Diversity of Tree Species Within an Urban Forest Fragment

BU R&D Journal21 (1): 33-44, July 2018 | ISSN (Print): 0016-4139

journal.bicol-u.edu.ph

Diversity of Tree Species Within an Urban Forest Fragment in Albay Province, Eastern Philippines

Dean Carlo F. Galias, Jonathan Jaime G. Guerrero*, Mheljor A. General, Erwin N. Bañares and Jocelyn E. Serrano

Abstract

Bicol University College of Science Department of Biology, Legazpi City*Corresponding author: [email protected]

Forest fragments in urban areas are important in many aspects of the urban landscape. In this study, tree species within the Bicol Kalikasan Park—an urban forest fragment in the province of Albay, Eastern Philippines—were accounted for the first time. Its community structure was assessed using the Point-Centered Quarter Method (PCQM). Diversity, dominance, and evenness indices were likewise computed. Results indicated that the 25 recorded tree species were distributed to at least among 25 families. There is moderate diversity (H’ = 2.84), very high evenness ( J = 0.88) and very low dominance (D = 0.08) in the sampled forest. The species Ficus septica (IV = 28.93), Melanolepis multiglandolosa (IV = 9.74) and Omalanthus populneus (IV = 2.94) are indicative of a facilitated regrowth forest. Invasive species such as Gmelina arborea (IV = 40.12) and Swietenia macrophylla (IV = 21.75) were recorded, with importance values (IV) ranked first and sixth, respectively. Tree diversity within the Bicol Kalikasan Forest Park was suggestive of the diversity of other organisms that were dependent on the tree species. Existing threats to the forest fragment, such as the expansion of the city and an adjacent university campus may be addressed by a strong policy that defines the extent of expansion and urbanization.

Keywords: Bicol Kalikasan Park, Ficus septica, Gmelina arborea, point-centered quarter method, urban forest fragment

Introduction

Forested landscapes have drastically been fragmented in many parts of the Philippines, and biodiversity is the most affected. However, only a few studies on biodiversity in forest fragments have been recorded. Despite this, forest fragments, especially in urban areas, remain important in many ways. They are essential in the conservation of many organisms, which may not find suitability in a bustling urban context (Godefroid & Koedam, 2003; Soga & Koike, 2012). Preserving natural habitats in an increasingly urbanized world mitigates global biodiversity loss (Alvey, 2006). Urban forests are also important in a changing climate, especially in air pollution mitigation and carbon dioxide sequestration (Escobedo et al., 2011). Other ecosystem services and the promotion of human health, likewise, form part of the intrinsic value of urban forest fragments (Sanesi et al., 2011).

Urban forests rely heavily on the diversity of trees that comprise them. The variation in tree species will alter avian abundance and diversity (Heyman, 2010), and insect diversity (Uno et al., 2010), among others.

Tree diversity has been shown to decrease the likelihood of tree mortality from outbreaks of insects and disease (Lacan & McBride, 2008), and reduce insect herbivory ( Jacktel & Brockerhoff, 2007).

In fragmented forests, the diversity of trees is most affected near the edges. An experiment was conducted by Krishnadas and colleagues (2018) wherein a weakened activity of fungal pathogens and insect herbivores has reduced seedling diversity. The result showed that the edge-effect can greatly impact the maintenance of biodiversity as cryptic losses of crucial biotic interactions.

Forest composition and diversity characterization, both for flora and fauna in remaining forest fragments—as well as determining the factors influencing its composition and diversity—are important aspects in aiding management actions and conservation practices (Sidehurst et al., 2012). According to Ma and co-workers (2015), forest fragment protection will conserve more regional species diversity than a single reserve and will

34

BU R&D Journal, Vol. 21, July 2018ISSN (Print): 0016-4139journal.bicol-u.edu.ph

Galias et al.: Diversity of Tree Species Within an Urban Forest Fragment in Albay Province, Eastern Philippines

Materials and Methods

Kalikasan Park Forest Fragment

Tree Species Assessment

Community Structure and Diversity Indices

The study was conducted at the Bicol Kalikasan Park, Legazpi City, Albay, Philippines (Figure 1). Specifically, it is located at the boundary of Legazpi City and Daraga, Albay, in eastern Philippines and adjacent to the Bicol University Main Campus. It is approximately 500 meters away from the national road. There is no clear-cut demarcation where the park ends. Both the university and the local government unit of the city of Legazpi exercise authority over the area.

Sampling was done using the Point-Centered Quarter Method (PCQM) of Mueller-Dombois and Ellenberg (1974) where two 100-meter transects were laid across the sampling sites. The sampling points were established every after 10 m. In this study, only trees with at least one-centimeter diameter at breast height (dbh=1.3m from the ground) nearest to the sampling point in each quarter were identified and recorded. The distance between the sampling point and midpoint of the tree was also recorded. The same procedures were carried out in the two sampling sites. Trees were identified on-site by botanists during the sampling period.

The collected data were used to compute for the community structure of the forest, as well as the different biological indices, such as Shannon-Weiner Index of Diversity (H’), Simpson Index of Dominance (D), and Pielou’s Evenness Index ( J).

also protect local traditional cultures.

The Kalikasan Park is an urban forest fragment within the city of Legazpi, Philippines, and is adjacent to a university campus. The continuous urbanization of the city and the rapid developmental expansion of the university pose challenges to the forest fragment. Possible future encroachment to the forest borders may reduce the forest fragment size and potentially endanger the biodiversity reliant on it.

Despite the ecosystem services and their intrinsic value, no formal recording of trees of the Kalikasan Park has been done. It is essential that an immediate and thorough documentation of the tree species within the forest fragment be done to provide baseline information on future developmental prospects. Thus, this study aimed to identify tree species within the park and determine its community structure and biological indices.

Results

The Bicol Kalikasan Park forest fragment has a total of 25 tree species belonging to 24 genera and 13 families. No single family dominates the area. The families Euphorbiaceae, Fabaceae, Lamiaceae, Meliaceae, and Moraceae all have three representative species, as shown in Figure 2. Both Malvaceae and Myrtaceae have two representative species, and the rest have only one representative each.

The forest fragment is estimated to have 407 trees per hectare, with a mean distance of 4.96 meters between trees. This was computed based on the total distances of all the sampled tree species from each of the sampling point. The top three tree species in terms of importance value (IV) are Gmelina arborea (IV = 40.12), Pterocarpus indicus (IV = 37.57), and Sterculia ceramica (30.41), shown in Figure 3. The remaining tree species, together with its community structure and distribution, are presented in Table 1.

The computed diversity and evenness indices denote that the forest fragment has moderate diversity (H’ = 2.84), very high evenness ( J = 0.88) and very low dominance (D = 0.08), (Table 2).

Discussion

The Bicol Kalikasan Park can be considered as a facilitated regrowth forest because of the presence of some pioneer species like Ficus septica, Melanolepis multiglandolosa, and Omalanthus populneus. These three species are also native to the Philippines. In terms of importance value, it is significant to note that F. septica and M. multiglandolosa ranked sixth and 12th respectively. Pterocarpus indicus, which is an important hardwood tree in the country, is also common in the area, ranking second in importance value. The forest fragment is also home to various tree species that inhabit shoreline such as Sterculia ceramica, Hibiscus tiliaceus, Terminalia catappa, Casuarina equisetifolia, Barringtonia asiatica, and Thespesia populnea (Pelser et al., 2011).

BU R&D Journal, Vol. 21, July 2018 ISSN (Print): 0016-4139


35


Figure 1. Maps of the Philippines (A), Bicol (B), and Kalikasan Park (C).

A

C

B

36



Figure 2. Family Distribution of Tree Species in Bicol Kalikasan Park, Albay




Rank Tree Species Common Name Family Relative

FrequencyRelative Density

Relative Dominance

Importance Value Distribution Status (Pelser et al., 2011)

1 Gmelina arborea Roxb. ex Sm Yemane Lamiaceae 10.94 12.50 16.69 40.12

China, India, Myanmar, Pakistan, Sri Lan-ka, Thailand, Vietnam; Extensively planted

throughout tropical SE Asia; Naturalized in the Philippines.

2 *Pterocarpus indicus Willd. Narra Fabaceae 6.250 5.000 26.32 37.57

S Myanmar, Peninsular Thailand, Cambodia, Ryukyus, across Malesia to Birk Arch., Vanu-atu, Solomon Isls. to Caroline Is., throughout

the Philippines.

3 Sterculia ceramica R.Br. in Benn Malaka Sterculiaceae 9.375 12.50 8.537 30.41

Lango, Borneo, Sulawesi, Moluccas, Philip-pines, Batan Is., Luzon (widespread in Western part), Mindoro, Sibuyan, Palawan, Guimaras,

Mindanao (widespread) Sulu.

4 Ficus septica Burm.f. Hauli Moraceae 14.06 12.50 2.364 28.93 NE India to S China, Taiwan, throughout Malesia to Australia to Vanuatu

5 Eucalyptus tereticornis Sm.

Red Gum Tree Myrtaceae 4.688 7.500 14.01 26.19 Native to Australia and New Guinea.

6 Swietenia macrophylla King Mahogany Meliaceae 6.250 7.500 8.000 21.75 Introduced from Tropical America

7 **Vitex parviflora Juss. Molave Lamiaceae 4.688 5.000 2.256 11.94 Lesser Sunda Isls, Moluccas, throughout Phil-

ippines.

8Gliricidia sepium ( Jacq.) Kunth ex

SteudKakawate Fabaceae 6.250 5.000 0.681 11.93

Introduced from Mexico, thoroughly natural-ized in the settled areas at low and medium

elevation throughout the Philippines.

9 Artocarpus blancoi Antipolo Moraceae 4.688 3.750 2.421 10.86Endemic to the Philippines.

Batan, Luzon, Mindanao, Palawan, Negros, Cebu, Mindanao.

Table 1. Community Structure of Tree Species in Bicol Kalikasan Park, Albay, Eastern Philippines

37



10Melanolepis multi-

glandulosa (Reinw. ex Blume) Rchb. & Zoll

Alim Euphorbiaceae 3.125 2.500 4.112 9.74

S Thailand, Indochina, Taiwan, Ryukyu Isls, Sumatra, Peninsular Malaysia, Java, Borneo, Sulawesi, lesser Sunda Isls., Moluccas, New

Guinea and Marianas Is, throughout the Phil-ippines. Batan to Mindanao, Sulu, Palawan.

11 Hibiscus tiliaceus L. Malabago Malvaceae 4.688 3.750 0.972 9.41 Tropics and subtropics, throughout the Philip-pines, particularly seashores and tidal streams.

12 Mallotus mollissimus (Geiseler) Airy Shaw Euphorbiaceae 4.688 3.750 0.698 9.14

Tenasserim, Thailand, Sumatra Peninsula, Malaysia, Borneo, Sulawesi, Lesser Sunda Isls. Moluccas Is, New Guinea, NE Australia, wide-

spread in the Philippines.

13Syzygium malac-

cense (L.) Merr. & L.M.Perry

Makopa Myrtaceae 1.563 1.250 3.780 6.59 Planted in most tropical countries; most part of the Philippines.

14 Terminalia catappa L. Talisay Combretaceae 1.563 2.500 1.686 5.75 Tropical Asia, W Australia and Polynesia, throughout Philippines’ seashore.

15 Trema orientalis (L.) Blume Anabiong Cannabaceae 1.563 2.500 0.583 4.65

Tropical Africa, Sri Lanka, India, Myanmar, Thailand, Indochina, China, Hawaii, Taiwan, S Japan, Sumatra, Peninsular Malaysia, Java,

Lesser Sunda Isls, Borneo, Philippines, Sulawe-si, Moluccas, New Guinea, Australia, Solomon

Is., Marianas, Polynesia.

16 Casuarina equisetifo-lia L. Agoho Casuarinaceae 1.563 1.250 1.720 4.53 World tropics to Africa to Polynesia, pantropic

in cultivation along seashores.



Relative Dominance


38




17 Lagerstroemia speciosa (L.) Pers. Banaba Lythraceae 1.563 1.250 1.598 4.41

China, Borneo, Cambodia, India, Java, Laos, Lesser Sunda Isls, Moluccas, Myanmar, Pen-

insular Malaysia, Sulawesi, Sumatra, Thailand, Vietnam, Philippines. Luzon, Mindoro, Pala-

wan, Leyte, Mindoro, Samar.

18Dysoxylum gaudi-

chaudianum (A.Juss.) Miq.

Igyo Meliaceae 1.563 1.250 1.024 3.84

Samoa, Australia, New Hebrides, Solomon Isls, Bismark Arch., New Guinea, Moluccas, Lesser Sunda Isls, Java, Philippines, Sulawesi, Christ-

mas Is.

19 Sandoricum koetjape (Burm.f.) Merr. Santol Meliaceae 1.563 1.250 0.949 3.76

Planted and semi- cultivated throughout the settled areas of the Philippines; Abundant in

old-growth forests.

20 Leucaena leucocephala (Lam.) de Wit Ipil- ipil Fabaceae 1.563 1.250 0.455 3.27 Native to tropical America; Introduced in the

Philippines.

21 Premna odorata Blanco Alagao Lamiaceae 1.563 1.250 0.342 3.15

India, Sri Lanka, China, Australia, Borneo, Java, Lesser Sunda Isls, Moluccas, New Guinea, Pen-

insular Malaysia, Sumatra, Philippines.

22 Barringtonia asiatica (L.) Kurz Botong Lecythidaceae 1.563 1.250 0.275 3.09

Sri Lanka, Andeman Isls, Thailand, Cambo dia, S. Vietnam, Taiwan, throughout Malesia,

Bismark Arch, Solomon Isls, Vanuata, NE Australia, New Caledonia, Marianas, Caroline

Is, Marshall, S Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, Cook Is, Society Is. Introduced in Hawaii, West Indies,

St. Helena. Mostly seashore.



Relative Dominance


39



23Thespesia populnea

(L.) Soland. ex Correa

Banago Malvaceae 1.563 1.250 0.237 3.05 Widespread throughout the Philippines along seashores.

24 Artocarpus camansi Blanco Breadfruit Moraceae 1.563 1.250 0.170 2.98 From New Guinea; Considered as synonym of

A. altilis by Berg et al., 2006.

25Omalanthus popul-neus (Geiseler) Pax in Engl. & Prantl

Mal-abinunga Euphorbiaceae 1.563 1.250 0.128 2.94

Thailand, Sumatra, Peninsular Malaysia, Java, Borneo, Sulawesi, Moluccas, Lesser Sunda Isls, Bismark Arch. Philippines: Luzon and Mind-

anao. TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 300.0

* Vulnerable (DAO 2017- 11)** Endangered (DAO 2017-11)



Relative Dominance


40



41


INDICES Value InterpretationShannon- Wiener Index of Diversity (H’) 2.84 Moderate

Pielou’s Index of Evenness ( J) 0.88 Very HighSimpson Index of Dominance (D) 0.08 Very Low

Table 2. Diversity Indices of Tree Community in Bicol Kalikasan Park Forest Fragment, Albay, Eastern Philippines

Figure 3. The Top Three Tree Species In Terms Of Importance Value (a) Gmelina arborea, (b) Pterocarpus indicus, and (c) Sterculia ceramica.

The Bicol Kalikasan Park can be considered as a facilitated regrowth forest because of the presence of some pioneer species like Ficus septica, Melanolepis multiglandolosa, and Omalanthus populneus. These three species are also native to the Philippines. In terms of importance value, it is significant to note that F. septica and M. multiglandolosa ranked sixth and 12th respectively. Pterocarpus indicus, which is an important hardwood tree in the country, is also common in the area, ranking second in importance value. The forest fragment is also home to various tree species that inhabit shoreline such as Sterculia ceramica, Hibiscus tiliaceus, Terminalia catappa, Casuarina equisetifolia, Barringtonia asiatica, and Thespesia populnea (Pelser et al., 2011).

Two tree species, namely Pterocarpus indicus and Vitex parviflora (Figure 4), were listed in the DENR Administrative Order No. 2017-11 as threatened species. The former is considered as vulnerable and the latter is already an endangered species. In addition, one endemic species, Artocarpus blancoi (Figure 5), was recorded.

Despite the diversity of the tree species and considering that there are threatened and endemic species, there is a looming danger of invasion due to the presence of Gmelina arborea and Swietenia macrophylla. These two invasive species ranked first and sixth in importance value. Studies conducted to analyze the allelochemicals effect of G. arborea on different crops

42



include those of Shanka and colleagues (2009; 2014).

Kalikasan Park supports a diverse community of organisms. At least 44 species of birds were recorded in the area, including 11 Philippine endemics (Serrano et al., 2019). Fungal and lichen communities were scattered across the terrain while insect diversity was estimated to be highly diverse. More so, the nutrient cycling within the forest ecosystem can be described as functional based on the diversity of macrofungi scattered along logs and forest debris.

The findings of this research is an opportunity for urban and university planners to create an integrative approach to developmental expansion. It is high time to create a clear-cut demarcation of the Kalikasan Park and to establish which area is dedicated to undisturbed conservation. The increasing demand for spaces dedicated to anthropogenic activities need not necessarily delimit the tree assemblage. In fact, it has already been shown that large trees in urbanized areas are keystone structures, maintaining a high diversity of other organisms such as birds (Stagoll et al., 2012). Other benefits of maintaining a diverse tree community include the control of floods (Berland et al., 2017) and the filtering of air particulates (Escobredo et al., 2011). The management of urban trees, especially within urban forest fragments, may potentially help in the air quality management of urban spaces (Luley et al., 2002). More importantly, trees provide physical and biological influences on the environment, promote energy and

Figure 4. Vitex parviflora Juss. is considered as an endangered species under DAO 2017-11.

carbon dioxide conservation, reduce urban noise and provide social benefits (Dwyer et al., 1992).

With increasing global temperature, cities become warmer because of the congestion of infrastructures. Urban forest fragments such as Kalikasan Park, can be an important component in the mitigation of warming (Long et al., 2019). Trees are natural regulators of temperature. More so, urban forest fragments contribute to the conservation values of plants, especially for some functional groups (Godefroid & Koedam, 2003). These point to the many ecological services derived from forest fragments.

Green planning and design may be adopted as integrative solutions on the management of the Kalikasan Park. Instead of shaving trees at the forest fragment periphery to give way to physical buildings, structures may be integrated into the forest in a blended and mosaic approach. This smart conservation strategy blends the green and the grey into an interconnected network that conserves the natural ecosystem and provides associated benefits to human populations (Benedict & McMahon, 2002). This approach does not only sustainably utilize spaces and conserve natural ecosystems, such as the Kalikasan Park, but also offers the benefit of ecosystem rewilding. Rewilding is the process of reinvigorating an urban area to go back as close as possible to its natural state (Schepers & Jepson, 2016).



43


Alvey, A. A. (2006). Promoting and preserving biodiversity in the urban forest. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 5, 195–201.

Benedict, M. A., & McMahon, E. T. (2002). Green infrastructure: smart conservation for the 21st century. Renewable Resources Journal, 20, 12–17.

Berland, A., Shiflett, S. A., Shuster, W. D., Garmestani, A. S., Goddard, H. C., Herrmann, D. L., & Hopton, M. E. (2017). The role of trees in urban stormwater management. Landscape and Urban Planning, 162, 167–177.

Dwyer, J. F., McPherson, E. G., Schroeder, H. W., & Rowntree, R. A. (1992). Assessing the benefits and costs of the urban forest. Journal of Arboriculture, 18, 227–227.

DENR Administrative Order No. 2017-11. Establishing the

References

These recommendations for urban and university planning require strong policy support. The university campus—which Kalikasan Park is adjacent to and the larger city to which the forest fragment belongs to—can shape the conservation and management efforts. It may be a good strategy to plan the maximum expansion capacity of university infrastructure and define where

further expansion is off-limits and non-negotiable. This scheme will protect the fragment edges from further encroachment. A strong policy and a strict implementation of that policy are key drivers to the continued survival of the tress and the organisms that are dependent on them.

Figure 5. Artocarpus blancoi is an endemic tree species in the Philippines.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Acknowledgments

Bicol Kalikasan Park is a facilitated regrowth forest fragment adjacent to Bicol University and is part of the urbanized city of Legazpi. This study accounted for 25 species of trees, including threatened species, an endemic species and a few invasive ones. A diverse community of organisms are dependent on them. It is recommended that a strong policy on conservation be crafted and implemented by the university and the city of Legazpi. This joint effort to preserve what is left of the forest fragment will be beneficial in many aspects to the urban landscape.

The researchers express their gratitude to Bicol University College of Science and the Bicol University Research Development and Management Division for funding this project. They likewise acknowledge Prof. Muhmin Michael E. Manting of MSU–Iligan Institute of Technology and Prof. Val Salares of San Carlos

University for their contributions, especially in plant taxonomy. The authors also extend their gratitude to Krizler C. Tanalgo for generating the maps used in the manuscript.

44



national list of threatened

Philippines plants and their categories and the list of other wildlife species. https://server2.denr.gov.ph/uploads/rmdd/dao-2017-11.pdf

Escobedo, F. J., Kroeger, T., & Wagner, J. E. (2011). Urban forests and pollution mitigation: Analyzing ecosystem services and disservices. Environmental Pollution, 159, 2078–2087.

Godefroid, S., & Koedam, N. (2003). How important are large vs. small forest remnants for the conservation of the woodland flora in an urban context?. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 12, 287–298.

Heyman, E. (2010). Clearance of understory in urban woodlands: Assessing impact on bird abundance and diversity. Forest Ecology and Management, 260, 125–131.

Jactel, H., & Brockerhoff, B. G. (2007). Tree diversity reduces herbivory by forest insects. Ecology Letters, 10, 835–848.

Krishnadas, M., Bagchi, R., Sridhara, S., & Comita, L. S. (2018). Weaker plant-enemy interactions decrease tree seedling diversity with edge-effects in a fragmented tropical forest. Nature communications, 9, 4523.

Laćan, I., & McBride, J. R. (2008). Pest vulnerability matrix: A graphic model for assessing the interaction between tree species diversity and urban forest susceptibility to insects and diseases. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 7, 291–300.

Long, L. C., D’Amico, V., & Frank, S. D. (2019). Urban forest fragments buffer trees from warming and pests. Science of the Total Environment, 658, 1523-1530.

Luley, C. J., Bond, J., & Agencies, C. (2002). A plan to integrate management of urban trees into air quality planning. Davey Resource Group.

Ma, L., Huang, M., Shen, Y., Cao, H., Wu, L., Ye, H., Lin, G., & Wang, Z. (2015). Species diversity and community structure in forest fragments of Guangzhou, South China. Journal of Tropical Forest Science, 27(2), 148–157.

Mueller–Dombois, D., & Ellenberg, H. (1974). Aims and methods of vegetation ecology. John-Wiley and Sons. DOI: 10.2307/213332

Pelser, P. B., Barcelona, J. F., & Nickrent, D. L. (Eds.) (2011). Co’s Digital Flora of the Philippines. http://www.philippineplants.org

Rykowski, K., Matuszewski, G., & Lenart, E. (Eds.) (1999). Evaluation of impact of forest management practices on biological diversity in Central Europe. Warsaw, Poland,

Forest Research Institute.

Sanesi, G., Gallis, C., & Kasperidus, H. D. (2011). Urban forests and their ecosystem services in relation to human health. In Nilsson, K., Sangster, M., Gallis, C., Hartig, T., de Vries, S., Seeland, K., Schipperijn, J. (Eds.), Forests, Trees and Human Health (pp. 23–40). Springer.

Schepers, F., & Jepson, P. (2016). Rewilding in a European context. International Journal of Wilderness, 22, 25–30.

Serrano, J. E., Guerrero, J. J. G., Quimpo, J. D., Andes, G. C., Bañares, E. N., & General, M. A. (2019). Avifauna survey within a university campus and adjacent forest fragment in Bicol, Eastern Philippines. Applied Environmental Research, 41, 84–95.

Shankar, S. R. M. R., Girish, N., Karthik, R., & Mahendran V. S. (2009). Allelopathic effects of phenolics and terpenoids extracted from Gmelina arborea on germination of black gram (Vigna mungo) and Green gram (Vigna radiata). Allelopathy Journal, 23, 323–332.

Shankar, S. R. M., Veeralakshmi S., Sirajunnisa, A. R., & Rajendran R. (2014). Effect of allelochemicals from leaf leachates of Gmelina arborea on inhibition of some essential seed germination enzymes in green gram, red gram, black gram, and chickpea. International Scholarly Research Notices. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/108682

Soga, M., & Koike, S. (2012). Relative importance of quantity, quality and isolation of patches for butterfly diversity in fragmented urban forests. Ecological Research, 27, 265–271.

Stagoll, K., Lindenmayer, D. B., Knight, E., Fischer, J., & Manning, A. D. (2012). Large trees are keystone structures in urban parks. Conservation Letters, 5, 115–122.

Uno, S., Cotton, J., & Philpott, S.M. (2010). Diversity, abundance, and species composition of ants in urban green spaces. Urban Ecosystems, 13, 425–441.

Documents

Diversity of Tree Species Within an Urban Forest Fragment