| Literature DB >> 35851664 |
Alemayehu Kefalew1,2, Teshome Soromessa3, Sebsebe Demissew4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studying the floristic diversity of a certain forest is a basic aspect of the design and management of forest vegetation; and consequently this study focused on the plant diversity and community analysis of the Sele-Nono forest. For the current study, plants were sampled from 90 plots using a stratified random sampling technique along the established strata of the study forest. In all the plots, both floristic and environmental data that were relevant to the study were collected following the state of the art. Based on the collected data, the community types, ordination, floristic diversity, and threats to the forest were analyzed using R-package and SPSS software.Entities:
Keywords: Canonical correspondence analysis; Cluster analysis; Community types; Multivariate technique; Ordination; Sele-Nono Forest
Year: 2022 PMID: 35851664 PMCID: PMC9294133 DOI: 10.1186/s40529-022-00353-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bot Stud ISSN: 1817-406X Impact factor: 2.673
Fig1Map of Africa and Ethiopia showing the study area
Stratification of the study area and total number of plots allocated to each stratum
| Strata | Altitude range for each strata (m, asl) | Total area (forest and village) of each strata (ha) | Total village areas in each strata (Ha) | Total net forest areas in each strata (Ha) | Proportion of forest areas in each strata (%) | Total number of plots allocated to each strata |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| stratum 1 | 2182–2448 | 18,490.44 | 117.35 | 18,373.08 | 12.22 | 11 |
| stratum 2 | 1994–2181 | 42,025.49 | 5279.31 | 36,746.17 | 24.44 | 22 |
| stratum 3 | 1646–1993 | 45,673.67 | 8927.49 | 36,746.17 | 24.44 | 22 |
| stratum 4 | 1378–1645 | 33,827.22 | 421.61 | 33,405.61 | 22.22 | 20 |
| stratum 5 | 1109–1377 | 23,637.48 | 253.55 | 23,383.93 | 15.55 | 14 |
| stratum 6 | 840–1108 | 1670.28 | 0 | 1670.28 | 1.11 | 1 |
| Total | 840–2448 | 165,324.60 | 14,999.33 | 150,325.27 | 100 | 90 |
Fig. 2Location of permanent sample plots in the study area. Numbers on the map are plot numbers
Fig. 3Design of plot layout in the study area (unit in meter, scale 1:600)
Fig. 4Species accumulation curve showing the relationship between the numbers of sites or quadrats and the number of plant species in Sele-Nono Forest
Fig. 5Determination of optimal number of clusters corresponding to plant community types in Sele-Nono forest (Diagram of the Elbow method shows the expected optimal number of clusters. Within group (Cluster) Sum of Squares values represent the sum of squared Euclidean distances between the plots and the centroid. The Elbow is the first breaking point, seen after the flattening of the curve, in our case, 7)
Top fifteen species rich families recorded in Sele-Nono Forest
| Family | Species No. | Percent contribution of families to the total number of species in Sele-Nono forest (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Asteraceae | 30 | 7.17 |
| Fabaceae | 25 | 5.98 |
| Acanthaceae | 21 | 5.02 |
| Poaceae | 16 | 3.82 |
| Euphorbiaceae | 13 | 3.11 |
| Lamiaceae | 13 | 3.11 |
| Rubiaceae | 13 | 3.11 |
| Aspleniaceae | 12 | 2.87 |
| Moraceae | 10 | 2.39 |
| Orchidaceae | 10 | 2.39 |
| Celasteraceae | 9 | 2.15 |
| Cyperaceae | 9 | 2.15 |
| Amaranthaceae | 7 | 1.67 |
| Malvaceae | 7 | 1.67 |
| Solanaceae | 7 | 1.67 |
| Total | 202 | 48 |
Fig. 6Growth forms of plant species collected in Sele-Nono forest
Fig. 7Dendrogram of the vegetation data obtained from hierarchical cluster analysis of Sele-Nono forest using Ward’s method and Euclidean distance (the term ‘Group’ on the legend is synonymous to clusters or plant community types established for the study area, and represented here as C1 to C7 where plots in each community types are presented within the parenthesis as follow: C1(71,23,8,48,1,3,63,67,42,81,28,84,41,74,38,80,25,36,76), C2(30,77,90,53,75,26,17,59,65,22,2,20,27), C3(47,4,40,69,89,70,58,31,13), C4(32,29,86,37,56,66,78,5,9,24,57,82,79,72,54,51,61,64,46,45,68,70,21,49,88,60,62,34,19), C5(10,43,83,15,50,12,16,6), C6 (11,33,55,86,44), C7 (14,87,35,52,39,73,18)
Diversity analysis for each of the seven plant community types in Sele-Nono Forest
| Cluster number | Altitude Range(m, asl) | No. of plots | Species richness (S) | Shannon diversity index | Whittaker’s diversity | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Species diversity (H) | Species evenness (J) | α-diversity | |||||
| 1 | 1600–1900 | 19 | 101 | 4.09 | 0.88 | 24.11 | 4.18 |
| 2 | 840–1250 | 13 | 71 | 3.82 | 0.89 | 19.69 | 3.60 |
| 3 | 2300–2448 | 9 | 58 | 3.62 | 0.89 | 14.00 | 4.14 |
| 4 | 1850–2300 | 29 | 186 | 4.36 | 0.83 | 29.20 | 6.36 |
| 5 | 1640–1850 | 8 | 55 | 3.64 | 0.90 | 16.25 | 3.38 |
| 6 | 1600–1800 | 5 | 46 | 3.53 | 0.92 | 24.40 | 1.88 |
| 7 | 1200–1500 | 7 | 91 | 4.16 | 0.92 | 30.66 | 2.96 |
Fig. 8Mean values of plant diversity per plot for the different clusters in the study area. A Variation of mean species diversity. B Variation of mean species richness. C Variation of mean species evenness between the clusters. Boxes represented by the same letters are not significantly different at P < 0.05
Most influential environmental factors that affect the distribution of plants in Sele-Nono Forest
| Environmental factors | Df | Chisq | F | N.Perm | Pr(> F) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Altitude | 1 | 0.4002 | 3.4289 | 999 | 0.001*** |
| Disturbance | 1 | 0.3736 | 3.2007 | 999 | 0.001*** |
| Slope | 1 | 0.2502 | 2.1434 | 999 | 0.001*** |
| Organic matter (OM) | 1 | 0.2177 | 1.8648 | 999 | 0.001** |
| Nitrogen (N) | 1 | 0.1679 | 1.4388 | 999 | 0.013* |
| Residual | 84 | 9.8049 |
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05
Fig. 9CCA showing the relationship of the environmental factors among themselves and on the distribution of plants in the study area (Numbers inside the ordination diagrams represents plot numbers; and C denotes community number; arrows representing environmental variables; and arrow length shows the strength of the environmental variable)
Fig. 10Common threat to the vegetation of Sele-Nono Forest
Results of preference ranking values from ten respondents (A-J) on priority ranking of five threats to the vegetation of Sele-Nono forest (based on their degree of causing damage: 1 = least damaging, 7 = most damaging)
| Lists of major threats to Sele-Nono forest | Key informants (coded A-J) | Rank | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | Total | ||
| Agricultural land expansion | 7 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 66 | 1st |
Selective removals Forest thinning | 6 5 | 7 5 | 5 6 | 3 5 | 6 4 | 6 7 | 6 5 | 6 4 | 7 5 | 5 6 | 57 52 | 2nd 3rd |
| Settlements boundry expansion | 4 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 42 | 4th |
| Road development | 3 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 24 | 5th |
| Over-grazing | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 22 | 6th |
| Fire | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 17 | 7th |