19.06.2013 Views

[en] Landscape Ecological Survey of the Bipindi-Akom II ... - ITTO

[en] Landscape Ecological Survey of the Bipindi-Akom II ... - ITTO

[en] Landscape Ecological Survey of the Bipindi-Akom II ... - ITTO

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

and <strong>the</strong> vegetation resembles 'cloud forests' with many epiphytes and a canopy that reaches only<br />

20-30 m. Ano<strong>the</strong>r striking characteristic is <strong>the</strong> near complete abs<strong>en</strong>ce <strong>of</strong> members <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

Caesalpiniaceae family, apart from typical mountain species like Monopetalanthus spp.,<br />

Plagiosiphon sp., Hym<strong>en</strong>ostegia sp. and Anthonotha cf. cladantha.<br />

Along <strong>the</strong> main access routes and in <strong>the</strong> vicinity <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> larger villages strongly degraded remnants<br />

<strong>of</strong> evergre<strong>en</strong> forests (nOS 234 and 251) are found. In g<strong>en</strong>eral <strong>the</strong> degraded vegetation is<br />

characterized by <strong>the</strong> abs<strong>en</strong>ce <strong>of</strong> a tree layer, except for a few residual forest trees, and <strong>the</strong><br />

abundance <strong>of</strong> pioneer species such as Haumania danckelmanniana, Harungana madagascari<strong>en</strong>sis,<br />

Megaphrynium macrostachyum, Xylopia aethiopica, and Musanga cecropioides. According to<br />

Letouzey's map, <strong>the</strong> degraded areas are not differ<strong>en</strong>tiated by phytogeographical zone, i.e. littoral<br />

Atlantic district and Biafran Atlantic district.<br />

6.2 BOTANICAL DIVERSITY<br />

A total surface <strong>of</strong> approximately 20 ha was inv<strong>en</strong>toried during <strong>the</strong> pres<strong>en</strong>t vegetation survey. A<br />

total <strong>of</strong> 490 taxa have be<strong>en</strong> id<strong>en</strong>tified to <strong>the</strong> species level, be longing to 76 families. The most<br />

species rich families are: Euphorbiaceae (47 species), Caesalpiniaceae (43 species), Rubiaceae (29<br />

species) and Annonaceae (18 species). All id<strong>en</strong>tified species are listed in Annex Va.<br />

Id<strong>en</strong>tification in <strong>the</strong> field proved to distinguish some 530 'species', including several (small)<br />

0" /. .groups ,groups <strong>of</strong> botanical species. The basis for <strong>the</strong> vegetation classification is <strong>the</strong> field id<strong>en</strong>tification.<br />

The number <strong>of</strong> plant species <strong>en</strong>countered will surely increase with time wh<strong>en</strong> collecting is<br />

continued and <strong>the</strong> skill <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> collectors grows. It is <strong>the</strong>refore difficult to indicate <strong>the</strong> plant diversity<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> TCP area on <strong>the</strong> basis <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se results. A large and species rich area like ours, needs<br />

int<strong>en</strong>sive collection to properly reveal species number, rarity and <strong>en</strong>demics. The second phase <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> Lul project will give some indications in this respect, while <strong>the</strong> forthcoming Ecoll project is<br />

will be properly equipped to address <strong>the</strong> question <strong>of</strong> plant diversity.<br />

6.3 VEGETATION CLASSIFICATION<br />

The vegetation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> TCP research area can be divided into sev<strong>en</strong> distinct plant communities.<br />

Information ga<strong>the</strong>red during <strong>the</strong> reconnaissance vegetation survey clearly indicates that within<br />

each <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> plant communities two or three variants can be distinguished.<br />

A d<strong>en</strong>drogram repres<strong>en</strong>ting <strong>the</strong> hierarchical vegetation classification is pres<strong>en</strong>ted in Figure 6.2. The<br />

hierarchy is based on similarities in species composition as giv<strong>en</strong> by <strong>the</strong> TWINSPAN analysis. A<br />

division at a high level coincides with major differ<strong>en</strong>ces in floristic composition. A division at a<br />

lower level coincides with more subtle differ<strong>en</strong>ces in species composition.<br />

Not surprisingly, a distinction is made on <strong>the</strong> highest level betwe<strong>en</strong> <strong>the</strong> floristic composition <strong>of</strong><br />

forest and shrub land. Of more interest is <strong>the</strong> distinction at <strong>the</strong> second level betwe<strong>en</strong> <strong>the</strong> forest at<br />

low altitudes and those on high altitudes. The flora <strong>of</strong> mountain forests (> 700 m above sea level)<br />

proves to deviate strongly from that <strong>of</strong> lowland forests, appar<strong>en</strong>tly regardless <strong>of</strong> soil type and<br />

former disturbances.<br />

In Table 6.2 an overview <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> vegetation types is pres<strong>en</strong>ted. Each community is named after a<br />

characteristic combination <strong>of</strong> occurring g<strong>en</strong>era.<br />

59

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!