonald R, Boucher T. 2007. Domesticated nature: shaping landscapes and ecosystems for human welfare. Science, 316: 1866–1869.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Khan NL, Menon S, Bawa KS. 1997. Effectiveness of the protected area network in biodiversity conservation, a case study of Meghalaya State. Biodiversity and Conservation, 6: 853–868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar A, Marcot BG, Saxena A. 2006. Tree species diversity and distribution patterns in tropical forests of Garo hills. Current Science, 91: 1370–1381.

    Google Scholar 

  • McIntosh RP. 1975. H.A. Gleason ‘Individualistic Ecologist’ (1882–1975) His contributions to Ecological theory. Bull Torrey Bot Club, 102: 253–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menhinick EF. 1964. A comparison of some species diversity indices applied to samples of field insects. Ecology, 45: 858–861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers N, Mittermeier RA. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature, 403: 853–854.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Newaz MS. 2006. Diversity and composition of tree species regeneration in the secondary forests of Chittagong, Bangladesh. Indian Forester, 132: 1419–1428.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odum EP. 1971. Fundamentals of Ecology (3rd edn.). Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co., p.574.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ojo LO, Ola-Adams BA. 1996. Measurement of tree diversity in the Nigerian rainforest. Biod Cons, 5: 1253–1270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pande PK. 2001. Litter nutrient dynamics of Shorea robusta Gaertn. plantation at Doon Valley (Uttaranchal), India. Indian Forester, 127: 980–994.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Parthasarathy N, Sethi P. 1997. Tree and liana species diversity and population structure in a tropical dry evergreen forest in south India. Trop Ecol, 38: 19–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul SC. 2004. Land use effects on soil characteristics of Terai region of West Bengal. M. Sc. Thesis. Uttar Banga Krishi Viswavidyalaya, West Bengal, India. Unpubl. 58p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pielou EC. 1975. Ecological Diversity. New York: John Wiley and Sons, p.165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raunkiaer C. 1934. The Life Forms of Plants and Statistical Plant Geography. Oxford, U. K: Oxford University Press, p.632.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reddy CS, Pattanaik C, Mohapatra A, Biswal AK. 2007. Phytosociological observations on tree diversity of tropical forest of Similipal Biosphere Reserve, Orissa, India. Taiwania, 52: 352–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richards PW. 1996. The Tropical Rain Forest: An Ecological Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p.575.

  • Shannon CE, Weiner W. 1963. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Urbana, Illinois, USA: University of Illinois Press, p.111.

  • Sharma GD, Bhattacherjee S, Sinha M, Das AK. 2002. Status of plant biodiversity of Cachar district and is conservation. Journal of Economic and Taxonomic Botany, 26: 94–1001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson EM. 1949. Measurement of diversity. Nature, 163: 688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh JS. 2002. The biodiversity crises: a multifaceted review. Current Science, 82: 638–647.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiwari BK, Barik SK, Tripathi RS. 1998. Sacred groves of Meghalaya-conserving the sacred for biodiversity management. In: Ramakrishnan, P. S., Saxena, K. G. and Chandrashekara, U. M. (eds), Conserving the sacred groves for biodiversity management. New Delhi, India: Oxford and IBH Publishing Co., pp. 253–262.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Forestry, Uttar Banga Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Pundibari, 736165, (Cooch Behar) West Bengal, India

    Gopal Shukla & Sumit Chakravarty

  2. Department of Botany, University of North Bengal, Siliguri, West Bengal, India

    Rajib Biswas & A. P. Das

Authors
  1. Gopal Shukla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rajib Biswas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. P. Das
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sumit Chakravarty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gopal Shukla.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shukla, G., Biswas, R., Das, A.P. et al. Plant diversity at Chilapatta reserve forest of Terai Duars in sub-humid tropical foothills of Indian eastern Himalayas. Journal of Forestry Research 25, 591–596 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-014-0452-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-014-0452-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation