Advertisement

Journal of Forestry Research

, Volume 29, Issue 2, pp 515–524 | Cite as

Genecological zones and selection criteria for natural forest populations for conservation: the case of Boswellia papyrifera in Ethiopia

  • Abayneh Derero
  • Adefires Worku
  • Habtemariam Kassa
Original Paper

Abstract

Rapid changes in land-use in the CombretumTerminalia woodlands of northwestern Ethiopia are mainly due to the increases in commercial farming and immigration. We used integrated ecological and social data collection techniques, including subdivision of the vegetation zone, vegetation survey, focus group discussions and key informant interviews, to identify genecological zones and set criteria for selection of viable populations of Boswellia papyrifera (Del.) Hochst in Ethiopia for conservation. Interviews of senior experts were supported with a rating method and involved 43 respondents and focused on identifying and weighting criteria and indicators of selection in a participatory way to prioritize populations for conservation. Using mean annual rainfall data, we reclassified the CombretumTerminalia woodland vegetation region into three moisture zones (wet, moist and dry), and designated them as genecological zones for B. papyrifera conservation. A total of 35 woody species were identified at Lemlem Terara site in Metema district, and the Shannon diversity index and evenness were 2.01 and of 0.62, respectively. There were 405 adult trees, and 10 saplings and 3314 seedlings per ha. The trees were medium-sized with overall mean diameter at breast height (dbh) of 16.9 (±9.5) cm. Seedling recruitment was poor due to grazing, crop production and fire incidences. Through a multi-criteria decision analysis, five criteria and 20 quantitative indicators were identified and weighted to prioritize populations for conservation. These criteria in their descending order of importance are (1) forest ecosystem health and vitality, (2) forest cover and population structure of B. papyrifera, (3) productive function of the forest, (4) biological diversity in the forest, and (5) socioeconomic benefits of the forest to communities. Multivariate tests in the general linear model revealed significant differences among researchers and nonresearchers in rating the criteria and indicators, but not among foresters and nonforesters. Hence, participatory multi-criteria decision analysis should involve people from various institutions to rectify decisions on conservation of the species. Careful evaluation of the investment policy environment and engaging those government bodies that are responsible to allocate the dry forests for commercial farming is recommended before the proposed criteria are applied to select populations for conservation, thus ensuring subsequent use of the outcomes of such exercises and better reconciling conservation and agricultural production increment goals.

Keywords

Agricultural expansion CombretumTerminalia Indicators Multi-criteria decision analysis method (MCDA) Settlement 

Notes

Acknowledgements

All scientists and experts who participated in the focus group discussion and in the refinement and weighing of the criteria and indicators are appreciated. This work was financed by CIFOR through its Community Forestry Project in Ethiopia funded by the Austrian Development Agency (Project No. 2008/03). The authors are thankful to the People and Government of Austria. They are also grateful to the Central Ethiopia Environment and Forestry Research Center, which supported the study by covering the staff time of the lead author.

References

  1. Aalbæk A (1993) Tree seed zones for Ethiopia. Forestry Research Center/National Tree Seed Project, Addis Ababa, p 120Google Scholar
  2. Addisalem AB, Bongers F, Kassahun T, Smulders MJM (2016) Genetic diversity and differentiation of the frankincense tree (Boswellia papyrifera (Del.) Hochst) across Ethiopia and implications for its conservation. For Ecol Manage 360:253–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ayele TB, Gailing O, Finkeldey R (2011) Assessment and integration of genetic, morphological and demographic variation in Hagenia abyssinica (Bruce) J.F. Gmel to guide its conservation. J Nat Conserv 19:8–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Castañeda F (2000) Criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management: international processes, current status and the way ahead. FAO, Rome, p 13Google Scholar
  5. Dejene T, Lemenih M, Bongers F (2013) Manage or convert Boswellia woodlands? Can frankincense production payoff? J Arid Environ 89:77–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Derero A, Gailing O, Finkeldey R (2011) Maintenance of genetic diversity in Cordia Africana Lam., a declining forest tree species in Ethiopia. Tree Genet Genomes 7:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Eshete A, Teketay D, Hulten H (2005) The socio-economic importance and status of populations of Boswellia papyrifera (Del.) Hochst in Northern Ethiopia: the case of North Gondar Zone. For Trees Livelihoods 15:55–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eshete A, Teketay D, Lemenih M, Bongers F (2012) Effects of resin tapping and tree size on the purity, germination and storage behaviour of Boswellia papyrifera (Del.) Hochst seeds from Metema District, northwestern Ethiopia. For Ecol Manage 269:31–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. FAO (2000) Annex 6: definitions and basic principles of sustainable forest management in relation to criteria and indicators. Italy, Rome, p 7Google Scholar
  10. FAO (2014) The state of world’s forest genetic resources. Italy, Rome, p 276Google Scholar
  11. FOREST EUROPE, UNECE, FAO (2011) State of Europe’s Forests 2011. Status and trends in sustainable forest management in Europe. Ministerial conference on the protection of forests in Europe, Forest EUROPE Liaison Unit Oslo, Norway, p 337Google Scholar
  12. Friis I, Demissew S, Breugel PV (2010) Atlas of the potential vegetation of Ethiopia. The Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters, Denmark, p 307Google Scholar
  13. Graudal L, Kjaer E, Thomsen A, Larsen AB (1997) Planning national programmes for conservation of forest genetic resources. Technical Note No. 48, Danida Forest Seed Centre, Humlebaek, Denmark, p 54Google Scholar
  14. Graudal L, Aravanopoulos F, Bennadji Z, Changtragoon S, Fady B, Kjær ED, Loo J, Ramamonjisoa L, Vendramin GG (2014) Global to local genetic diversity indicators of evolutionary potential in tree species within and outside forests. For Ecol Manage 333:35–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Groenendijk P, Eshete A, Sterck FJ, Zuidema PA, Bongers F (2012) Limitations to sustainable frankincense production: blocked regeneration, high adult mortality and declining populations. J Appl Ecol 49:164–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. IUCN (2012) IUCN red list of threatened species. Version 2012.2. http://www.iucnredlist.org.
  17. König AO (2005) Provenance research: evaluating the spatial pattern of genetic variation. In: Geburek T, Turok J (eds) Conservation and management of forest genetic resources in Europe. Arbora Publishers, Zvolen, pp 535–565Google Scholar
  18. Lemenih L, Teketay D (2003) Frankincense and myrrh resources of Ethiopia. II. Medicinal and industrial uses. SINET Ethiop J Sci 26:161–172Google Scholar
  19. Lemenih M, Feleke S, Tadesse W (2007) Constraints to smallholders production of frankincense in Metema district, North-western Ethiopia. J Arid Environ 71:393–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lemenih M, Arts B, Wiersum KF, Bongers F (2014) Modelling the future of Boswellia papyrifera population and its frankincense production. J Arid Environ 105:33–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mendoza GA, Martins H (2006) Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management: a critical review of methods and new modelling paradigms. For Ecol Manage 230:1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mendoza GA, Prabhu R (2000) Multiple criteria decision making approaches to assessing forest sustainability using criteria and indicators: a case study. For Ecol Manage 131:107–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Negussie A, Aerts R, Gebrehiwot K, Muys B (2008) Seedling mortality causes recruitment limitation of Boswellia papyrifera in northern Ethiopia. J Arid Environ 72:378–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ogbazghi W, Bongers F, Rijkers T, Wessel M (2006) Population structure and morphology of the frankincense tree Boswellia papyrifera along an altitude gradient in Eritrea. J Drylands 1:85–94Google Scholar
  25. Rijkers T, Ogbazghi W, Wessel M, Bongers F (2006) The effect of tapping for frankincense on sexual reproduction in Boswellia papyrifera. J Appl Ecol 43:1188–1195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rotach P (2005) In situ conservation methods. In: Geburek T, Turok J (eds) Conservation and management of forest genetic resources in Europe. Arbora Publishers, Zvolen, pp 535–565Google Scholar
  27. St Clair JB, Mandel NL, Vance-Borland KW (2005) Genecology of Douglas fir in Western Oregon and Washington. Ann Bot 96:1199–1214CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Tesfaye G, Teketay D, Fetene M, Beck E (2010) Regeneration of seven indigenous tree species in a dry Afromontane forest, southern Ethiopia. Flora Morphol Distrib Funct Ecol Plants 205(2):135–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wale HA, Bekele T, Dalle G (2012) Floristic diversity, regeneration status, and vegetation structure of woodlands in Metema Area, Amhara National Regional State, Northwestern Ethiopia. J For Res 23(3):391–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. White TL, Adams WT, Neale DB (2007) Forest genetics. CAB International, Wallingford, p 682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wright JW (1976) Introduction to forest genetics. Academic Press, New York, p 463Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Northeast Forestry University and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Abayneh Derero
    • 1
  • Adefires Worku
    • 1
  • Habtemariam Kassa
    • 2
  1. 1.Ethiopian Environment and Forest Research InstituteAddis AbabaEthiopia
  2. 2.Center for International Forestry Research, Ethiopia OfficeAddis AbabaEthiopia

Personalised recommendations