XI. PUBLICATIONS

PUBLICATIONS

Research PublicrWons

> Mani, S & Parthasmathy, N. 2005. Biodiversity assessment of trees in five inland tropical dry evergreen forests of peninsular India. Sydemntirs and Biodiversity (Camb. Univ. Press) 3:l-12.

> Mani, S & Parthasarathy, N. 2006. Tree diversity and stand structure in inland and coastal tropical dry evergreen forests of peninsular India. Curnnt Science 90: 1238-1246.

i Mani, S & Pahsarathy, N. 2005. Above-ground biomass estimation in ten tropical dry evergreen forest sites of peninsular Ind~a. Biomass and Bioenergv (Elsevier) (communicated)

> Mani, S & Parthasarathy, N. 2005. Tree population and above-ground biomass changes in two tropical dry evergreen forests of pe~nsular India. European Journal of Forest Research (Springer) (communicated)

P Mani, S & Parthasarathy, N. 2006. Short-tcm change in trec population and stand structure in five tropical dry evergreen forests of peninsular India. Tropical Biodiversity (Communicated)

Book chapter

i Mani, S. & Parthasarathy. N. 2006. Trce dlvers~ty of ten tropical dry evergreen forests In peninsular India. In Ecology, Diversig~ and Conservation of plants and Ecos.vstems in India (Eds. Pandey, H.N. & Barik. S.K.). Regency Publicat~ons. New Delhi (In press).

Paper presented in symporiumlworkshop

i Mani, S. & Parthasarathy, N. 2004. Tree divers~ty of ten tropical dry evergreen forests in peninsular India. International ~mposlurn in Recent Trends Plant Ecology and Biodiversiy Research. May 20-22. North Eastern Hill University. Shillong.

2. Parthasarathy, N. Venkateswaran, R, Reddy, M.S. & Mani, S. 2004. Role of sacred groves in biodiversity conservation of tropical dry evergreen forests. National Workshop on S t r a t e ~ j o r Conservation of Scared Groves. 27-28 May. IFGTB, Coimbatore.

Biodiversity assessment of trees in five inland tropical dry evergreen forests of peninsular India

Abstnct A biodiversity inventory o f trees was carried out in flve hitheno under. studied inland tropical dry evergreen forests of peninsular India, by establishing a i.ha permanent plot in each (Araiyapatti-AP, Karisakkadu-KK. Maramadakki.MM. 5hanmuganathapuram.SPand Rayapani.RP). Theresitesaresiroracred grovesand forest fragments experiencingvarious levels of human disturbance and can be clas. sified as relatively undisturbed (AP), moderately disturbed (KR. SP and RP) or highly disturbed (MM). Site disturbances were categorized based on forest encroachment. tempievisitors'impad, resource extraction and the degree ofcattleand goat brows- ing. All trees? locm girth at breast height In the five piots were enumerated, thelr

girth measured and tagged. A total of 60 tree species belonging to 49 genera and 26iamiiies were recorded. Treespeciesrichness wasas lowasi9species per hectare in the moderately disturbed site RPto as high a5 35 species in the relatively undis- turbeds~teAP.Treedens~ty rangedfrom 596stemsper hectarein siteKR tot663 trees in site SP and that of basal area from 12.4 m' (in RP) to 22.1 m' per hectare (in SPI. Three species Memecylon umbeliotum. Chioioxyion rw~efenia and Pterosper. mom conescens scored high Importance value index. The Rubtaceae. Mimosaceae. Euphorbiaceae. Rutaceae and Sapindaceae constituted the most.speciose families. Among the five sites. SP exemplified a mono.specific dominant tropical forest, with Memecyion umbeliotum occupying 69% ofthe total forest stand dens~ty, In ail five sites tree species richness and dens~ty decreased w ~ t h ~ncreasing girth class. The stand structure offorest sites dtsplayed a reverse I-shaped curve wlth the exceptton of site KR. Spatial patterns of trees In the five sltes revealed that the individuals of most species are clumped at the t.ha scaie. The nonmetric multid~menslonal scalingordination, based on species richness, diversity Indices, stand density, basal area, specles population density and disturbance scores, organized the sites into three clusters, chiefly influenced by three variables - specles richness, density of predominant species and site disturbance score In the iight of the extant biod. wersity, forest hagmentation coupled with humandlsturbance,and also the cuiturai tradition associated with the local people. the need for conservation of the sites is emphasized.

Key words Conservation, human d~sturbance, monodominance, permanent plot. sacred groves, tree diversity, tropical dry evergreen forest

introduction species dtverslty (Conda n oi.. i5'%1 Tm spctes Invent- ones at defined riles and m m~ntmum d<amslcr cisircs glvc a

Tree rpcler d~vcnlry ts an lmportsnl aspect of foresl em- nl~able ~narumentlotnd~caslkd~verr~ty leveiofartudy rllc ryrtcmd~ven~ty (Re~mllr & Laumannr. ZMO). Tmplcal trees (Wattenberg & BmWe. 1995). Qvant~tsr~vc Rorist~c rampilng are crpcc~diy inlcrrsung subjects k a u v lhcn ts so much slw, provider Ihc mcessary consxt for planning and m-

srprcting long-term ecoiog~cal research (Phtiitpr el 01.. autha 2003). The lonplerm pmancnt plot and pennwently Oggd

I 1 5. Man18 N Panhawrathy

ind~v~dua l% o f tmc\ pmv~dc r unjquc appanunlt! lo Invertlg- aa thc d)namer o f ?ndtvaduai spsrles and Iota1 foresl I" space and t jmr ~Ayyappan & Panhawrath,. 1991 Such large-scale pemanenl plal audlo arc *Ira lmpananl lorconmlvallon and managemcnl oftropical fm i t \ !F$c ld & Vazguezyaner. IW3!

Rccentl) !he number of wrmaneni plolr ha, lncrcarcd rap~dl) ~n various lrop~cal fo rc r~ i of thr uorld IHubbell & Fo$lrr. 1983. Wanolaran pr 01. IVVU. Sukumar el a ! . 1992, Condll. 1995, Alha & Kitayama 1999. Ayyappan & Panhsrarathy.2W1, Ncbel~lo!. .?Wl.Sagar& Slngh.ZW31 So far permanent plotr hrvc been crlabil$hcd rn two larallons for lroplcal dry everpen forcrls The! tnclude the two I-ha plots ~n Thsiland !Bunyauc~chew~n. 19991 and Ihr 6vc I-ha plots ~n live i ~ c r on the Commands1 caasl o f south lndla (Vcnkale~waran & Panhararalh). 2W3) ?he% rcudss have gencratcd gredier ,nlcrcil ts the quanlllauvc ~nvcnloi) of w m d ) plant rlwrr\!!), lore\( sliuclure and stand dynam~cr, and the rclvl~on of lherr lo human dlilurbance

Trnplcill dr) eierereen forest\ are two. la threc.lsycred. rhon.r!sluredbreuroceumng~ndnerarea~wh~ehexpcmnce abut 3 4 d i ) monlhi m a year, harbour largely cvergrwnspe- cle, wilhafcb dec!duour i n d brcvt-dec&duour ~pertcsandalm a conildriabie drverill) and denuty of itanmi. The= farerlr hare leh, ba rd arcs lhan wet evergreen fomslr When cum- patedwth lmptial we, fonrl \ , lhcy ncr!re Irr\annuslralnfall (c l?Di)mln), b u l t r o ~ r ~ n ~ r a n . u a u l ~ f l o i y zsuncomman,rrec baler are mostl) 8-12m m helghl, herbaceous vsvular cpl.

phylcr art veg rare and large venebraa dtspenen abrcnl Tropical dry evergresn foresti are d ~ ~ t n b u l c d along

Ihe easlem (Curomandel) cuarl o f India (Panhabarath) & Selhl. IYPJ!. erlend~ng )"land a b u l Slikm. to nonhcaslem Sn Lanka (Bla$co & Legns. 19731 nonheaetern Thailand !Bunyavc!chew8n, 19991 and Jsrna~cv iKell) rr a ! . 19RR) The lndlan coastal and tnland tropbcal dry cvergrecn forests prebenll) wcur as p s e h o o i forerl fragments o f natural cl l - ma" ecos)rlcm\ and ihehe furcrlr, panlculvrly sl the lnland uler, arc (11 known, even locall) Comporcd of lndlgcnoui Speue5, mo\l ire sacred grove, prerrrvcd as a reiull of lhe re- Ihgious bel~efof lhc local geople lPanha\aralhy 8: Kunhlkcyan. I 997)

The land uye \y?tem< ~n man) sacred gmvc? arr now

IhxaLcned (Chandra~ekam & Sanlar. I9Y81, snd must be hrud~cd iimullaneourl) lo undersland and mlnlmtzc ~ h c ccolo. glcal lrnpacl of humans on foreit ecoiyrtem5 (Wllllami- Liners. 2W?l Snlall loreil frapmmlr are rcpaned lo pravlde i safcl) net far a <~gnibcini number of ~peclcr and lhelr gc- netlc d~vcnl!) ITumer rr o l . IY941, a breathme space for conservallonl5t~ lo plan ammcg!e$ for prevcntlng the loss oi Ihe Fpecle, concerned (Turner & Corlctt. 1996) Rc\carch on a\pecl\ olplanl dlveirn) !Panhr,aralh) &Seth#, 1997: Panhararslh) 8 Kanhlkqan. IYVJ. Rammulam & Kadamban. 2 W I : Venkalciuaran & Panhararath). 2WJ). nulnenl cyellng (V1ralaksh8. 19931 and blomontlonng (Vcnkaleswaran & Panhararalhy. 2WS) has been carred

IIgvm L LOLII~OII 01 lhe RY) ntand trop~cal dry evelgreen larest 111e1, for iomplele namcr at study iller, refer 10 'Study a w l ' In lei,

Ihew c o m p i ! t ~ o n 01 prrdomtnrnl ~ p e c l o and ~n Ihc degree o human dnrlurbance and (10 lo cornpare the nsultr from thev fire sllcs walh other lrop~cal dr) cvcrgiecn fureslc ~n India ani

elrcaherc. We proposed two hyp the ie i !>I forest slle\af chi same vegclatlon tyge rhow r lm~ la r lrer sgecler nchners, den r l ly anddom!nsnt\, and i10s landr l~c lureof for t~ l~ t lc ivanP accardang lo Ihe level o f i l l e d~~lurbancc

Materials and methods

Study ares Thc research war camed oul ,n l ~ v r fnland lroplcsl di) evergreen forcrtr w h ~ h are locaad 40 k m vest o f the car1 em coarlal area and appmx~malcly : S U h routhwcil 01 Pondlchsrry lawn. ln Pvdukorta~ dlrmet (9'50' and 10 40' la1

trudc. 7R 25 and 79 IS' Iong~tudcJofTam~l Nadu, roulhlndl' (Rg. I ) They mclude Amiyapattl (API. K a n s W iKRl Maramsdakk~ (MM), Shanmuganalhapursm (SP! Rarsoall! iRP). The ma of Ule rtudv ~ l t c s rmsea fmm ! 5 hs , ,

out a seven1 coastal tmplcal dry eusrgmen forerr nus. whllc (10 r~ te r AP, SP and RP) to 2.5 ha (;lter KR and MM). SIIC' the inland fonsts have no1 so far bnn mvcntoned MM. SP and RP nn clow la human habfratm, while hf

The main objcc1lvcs of the presenl study were !I! l o tn- and K R a n appoximatcly 3 W m away from habitadon A P vesrlgatc lree spcctcs nchnea, denslly and r tmd $tructum ~n r~cul lursl ficldr of pddy , mane, mOle1. ~ u g l r c ~ c w vcgcl five lniand lroplcsi dry cvcrgncn fore71 sller uhlch vary m abler and /a ics rkv nlantal~onr svrmund all !he- sl l t r

W

D i s t u M e AP KR MY SP RP

: Site encroachment B n d UK within the forest)

i. tempte construction 1 2 3 2 3 I Bridle path use 1 2 3 3 2 3 Templev~sitors'impacf:

area used for i, vehicle parking 1 3 3 3 2 ii. cooking 1 3 3 2 3 iii.festiveoccasion use t 2 3 2 2

4 Grazing kanle/goatI 2 2 3 2 3 5 Cuituraiattathment 1 2 3 2 2

of locai peopie i Resource removal

I, firewood 1 1 2 1 2 it, timber 1 1 1 1 2 iii. othei: medicinai plants. 1 1 2 2 2

edibie fruitsandsoii 7 Nearest habitat~onand I 2 3 3 3

people's forest dependence 8 Approach road to 1 2 3 3 2

tempie (width1

Totai score 13 23 31 26 28

Tabtel Site dlrturban<r vorar (rank. 1, rare, 2,Mialional: 3. frequent! 01 Rvo ("land troplca: dry evtrgRen forest SIOI lAralvapatt~,AP, Karirakkadu. KR: Maramadakki.MM, Shanmuganathapuram, 5P. Rayapaltl, RPlln louth lodla

aer-dlrtance between the hvc stud) slter ranger fmm 3- !Okm. Sxcr AP, KR and MM are 3 km away from each other. uhllc SP and RP a n lwaled 7 km and 20 km swa) from rtlc 1Prerpecllvcl) So$l$arr haricaliy latentlc and sandy tosandy loam in IeXNre ~n all the qtteq T h e five sties expenence van- JU, leveir of human d15wrbance Slle dl~turbance w'onr were lelermlned based on thr cxant of anthropgenlr acuultai mch as firewood coliecllon. templc vlrltoo' Impacl, gramg h i cilttle and pat i . other ESOUTCC removal and EUI~UIPI al- Idchmcnt 01 the local people. The gualttaltve aswrsment of lhc various types oldisturbsnce was ranked as rare 11). a c a - >lanai (2) or frequent (3) (Table 1). The rum of all the scores

Ihu shaved h e &I -is a htgh kvel of rmhmpogenn dnuurbsna .nd low M k s e x p r r l o r d s t h c

CllInate 7he elimle dau available for 1992-2W2 hom the newst sattan (Iwalcd c. I J km fmm w sud) n a r l reveal I mean ~ n u d temperature of 29 5°C a d a man annual ramfall of

25"Cto 94" for UK m p n d Tkcltmalr 1% tmplcal dl?. symmnnew!ththe bulkofthe ram fall~ngdunngthcnonhesst

Vegetation The vcprUtjon of lhns r e ~ f m tr dcrcr~kd a, tmplcsl dry ever. . . green 6msl (Type 7iCI i f champlan & Seth. I W ) , degraded to lhomy scrvb duc to anthmpgcnc d l , t u h c m varloua m r . All the five study ~ ~ l c s have tee-dom~nated (man helghl 8-I2m). two. lo three-iayemd fon\t\, wtth a rpam gmund flora.

Site AP cootams a modcisw denwy of Srral~w,r n u . t omw and Pnn~omrapinnoio m the uppenlore) It I& the least dlslurbcd us. wtth arrresm flawme near Ihc piol and cncom- passer spnmct~vc~emplc nrpreqcnted b) a 'Ganesh' ~dol under aCroiarbu maRno me, without any concrete slrvcturr oveithe ~dol, and Is acca~~onnlly vcs~ted by the locai people Sttr KR ~taeks s hlghden~!ly ofDryperrs srpio,do I" the louer uorey It houses8 temple of 'Ayyanar' In front ofthe temple thereare three rows of stone stover (each rou conlacn~nv I 811 Uovr')

lover stony and repn=ntr the mo$ldlstuibed $as, owone to8 heavy lnflvr of p p i e who vlsn a weil.conrliuetcd 'Amman' temple Sxlc SP IS a madcralel) dlslurbcd one, compn5mg a monosocc8fic dom~nant forest oiMtmrrilnn !rmh~liorum Inthe lowerstorey Itcncampsrrcr apnmltlvc iomafrwo'Ay)anar' temple. A stream flow wthm the pint and there I, an open bamnma 1'. 25 x 25m) m the centrc vlth twamw~ofmud blaci-stover leach rou conlalnlng c 50 \tovol urcd by the local pmpie for coaking dvnng festnvals. Slle RP Is the wcond most hlghly d$slurbedvta wtthan a!.-oldtempieenrhnned by 'Ayyanar' If l i compo~d af the dcoduous tree Chloinnion ~nrr t rn ia ~n the lower storey and Plrrosp~rmum conrrcmr tn

the upper slarcy.

I." I& Mu Aw Ma, 1"" lui A"l * 03 Na Da

Mrn*

j.~," DM.. . R F ~

Iinrn r revear (~ppr-,m,)~l~mre data oliknudy area Wwlng the mintmum temwrature (Mm.1. mallmum trmpralure (Mail and rainfall (RO.

Variable

Species richness No. ofgenera No. of families Dtversity indices

(D Shannon (iil Simpson (iii) Flrher'sn

Density [stems ha 'I Basal area (m' ha-') NO. of multi-stemmed

lndividuais No, of buttressed trees No. ofdead trees

(IILUI trees ilil standins dead

Evergreen species (%) Deciduous species (%) Brevf.dec~duous species (961 Marlmum tree gbh (cm) Mean lree gbh

h M e z Summarydlr~~dlverrtly Inventan/(? lorm gbh) #n %.ha plololfivelolanelrop~raldn/rergiccnforcrl sIor1AP.XR. MM,SPanb RPinrouthIndla. Study rile abCsviallonr are emlainedinlc~t under'Sludy area'.

Fleld methods uniform pancrn Th~squant~tatwe $palla( pallem IS not strong) F ~ v c ].ha squm plori (100 x l(13m). d~slr~buled one m each ~nfluenccd by rpecles nchncrs and snmplc rtze, although 11 I

rile. wsrer,rablt,hcd. Eachplo~ war\ubgnddad~n~o. hundnd \cn\ll>ve to the abundance of the specter We cxamtncd Ihe IU x IUm quadrats All trccr ? IOcm elnh a1 brsarl hciehl pallems of lree rpecle, comporztlon m the hvr sltei rslsg

wlnl marl war madeon the lrunk where Ihc abh measurement nerr, ~~VFRII) lndlccs (Shannon and Faher's a). itand den- wr, taken to factllrate later re.meawrcmcnt for growlh For rlt), barai ma, rpeclcr populallon abundance, and dlslurbanie rnultl-slemmcd ~ m r , bole ginha were mcasund scparakly, wore,. uslng PC-ORD package basal ma calculatcd and summed Voucher rpeclmens wen collcclrd and depoulcd lo the herbmum of the Sal~m All School of Ecology, Pondlcherry Lnlvenll) Results

Data analysis Spcclcr dwerrlt) ~ndlces quch ar the Shannon, Slmpron an4 RJsr's o 1ae m Maeunm, IYkRl were caleul~ted To un- dcrsland a speclcs' share I" the tree community, thc specsi lrnponance value ~ndcx Ir, per Collom & Cumi, 1956) and famlly nmponsncc valuc mdcx (baied on Mon sr 01.. 1983) wen calculatcd The program EsumalcS \ 5 (Colwc11. 1997) was "red for ralslng rpccsi-srsa curvcc, plotted as spccler lncremcnl wtlh cveiy 0.1 ha area. The nlattonrhtp bclwcen lorest stand rtmclure (basal areadlitnbuuon) and stte dtlurb. ance s o h war analysed by Spaman rank cornlat~an (&.

1984). Spatial patterns of speclo (whether lnd<vldualr of t m speelcs are mndomivn~formiciumped m d~imbulton), rspnr- enled by >50 md~vldualr ~n each rite, were dctcrmtned b) the quadnl count mclhcd ustng rlandadtzcd Monrlta mdrx (Krebr, 1989). A ratlo of z m lndlcalcs a random dlspenlon patcm, above rem a clumped pattern and lcrr than wro a

Tree species rlchness and divenlty Atotalof60lrce spccnes ( 2 10cmgbh)kIonglngto49gcnrri and 26 famllles wen recorded in the hve l-ha plat$ (Table 21 T m Epcles nchnesr war ac lou as I 9 rpcc~es per hsclarr an the muieralely dtsarted sllc RP to sr high sr 35 rpeLler per heclan ~n thc leert d~rlurbed rltc AP, thrwgh antcrmedb ate f igmr of 30. 28 and 26 species p r heclan m the orher dlwudxd sites KR, MM and SP, respectively Elght rpccle' 113.3%) wmcommon lo all the Utes. Out of the total rp: cles. 56.1% wen evergcm. 30% were dec~duovs ad 13.3% were bvi-dertduour apsles.

?he rpcctes dlvsrraty rndbccs vaned w l y nsmrr thC five study sltes (Table 2). Slle AP r o d a hlgh vduc or Shannon snd Ftrhcr's o indtccr. h t Stmpson vdue W a lou Sltcs KR and MM scored ~ntcrmedlate values and RP 5 ~ 0 ~ ~

a law valve of Fisher's m. when compared wrth Ur Mhns~tei The pmpntm of mutlt-remmed andividwia was grrller In

+ Soh -C Slnghlool + 0ubterons &ICE tl0,

' lguaq Sprlrr accumutatlan curves 1Sabri.thc rthnerieamalar LlCLi, rlngtelon anddo~bleloni 1raw specell In the study s l e i

hemoderately d8rturbed rite SP(14 6%. 243ilcms) thanat the moderalcir dlrturbed site KR to a maximum of 1663 tncr pcr

Species-area curve ipe~eb-area cuwes fu all the fire ploti dld not reach an arjrnptole at Ihc i.ha wale (RE. 31. Thc observed spclcr iccumulaeon curve for each i l lc captured abou~ 50% of rpe- \ I ~ S at the 0 2 heclare scale and a b u t 80% at the 0 7 hectare late, and then ~t raised gradualiy wlth an addltlonai 1-2 rpe.

ile, for every 0.1 hectare The obscwed rpeclcs nrhncai I$

nrarly equal to the rxpcted valuer ~n sttes AP lexpcted .iluc=35.79. r1=0.2ffi. P>O.O51,KR(304II , x 2 = 1232. " ~ 0 0 3 1 . SP 126.21. ,x1=0.322, P>0.05) and RPl1855. r ' = 0 0 6 1 . P ~ O O 5 1 . c x c c p t a t s 1 ~ e M M 1 2 6 4 . , x ~ = 0 9 2 2 . ". O.O5), wherein theexpected spcier nchners was lcssthan (ha observed value. Tk curves of the five sites can be reen dlmort evenly spaced (Fig 3). cxecpt between slter MM and SP rhcie theewer moved together upto0.5 hecm, beyond rhlch they were d i r twed by two spcelcr. Airo. when all the 'lve rltcr wen cumulattvcly anslyxd ai a p l e d $ampic. no d.!mptolc was oMalncd (Rg 4). Momover. the rtnglcton and loublcton curves alrodld m stabablltu

Tree denslty and stand b a u l area There were4676 ~nd#vldualr of trres~n Ihc five I-ha plots and he dcnstly ranged horn a low of 596 t w s pr hcflan In the

snc RP to as hlph as22 I m' p r hectan for SP

Species population density Thc pupulal~on denrlty of Ihe Mi me r p c ~ e r vaned consid. crably across the hvc study ittcr (Table 31 Mtmn)bn ,urn hrlla!um was Ihc most abundant spccer ~n rblr SP 169% 1148 ilcmsi. Chlaroxrlon sn'rtasa (44s. 390) and Plrro- spermurn (anrrcms 121.8%. 193) wen abundant 10 cite RP, Drypsier sepjono 142 48,253) I" rltc KR and Srnrhnor nu,- lomxo 129 1%. 235) !n rlu AP The pcrcenlage contnbut,on of clght tree ipc icr whlch were eommon lo all the five $ad) ures vsnedgmtly: Mem<cylao umbrllarum~nst~tuled 26 5% of rlcmr.Chlomrvlons~errnto 10.3%.AL:,oomaro4 75%. Euphorhro onnquorum 2.65% and Monrlkora he~ondra just 2% o i l k stand denrlly, whereas B n n ~ arcoicco 1092%). Casriajr lub (045%) and A:odrarhra l n d m (0 459 I werr p r i y nprewnled

The rf10110d0mlnlnt forest Among the fivc study ales, rtlc SP s vnaqve and exempllfier a monodomtnant fwert, The pndom~nant rpclcr, Mcmrc~lon umbrllatm (Mclastomnascae), contttuud 698 11 148 stems1 of lk forest sund denr~ty at hlr sis, wlth a total IVI of 107, although its basal ma contnbut8on was less 13 I m'. 14%).

bns l t y ml h

Sl. no. Spclcr As KR MM SP RP

I Memecyion umbellorum Burm f. 89 73 323 1148 74 1707 (Melastomataceael

2 Chloroxylonswreteoia DC. 40 16 I0 26 390 482 (Fl~nderslaceael

3 Pterospermum canesceos Roxb. - 8 14 228 193 443 (Sterculiaceae)

4 Drypeles sepiano Wight & Am.) Par 8 3 253 86 38 - 380 Hoffm. (Euphorb~aceael

5 Strychnos nux.vom,co L. (Loganiaceae) 235 - - 5 - 240 6 Albizjo omaro (Roxb.) Boivin (Mimosaceae) 61 30 25 48 58 122 7 Glposmispentophyiio (Retz.1 DC. (Rulaceae) 48 11 80 26 - 165 8 Lepiroother tetmphyiia (Vahll Radlk. (Sapindaceae) 121 3 4 1 - 129 9 Fuphorbio ontiquorum L. (Euphorbiaceael 5 56 n 25 30 127

to Maoiikaro hexondro (Roxb.) Dubard (Sapotareae) 7 26 37 1 23 94 11 Conthium diroccom (Gaenn.) Teilsm & Binn. - 11 69 - - 80

IRub~aceaeI 12 Pongom,opinnoto (I.) Plerre IPapilionaceaeI 72 - - - - 72

13 Vitex oitrss!mo L.f. Nerbenaceael - 10 17 23 - 50 14 iorennoortot!ro (L) Kuntze ex Schumann (Rub~aceae) 7 4 3 22 7 43 15 Lonneocommandeiico (Houtt.) Merr. (Anacardiaceae) - n 1 1 I4 37 $6 . Plerospeimiumolofum Wall. ex Wight & Am.) 2 - - 3 32 37

Swingle (Rutaceae) 17 Ciouseno deotofo (Willd.) Roemer (Rulaceael 3 - - 6 22 31 18 Syzygium cumin! (L.) Skeels (Myrtaceael 9 - - 21 - 30 19 Codobo trifoiioto (Roxb.) Wight a Arn. (Capparaceae) - 12 lo - 3 25

20 Cassia fistula L. (Caesalp~n~aceael 6 3 6 5 5 2 5 21 &od~mchtoindico A. luss. (Meiiaceae) 4 6 1 6 4 2 1 22 Wrightio hnctona (Roxb.) R. Br. (Apocynaceae) - - 1 3 16 20 23 Gorde~la resinifem Roth (Rubiaceae) - 1 9 - - 1 9 24 Prosopis,ulifioro (Sw.) DC. (M~mosaceael n - 8 - 1 9 25 Cordin obbqua Wllld. (Cordiaceae) 18 - - - - 18 26 Monndopobescens I.E. Smlth (Rubiateae) 4 5 - 5 - 5 4 27 Diorpyros ebenum Koen, (Ebenaceae) n 3 - - 1 4 28 Albizio o d o r ~ t ~ ~ ~ i m o (L.f.1 Benlh. (M~mosaceael 3 - 9 1 2 29 Bomssusfiobell~fer L. (Arecareae) - - - 11 - 11

30 Ataiontio monophyiio (L.) Correa (Rutaceae) 4 - - 6 - 10

31 Sopium msigne (Royle) Trimen (Euphorblaceae) - 9 - - 9 32 Diospyms montano Roxb. (Ebenaceae) 9 9 33 Slryihnos potatorum L.f. (Loganiaceae) 9 9 34 Aibizia iebbeck (L.) Ilenth. (Mlmoraceae) 5 . - 1 - 6 35 Gmeiino osiatico L. Verbenareae) 5 - - 6 36 Ficus bengholensis L, (Moraceae) - 2 2 1 5 37 Cassia mxburghii DC. (Caesalpin!aceae) 3 - 1 4 38 Commiphoro coudalo (Am.) Engl. (Burseraceae) - 2 2 4 39 Premnosermtifolio L. Nerbenaceae) - . 4 4 40 Cmtoevo magoo (Lour.) DC. (Cappaiaceael 3 1 - 4 41 Cassior~omeo Lam. (Caesalp~niaceae) 4 - - - - 42 RcusampbssimoI.E. Smith (Moraceae) - I 2 - 3 43 Benkom maioborico (Lam.) Tlrven. (Rubiaceae) - 1 2 - 3 44 Ficus mirmcorpa L.f. (Moraceae) 3 - - 45 Acacmieucophloea (Roxb.) Wiild. (Mimosaceae) I - - 2 - 3

abb h,ui * tnndenr i t r O ~ ~ I C C I P ~ ~ I C S ~ ~ larmgbhl m1.haplolr or five Inland ~ m p ~ i a ~ ~ r y r v ~ r p r ~ e n f ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ t e ~ o r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n d i a ~ Study rltc abbaaatlonr are e~plalnad in tenl under 'Study area'.

11. no.

Dioipymr fern0 var, bd@I io (Ronb.1 Bakh. Obenaceae)

P h ~ l o n f h u s p o l v p ~ l ~ Willd. (Euphorbiaceae) So~indur emoroinms Vahl [Sa~lndateael

Do oergro (ommono? on0 Pra n (Pap:. onaceae Arlopn, .r re,mr.r (Ron ) 6.n (Saainoaceae Dodonoeo ongustifolio 1.f. (Sapindaceae) Moytenus emorginom(Wllld.) Ding Hou (Celastraieae) Wolsuro riifoiio (A. luss.1 Harms (Mellaceae)

Alrton (Rubiaceae)

Total

120

{ 1. W A P .KR OMU D S P W R P

; so 60

: 40

/ 20

0

Wen Chl Ptr Dry Alh S l r n v r Go Eup Lrylrr Muii urn6 s r , <en &cp oma pcn anr her

Spteles

f1~1.~ 1mp~nan~~vaIuc;adcr !lVIlalthetop tm rpcr~erlnthcRve i l t e ~ . l a r u n n a m ~ i a r ~ a b b r ~ v ~ a t ~ d t a t h ~ ~ r ~ l three Iklterrofthcgtnur and rpcmr !lor romplscrpe'iar name,rrlcrtoTable 3 Syrnbolifo~ i ludyilaar ~n Fig I

Ulni?<rloti urnbiiorum 8s a shade-lolcrant undcrstony t c canlnbuadbS.R'rof~oresttli(ndden!tl) and78 5%of5pcecler and mast of 11s ~ndlvlduals had small slcmr of liL30cm gbh nchnrsa and 11 decnarcd gradually wtlh ~ncxarlng L w slw

class Among the hue sllei, the cantnbut~on afthc lower glrth

Importance value index (IVI) class (1&3Ocmi1otrce rwclcs nchneir ranged fmm a low of Pne IVI of the lop lcn abundant tnc rpecjcr across the five 68 6% m me AP to a hlph or 89.59~ in sir RP Tree dcns~ty

dty eevrggra forest sllei vaned conrtdcrably (Fig. 5 ) The ~n the lower glnh clasr 0&30cmI was greater m sites SP predominant swas M ~ m r i ~ l o n umbellorum scored greater (79.3%). MM (67 8%) and RP (61 9%). and modcralc in the

IN1 10 aar SP (107.61 and M M (73.8) and al~ocontnbu~ed to m~ddlc nw clarresi61-120cm) Amngthefivesito.rtlt KR

uar ~P(67.65) and RP (71 74) and Drypeter tguna m rlte clasr 07.19) (Table 4) KR (108.03) Srryehnar nru.romfca damlnaled stte AP with an IVI oi61.6. Plant farnllla

The mmtutlon of 26 plan1 famtilo towards me tsra dl. Girth class specles richness and denslty vcnlty (gcmra and specter) and sund density vmed amrr hec speclei nehnerr and stundance dsnd with incnsr. Ihc five soles (Table 5). The Rublame ( rcpnxntd by six

8ng ginh class except for the largest sue claar (> 210cm) m g e m and nr spccra) m laxowmicslly dlverse and consu- illcr AP and KR (Table 41. The lower gtnh class of IC-Mcm luted the mml spciow famdy. The Mirnosaccrr alth t h m

GlRh Rlchnas h n r l t q Chis (cm) AP KR MM SP RP AP KR MM SP RP

10-30 25 14 21 20 17 507 211 491 1319 549 31-60 20 16 13 11 16 176 201 112 166 256 61-90 18 11 12 10 8 79 102 62 83 64 91-110 9 8 7 9 4 20 40 30 55 10 121-150 9 7 6 6 1 14 14 18 27 5 151-180 2 4 3 5 I 3 4 7 11 I

181-1x0 2 1 2 o o 2 7 1 0 0 ,210 3 4 2 2 1 6 b 2 2 1

1aM.q Gnhitasr ~ p ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ t h n e ~ ~ a n d d c n r l t y oltralr In five iludy I,~DI 01 tiop!cat dry evergreen forest

I Farnlly Melastomalaceae Euphorblaceae M~mosaceae Stertultaceae Fllndersaceae Rublaceae

'Sapotaieae Loganlaceae Rutaceae Sap~ndaceae Moraceae Verbenaceae Flacounlaceae Paplljonaceae Myrtaceae

Denslly Genera Spcles (ha-') FlV 1 1 3414 436 4 4 1036 358 3 5 514 281 1 I 886 250 1 1 964 172 6 6 3 14 8 1 1 188 l 3 8 1 2 498 127 4 4 486 123 4 4 166 113 I 4 2 6 104 3 3 12 10 1 1 1 0 4 9 3 2 3 148 9 0 I I 6 8 7

16 Ebenaieae 1 3 5 6 4 17 Cordiaceae 2 1 4 4 6 18 Mellaceae 2 2 4 4 4 3 19 Capparaceae 2 2 5 8 4 2 20 Anacardlaceae 1 1 7 4 3 9 n Combretaceae 1 1 0 4 3 9 12 Areraceae I 1 2 2 2 9 23 Apocyanaceae 1 1 4 2 2 24 Burseraceae 1 1 0 8 I 7 25 Caesalplnlaceae 2 4 7 1 6 16 Celastraceae I I 0 2 1 6

Total 49 60 935 1 300

Table5 Conlnbut~ooaftarnil~trtotrce$Cnera Iperlesriihnerr anddrnrltv andlam~ly ~mponanta value i i V in the five 11vdv rllsi

genera and 6vc rpccrr fanned the second morl specm rich famll) an the forests rlud~cd The Euphorhtaccac Rutsccac and Saptndaceac wllh four genera and four specter cach were equally represented ln all the mcs Rc Vcknaccac W p ~ l ~ a ~ c r a c and Ebenacssc ucm cach repmrented by t h m spctcs Bared on the family lmponlnce value [FIV) Mclalomataaac stmd l int wllh a hlgh R V of43 6 followcd

by Euphotblaccae (35 8) and M~moslccse (28 10) ad k, rhur eonrt~tuted the top three plant famlltcr of Ulc ares The h~gh tolal abundance of P n r ~ l p v n v n c m ~ ~ ~ 1443 slems 947%) lo the five study rltcr p l w U, Ssrculasaae [RV 251 m the f m h poratm af FlV, vhll Chiomxyion s*'docnia 1482 semn 10 3%) ai R8nderstacuv wrth an FIV score of 17 2 rcmaancd m !he 6Lpr1t8on duct, 11s lesser basal ma conmbut80n

Structure of forest stand The StiucNn offorrrt stand dlr~laveda revene I shapalcurv . . wlth LC cxccpt~onoir~tc KR whfch showed arlgnlhcanl van atmn iP c 0 05 Kolmogorov-Srnlrnov one sample ten) lrn

had a poor reprcwnol$on of tner !n slmort all g!nh c l s s ~ ~ ~ when compmd wllh the other four sates IFlg 6aJ Rc ha area dmtnbuuan of t r u specfes across the five sates d ~ d no show a rlgnlficant variauon iSludcnt i r tcrt P < 0 05) W, cramlnsd the nlatlan belwcen beral arrscontnbttan of lowr (1&30cm)and hlgherp>nhciasi I > 210cm) oflrecr wtlh $11,

dlrtuhancc scores among Ihe hue ster b t the) dld no1 ror xiarc wlth each olher [Spearmrn rank comlauon P c 0 0'1 Among the five stlcr the bawl aiea valuer of he z 21 l c ~ x size class was nalabl) grcalei bn bile? AP md KR (Fag 6h)

Tree dispersion patterns The iparcal palrem, of tree rpecle? repre~enad b) > 50 ~ n d ~ rfduds ~neachs~tarevea led~ha~the~ndt~~dua l~ofmoi ispc~e cxhlbtted clumpd dlbpnlon dl the i hr rcalr (Table b) Tvr rpclcs M e m ~ r ,ion umhrliarum md Chiotoavion ruwrrnio wen clumped ~n all Ihe five ctudy rl ici MatalAaio he~andri WaF iandoml) dl~tnhulcd 10 vie AP wh~le it uas clumpd s the other three ?1s\ (KR MM and RPI Rere was no smell spcctcstha was unrfomly dtrperred an any oftheflve plot,

Ordination R e non metrcc mulud~meoi~onal rcallng INMSI ordlnallon based on the specvcs nchneis dwera~ty mdlccs (Shannon ant

Fjrhcr so) stand dcnslty basel ares spccbcs mpulal~ondeni . . 11y and dlrtvrbancc score far the hvc utes I S shown ~n Fig 7 Axlc I accounted for 40 9% of tolal vanallon and war po,ll ~vei) related w th npctcr rtchncrs rtand dcnvty basal srea an< hrgh abundance ofdomtnant lrcc rpvlcr AXIS 2 accounted 101 24 2% of lotal varlallon with rerwcl lo d~verr~tv lndlces an' low abundance of the canslltucnt specxer Sate AP Is dlBmctl! laced on the paslt~ve co ordtnater of the NMS axcs pnmanl! because of hlgh total species nchncrs hlgh dcnszly of thrrr specter (Srrvchnos nut wmico kprronihrs irtraphylio anr Ponlom#a p ~ n ~ I 0 1 and low level of forrrt d!sturbance wlth a moderate rtand density and haul ares S~ter KR M M and SP were ~vxtamscd due to moderate s~ectcs nchncss yd alil . . pmrreprermleuan of the f a r thrce~pc~c$ Slle RPfigud 10 the bonom left of the ordinsum due to 11s low speclcs nch nerr bassi area and d~vcn~ t y ~ndlccr

Discussion In comparison with a compl~ble rtvdy of lm dxvcrn~ty In fire stter of tmplcal dry cvergmn forest an the Commandel co*il

OAP .KB MMM mSP DRP

1 OAP W K R .MM DSP DRP

11~116 Foleltrtand rlrurture baicdon (a1 Ineabundanceand Ibl basalareain IheRveriter Symbols lor study i l c r a r n fig r.

Species Memecyioo umbeilatum (hioroxylon swletenic Zferospermum conescens Drypetes sepiorrc iliychnos ~ U X . V O ~ , L O

Aibrzro omoro Glqcosmis peotophyllo lepisonthes tetrophyllo Euphorbio ontiquarum Mcnilkoro hexondro Ccnfhium dicoccum Pongom~opinnofo

laM1.6 Stsndaldlztd Moril~ta indexvaluer and rpatlaldilperron oflner rtpnranlad by > 50indlviduillr 8n each ofthr Rve rludy rltei Ic,rlumpd: r, random).

o i pen!nrulnr lndta (Vcnhaswrran & Paz?harmthy, ZW3), harbour 31% of dceiduwr I= s ~ l a . lhe cvcrgnen spcctcs Ihc procntage of cvcween spcclcs ~n lnlvld dry evergncn (60.3%) dominated the forest sand. A 6 6% gnaler dcvcrrily . . i o n n $$lea s 10% less ud those o f brevidee!duoul rpcclcs snd219ogreattrdcnrily a f d e c ~ d u a u o t m r p c ~ e s mhc ln land lhrcc llmer Icsr. Deciduour t n c spcles formed 31% m an. lmp~caldrycvcrgrrcnfornIs~~s~~n~ ~ 1 h I h e c 0 I 1 8 1 sltcs

land forests, compared l o 23.6% m Ihe coastal dry w c w n can k ambvted la h e relsl~vcly hlgh I5 'C more) mean an- ionsl rttcs. Although Ihe inland lmpical dry evcrgrccn fonstr nual l a p r a t m and a low i4Mmm less1 mean annual nunfall

FI~UII I Nan metr~- mulidimenronal rcallng JNMSI oid.nal<on of tne Hve rltcr bared on rpc<ler ilchnerr, dlveirity ~ndirar, rland denri!? b a s a l ~ ~ a , rptc8eipopulalon density and daturhancc rrorei in the study rlter Syrnbolr ior study slleiar 10 Flg I

~n Ihelnland riles AccordingloRundell& Boanpragab(l9951 there ti d much k t l e r undcrlandmp o f (he lnleracllvr nature o f nutrient rvmlab~l l ly and sea*unrltl) ~n ,031 mol,lure, uhlch lead (abroad pd~em, o f fon \ l dom~nance hy evergreen or

dec~duou\ specie\

The total of 60 tree rpecle, (19-15 rpecles pcr herlarcl rnumcraled i for 5 I c m s ~ lOcm gbh! ~n thcrc five Inland lrop t i i l dr) evcrerecn form1 rile\ 1s grcsler b) four ipeckei than lhal of ,he five Jl.ha) coastal dr) evergreen fore51 ille, 124- i l bpeacs perhectare Venkatcrwaran & Panhaiaralhy. 2COi) u81h1n pen~nrular Indla, whcrea, the gcneia and fdmll! diver. rlt) vdluci were nearly ~!mclar ~n Iha inland and coaital $ale\

It Is natsblt rhal Tr!iol,no \ phae ,o<spu I l ub~aceae l Gorctnm Titaro (Cluraaceacl and Ch~o,iooihvr :rilanr<o t0leaccar). whcch were the top lhret mo\l abundani t ree \o i the caa\tal lroplcal dry evergreen fonr! i (Venkaaiwaian & Panhasarathy 2W1). am lotally ahsent from the tnland s~tcc. WherearCi~bmx~loni~trr~!iioIFl~nder~~aceae! S m h nor nu) lomiro llapantaceacl and Monllkoro hr~nndro (Sapataieael, whlch were among lhc lop mn mo5l abundant speclesoflhe inland fon$l., are .bsenl from Ihe coaslal iae5

H@meivioa umhrilorum was dommam ~n the coaqlal rller hul predomtnant $"the tnland slier Admlltedl) all Ihc fore51 sllcs

studled hclonp to the ram? tropical dr) evergreen foreil l y p allhaugh the liee ipeclrr nchncrs. denwy and pnaencc o f dommsnt Epccha? ianrd coni>derabl) Rublaccac Ebenaccse and Stcrcullaceae conrulutcd the predom~nanl plant famtltcr by denr~ty m Ihe coastal f o n t s (Panhararathy & Kanhtkeyan, IW7!, w h c n a ~ ~n ~nland forest% Melaiiomalacea~ Fltnder. slaccae. Stercul8aceac Euphorblaceat m d Lupanbaceae werr pndomlnant I n cantrasl. Dlplemcarpaccar dammated ~ h c seasonal dry evergreen forest of Thruland IBunyavcjchew~n, 19991

The mean me dcnrlly of 935 stems per heclarc (range 5961653 stems LW hectare1 m the five d a n d s8tcs IS thus

the tive coastal illes The mean stand baral ana o f 25 1 m' per hcclarc (range 1 4 6 3 7 6 m 2 per hectare1 tn the coastal foresls IS 28% g n a w lhanlhat oi thc %"land forcrl r l lcr (mean I 8 14m2 p r hcc tm. range 124-22 1 m' per heelami I h c Shannon lndcx a i Ihc five CMEI~ r l t ~ i was s. high a i 2 2' whdc for the miand rites 11 waslust 1 96. as there were gnalel numben ofrare speclcr repreFented by < IO lndlv~dualr m Ihr miand snes I n caara~ t , the Stmpron tndex was greatcr for miand sites 10 27) as compared wtth the coastal rller (0 111

The non-rtabl l l r~ng ipectes-arracurvcr apparrntly and>< aa thal the arra yampled wasnot iufficccnl The nchneareitlm ator (ICE1 also prolecad 32 add~ttonal me species I > lncin gbh! for the h \e ~ t u d ) r l lcr bul the sludled forest fragmenl. an. an nalay, patches of sacred grovcr wh~ch are no1 erpLc!eil to harbour man) mort s p c r s . beeaux the IMei arral exlcm of lndlv8dual sltcr would hardly cxcced 0 % ) 5 ha beyond our rlud) plols Funhcmors, a gualllarlve flonrtlc SuNe! of the sores revealed rpcler npesnon. wlth very h w addctlondl sperler beyond our rmdy plots

Ten rpctcs dom~nated the lnlsod tmplcal dry ei'er green fonar , bul ~ntcrestfngly the domtnanl rpcncr of In dlvldual sllcr vaned Baicd on rpeclcr dam!nancc, an .xial lon of M ~ m r r r l o n umhrlio~um-Chlomn~lon m . , f K n ~ ~ can be dcslnnated for Ihe miand dry cvcnmn fai t i f whereas for the coaslal d q evergreen forertr an assoelallon of Memecvion urnhriialwn-Trtrolrsa rphaerorotpo was E P l ted!Vcnkaawanm 8: Panhasamthy. 2003) I n all the tmplcdl dry evergreen forerls. Memecyion umbcliorum canr t~ tu td the most lmpomnt and charactensttc r p c l c r

The monodominunt forest The .naa.lolcran! ~ r r c rp; lcrMrmr $.on onr..ar*m. a;.pler the .auar nux) tn sltr 5P. lr *el. qrcwnw pz' cu lu lv m the lover el* clarscs (10-60cm gbh! Jmh'

r ;IF lkrr tnsn tnat ol Ihc mean ~ r e c am. I\ 2' !5,' . ~ m , 1988 tn., aomlnurc b) a 9ng.r spccur ,n In'

per n c c u n mpr b5b2hl5 nrm, per hw11x marred (0 ICB forrvs ohcn Ina.caar part m r g r , ana pm.ou6 fIR"

dr lu l tu fe cald be a Lnn in 8he 6m fcmm d l c d here Hawem, fcaum o w i t as sn Ihmd.wc af rcodligr

I md juvcailn a I- gtnh dupcr md & didirprvl by iencbnlc f u r (birds and d l rnandr) sn likely lo qualify lblr ~PMI u I pUJit(aYIy m m o d m m t W.

Stud~ i by M M i w & BulloCk (19%) m Mexm indt- d e d Ihl d a n i ~ m e w a gmtx in luger size elsswr, wtlh #nore than 63% of lner in the largest clarr belonging to one species (Ctla~nod~ndmn muicanum), while at wr rile

SPJ the monodomlnsnt tree. Mernrqlm u n t u & l m , h d A gnarer abund.nce of individuals in the lower gmh clan I 0-30cm). Monodominant fonrts domlnaled by dlffennr tree spcclcr havc t e n reponrd from various tmplcal reglonr

f~larnodrndmn mexicanurn (Euphorbiaccae) in Mexico Uanljena & Bdlak. 19941, No!ho,b#d aaqutirrrolir Fagaceael m New Caledon!~ (Read rr ol., 1995). PeIlofiyne . ru<~h,wr (Curalp~naaccac) ~n Maraca ~rland. Bra211 Nasc~mento r l ul.. 1997) and Gribrniodmdron d?n.e%m Cscralp~ntacear) in Ilun forest, noitheastern Congo (Gmas ,r o i . 2WO, Ton, rr 01. 2W1) Monodomlnanl plant fm l l - I:\ include the Legum>norac lsubfimtly~ CacralpmlacsacJ m the Neatmpicr and Afncs (R~charda, 19%). Dipteroearpaceac n Malayva. Borneo and Sumatra (Manotaran r i a l . 1991 Whltmore, 1984: Richards. 1996). Cluslaecac ~n Agumhe. Western Chars. India (Snnlvas & Panhawaralhy. 20301. and Uela,tomataccac m the mplcal dry cvergmn forrats rrudled here

Conwrvatlon of small patches of tmplcal dr) evergreen lore,[ such as tho* found at our rludy rttcs would bc )ust~- I I C ~ . ~CCBULC lhey harbour a moderate wee rpctcs nchnci, h u speclesl. high 1% mean denill) 1935 Elems per heclarr). ind moderate bsrvl ana (18.14m2 pcr hectan) comparrd la other lroplcd dry evcrgmn fonstr Thcrc sar. bctng sacred voier, are a%oclated w~Ih the lrad~llanal culture of the iocal ~ u p l e and they also iuppon mwcts, birds, repllics and mam- mal,, many ofrhlch help 10 farerrfuncl~onmg (poll~nal~on and .eed dvsperaal, etc.), although there an at the same amc hu- man cmpacts 10 [he farm .,freiaurce removal (firewwd, cattle indgoal gm~n~mws~ng,ctc.l.Corlcll&Turner 11997) have lnoted [hat marc of Ihconglnal plantd~vcrrlty pr i l r t r bn farerl iragmenlx tn Slngapan and Hone Kong, desplle a masrive

o i c of reelonal forest cover Pilhcr & Kellman 12002) ai\o

mphulmp Uul Ih m l l i a n of dl Id- hrbiuts e mlial fa the mlinMarc of diveniy ( W l h - L i n c n o a/.. 19981. Hweva, fomu fmpmm&m das rm orcur ~n ~solnnon, bul is llvlyr wwi.lsd via Mba hum-induced lhmls, such alogkag, turning and huMiagofkey v m c h l e xed d t s p ~ a r CBbsnllt el ol.. 20%) H m , raovm plan- nen rharld nol ~gnae or dlminish the pdcntul m k of very small forerl fragments tn conaervallon tn~tiativcs bul rather rhould u l i l le lhem sa convitullng rmpanenlr m ngiansl plans (P~ther & Kcllmm, 2002).

Acknowledgements We thank Lc Lkpmmnr of Sciena and Technoloey.Oovemmcnl at lndla h r lvndlng th~r study. DrK S Murshfwhelp 8n dam analyssr and an onnnymou, wlevtr lasupgestlons whrh b w contldemhly Impmvcd !h,r manvamp

References AIBA. S & K I T ~ A M A . K 1999 Slruclurr, rompr8flon and rprlei

dwintn m a n nltwdc-.ubrmlc marrlr of ram lonrl na com- rnun8tlas on Mount K8nahsiu. Bomm Pion! Eioloyi la. 139- 157

wlh8n a Irige-<crlc permwcnl plol of rrop8cal cvcrgmn fonn. W e w r Chuci lndla E<oimp8io 1.61-76

B! ~ s c o F &Lei;~lr.P 1911 Dr) r~rrgrrisfoartofPo~nlCaIimerc and Mdrdkanm lournol d B a m h r i hurzlrol H8rrorl Dfirn 70. 279-214

BU~YAIUCIIEUIN. S 19W S~NCIYB u d dynamw m rcuonal dry cvergrcen forcai ~n nonhcnarem naliand luurnul <qfb~~crurivn I . i r n # r 10 717-792

CHAIIIIOI. HC & S N S K I968 A rcl.i$ed Turin iflhrfi,rcir npcT,$lndiu Corl of lndla h s a Lkihl. 402 pp

CHIIDRAIHEIL~RA. UM & SA~IAR. S IWB Ecologj and man- agvmcn, of racrrll gmve* ," Kerala, Indl8 hlnsl Ecolo#i ""d Mono#?mmr 111. 165-177

CDlVELL R K IW7 Esllmnl~S SIBUSIIC~I CLllmBllOn of S W l E I

r8chnc.r and ,hard %pcier lrom ramplc\ Vcnton 5 Uur'? gud l and sppl8csflon pvhlirhed af hnp:I/v~c~my.crhunconnsdsdI c\,,mster

.onitder that even \cry small fonst patches (lerr than I ha coron, R 1995 Rcwnrrh ~n laxc, long-em rmptral fowl pias

~n LIZ) could play a mle on the mumcnancc of regtonal dl. Trrnh in EiuJupl ~ ~ E ~ o l u t i u n 10. 18-22

ierrlly by augmenting regconal populatlons (Turner & Corlen. Co'D'T, HL'UBELL, L*FR*NKIE. I Y , SC'uUAR, R .

Wh), and pmvldlng hah8let and faad for plant and anlmal ~ ~ ' ~ 5 ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ l ~ , ~ s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ l ~ , s ~ ~ ~ ~ : ipcles (Ouldan. 1%. Lvon 8. H o ~ c h . 19%) In smaller pa.,o,ofrhrrc ~ ~ - h r p l o r ~ . l ~ ~ r ~ l o / ~ ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ u,s49-?62 fragments rpccles often k o m c hypcrdirturbed, lcadlng lo CORLLT. R T &TURNER. I M 1997 Long-term avvival tn uop8rd

pragnsrlvechangermRonrt~ccompor~t~on(Laurancc, 1997). mmmu ,n Stngaps ad Hmg Kmg. In LAURA~CE. WF & bul forerr hsgmcnlr can breath,ng In BIERR~EGAARO. R O In.. Edr. Troptcpeoi Foasr Remnvnrr C u uhlch conlcNa rtrafeglcs can be to arr,rl the io~~.Mvoil~~mln~o~dCona~~ononolF~o~m~nirdCommun~~

Unlvtnry ot Cbcago Rrs, Chicap. lllmo~r. pp 337-745 ipclcs mncerned Idrally, the eslabllrhmcnl of large fornil C-M. G arums. 1 7 19% The ulr of dlswr, mrsurrs ~n lraclr as conrcrvalion arc- would avo~d Ihc necessity for such phy~oroceolagtcal sampling Ecology 37.4514Mi

TlUrfltaltOn fmm llny fqmenu, but !n romc caws the need RUD. C B & V W ~ Y A N E S . C. I593 S p r s of the genus Plpr'

already ex~sls (Turnnrrol.. 1995). Thus rmali fonrt remnants pmVidc lo ld) how PIanu can grow In d'mrcn' kind'

ma) havc mpnant btolag~cal, economic and ur la l rurpcets G ~ ~ ~ [ ~ ~ $ , " ~ ~ " , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , B ~ ~ @ ~ ~ M . L y , PD 2m Laurancc. 1997) and mew fragmented pchcs will contn- ~~~d~~~~~~~~ an AI~CM nln forcat, a rrducd krbivay hute most of the plan! rpecles available for reeolanizat,an. tmpomnr'B~lurmpiro32.43M39

G u l m r C F IW6 Rr t m p a u m o i fomt frugmmls lo thr muntennncr ofnglansl blodavemr). on Cosm Rlen In SOHPLIIAI J &GRE~NBUG R Edr ForrsiPar<hrl aTiupxulhndcrdpa lslrnd Prra Lid Warhmglon DC pp 168-186

HUBBLIL S P & FOlTFR R B I981 Dlvrnily of CanW tree? 8" a ncntrop>cnl forccr md ~mpltcsr~nnr for eonvrvat,on In GENTRY A H Ld T,up,tul R a n F D ~ s ! E,dau, ond Morweemmr Bllckwcll OlifC,d pp 2141

l a u s , M 1988 The Trvpiivf Ram Foreri u Fin1 Enruunlrr spiinecr Vcr1q Bcrll" 295 pp

KLLIY D L Thhwr~ E \ ' J K A W ~ \ DICKI~SO~ T A GWIII~LIIIU G A & FAIKRAIRN P IYXR J8marean I~mr*mrr 811e11% f l ~n \ r t i t ~ ~ R C I U ~ dnd mrironment or three cxsmplc\ alongr ra~nf.11 pradrcn~ J f , u rnu l , ~T i r , p r~u~F io i u r i 4 121-156

K i l ~ l b CJ 1989 Fi,iliiliiiir Mcdidolua, H a m i and Ruu Nlu Yurl 654 pp

L A L K A ~ C L WF I997 Hypci di,lurted park. cdgc effect6 and Ihe e ~ o l ~ g ) (11 l i~ldled MIIIIOICU ~cvWL.I ~n lroplssl Avhlrslla In L ~ i u r N r i U 1: & BikUxPGAraU R O Ed, Tropropirui Fond Xcnitlaors F, I it&! I(uouy,mmr ond Conrri,u!ion dFrvxrnrn ~td(~rniniunci,i, I ~ l r v c r i # ! y ofChrcaeo Prr\r Chlcsgo pp 11-

L>or I b. HORUICH R H 1996 Muduiiatlon of ~ropccdl forcar nrllllrr lor u,ldl,fc pm,ai,,on and rDmmunily cnnnmation 1 8 , ~ c l l l r ln SCHIIHAI J & GRLL~BLRO R Cd, Fvra, ixiahc, ioorn~~rol lunoi idnr~ lrland PrrrsLtd Washln~ron DC pp 205-2111

MI( IXu+r A l9XR fiol,,~,iul Dnp i i i t i und ~ r i M~osurcmrnr Pr8ncelon llnwcnlt) Psrr New Jcrvy l79pp

h i a w * ~ ~ \ - N L A ~ R A ~ K E ! ~ J V &ISMAIL R IWI Smcturc and cnmoo*iion af the D8ntcrocamairac a a lowland r u n ic>rc>l (!I pn80rular Malayslr I n ' s o b a i ~ v f f i ~ a ~ I TinaomMo 5 S [ l a m R c B~IMBOH I ma ~ r o ~ r r d ~ n y ~ u ~ i h r ~ o i ~ r ~ h X x u n d ruhli Can/ermrr oiDiprrio<urpi pp 117-111 BlOTROP SF < * I pvbl8cvl~on No 41 SEAMEO BIOTROP Bngor

M & \ o k ~ l ~ h N LA FYANKIF JK J V KWHUMMB'I K M OLAR f S K L A H ~ J E ATHTON PS &HUBBELL SP IWO In CHAV H T Ed I l trhodol(~~i lot rht Fdji Hrirurr Rrsrvnh Pior or Piniih k,8orRrrtn r Forc,~ reeanh lnitllua Mill.cysia R n ~ u i r h

212 YAS(IMINIO M ? P R O C ~ ~ ~ R J &\'ILLLLA D M 1991 Fo~SlaWdc

l v r r Rons!~c cornp>,lrlnn md ie#ls "fan Amazaaan monodomln 4s t o ~ i k on Munir Island Rnralma B m l l Edinhu>yh Juurnul iiJiiirvni Y 1-18

Nkiitl (I Kiibl L P ~ ~ Y C L A I JK CHR~STEYSEN H ratllri L & R ~ l z J 2W1 Ssumurc and flor8~tlc composltian 01 RcdpIr8n liirr\ci ~n~hcrcruvlan AmuonI Overson) F,~nr Flciioyi ondManuxrmmi 1 8 27-57

PARTHASAYITHI N & KARTHIKEYA~ R 1R7 Plant bcdaerr~n. imenloiyand r<m,enallunof rwolmp~caldrycvrrgrecnfore\b an ~heCoromandclror~t \ou!hlnd#u Bivdi l r i i i t i ondCunsri,uriun 6 1063-1081

PARTHASMATHY N & s r r a P 191 Tmo and lhma spectea dl YCO~IY md popularinn ilmrrvm m aooplcal faml msoulhlnd8s T~PNPI~UIE~U~U~I 38 19-30

PHILLIPI 0 L MARTI~EL R V VARGAS PK MO~TEAGUM A L ZANS M C SA~~CHFZ WG CRLZ 4 P T I U A ~ A M YLI HALLA M & ROst S 2W1 Efhr~inl plot hacd Ranrt~c ar usamenlafmp~cd forertr J r i u r n u I n J T i ~ p i ~ ~ l E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p ~ 19 629- MJ

PImm R KULMA* M 2W2 Tnr spelcr dncn>ry in smdl uop,calnpmsnforrnhgmcn~~ m Bclize Ccnlral Arnsnca B i d lirnli) andConwmolcn ll 1623-1636

RILIANUIAM MP & KMAMBAN D 2 m 1 nm two uupral dry rvcrgncn fow l$ 8n Ux Pondlfmy ~poo. Souh l d l a and Ihc mk of b l i r f ly lums m Uxvmol.*p4 B,udi,eilin undCunr.noaon 10 1203-1217

READ J HALUM P & C~mnlm J 1595 Th. m&mwt mpwal mmforrsls m e pd8mn.y *, son* ~n Ur NorIwJoxurmm8mud m n f w n u d Nov C.*dpiu J~~u ino l dTrop#cui h i o y , I 1 359-389

RCY~ULLI K & LAUMOPIIUI Y 2Lx0 s c a t s divcnth man

S R ~ Z ~ ~ A S V & P~RTHIEARATHY N 2Lx0 Comparntivc mdysbr oj

ircc d~ver\#l) and d l~pr r lon in the uopesl lwland e m r fare&, of Agumbe cenml Wsslem Ghats lndla T ~ P ~ c o I Bind ,3?.,,,$ 7 4 5 4

SLIILMAR R DAT~ARAIA H S SURUH H S RADHAYLISHNAN J VASUDEII R NIBMALA S &JOSH! N V 1992 Lone Lemmon aonng of$rgrlal#nn m d Implcal deciduou~ fnresl 8n Mudumnlal soulhem lndrv Cvnroi % l r n i e 62 608416

TARARPLLI M S l i i ~ J M C D & G ~ r m r C 20M Fort# f r n ~ mcntatlun .ynrip~~m\ and !he tmpmvenshmrnt of monoplcnl lorr ib B!udt~rir in ondCons?nuiion 13 1419-1425

TORT1 S D COIIY PD & KLKSAR T A ZWI Csuxl and iun5equrnici of munadomlnnnct 8n tropical lowland fonsta Amcrtion Vuiaruiiir IS7 141-I51

TIKkER I M C i ( l 4 K S OIG J S Y SWVG B C & T A ~ H T W 19% A rmlur) of plant rpecm l o v fmm an 8solslsd trap mcnt 111 lowland noolcal run forest Cvnrcrvviion Blu1u.t 10

$mall 8stllarcd fraemenlr of lowland rroplcrl r u n foasl Trend& in Fiolo~i iindE,r,luiion I 1 l1&1'1

TL ~ V F R I M TAN H T W WFF Y C ISRAHIU A B CHEU PT & Cmirn R T 1994 A study of plant s p a 8 sxuwuon ~n Sltleaoari lcs~ons tor Ihr consemillton of u o ~ ~ c a l b l d v c r r i l i - , ron%<r!vrion Bluiiiy, 8 701-712

VI\KLTLSWAYA'I R & PARTHASAIMHY N 2W1 Tmp~cs1dr)rvrr. pncn lore\t\ on thr Commandel cwrl of lndm srmelvrc corn. po,if~on md hhumrn dlstvrbnna Ervrruprru 9 45-58

'VEYIITELWAIAL R & PARTHAIIKATHY N 2 0 5 Tnc populauon rhanger ~n a trnp8cal dry sucrgrrrn f o m l at s u i h lndla oici I decrdc 11992-20021 B t d i i r r i t t uiconsrrvoeon 14(mpa*i

V I I A L ~ K ~ H I N 1991 L8tf~rfall Slandlng crop of l imr and bell nurncnh 10 two tmplcal dry rvergnsn fonals ~n lndls lnar not,r,nai Jouiool 01 fiuiux, and Emimnmenai Srrrocrs 19 I6.i.I"" ...

WAmbBLKO I & BRkCKLE S W IRS Trtt s p r r dtvenlt) a prrmonlnns mn iore~i in the Cordlllers dr Ttlann Casu RI? Eiurnio8io 1 21-30

WHITM&E T C I 9 M Tmpmpiroi Roln Fonso ofrhr For Em1 1 edean Oxford Unmnmry h n r Orfad 352 pp

cioudiorta Biod8vcrnp udCoamo, ,on 11 18&1845

1 WIUAMS LINER* G 1W2 T m swab nrhrers mmpleMnUnlY d~nrurbance &nd imgmcsruon ~n r Mcr~ran a o p d manun

WILLIAM. LINER* G DOMINOUU GAETELU V & GAnC1' Z u n l r ~ M E 1WR Mtcnrnvsmmrnr snd Rona~ea ofdlK-1 edger ~n a ingmacd nop~ral rslnforut Conre~allon B~oio? 11 1091-1102

UR J H 1984 Bior!oi~scol o ~ h s , r 2nd cdtonr Rcnm Hni New Jenry 718 pp

IESEARCH ARTICLES

free diversity and stand structure in inland ~ n d coastal tropical dry evergreen forests of peninsular India

1. Mani and N. Parthasarathy* irmmnmt oiEcobm and Env~ronm~nta l Sitmic>. P e n d i e h q Unncralty Pondtchcm 605 014, lndn

o examine he r dlveralty and stand structure and thelr tlation to slte dbturbanees, we used the tree datawt i ten I-ha orrmnnrnt lots of troolral drv everereen .zrtr of p;nlnsuiar l;dra, dlstrlduted in t;tamd -d h e I1 coaltal arras. I n thr ten Indrpendrnt site$. 1110 m x I W m prmanrnt plot uasntablishrd. and all

.trr 2 10 em glrlh at breast height were enumerated, ipir glrth mearured and tmgged. Tree diversit) totalled ' rpecles In 61 genera of 30 families. Tree densit) eried f rom 596 to 2813 stems ha-'. and basal are8 tnged be t~een 12.4 sad 36.5 m'ha-'. Species rlchness I d not show any signillcant varlatlon wlthln and bet- te rn the inland and coastal areas. We rramlned the ?Istionship between basal area m d slte dlsturhanre cores between the flve sites of Inland and eonatal forelt reas and found a negative eorrelatlon In both the areas. 'he caemclent of varlabiliw i n Sneeies distribution n .ng the ten sites rt,rrled'thr r r i r n t uf ,pecrrr hrt. .~gmr l t r . 1 hr numbcr o f$prr l r r m d strm$ dctrrsrcd

m the ~ m ~ l l e s t to largest girth rlarr. The tree ~ n s t n - ories of the studied sites when compared with those of lher tropical dry evergreen forests showed great dlf- rrences in density and bassi area, probabl) due to dlf- rrent geographies1 locatton and varying annual rainfall rtterns. Our stud) sites ern be designated as Weme- Ion umbrllorum-Drypnm sepbrio-Plrrospermumm onereens series, based on species Importance value.

numkr, sue and shapc ofthc p l m bcs~des the glnh rhrcrhold of trees Quantlfytng spctcs divmtty on a rcg~onal scale IS qurte challcngmg b e a u x o f d!fiicult~cs In mcasunng spcc~cs abundance and dismbulionb, and hence flonst~c Inventones and studtcs of forest dynamtcs usually rely on sampltng plotsY Quanttdatc~ flonstle sampltng a l a pmv~dcs necessary context far plann~ng and lnterprettng long-term ecological rescarchb In pamcular, largc-scale permanent plots provide lhe bass far flanst~c and smctural stud~es". and are lmponant for consewauon and management of lrop~cai forests".

Trop!cal d o evergreen forests are d~str~buted on the castem (Coromandcl) coast o f lndla and cxtendmg tnland abaur 50 ion. nonhem Sn Lanka '. nanhcartem hatl land", southwest Chma". lamalca" and the Bahamas'' Thc penln. sular lnd~an dry evergreen forests presently occur as patches or forest fragments of natural climax ecosystems These a n also 'sacred groves' or 'templc forcsts' composed fully of natfve plant speces and prewrved as a result o f the reit- g~om belief o f the local people" The sacrcd groves arc the lreasure sources of rare and endemlc spec~es~ These forests could act as a reserve of trees wh~ch can help create cllmax forest through succession All sacred.grove tree specler are rich sources of natlve med l c~ne~ Hence dc- velopment of temple forests would also ~nd~rectly lower the currentl\ h!eh coa of nailbe medicine At present, . -

heywords: Coastal dry forests, lniand lhese 'lteS experlcnce due lo graz'ng'

'ra, stand structure, tree dfverslry. resource removal, and stte encroachment or the abandon. men! of areas that were prevtously cieared for agr~culIural

.iw dtvers~ty mvcntones In troplcal forests have mostly rcn concentrated on tree rpectes than the other life-forms. Ltause tree rpeclcs drventty IS an Important aspect of .rest ecosystem dtvers~ty' and also fundamental to total .Jplcal forcst b~odivcrs~r).? They provtde reiourcer and rh~tat stlucture for almost all other species' SNdles on i'plcal tree dtversity havc accumulated over the past rtides and there 1s a great deal o f interest to dcctpher the Uuern and process relaring to tropical forest divcrs~ty md In gcnerattng comprehenrlve revlew pap en'^‘. 9 wldc range of sampling methods hsbe been employed ' tree-diverstry tnventoncs aver the years, espcc~ally the

activ$t~es, and land-use systems In many sacred groves are now threatened" Although knowledge of b~odtven~ty iehels IS uncenatn, i t IS well-establ~shed that b~odivers~ty 1s threatened greatly by human act iv~ty '~

In human-domtnsted landscapes, forest ma) be portrayed as completely absent, when in fact, small forest patches may cx~rt" Small forcst fragments arc rcponed to pro- vide a safety net for a stgn~ficant numbcr of species and thew gmetlc dcvcnirJ'. Dunng the past wveral years, largc complexes of natural habllat have been convened Into agri- cultural. industrial or urbantzed iandscapcs, leadrng to se. "ere losr ofthe ongtnal habmt and an tncmslng fragmenta- tion of the nmnant oatchcsu, lncreas~nn framnendatlon will " - result in the loss of a valuable ponron of the forest eca-

'rr comapndencr (crnmi panhapu@yahm ram1 systcm, the rare and shade-tolerant specs*' Rapd

b CUREN7 SCIENCE. VOL PO NO 9. I 0 MAY 1Wb

fragmentallon of formerly vast and un~nterm~ted forests has rcsultd In the present-day spcclcs camposltlon wh rh 1s not ~n full equ$l~bnum" Trec spcc~es x l th small PoPu. lattans wbll be the Rrst to be last ~n the process of forest fraementatlan" Small framncnts are lhkely to d~ffer markedly ~n comporttlon from thc onglnal foreb', and spe- C ~ C S ~ I C ~ ~ C S I followtng hgmcntat~on dccl~nes over tlmc" Fragmcntat~an chartg& physical cond~l~ans through edge effects'" Funher, even small forest patches of less than I ha ~n szre could play a major tale ~n macntenance of re- gional biod~vers~ty'~

Trec dlvcrslw data have became ava~lable from high. d~veracj and low.d~rerslr) tropical foresti over the past decades and they could be potent~ally used for plannlng and managing forest bmd~vei i~ ty Rercarch on aspects of rrcr dlrerslty haa heen canted out in tach o f the five I-ha plots o f miand and coastal trop~cal dry evergreen forcst of pcn~nsular lndla Thc maln objectives ofthe present smdy werc to compare the bpecles d~vcrs!@, denr~ty and stand structure of thc tcn forest sltes of peninsular Indla, and to stud) ~nter-stte vanatlon in lnland and coastal areas

Mater ia ls and methods

Stud?. urea

The dataset an tree dlvcri~ty used herc i s bascd on thc ~n kentones carried out In a total o f ten I-ha permanent plots cstahlirhed five each In ~nland" and coastal" trop~cal d g evergreen foicsts o f pcnlnsular lnd~a The five ~nland ~htcs are located In Pudukottai dlsrrlct (9"s-1O045' lat and 78'2s-79'15' long i. Tamd Nadu and are 40 km we.;! of thc castcm coastal area and < 250 km southwest o f Pond~chcrry town (Flgurc I ) They mcludc Aralyapattl. AP. Kansakkadu. KR, Maramadakki. MM, Shanmugana- thapuiam, SP and Rayapattl, RP The forest area of cach s ~ d y sltc ranges from 1 5 to 2 5 ha and ~ntcr-dlnance her. wcen thc five snes ranges from 3 to 20 km The mean an- nual ttmpetature far a decade (1992-2002) 1s 29 5 i 2 45°C and thc mean annual ramfall 1s 1033 i 69 79 mm The five coastal plots are located on the Coromandel coast of Tam11 Nadu, south lndla (Flgvre I ) Sltcr Puthu- pet (PP 12'03'N and 79'52%) and Oorani (OR, 12") I 'N and 79'57'E) are located I 5 and 28 km north o f Pond). chcm town, and three othcr sltes Arasad~kuppam (AK. I I042X and '936'E). Kuzhanthalkuppam (KK. l l"43'N and 79"38'E) and Th~mman~kkuzhi (TM. 1 I"43'N and 79'4I'E) arc 6 km apart and lacatcd 39 km south of Pond~chcny town The foresl area of each study rlte ranges from I 2 to 4 ha The mean annual temperature i s

28 5 f 1 92°C and the mean annual ramfall 1s 1378 f 116 86 mm for a decade (1992-2002)

The ten study sites cxpcrlcncc vanour icvels o f anthro- pagenic disturbance Site PP and M M are hlghly disturbed duc to lmpact of temple vtslton, whereas snc AP 1s the

least dtrturbed and thc other e v e n SIUI rn dmnbed Sktc d~avrbancc s c m obwncd by grlitav asrearrag vanous dl~rurbrnces (fircwwd collestlon, tl plc vts~tors' Impact, wing by cattle and gomw op resource removal) w m ranked mnm rare (I), 0-1 and frequenl (3 ) level of disturbance The sum of '11 , scOrc6 that showed hlgh ranks reveals a hlgh kvcl of, thmpogcnlc dlsturbancc and low ranks express low d turbsnce (Tablc I )

The vegetat~on of this reglon IS trop~cal dry cve rg~ forest, based on the class~ficarton of lndlan f o m t wl and It 1s degraded to thorny scrub due to anthmpago dtsturbancc tn various areas All the ten study sltcs I trce.dombnatcd (mcnn height 8 to 12 m), two- to thq layered forests, w ~ t h spanc ground flora When compared trop~cal wet forests, lhcy reccwe less ramfall (< 1200 mJ hare lowcr basal area, buttresses are rare, caul~flo uncommon, hcrbaceaur vascular cptphytes are ver)l and large vertebrate djsperrers arc absent In tropical evergreen forcsts, thc upperstorey IS formed by trec s cle\ such as Preru\parmum cmercons, G o r c l ~ a spicr Lonnvv ~ommundelicn, Sryhnos ntu-vomdeo, Chiom bn \w,eirntu and Poogomta ptnnaro The mlddle sto 1s oceupled by Lep>sunrhu> rerruph.ylio, Dripere, piorla Cunrhgum dtcuccum, Tricalvs,~ sphnero<r(

CURRENT SCIENCE VOL PO NO 9 10 MAY ZOO6

r memachmml ttmd uro wthm Ihr ronrtl far I 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 I I . n n l t M w n aflrmpk .811ep81hulod I 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 mvlc \atlon' impn aroaulod for I vh8rlc parklnp iucs occvplcdl 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 I I I unklng lnrldcthc forerr t 1 1 1 3 I I I I I

t:s,>,< WC*S,.,", I 3 2 2 I 1 2 2 1 tine lcanlc %osl 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2

J turn1 atlrehmcnt o f Imrt pmple 1 1 1 1 t 3 1 I t _,?"R(C rnrn0"ll f~rcwood I 1 2 1 2 ? ! ! I ',",be, I t 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 lllhcn mcdte,nat plants. cdtblr frum md roll I t 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2

I ~mc$ralhahmtron and pe~pio'r dcpcndrncc on fmrsl I 1 3 1 3 2 1 2 3 3 .?roach roadto temple tw~dlhi 1 2 1 3 2 3 3 3 2 ,#I xorc 13 21 12 20 28 19 31 21 24 I8

t,Api.ror ebenum. Alhirzo omoru, etc Memrcylon um- non-mctnc multldlmcns~onal scaling (NMSI ord~narjon ,'iorum and Gl~,eosmii penrophvlio form the undcratorey bascd on the data oflmponance value index (IVI)" of lop rerles Combreturn olhidum and S minor are the pn- fifteen species, using PC.ORD package Coeificient of mnant lhana species In trop~cai dry evergreen forests, varlatton ICY, standard devlat~onmcan for a species) was 1"" of specles are dtspersed by small benebrater such as computed to ~dent~f) whether there 1s an ol~garchy In tree ilm c~vet. ackal. small lndlan cwet, rodents and bats spccles betuecn the inland and coastal forest areas Thls t c \ t anlmals depend hea\,tly on the fleshy h t t r of major would pra i~de tnformat>on on slrc dffcrent~at~on with rc. -~~~-reward~np sDecles such as M umbr/iorum. G Den- spect to species composition, nhcther specter wlth lo* - . . ih~llu. Grewia rhomnfi,ltu. L coromond~lrca and 1 0 s - C\' regardless of absolute densliy arc equitably distributed. n u m ooau~tr(o1,um" or those wlth hlgh CV show a large degree of vanablltry tn

the~r d~smhutlon Th~s s~ngle'suppan~ve objective method for dcs~parlng dominance subdtvlded an obvtous contln. uum of relative abundance for practical propose'q*.

.I m x I 0 m) quadrats for tree mventorles All mes L IOcm rth at breast hesght (gbh) were ident~fied, tagged and a ant mark uas made on the trunk where the gbh meas- ':menth were taken, to fac~litate later re-measurement I r growh. For multt-stemmed rrccs, bole gtnh was mcas- ':d separately, basal area calculated and summed

r specles d~vcniry. Shannon mdcx (K =- pilnpi, where I S the proponton of ith specbes, as in ~agurran") was

clculated for all the sites. Thls ~ndcx, formulated on lcoreucal basis, does not account for m e s ~ e and slzc- dss vanation, and 1s mus less sensltlve when used In crest stands'6 The frtqucncy datrihution of tree s ~ u igbh) asses betwecn thc study sttes was compared urlng Kal- ~ogomv-Smirnov one-sample test". We analysed the jarterns of tree species composttion in the tm sites using

Spec~er richness and drvrrsiry

A total o f 7- tree species (2 lOcm gbh) represcnttng 61 genera and 30 fam~lles were recorded in the ten ).ha plots, d\strcbuted five each in inland and coastal tropical d n eterprern forests (Table 2). Spec~es r~chness ranged from 19;o 35 spectes in the ten sties Out of 77 species, 24 131%) were exclustve to the ~nland sites and 17 (22'.6) .were confined to the coastal sttes, whlle 36 spectes i47°z6) were common to both the areas.

The miand s~te AP scored a high valuc of Shannon tndex (2 44) and the coastal stte AK rmrded a low value (O.OS), uhm cornpara to Bc olncr sacs Thr pmpor on o' ~ J P - stemmcd t?on.~iuals u s greater .n site AK 34 j ' c . Cb!

stems), wh~ch IS imr to five tlmes greater h n the five ~nland sttea. The observed spctes richness dtd not vary siptficantly with the expected values among the five mdt-

CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL W. NO 9.10 MAY 2W6

RESEARCH A R T I Q P -

Table 1. s u r n r n a ~ o f m dtveral~y ~nvoncaiy 12 1O.m pbh! r ful r m p l u l dv c r e w n lorn,! uta oilouh I d a

Inland rllca C o a l lllr

Sub-1 far Subl#al lor * Vanablc A P KR MM SP RP flvcafcr A K PP OR K K T M 6 v i 8 t m fwmvr

Sprotrr rlihncrr 1 1 10 28 26 19 b9 10 10 1 9 28 22 14 71 No o i g r n c n 3" 27 25 24 18 49 28 17 28 21 21 46 61 NO oifamll#cb 21, 11 18 18 15 26 20 11 IP 18 15 26 10 s f s n d d r n ~ ~ ~ ~ istcma ha j 807 196 1 4 1%) 886 - 2811 1561 1204 1149 1077 - - Basal a r ia lm'ha I 9 216 155 221 124 - 116 3 6 5 273 I 6 9 2 9 1 - - D8rcruty ~ndrcc, fhsnnnn mdvx 2 44 2 24 2 01 1 2 9 1 84 - I 82 I M 2 31 2 02 2 06 - -

Table 1. Dcnrlt! u r tap I ~ c r . ,pscrci 12 10 cm gbh! cnvmcrsfrd $0 Rvc 8nd8vldurl s,lar o f l n l l n d and eoarial froplrsl d q ebergnm Im( South lndls arrangcd ~n deircar8ng oidciolthe8r l o u l nbundsncc

inland ,,lr Casrlal a,ic i

,S,caul,accocl i , n p r l r ~ i y l ! u i , u ~ W ~ g h t & A m ) 3 111 86 18 380 - 110 259 12 71 512

I Pax g Hofllri ltvohorb8aicsil

Sub4olal 617 4M 622 1111 145 1999 2111 1476 1014 1246 979 1486 1148

Romalnmg 62 rpecle I W 112 102 111 141 611 82 91 210 101 98 604 128

Grand tot81 807 596 124 1663 886 4676 2811 I161 I284 1149 1011 8WO 8276

n d u a l s l les of the ~ n l a n d and coastal areas Q:,, = 9 48, Species dominance P > 0 0 5 ) F u n h e r . s ~ n g l e t o n rpeclcs were t w i c e greater

In tn land sltes ( 8 specles l l h a n coastal sl tcs ( 4 species), w h ~ i e doubleton spccies w e r e j u s t u p b y one species

m the ~ n l a n d a ~ t e s (7 s p e c ~ e r l than l h c coastal ones (6 spe- 3 0 - f o l d d i f f e r e n c e e v c n among the t o p I 5 species I T ciea)

CURRENTSClEhCE VOL %,NO 9.10MAY 2 W

-- - - RESEARCH ART&\

Clnh elms (rm)

F1gvre.l Siand r s u c l r c bawd on lrcc dcn,ay Irolld I ln iJond bars1 arcs idoncd Ilnc) in !hi. tcn forests rltcs

greater ~n coaslal sltcs (6.2 m'ha ') than thc mland sltca 0.8 m'ha I). The rclar~onshtp between basal area and d~slurbance scores showed a negative correlation for both ~nland (Spearman rank correlation, r:, = 5 3, P c 0.05) and coasral areas (r:,, = 0 1763. P < 0 05)

Comparison with other tropical d y evergreen forests

Var>atlon In the mahodr employed In tree dlverst, in- ventones, pan~cularly plot area. d~mension and stzc threshold considered, rmders a dlrect companson of tropical

dry evergreen forest across sltcs dllficult Yet an anel

has been made la compile available data on rrer dtver lnventorter ~n thc tropical dry evergreen forests (Table At I-ha scale, the mean tree dcns~ry of 935 stems ha tnland and 1618 stcms h a ' ~n coastal areas rema~ned * wthln the range of 11 15-1499 trees h a In dry evcrgn forest o f haila and" for sterns 2. 10 cm gbh Where85 species rtchness (65-1 11 speclcs ha-') and basal I

(28.9-29 4 rn' ha^') were greater tn Thailand than In presently studied forests (Table 5) Whlle at the scale 0.1 ha area, the tree denstry 1s lower in penlnsuiar 1; forests than In the Bahamas ( 1 7 W 6 5 0 0 trccsha upperstorcy) and J a m a m ( 5 1 2 6 5 9 m e s ha-'). The b)

CURRENT SCIENCE. VOL W. NO 9.10 MAY 2OOb

PSEARCH ARTICLES -- - -

1 ln l vd C-a1

1 ,nh clYT M m l ~ d ~ t ~ 1 M u o am, Spclcr a r o u m c mtc M m rperlr. Mcm stem S p u r mcuncncc nu 1 - n ~ h n c ~ ( f S D ) h 8 i f ) I f SDI t s s ~ e c nchrrwacrndcn~~v) nchnculf SD) d n w y l i SDI ISFK> rxhncsvrnn dcnrlty~

10 2 1 4 t l 2 l 6156i11516 0011 22 f265 12166+68J.I 0018 4 0 t J t 1 1 6 1 1 2 2 t S l l l 0.082 1 4 8 t 4 M 2Y.bi8967 0 M I I VO I I 8 t 1.77 78 f 16.21 0 l i t 1021192 7J. l f1763 0 I14

, 1 2 0 7 1 i 2 0 7 l l f l 7 4 6 0218 i t 2 1 5 1 6 4 t 2 l W 0 I92 1 5 0 6 t 2 5 1 t 7 6 f 8 6 8 0 140 i R f 2 6 1 174f 1488 0 333 I 8 0 3 i 1 5 8 521190 0 576 1 8 i 1 0 3 1 6 t 8 2 6 0678 i 3 6 r l O 7 5 6 f 4 9 1 OM1 4 4 r 2 4 l 8 8 t 7 l l 0 IW

nblr 5. romprilon orrpc!es and ramlty nrhnna, dcnaln snd b s r l srca o l tmn lnvcntortrd ~n vmnvs othcr mlul dr, crrrgrmn rarrrls 8,

therstcof I-hsandn I.hl

Numb, llf - .

,,slam pbhldbh Trcci Specaa Famllla Banst arca Padomlnlnlapceics Mgar fsmiler

41.ha riata P.nlnrular lndla'

Inland s,,ir l l l i i 0 I h. plots1 io l l l s l l l l D I

(Re 0 I ha plolc)

\<l"h 4ndr0, Iklrnd. Bshamar' tfiilccnu I ha plolil

0,crriorcy ryxe,rr

Round t i~ l l . lamalca' I'uo 0 I hs olotri

2 10 irn gbh

l l ocmybh

)45cmdbh

L 10 t r n ~ b h

2lOcmphh

Llcmdbh

Lscmdbh

L'crrdhh

.!:a values (range 0 90-3.55 m2.0 I ha) remained w ~ t h ~ n *; rangc o f other mp lca l dr). evergreen forests of ~amalca"

Discussion

'1; present s ~ d y rcveaicd Ule dlfferencer between inland ird coastal forest areas m tcrms o f composltlon o f doml-

ant species, stand srructure m d plant physiagnom~c groups u~ergrccnldcciduous). Ihe difference ~n the number and -mslty o f treea under the two spccles phys~ognam~c 'loups can be attributed to the vanatton I n mean annual alnfall The mean annual rainfall i n the coastal area IS

14% greater than the tnland areas and also the mean an.

nval temperature IS greeter b y 1" C" Ihe lnland arcar I n #"land forests, [he denrtty of dec~duous specbes 1s fivefold greater than the coastal forests, and t h e e are masrl) the

uppcrrtorey speclrs Accord~ng to ~ e a r d ~ ' . formatton senes. edaph~c factors as wel l as annual ralnfsl l are rerponstble for rhc diNcrmFcs m f o r m smcm among vanous wptcal dry evergreen forest formattons There i s a much bcucr understand~ng o f thc tnreractlve naNre o f nutrlcnt avall. a b ~ l ~ t y and seawnaltty In sod molsmre, whlch Id l o broad panrms o f f o w l domlnawe b y evergreen or dcclduous species".

Overail, thc campasltion and nbundsnce o f species rancd across rhc ten sties smd~ud M umbellaturn (36.5% total Elem dcnstty i n miand and 29.8% m coastal a~tes) is !he

CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL W.NO 9. IOMAY 2W

RESEARCH ABTZCL - -

only predom~nant understomy npectcs that occurred ~n all the studled s~tcs and IS well rcprescnt~d in lower ginh classes IlC~4-61 cm gbh) It Ira shadc-taleranl speclea w~rh clumped dlrtrtbutfon and eonstjtuted 69% (1 148 rtcms) of the forest stand denslty tn the ,"land s>!c SP, whsh featured th~s slte as unlque and cxcmpllfycng SP as a monodomlnant forest" Single-dominant spectcs share certaln character- lsticr whlch arc probably connected ulth a gregarloub or strongly clumped djsperaal pattern" and clumpcd dlstn- burlon oanem of habltal oatchcs ma, lead to hieher survival rates I" dynamic iandseapc for species atth restr~ctcd dls- lance effects of dlspcisal ab$llr~es:'"". The mland and coastal forest area; u,hich arc distanced by c 250 km, vaned tn rjlnfail patterns and 5howed no consistency In the compasltian of domtnant specles However, wlthln each forest area there was a set of four to slx lmponanl spc- c ies The dominance afromc ol~garch~c spccles may also bc due lo djsturbanccp For cxample. M urnbrliaum In one oithc lniand sltes 1SPI and T rphurrocorpv In one of ~ h c cna5tal sltcs (KKI was most abundant. probably due to prrt disturbance

The I\'l of lhree speclcs showed a positlvc correiatlon u ~ t h axes I and 2 (Flgure 2) because oftheir hlgh denrlty and basal prea The studled pen~nsular lndjan dry ever- green iorests can be des~gnatcd bared an these damlnants as M irmhcllorum-D ~ rp~uno -P conexen., sencs, u,hereas m other trup~cal dry evergreen forests, an associat~on of Hope" kmeu-Shoreu hmr.~onu in Thailand", Metopurn- Cu<<o!uha ( ~ n coastal r~tes) and Eroiheri-Burwru- Mutopipium Ontenor) In the ~ a h a m a s ' h n d Mrtirptum hruunli-Bursera rtmuruho In lamalcal' was repaned The trce invcntorres summarized zn Table 5 compare the studled pcn~nsular lndjan rroplcai dry evergreen forcsts u ~ r h olher sltei. Although the sltes compared In Table 5 belong to the samc vegetation type. vtz troplcal d q rv. ergreen forests, varlatlon In specter composltton, famllces and stand , t~cturc can be attributed lo geography. loca- tlon. climatic and so11 factors

The studled pen~nsular Indtan trop~cal d o cvergrecn fureaa are 'sacred gro\,c' or 'temple forests' and they offer a unique opponunity for study~ng the impacts o f human disturbances on b~od~vers~ty. S~te encroachment and temple \~sitors' Impact constltutc the major dlsturbancer across the sltes and each site experiences varlous padlentr o f dlsNrbance (Table I )

Our study dcmanstrated a negatlve correlat~on betwccn the stand basal area and dmturbance scares ~n both the inland and coastal areas ~mtct'* correlated basal area wlth the rate of dlsmrbsnce, and d~amcter dtsnibuttons are commonly used lo assess the dlsrurbance effect wlth~n forests" The basal area of the studled stands indlcales a hlgh level of human d~srurbance In lower (10-60 cm gbh) and mlddle g ~ n h classes 161-120cm gbh. Figurn 3) be- cause of selectlvc felllng of undcrstarey lh( umbeliorum) and upperstorey trees (Plerospermum consreens and Chlarovlon swielen~o) for fcncc-pasts, hauw consmctjon

CURRENT SCIENCE. VOL PO. NO 9.10 MAY 2mb

and athcr agncuitural ~mplements wording to the & tion gathered dvnng field wok. Such le ls t ive e l a m a l speclcs would affect forest species compor i th stand rMeNrc, and also a marc subtle impan and dep largely on accenc~btllty, whlch ~Ur l f l s rrlstedtotqq,,ph Sztcs MM and PP were rnortly aflected because of temple consmeted them, rnulttng !n thc redustton ,,ti, mlnous trees I > 180 cm gbh) of species such as hDt tepionu. Alhmo omoro, Pterosprmvm canace", , Mvndkora herundm. Logglng may havc bcen d i v q tlonal, such that the basal area in larger dlameter claa has become reduced as also rsponed In westcrn Kenya1

Conclusion

The quantltatlve inventory oftree specles diverstry revea a conrldcrablc vanatlon In the composltlon o f dmln spcclcs and stand density In the ~nland and coastal foj areas Compared to other troplcal dry evergreen i o n tree d~\.erslty In the studled pen~nsular lnd~a 1s "cry I, Trec dwers~ty In tropical forests vanes greatly from nl to placc, malnly due lo rariarlon In b~ogeogmphy, hab and d~sturbancc". Human dlrturbance patterns also aN the structure and compos~r~on offorcst ~ f t es ' ~

The studled forcrrs are represented by smail patshcs iragmentb, and are also assoc~ated wtth the culrurai tradlt of the local peoplc as aacrcd groves Thc role af natL forest sues, panicuiarly sacred groves, m amactmng tncrcai lntcrest ~n mternatmnal and conscrvatlan orgarat,, such as UNESCO and WVF, has s~gnlficant relevance the ~mplcmentat~on of Artlcle Rj of the Conservatcon B~ological D~vcralty, u,hieh stresses more an the urc tradlt~onal alsdom and practices for conservation i sustarnable use o f b!ological dncrsriylx The extant Is of plant dfven>ry of these forests Is because of their sac grove status. These forests also contribute to the conser tlon of blad~vcrrry by providing habitat for plants 1 rood for faunal communilles

I Rennoli. ii snd Laurnonin Y . S ~ c l a dlrcn8tv alrucivrc ad i t s wo ricer 10 thc troplral ralnforea~ o f s u m a n J ?rap E 21100, 16 251 270

2 Husng. H. . Pohlocnen. V . Johanaon, 5.. Nuhands M . La11 M I L and Luukkancn. 0 . Specler d ~ c n # l y , forest rtmcfurc VC%CL Cornaitt8on 8" Tanraman liop8cal farcrls For Mannee. 2003. 173. 11-24 i

1 Cannon. C H . Pcan. D R and Lohron. M., T m s ~ c ~ c s d nl) mn"comm.rclally logend Barncan nlnsrtrl scirnr.. t m j I366 1168

4 gent^. A H . Changsi In plant somrnvncty dwcnlly md eomposltlon an cnrlronmcntal end gcayaphlcal srsd~rnlr Mo Bol Card. 1988.71. 1-34 GCOIN. A H . Flonsl8r s!mtl.il!,cs md d?K-s be roulhrrn Cenml Amcnrs ond Uppsr md Ccoml Amuon' Four N~oirop~eol RemnJoresr~ (cd ~sntv, A. H.), N n H Yale Unlrcrslly Rcn. IPYO, pp 141-t6C

6 Ph8llipa. 0 L el 01. Efir~cnf p1ot.W flonmr8c rsMImc Irojlerl forcrlc J ?rap E c a i . 2001, 19.62')-641.

7 Condlt. R rr 01. Splllal plnrrnn m thsdrmbuuan OitmV~c.' IPmlor Scirnel. 2Wo. 188. 1414-1418

1

Biomass & Bioenergy (Elsevier) (Communicated)

Above-ground biomass estimation in ten tropical dry

evergreen forest sites of peninsular India

S. Mani, N . Parthasarathy*

Department of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, Pondicherry Universip,

Pondichery - 605 014, India

'Corresponding author.

E-mail address: partha~u@vahoo.com (lu'.Parthasarathy)

Abetnet

The present study aims to estimate the above-ground biomass (AGB) distribution in ten

I-ha permanent plots, established in five sites each in inland and coastal tropical dry

evergreen forests of peninsular India. Two linear regression equations, one using basal

area (Method I) and the other using basal area and height (Method 2) were followed.

Using method I, the AGB varied 39.69 Mg ha" to 170.02 Mg ha-' and by method 2, it

varied from 73.06 Mg ha" to 173.10 Mg ha". The relationship between basal area and

aboveground biomass yielded a pos~tive correlation for all the five sites of inland and

coastal areas. The basic wood specific gravity of 41 tree species determined by oven-dry

weight by volume, ranged from 0 46 to 0.92 g cm-'for inland sites and 0.47 to 0.89 g

cm'90r the coastal sites. The AGB estimat~on obtained in this study represents a more

realistic p~cture of biomass of trop~cal dry evergreen forests, because a relat~vely large

area was sampled.

Keywords: Peninsular India; Tropical dry evergreen forest: Permanent plot; Above-

ground biomass; Wood spec~fic gravlty

European Journal of Forest Research (Springer) (Communicated)

Tree population and above-ground biomass changes in

two tropical dry evergreen forests of peninsular India

S. Mani ' N. Parthasarathy

Department of Ecology and Environmental Sciences,

Pondicherry University, Pond~cheny - 605 014, lndta

E-mail: oarthal~u:u valioo.com

Abstract

Recensus of all trees (>lOcm guib at breast height) was carried out at 10-year interval

(1995-2005) in two tropical dry evergreen forests (Kuzhanthsikuppam - KK and

Thirumanikkuzhi - TM) of peninsular India. Over 10 years, tree diversity decreased by

7.7% in site KK and 15% in TM. Tree density declined by 10.5% in KK, but increased by

17.5% in TM. During the 10-year gap, basal area in site KK marginally increased from

14.6 to 14.9 m2ha.' (2.3%) and in TM it decreased by 6.8% (28.9 to 27.0 m2ha-I). Two

species were added, 4 species were lost and 22 species survived in site KK, while in site

TM, just one species was added, 5 species were lost and 21 species survived. Changes in

the abundance of individual tree species after 10 years revealed a considerable variation.

Overall, Memecylon umbellatum, a shade-tolerant, understory species suffered the highest

density loss (-135 stems). A simple linear regression analysis was performed for above-

ground biomass (AGB) estimation. During the census interval (1995 to 2005), the total

AGB decreased by 22.4% (-1 83.93 Kg ha") in KK and 13.1% (-207.67 Kg ha'') in TM.

There is no significant variation in the AGB across various tree girth classes betwecn

1995 and 2005. The total AGB for lower girth class declined by 22.1% (-62.92 Kg ha")

in site KK, whereas in site TM it gained by 14% (t24.63 Kg ha"). Quantitat~ve analysis

of tree population changes is a key factor for predicting and understanding forest

management and conservation.

Keywords Agove-ground biomass Basal area Peninsular India Tropical dry evergreen

forest Tree population changes

Tropical Biodiversiy (Communicated)

Tree population changes in five tropical dry

evergreen forests of peninsular India

S.Manl and N.Parthasarathy,

Department of Ecology and Environmental Sciences,

Pond~cheny University,

Pondicheq - 605 014. India.

e-mail: parthapu@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT

The shoii-term changes in'aee population were assessed in five I-ha permanent plots

(100 m x 100 m) of tropical dry evergreen forests, south India. All tress 230 cm girth at

breast height (gbh) were tagged and measured in 2003 and remeasured in 2006 to

examine short-term changes in forest structure and species composition resulting from

mortality, growth and recruitment. During the three-year interval, mean annual mortality

rate in the five sites ranged from I% to 2.2% y~" , and the number of trees d~ed ranged

from 4 stems ha" to 22 stems ha.'. Mean annual tree recruitment rates dlffered

considerably (range 0 7% to 2.3%) across the five sites. The basal area growth ranged 1%

to 12.4% and mean girth increment ranged from 0.37 to 1.08 cm yil over the three-year

period. The mean g~rth increment of all individual tree species of the five sltes showed a

sign~ficant vartatlon. Overall, the density of individual tree species varied marginally for

some species, and for most specles it remained unchanged. Tree density decline was

especially high for Euphorhia antiquorum (-14 stems) and Dtypere~ sepiaria (-10 stems).

Changes in tree population at short-term period are not only important to study the effect

of forest structure nr species diversity, but also can provide valuable ~nformation about

forest characteristics useful for the management of tropical forests

Keywords: tropical dry evergreen forest, moliality, recruitment, girth increment, tree

population change.