Succession of the plant communities of Fakahatchee Strand ...

sfrc.ufl.edu

Succession of the plant communities of Fakahatchee Strand ...

ivABSTRACTFakahatchee Strand is a diverse system made up of prairies, marshes,mangrove swamps, ponds, hammocks, and a central cypress strand.Fakahatchee, however, is far from pristine. Disturbances including drought,hurricanes, road construction, drainage canals, logging, and subsequent firehave affected the hydrology and plant communities of Fakahatchee. In 1989,Whitley (1991) studied the distribution of the woody plant communities ofFakahatchee Strand based on hydrology, fire, and logging history. The currentstudy re-examined those plant communities to quantify successional changessince the original study. This was accomplished through a comparison of1989/2008 species basal areas and tree ring analysis of cores from cypress(Taxodium distichum (L.) Rich.) and pop ash (Fraxinus caroliniana Mill.) trees.Cypress basal area has increased while red maple (Acer rubrum L.) and laureloak (Quercus laurifolia Michx.) basal areas have decreased. Cluster analysis ofplant species basal areas showed that although the species composition of thestudy sites has undergone some changes, the types of plant communities havenot. Crossdating of cypress cores was unsuccessful; however, crossdating ofpop ash cores resulted in a 69 year chronology. Regression analysis resulted ina significant positive correlation between the chronology and mean annual waterlevels in the immediate area. These data indicate that Fakahatchee’s plantcommunities are recovering to pre-logging compositions and that the pop ashtrees within the Strand are responding to the water levels around them,potentially serving as indicators of the effects of hydrologic restoration.


vTABLE OF CONTENTSAPPROVALACKNOWLEDGMENTSABSTRACTTABLE OF CONTENTSLIST OF FIGURESiiiiiivvviiIntroduction 1Disturbance and Forest Succession 1Cypress Strand 4Recovery of Cypress Swamps Following Logging 12and FireDendrochronology 15Research Objectives 17Methods 19Research Design 19Vegetation Data Collection 21Water Level Data Collection 22Tree Ring Data Collection 23Data Analysis 24Results 28Vegetation Analysis 28Water Level Data Analysis 31Dendrochronology 32Regressions with Climate Data 32


viDiscussion 35Changes in Plant Community Composition 35Dendrochronology 41Further Research 44Conclusions 45References 46Appendix 1 – Total basal area (cm 2 ) per species per transect 53Appendix 2 – Pop ash chronologies 55Appendix 3 – Aerial photographs of Fakahatchee Strand 57Appendix 4 – Similarity percentages for each transect 61Appendix 5 – Similarity profiles for each transect 66Appendix 6 – Transect cluster diagrams 69Appendix 7 – Equations and R2 values of environmental data and 72selected chronologiesAppendix 8 – 2008 transect data 73Appendix 9 – GPS locations of transects 103


viiLIST OF FIGURESFigure 1 – Map of stability 2Figure 2 – Location of Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park 5Figure 3 – Photographs of logging activities 7Figure 4 – Diagram of roads surrounding Fakahatchee Strand 9Figure 5 – Diagram of canals surrounding Fakahatchee Strand 11Figure 6 – Successional diagram 14Figure 7 – Diagram of annual rings with false ring 16Figure 8 – Map of study site location 20Figure 9 – Regression analysis of park and transect wells 26Figure 10 – Mean change in basal area (cm 2 ) per transect and 28per dominant woody plant speciesFigure 11 – Cluster diagram of transect totals 29Figure 12 – Cluster diagram of transect 3 30Figure 13 – Water levels at wells on transect 2 31Figure 14 - Regression of well T2-1 mean annual water level 34and ARSTAN chronologyFigure 15 – Successional diagram with current transect placement 40


2disturbance, traits of the pre-disturbance community, environmental factors,consumer impacts, and chance (Halpern 1988).White and Pickett (1985) define a disturbance as “any relatively discreteevent in time that disrupts ecosystem, community, or population structure andchanges resources, substrate availability, or the physical environment.”Disturbances may act synergistically, causing a community to be moresusceptible to damage or mortality from the combined stresses of two or moredisturbances (Pickett & White 1985).Margalef (1969) defined a system as stable “if when changed from asteady state, it develops forces that tend to restore it to its original condition.” Hedescribed the condition in which an ecosystem exists as a matrix (Fig. 1).Figure 1 – A map of the states within which an ecosystem might exist. A stableecosystem will return to area A if a disturbance pushes it into area B. Thetrajectory of a system pushed outside of B is unpredictable (after Margalef 1969).


4Cypress StrandA strand swamp or cypress strand is a shallow forested river that slowlyflows through a central trough in a flat landscape (McElroy & Alvarez 1975).According to Mitsch and Gosselink (2000), cypress strands are found primarily inthe relatively flat topography of south Florida. The cross section of a cypressstrand would appear arched due to the smaller cypress trees at the outer strandedges and the larger trees toward the center (USFWS 1999). Open ponds anddeeper sloughs may be found in the strand center. Cypress ponds may becomestrands when they are connected during periods of high rainfall (Myers & Ewel1990). Peat soils are thicker in the deeper center of a strand than along theshallower edges (Carter et al. 1973, Gunderson 1984). Strand swamps arecharacterized by a seasonal wet and dry cycle (Mitsch et al., 2000) that results inseasonal flooding (McElroy et al. 1975). Strands are characterized byhydroperiods of 200-250 days (Gunderson 1984).Cypress strands, as the name suggests, are characterized by a canopy ofcypress (Taxodium distichum (L.) Rich.). For the purpose of this study, I do notdifferentiate between baldcypress and pondcypress and all nomenclature followsAustin, Jones, & Bennett (1990b). Subcanopy hardwood species may includepop ash (Fraxinus caroliniana Mill.), pond apple (Annona glabra L.), red maple(Acer rubrum L.), Carolina willow (Salix caroliniana Michx.), and swamp bay(Persea palustris (Raf.)Sarg.) (Duever, Meeder, & Duever 1984). Gunderson(1984) describes cypress strands as subclimax to mesic mixed-hardwoodforests, maintained by fire and hydroperiod.


6Fakahatchee Strand has been severely impacted by many humanactivities including logging, and road and canal construction. Austin, Jones, &Bennett (1986) note that, with some exceptions, the location of most plantcommunities within Fakahatchee Strand have not changed. Saltwater intrusionhas allowed mangroves and salt marshes to move north of Tamiami Trail (Route41) and some areas along the edges of the Strand that D. Graham Copelanddescribed as prairie in 1947 have developed into cypress swamps (Austin et al.1990b). The structure, richness, and community diversity of the plantcommunities of the Strand have changed. Large cypress trees were removedduring logging, allowing hardwood species such as laurel oak (Quercus laurifoliaMichx.) and red maple in shallower areas and pop ash and pond apple in deeperareas to increase. Willows and pop ash invaded areas impacted by severe fire.Drainage from canals surrounding Fakahatchee Strand, which have shortenedhydroperiods throughout the strand, may have contributed to the increase inmore upland species (Austin et al. 1990b).The Lee-Tidewater Cypress Company began logging FakahatcheeStrand’s old growth cypress trees in the late 1940’s (McElroy & Alvarez 1975).The first step in this process was the construction of raised earthen tramways fora small gauge railroad used to haul the cypress logs out of the swamps (Burns1986). “Borrow” canals were dug to provide fill for tram roads. Construction ofthe trams, 16 feet wide and totaling 200 miles in length, created earthen damsthat block the westerly and southerly flow of water and ditches that further alterthe Strand’s natural sheet flow (Hingtgen et al. 2004). Because the old growth


7cypress trees were large and grew fairly close together, Fakahatchee waseffectively clear-cut (Alexander & Crook 1975) (Fig. 3).a.b.Figure 3 – Corkscrew Swamp area in southwest Florida in the late 1940s andearly 1950s. (a) Logging of old growth cypress logs. (b) Removal of logs bynarrow gage railroads on elevated earthen tram roads. Source: CorkscrewSwamp Sanctuary.


9Picayune Strand State ForestFakahatchee Strand PreserveState ParkBig Cypress National PreserveFigure 4 – Roads that surround Fakahatchee Strand. Data source: CollierCounty GIS Department and Florida Geographic Data Library, map created byBrenda Thomas.


10In the 1960’s the Gulf American Corporation bought over 57,000 acreswest of Fakahatchee to create “South Golden Gate Estates,” what would be partof the largest subdivision in America (FLDOF 2004). This tract of land nowcomprises the largest portion of Picayune Strand State Forest. The canalsconstructed to drain the land for building left the area severely drained,conveying water from both Picayune and Fakahatchee Strand south through theFaka-Union Canal and out into Faka-Union Bay and the Gulf of Mexico (Fig. 5).As a result, ground water levels in Fakahatchee dropped as much as four feetnear the eastern canal and to lesser depths toward the Strand center (Swayze &McPherson 1977).All of these factors have had an impact on Fakahatchee Strand, whethernegative or positive. While the Strand is far from pristine, it is a valuable piece ofthe Big Cypress/Everglades ecosystem. The deeper waters and saturated soilsin Fakahatchee’s central strand create protective humidity that allows many coldsensitive tropical plants to survive there (Lodge 2005). As a result, 38 species ofepiphytes including 11 species of Bromeliaceae, 23 species of Orchidaceae, andfour Piperaceae grow in Fakahatchee. Many of them are found nowhere else inthe United States (Austin, Jones, and Bennett 1990a). Austin, Jones, andBennett (1990a) identify 477 species of vascular plants in Fakahatchee, 106 ofthem listed as endangered. A great diversity of wildlife also call FakahatcheeStrand home, including many species listed as threatened or endangered. Listedterrestrial species include the Florida panther (Puma concolor), Florida blackbear (Ursus americanus floridanus), and eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon


11Picayune Strand State ForestFakahatchee Strand PreserveState ParkBig Cypress National PreserveFigure 5 – Canals dug for drainage and as part of road construction that surroundFakahatchee Strand. Data source: Collier County GIS Department and FloridaGeographic Data Library, map created by Brenda Thomas.


12corais). Listed bird species that can be found in Fakahatchee include theSwallow-tailed Kite (Elanoides forficatus), Snail Kite (Rostrhamus sociabilis),Osprey (Pandion haliaetus), Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), and WoodStork (Mycteria americana) (USFWS 1999). Aquatic species such as theAmerican Crocodile (Crocodylus acutus), West Indian manatee (Trichechusmanatus), and loggerhead (Caretta caretta) and green sea turtle (Cheloniamydas) can also be found in Fakahatchee Bay (Florida State Parks 2005). Anunderstanding of how the plant communities of Fakahatchee Strand haveresponded to human impacts is critical to the Strand’s preservation andmanagement and may serve as an assessment of the success of CERP.Recovery of Cypress Swamps Following Logging and FireLogging of cypress swamps often results in dominance of what werepreviously subcanopy hardwood trees (Alexander & Crook 1975). Because oftheir slow rate of growth and precise germination requirements (Carter et al.1973; Gunderson 1984), cypress are slow to regenerate allowing species suchas red maple, pop ash, and dahoon holly (Ilex cassine L.) to dominate (Duever,Carlson, Meeder, Duever, Gunderson, Riopelle, Alexander, Myers, & Spangler1986; Carter et al. 1973).Fire in a cypress swamp is rare, happening only under severe droughtconditions (Carter et al. 1973). Surface fires will kill hardwood species (Ewel &Mitsch 1978) while cypress, better adapted to fire, will survive (Gunderson 1984).Cook and Ewel (1992) suggest that fire increases cone production in cypress anddecreases competition, improving survival rates for cypress seedlings. However,


13a peat fire will destroy cypress roots, killing the trees and eliminating resprouting(Duever et al. 1986).Fires following logging are often severe, fueled by the slash left behind(Alexander & Crook 1975; Duever et al. 1986). Cypress seed sources aredestroyed and willow and pop ash invade the site (Gunderson 1984). In theabsence of fire or light surface fires, these areas will succeed back to mixedhardwood forests or cypress/mixed hardwood swamps, respectively (Duever etal. 1986).The successional diagram pictured in Figure 6a, developed by Duever etal. (1986), focuses on logging, but does not take into consideration a change inthe hydrology of a cypress forest, such as those changes that have impactedFakahatchee Strand. The diagram in 6b does show that hydrology has asignificant effect on succession. It should be pointed out, however, that the linesbetween types of plant communities are seldom as distinct as this diagramdepicts. Ecotones, areas of transition from one ecosystem type to another(Ricklefs 1990), almost always exist. It is also important to note that bothhydroperiod and fire regime may vary greatly from year to year. Canalconstruction, road construction, and logging have all impacted the hydrology ofFakahatchee Strand. Species composition within a plant community may notchange as long as the hydroperiod remains the same (Adams and Anderson1980). Drier conditions created by drainage result in a shift within the plantcommunity to a shallow wetland community or an upland community (Duever2005). According to Monk (1968), cypress systems may succeed to mixed


14a.b.Figure 6 – (a) Successional diagram of cypress swamps in relation to loggingand fire regimes (Duever et al. 1986) and (b) successional diagram of southwestFlorida ecosystems in relation to fire regime and hydroperiod (Duever et al.1984).Diagram (a) does not take hydrology into consideration and diagram (b) does nottake disturbance by logging into consideration.


15hardwood forests with increased drainage. Marois and Ewel (1983) found thatthe importance values of cypress (calculated as the sum of the relative density,relative frequency, and relative dominance) were less than hardwood importancevalues and shrub densities in cypress domes with hydrology that had beenaltered by ditching and berming. Alterations in hydrology would also modify fireregimes, further affecting plant communities (Gunderson 1984). Therefore, itseems reasonable to expect that the plant communities of Fakahatchee wouldrecover after logging along a different trajectory than they would if no changeshad been made to the Strand’s hydrology.DendrochronologyDendrochronology is the study of the growth rings produced annually insome tree species (Stokes & Smiley 1968). Tree growth is affected by a numberof environmental factors such as precipitation and temperature, as well asdisturbance. The pattern of wide and narrow rings produced during times offavorable or unfavorable growing conditions by trees over a particular area allowsthe accurate dating of the trees (Fritts 1976). Most dendrochronology work hasbeen done in arid regions where trees may respond to a greater degree tolimiting factors such as soil moisture and temperature (Ewel & Parendes 1984).However, chronologies have been successfully constructed using coresfrom cypress trees from across the southeastern United States (Stahle,Cleaveland, & Herh 1985). Cypress is used by dendrochronologists because itproduces distinct annual rings, although false rings and missing rings can occur(McCollom, Neuman, & Duever 1985). Because cypress is a long-lived species,


16cores from cypress trees have the potential to produce millennia-longchronologies (Stahle, Cook, and White 1985). Due to its rot resistance, coresfrom subfossilized logs may further extend those chronologies. At the southernportion of its range, however, cypress is not always accurately datable (Stahle etal. 1985) due to the frequent production of ring anomalies such as false rings(Fig. 7) and missing rings. False rings are produced by a variation in thestructure of the cells within an annual growth ring that creates the appearance ofmore than one growth ring (Fritts 1976). These ring irregularities could becaused by fire, drought, or insect defoliation (McCollom et al. 1985). Young,Megonigal, Sharitz, and Day (1993) studied false ring formation in cypressFigure 7 – True annual ring (left) and false ring within a true annual ring (right)(Stokes & Smiley 1996). Note the false ring does not exhibit a distinct boundarybetween the latewood of one year and the early wood of the next, but changesgradually.


17saplings subjected to two flooding regimes. The study showed that false ringsmay be formed when dry conditions are followed by wet conditions within thesame year (Young et al., Ratard 2004). Missing rings are the result of annualrings that do not develop around the entire circumference of a tree (McCollom etal. 1985). McCollom et al. (1985) state that this could be the result of a numberof stresses including lack of water or nutrients, loss of a main branch, or damageto a main root. Pop ash trees produce annual growth rings (Duever & Riopelle1984), but there are no reports in the literature of these trees being used indendrochronology. Because pop ash is not as long lived as cypress and doesnot exhibit the same rot resistance, it does not have the potential for millennialongchronologies. Still, a century-long chronology could answer important shortterm questions in many forests, particularly in south Florida.The study of tree rings in Fakahatchee Strand can provide clues to forestdynamics both before and after logging and as affected by altered hydrology.Analysis of the rings and the wide and narrow patterns within them can produceaverage growth rates, determine species responses to climatic andenvironmental variables, and show the timing of major disturbance events.These analyses enable a better understanding of the response of Fakahatchee’splant communities to their environment.Research ObjectivesIn 1989, Whitley (1991) studied the distribution of the woody plantcommunities of Fakahatchee Strand based on hydrology as well as fire andlogging history. My research investigates the dynamics in those same woody


18plant communities on the same four transects. My objective for this study was todetermine the successional trajectories of the woody plant communities ofFakahatchee Strand utilizing vegetation analysis and dendrochronology.


19METHODSResearch DesignIn order to relate plant communities to water levels, Whitley (1991)selected study sites within Fakahatchee Strand that were in the vicinity of wellsestablished by the Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park in 1987. The studysites were chosen to contain at least two types of plant communities. Whilemost, if not all, of these communities had suffered some disturbance duringcypress logging, areas with a greater degree of disturbance caused by thedragging of downed logs to the tramways were avoided (Whitley, 1991)(Appendix 5). The purpose of the current study was to remeasure Whitley’soriginal study sites (Fig. 8).The four original transects were located using cardinal directions anddistances Whitley (1991) provided from park monitoring wells 18 and 20. Theoriginal rebar used to mark the corners of each transect as well as the PVCmonitoring wells installed along each transect were successfully located.Transect 1 and transect 4 each measured 5m by 80m, as reported by Whitley(1991). Whitley (1991) reported transects 2 and 3 as 5m by 100m. However,when transects 2 and 3 were remeasured, it was determined that they were 5mby 95m and 5m by 109m, respectively.Whitley (1991) based the descriptions of the plant communities he foundon his study sites in 1989 on those of Austin, Jones, and Bennett (1990a). Theplant communities found at the time of this study are as follows.Transect 1 – Three plant communities are found on transect 1 which runs


20Figure 8 – Location of transects and park wells within Fakahatchee Strand alongJanes Scenic Drive and West Main Tram. 2004 aerial photograph. Data source:Collier County GIS Dept. and Florida Department of Environmental Protection,LABINS; map created by Brenda Thomas.


21south/southwest by north/northeast. The more southern community is dominatedby cypress and the center is dominated by laurel oak. A small pop ash pond isfound at the northern end of the transect.Transect 2 – A large pop ash pond dominates the western end of transect2, which runs almost exactly west to east. The east end is dominated by cypresswith a subcanopy of pop ash. One subplot in the middle of the transect containsalmost exclusively red maple.Transect 3 – Running almost west to east, transect 3 is dominated by popash on the western end and cypress and laurel oak on the eastern end. Therewas more visible disturbance in the form of downed trees on transect 3 than anyother transect.Transect 4 – At the south end of north-south running transect 4 is atropical hardwood hammock dominated by gumbo limbo (Bursera simaruba (L.)Sarg.) and willow bustic (Sideroxylon salicifolium (L.) Lam.) with an understory ofwhite stopper (Eugenia axillaris) and marlberry (Ardisia escallonioides Schltdl. &Cham.). The rest of the transect is dominated by pop ash.Vegetation Data CollectionCollection of vegetation data followed Whitley (1991). For the purpose ofmeasurement, each transect was divided into 5m by 5m subplots and identifiedalphabetically to organize data collection. All stems and branches greater than0.5cm in diameter at breast height (dbh - 1.3m) were measured, recorded, andtheir location mapped (McCollom 1990). Stems that appeared to be emergingfrom the ground individually were counted as individual plants. If stems


22appeared to be connected above the surface of the ground, they were countedas multiple stems of the same plant (McCollom 1990). Diameter tapes wereused to measure large individuals (>2cm) and calipers were used for smallerindividuals (


23ground measurement – length of tape inserted into well – amount of dyed pasteon end of tape. The well on the tropical hardwood hammock on transect 4 wasplugged and could not be used. The remaining 15 wells were measured eachtime field work was conducted from January 2008 through May 2008 (transect 1,and 2 n=6; transect 3 n=8, transect 4 n=5). Park wells 18 and 20 were measuredon the same days as the transect wells. It was not possible to make surfacewater measurements on each subplot as Whitley had done due to the droughtoccurring at the time of this study. During the entire year of data collection, waterwas found above ground on only one field day at one end of transect 2.Tree Ring Data CollectionDue to time constraints, only one transect was sampled for tree cores.Transect 2 was chosen for tree coring because it had adequate numbers of bothcypress and pop ash trees, both of which exhibit annual growth rings (Duever etal. 1984). Only trees with a dbh >10cm were cored and two cores were collectedfrom each tree in an attempt to begin accurate dating at the tree level.All dendrochronology methods followed Stokes et al. (1968). Cores weretaken at 1.3m from the ground from cypress and pop ash trees on transect 2using a Haglof increment borer. The cores were collected in plastic straws andthe straws were labeled with the date, tree number, and species. Labeled strawswith cores were placed in a ventilated hood to dry for several days. Each corewas then glued into a grooved wooden mount with the tracheid cells alignedvertically. All information written on each collection straw was transferred to thecore mount. Cores were sanded with a belt sander using 220 grit sandpaper.


24Hand sanding followed with progressively finer grade sandpaper. The coreswere finished with 600 to 1500 grit sandpaper so cell structure was clearlyvisible. Cores were then examined under a stereoscope so growth rings couldbe counted.Growth rings were counted from the bark side in, moving back throughtime. The rings were marked with pencil with one dot indicating a decade, twoindicating a half century, three dots indicating a century, and four dots indicatinga millennium. A skeleton plot was then created for each core and a masterchronology constructed from the skeleton plots. Marker years, those years thatexhibited small rings in greater than 50% of all cores (Speer 2010), weredetermined. Ring widths were measured to the nearest 0.01mm on a Velmexmeasuring system using MeasureJ2X software. Crossdating of the cores wasverified using COFECHA (Grissino-Mayer 2001) and the tree ring series werestandardized in ARSTAN (Cook 1985).Data AnalysisTree and shrub diameters were converted to basal area using the formulaA=π (dbh/2) 2 where A=basal area, and dbh=diameter at breast height. Basalarea for each plant species was calculated per 5m by 10m subplot for eachtransect by summing all individual stems of that species and used as a measureof dominance (Gunderson 1984, Whitley 1991, Terwilliger et al. 1986). Thesubplot basal areas were then summed for each transect. Mean basal area wascalculated for each year studied by summing the basal areas of all species oneach transect and then averaging the transect basal areas. Analysis of variance


25was performed in Microsoft Excel 2003 to determine if the mean change in basalarea of transect totals as well change as in the basal area of dominant plantspecies was significant between study years.Cluster analysis using Bray Curtis similarity coefficients and similaritypercentage calculations (SIMPER) were performed using Primer 6 (Clarke &Gorley 2006). Included in the cluster analyses were similarity profile (SIMPROF)permutation tests to determine if the clusters were statistically significantlydifferent from each other (Clarke & Gorley. 2006). Cluster analysis wasperformed to compare 1989 transect basal area totals with the 2008 transecttotals to determine if the composition of the transects had changed (Dale, Ware,& Waitman 2007).1989 and 2008 basal areas for each transect werecompared to look for changes on a finer scale between sampling years. SIMPERwas performed for each cluster analysis to determine which species were drivingthe clusters. Analysis of variance was performed in Microsoft Excel 2003 todetermine significance of change between 1989 and 2008 for collapsed transecttotals as well as individual transects.Regression analysis performed in JMP 7 (Sall, Creighton, & Lehman2007) using water level data collected on field days from park wells 18 and 20and from all usable transect wells showed that the water levels at the transectwells were positively correlated to the park wells (r 2 >0.95, p


26from Park wells 18 and 20. Regression analysis was not performed on well datafrom transect 4 due to the small sample size (n=5) (Townend 2002).100y = 1.0006x + 83.785R 2 = 0.9937Well T2-1water level (cm)-10-20-30-40-50-140 -120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0Well 20 water level (cm)Figure 9 – Regression analysis of park well 20 and well 1 on transect 2 resultedin a significant R 2 value and produced an equation used to calculate water levelsat well T2-1 from 1987 to 2008.Crossdating of cypress and pop ash cores was verified in COFECHA andinterseries correlation (r=0.223; r=0.692) and mean sensitivity (ms=0.778;ms=0.512) were calculated (Grissino-Mayer 2001). The low interseriescorrelation of the cypress cores indicated that accurate crossdating of cores wasnot possible and so no further analysis was done. After analysis in COFECHA,pop ash core segments that were flagged by the program as below anacceptable correlation value were dated a second time, remeasured, and


27COFECHA rerun on all the cores. Standardized chronologies with age relatedgrowth trends and autocorrelation removed were developed in ARSTAN (Cook1985) for the pop ash cores.ARSTAN produces four chronologies, each with differing levels ofautocorrelation, age-related growth trends and background noise removed(Speer 2010). The raw chronology is an average of the raw ring widths from allcores. The standard chronology has had age-related growth trends removed, butnot autocorrelation. Because smaller trees have a smaller cylinder to add growthto than large trees each growing season, the smaller trees tend to produce largergrowth rings. ARSTAN accounts for this trend in the standard chronology. Thischronology is not suitable for regression analysis because the autocorrelationviolates the test’s assumption of independent measures. The residual chronologyhas been detrended and had all autocorrelation removed. This makes it suitablefor regression analysis, but may remove much of the signal of interest. TheARSTAN chronology has had the autocorrelation removed, modeled, and astand-level autocorrelation added back into the chronology. It is therefore moresuitable for regression analysis and may exhibit the environmental signalremoved from the residual chronology. For this study, the residual and ARSTANchronologies were examined.Regression analysis was performed with JMP 7 (Sall et al. 2007) on thesechronologies and numerous climate and environmental data to determine whatvariable might be causing the change in pop ash growth ring widths.


28RESULTSVegetation AnalysisMean and total basal area increased for each transect between 1989 and2008 (Fig. 10), however analysis of variance showed the increase was notsignificant (p>0.05). Similarly, the change in total basal area of the subplots ofeach transect was not significant (p>0.05) with the exception of transect 4. Thechange in basal area for woody plant species between study years wassignificant (p


29areas for each woody plant species as well as the change between study yearsis found in Appendix 1.Comparison of the 1989 and 2008 transect totals including the SIMPROFpermutation tests in Primer 6 (Clarke et al. 2007) produced no statisticallydifferent clusters (Fig. 11). Transects 1 and 4 exhibited similarity between 1989and 2008 while transects 2 and 3 did not. Detailed results of all SIMPROFFigure 11 – Cluster analysis of basal area (cm 2 /transect) of the 1989 and 2008transects using Bray Curtis Similarity. Note that transects 1 and 4 remainedsimilar between study years while transects 2 and 3 did not, as indicated by thethin dendrogram lines.permutation tests can be found in Appendix 5. Similarity percentage tests(Appendix 4) of 1989/2008 transect 1 showed that laurel oak and cypress werethe greatest contributors to the transect’s similarity while pop ash and gumbolimbo contributed the most to the 1989/2008 transect 4 similarity. Pop ash and


30red maple were dominant contributors to the similarity of the 1989 transect 2 and1989 transect 3 grouping. Pop ash dominated the cluster of 2008 transect 2 and2008 transect 3.Cluster analyses of the subplots on transects 1, 2, and 4 each resulted insignificant clusters (Appendix 5). For each transect, some of the subplotsremained similar between sample years while some did not. Cluster analysis oftransect 3 resulted in no significant clusters (Fig. 12). None of the transect 3subplots exhibited any similarity between 1989 and 2008. Cluster diagrams oftransects 1, 2, and 4 can be found in Appendix 6.Figure 12 – Cluster analysis of basal area (cm 2 ) from transect 3 comparing 1989and 2008 using Bray Curtis Similarity. None of the subplots exhibit similaritybetween sample years, as indicated by the thin dendrogram lines.


31Water Level Data AnalysisThe equations produced by regression analysis of park wells andtransect wells were used to calculate water levels at transect wells from 1987 to2008 (Fig. 13). Transect 4 was not used in analysis due to a small number ofWater Level At Transect 2 Wells from 1987 To 2008100500-50-100-150-200T2-1T2-2T2-3T2-412/1/8712/1/8912/1/9112/1/9312/1/9512/1/9712/1/9912/1/0112/1/0312/1/0512/1/07Water Level (cm)DateFigure 13 – Water levels at wells on transect 2 from 1987 to 2008 calculatedusing equations produced by regression analysis of water levels at park well 20and transect 2 wells measured during the time of this study.data points (n=5) (Townend 2002). A severe drought occurring at the time ofdata collection resulted in the transect wells going dry. As a result, there are asmall number of data points for all four transects. The large gap between datapoints in Figure 9 is the result of one rain event that briefly brought water levelsabove ground on Transect 2.


32DendrochronologyThe oldest cypress core collected dated back to 1981. The COFECHAoutput for 13 cypress cores resulted in a mean series length of 23.1 years, aninterseries correlation of 0.223, and an average mean sensitivity of 0.778.Two cores from the same pop ash tree dated back to the early 1900’s.However, due to the small sample size for these years, only dated ringmeasurements from 1950 forward were used in analysis. The first run ofCOFECHA on rings from 22 cores resulted in a mean series length of 45 years,an interseries correlation of 0.602, and a mean sensitivity of 0.492. The 20segments flagged as possible problems were rechecked and remeasured.Analysis was run again in COFECHA producing an interseries correlation of0.710 with a mean sensitivity of 0.513. Visual examination of the masterchronology developed from the skeleton plots of all dated pop ash cores resultedin the following marker years: 2000, 1997, 1989, 1982, and 1959. Thischronology was verified by COFECHA and standardized in ARSTAN.Regressions with Climate DataRegression analysis was performed in JMP 7 using the residual andARSTAN pop ash chronologies and a variety of climate data. No significantrelationship was found with minimum temperatures, mean minimumtemperatures, mean maximum temperatures, annual precipitation, dry seasonprecipitation, wet season precipitation, annual Palmer Drought Severity Index, ormonthly Palmer Drought Severity Index. All data listed above were obtained


33from NOAA (http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/ncdc.html) for the Everglades CityWeather Station.Regression analysis of mean annual water level data from well 1 ontransect 2 with the ARSTAN pop ash chronology resulted in a significant positivecorrelation (Fig. 14). The equations and R 2 values of this and all other significantrelationships can be found in Appendix 7. The residual chronology exhibited atrend for correlation with the well T2-1 water levels (r 2 =0.20, p=0.07). Regressionanalysis of mean annual water level data from wells 18 and 20 with the ARSTANchronology also resulted in a positive correlation (r 2


34a.Water Level (cm)0-20-40-60-80-100-120-140-160-180Y88Y89Mean Annual Water Level on Transect 2 Well 1Y90Y91Y92Y93Y94Y95Y96Y97YearY98Y99Y00Y01Y02Y03Y04Y05Y06Y07Y082.5ARSTAN ChronologyRing Width (mm)21.510.5Y1987Y1988Y1989Y1990Y1991Y1992Y1993Y1994Y1995Y1996Y1997Y1998Y1999Y2000Y2001Y2002Y2003Y2004Y2005Y2006Y2007Y2008b.0YearRing Width (mm)Regression of Water Level at Well T2-1 and ARSTAN Chronology2.52y = 0.0091x + 1.9788R 2 = 0.248 p


35DISCUSSIONFakahatchee Strand has been affected by natural and anthropogenicdisturbances including drought, hurricanes, road construction, drainage canals,logging, and fire. This study re-examined Fakahatchee’s plant communities todetermine if the Strand is returning to pre-logging conditions or if the synergy ofanthropogenic disturbances has pushed the plant communities in a newdirection. The results indicate that Fakahatchee’s plant communities arerecovering to pre-logging compositions and pop ash trees within the Strandrespond to the water levels in their environment serving as hydrologic indicators.Changes in Plant Community CompositionIn terms of species composition on a transect level, the transectsmeasured in 1989 and 2008 were not statistically different. However, transects 2and 3 did exhibit change between study years (Fig. 11). Clustering of thecollapsed transect totals showed that the decrease in red maple basal area andthe increase in cypress basal area caused the decreased similarity between1989 and 2008 on transects 2 and 3 (Appendix 6). This may be attributed to anormal pattern of successional change. Red maple and laurel oak decreased inbasal area on all transects between 1989 and 2008, with the exception oftransect 2 where no laurel oak was present. Both species are considered shortlivedtrees and red maple is sometimes classified as a subclimax species that isoften replaced in the overstory (USDA Forest Service 2009). Red maple andlaurel oak are also more likely to suffer damage from hurricane winds thancypress (Gresham, Williams, & Limpscomb 1991; Duever & McCollom 1993).


36Examined at a smaller spatial scale, the subplots of transects 1, 2, and 3did not exhibit a significant change between 1989 and 2008. Only transect 4 did.The pattern of vegetational change proved to be the same for each transect: adecrease in laurel oak and red maple basal areas and an increase in cypress.Cluster analysis of individual transects 1, 2, and 4 showed that not all of thesubplots exhibited similarity between 1989 and 2008, indicating that thecomposition of the plant communities has changed. Clustering of transect 3produced three clusters, but resulted in no significantly different plantcommunities (Fig. 13). None of the transect 3 subplots exhibited similaritybetween 1989 and 2008. Transect 3 exhibited the most visible evidence ofdisturbance in the form of downed trees of all four transects, possibly due toHurricane Wilma, a category 3 hurricane that impacted Fakahatchee Strand inOctober 2005. Discrepancies in the measurement of transect 3 between 1989and 2008 may have also contributed to the decreased similarity between studyyears.These data suggest that for short time periods such as covered by thisstudy, comparison at the species level may be warranted to detect thesignificance of successional change within a forest community. These changes,while significant, would be missed on a larger spatial scale. These data furthersuggest that Fakahatchee Strand is recovering to pre-logging conditions.Austin et al. (1986) stated that the vegetation of Fakahatchee Strand is “acomplex mosaic” and that distinct plant communities are often notdistinguishable. Whitley (1991) assumed that cypress were the common


37denominator in the pre-logging plant communities of Fakahatchee Strand and sosuggested that removal of the cypress left the communities less similar to eachother than pre-logging. I suggest that similarity between the plant communitiesstudied has increased since the time of Whitley’s study with cypress regenerationwithin those communities. The composition of the tropical hardwood hammockWhitley (1991) described has remained virtually unchanged in the last 20 years.Austin et al. (1986) observed that the location of plant communitiesthroughout the Strand had changed little since D. Graham Copeland’s vegetationmap produced in 1947, but composition of those communities had. This studyfound that to be the case for the period 1989 – 2008, but on a much smallerscale. The plant communities that Whitley described on the four transectsstudied in 1989 have not changed in physical location but have changedsomewhat in composition.Ewel, Davis, and Smith (1989) asserted that clear cutting does notnegatively impact the species composition of cypress swamps and that theswamps regenerate in the absence of severe fire. Some of the study plots withinthe transects exhibited fire scars in 1989, but only the western end of transect 2experienced a severe fire following logging (Whitley 1991). In nearly every studyplot within the four transects studied here, cypress increased in total basal areabetween 1989 and 2008 or grew to a measurable size since 1989. Therefore,the cypress are regenerating.Gunderson (1984) suggested that development of a mixed hardwoodforest without cypress is likely following a severe burn until seeds arrive from


38outside the burned area. The pop ash pond at the west end of transect 2experienced a severe burn between 1940 and 1953 based on aerial photographsfrom those years and visual evidence on the ground (Whitley 1991). Yet in eachsubplot within the pop ash pond, cypress are regenerating as shown by anincrease in basal area from 1989 to 2008. This follows the successional diagramproposed by Duever et al. (1986) (Fig. 6a) as well as Gunderson’s hypothesis.Aerial photographs of Fakahatchee Strand taken in 1940 and 1953 showthe extent of the change among the plant communities caused by logging. Whatwas a closed canopy cypress strand in 1940 appears virtually clear cut in 1953(Appendix 3). An examination of 2004 aerial photographs shows a recoveringsystem with the canopy once again closing in. In reference to the Margalef(1969) diagram (Fig. 1), it appears as though the plant communities ofFakahatchee Strand were pushed out to the borders of area B, but haveassimilated the changes caused by logging and hydrologic alterations and arerecovering back to area A.To more clearly see the successional path each transect or portion oftransect is on, it is useful to re-examine the diagram developed by Duever et al.(1986). For placement of each transect or transect portion, see Figure 15.The north end of transect 1 (Fig. 15A) was within the central strand oflarge cypress and mixed hardwoods in 1940. Whitley (1991) reported evidenceof light fire at this end of the transect. Currently, this end is dominated by laureloak, but the basal area of oak has decreased since Whitley’s study. There werecypress present at this end of transect 1 at the time of the current study, but


39Whitley reported none. The south end of this transect (Fig. 15B) was within thesmaller mono-specific cypress at the outside of the strand. Today, that end ofthe transect is dominated by cypress.The west end of transect 2 (Fig. 15C) was within the central strand oflarge cypress and mixed hardwoods in 1940 and then suffered a severe firebetween 1940 and 1953 (Whitley 1991). That same end is currently dominatedby pop ash trees, but the cypress have increased in basal area since Whitley’sstudy. The east end of transect 2 (Fig.15B) was within the smaller mono-specificcypress at the outside of the strand. Today, that end of the transect is dominatedby cypress and sabal palm.Transect 3 had the most evidence of disturbance in the form of large treesdown on the transect. In 1940, all of transect 3 fell within the central strand oflarge cypress and mixed hardwoods. Whitley (1991) reported no evidence of fireand none is visible today. Currently, the entire transect (Fig. 15A) is dominatedby a mixture of pop ash, cypress, and laurel oak with cypress and pop ash basalarea increasing and laurel oak basal area decreasing.In 1940 transect 4 was contained within the central strand of large cypressand mixed hardwoods as well. Today, the northern and central portion of thetransect (Fig. 15A) are dominated by pop ash with only one cypress. NeitherWhitley’s (1991) nor the current study found signs of fire. The tropical hardwoodhammock (Fig. 15D) has not changed in species composition in the 1989 – 2008time period. This hammock is higher in elevation than the swamp around itresulting in a shorter hydroperiod, while the wetter swamp protects the hammock


40from fire. The tropical species growing on the hammock are protected from coldby the insulating properties of the water in the swamp (Lodge 2005).ABDCFig. 15 – Successional diagram by Duever et al. (1986) showing currentplacement of transects or transect portions along successional trajectory as listedin the chart below.A B C DNorth end of T1 South end of T1 West end of T2 South end of T4All of T3 East end of T2North end of T4This exercise shows that the plant communities within the study sites arerecovering from logging along expected trajectories. Cypress are regeneratingand increasing in dominance while hardwoods are decreasing. What remainsunclear is what effect hydrologic alterations to Fakahatchee Strand have had.


41Did the severe drainage of the Strand from the Faka-Union Canal system slowrecovery? Or did it facilitate cypress regeneration by improving conditions forseed germination? Will longer hydroperiods and higher water levels created bythe plugging of Prairie Canal improve growth rates of the cypress plantcommunities or will they discourage seed germination? Will longer hydroperiodsdecrease the frequency and severity of fire, allowing the long term survival ofcypress? These questions will only be answered with continued long termmonitoring.DendrochronologyTree ring analysis of cypress and pop ash trees from the pop ash pond atthe western end of transect 2 produced mixed results. Cypress cores did notproduce a reliable chronology due in part to the presence of numerous false andmissing rings. The oldest cypress core dated back to approximately 1981.McCollom et al. (1985) added 5 years to the age of a core to compensate for thetime necessary for saplings to grow to breast height (1.3m). With thisadjustment, the cypress trees within the transect 2 pop ash pond would havegerminated some time in the late 1970’s to early 1980’s. This is not unexpected.Logging took place in this portion of the central strand in 1947 (Jones 1983). Thesevere fire that followed logging between 1947 and 1953 (Whitley 1991) wouldhave destroyed any viable seeds or coppice sprouts from remaining stumps.Any regeneration would have depended on an influx of cypress seeds from otherareas within the strand during periods of high water (Gunderson 1978). Also, theprecise requirements for germination and survival of cypress seeds and seedling


42establishment limit their recolonization (Gunderson 1978). Brown (1984)reported that cypress seeds will not germinate under water but need moist soil.Furthermore, the seedlings must grow tall enough in the first growing season toreach above water levels during the rainy season. The synergy of all thesefactors would have made successful cypress germination and survival difficult.Accurate dating was possible for pop ash cores taken at the same end oftransect 2 and a chronology was successfully constructed. The two oldestcores, which came from the same tree, dated back to the early 1900’s. The restof the cores dated back to 1950 through 1969. Pop ash trees grow faster thancypress (Gunderson 1978) so it would probably take less than the 5 yearsallowed by McCollom et. al (1985) for pop ash trees to reach breast height. Thetrees that produced cores dating back to 1950 probably sprouted sometimeshortly after logging began in 1947. Whitley (1991) assumed that all pop ash inthis portion of transect 2 were post logging and post fire. Tree ring analysisshowed that one tree sampled was standing prior to and during logging. Visualexamination of a graph of the pop ash chronologies back to 1940 shows arelease event in 1947 (Appendix 4) which is when logging operations began inthis portion of Fakahatchee Strand (Jones 1983). However, due to the smallsample depth, only two cores from one tree, an assessment of the cause of therelease would be suspect.The results of regression analysis show that the pop ash trees cored areresponding to water levels in the immediate area. This includes mean annualwater levels at the transect well at the study site as well as Park well 20. The


43chronologies did not correlate to mean annual water levels at Park wells 1 and 6which are approximately 5 miles away. However, water levels at the transectwells do not correlate to precipitation data from either the FSPSP office atCopeland or the NOAA weather station in Everglades City. This could be due tothe canals that encircle Fakahatchee Strand which drain water from the Strand(McPherson & Swayze 1977), the effects of rainfall north of the Strand, or thespotty nature of rainfall in south Florida (Key, Everham, Ceilley, Thomas, &Leisure unpubl.).Stahle & Cleaveland (1996) found a correlation between cypresschronologies produced in other areas of the southeastern United States andMarch through June precipitation. The pop ash chronologies produced in thisstudy did not show a correlation with the March through June precipitation fromthe Fakahatchee Park office at Copeland (r20.05). However, theresidual chronology exhibited a significant correlation with May precipitation fromthe office site (r2=0.42, p


44This suggests that the effects of drainage from the canals in Picayune Strandmay have been minimized by distance in this part of Fakahatchee.Further ResearchIn order to determine the path of recovery of Fakahatchee Strand, longterm monitoring should be continued (Spencer, Perry, & Silberhorn 2001). Theplant communities of Fakahatchee will continue to change as Evergladesrestoration moves forward, especially the restoration of Picayune Strand. A reexaminationof these study sites will be important in evaluating the success of themanagement and restoration efforts going on in and around Fakahatchee Strand.A search for more large pop ash trees that would predate logging shouldbe carried out around the pop ash pond on transect 2. A greater sample depthwould allow for water level reconstructions as well as create a picture of standlevel response to logging and the severe fire that followed. The next step wouldinvolve coring pop ash trees from other areas of Fakahatchee to determine ifthere is any correlation between series from these other areas and the pop ashpond on transect 2. If that proved successful, cores could be collected andanalyzed from the larger southwest Florida region to look for similar relationshipsacross the larger area. Tree ring analysis of pop ash trees closer to PrairieCanal in eastern Picayune Strand could provide a clearer picture of the effects ofdrainage on the growth and recovery of the plant communities of FakahatcheeStrand.


45CONCLUSIONThe process of succession and recovery of logged cypress forests will notbe measured in years, but rather in decades or centuries. The plant communitiesof Fakahatchee Strand are returning to pre-logging compositions despite thecompounding stresses created by humans. Cypress trees are increasing inbasal area while red maple and laurel oak basal areas are decreasing. Tree ringanalysis shows that pop ash trees within the Strand respond to the water levelsaround them. During years of ample water, the trees exhibit greater growth,while during dry years, growth slows. Continued monitoring of water levels andplant community composition will permit an assessment of the success ofmanagement and restoration efforts in and around the Strand. Expanded treering analysis will allow a more complete assessment of the effects of both naturaland anthropogenic disturbances on Fakahatchee Strand.


46REFERENCESAdams, D. E., & Anderson, R. C. (1980). Species response to a moisturegradient in central Illinois forests. American Journal of Botany, 67, 381-392.Alexander, T. R., & Crook, A. G. (1975). Recent and long-term vegetationchanges and patterns in south Florida (Technical Report No. Part II,Appendix G in South Florida ecological study). Homestead, FL: NationalPark Service.Alvarez, K. C. (1973). Report on the November 5, 1973 on-site inspection of theFakahatchee Strand. Unpublished manuscript.Austin, D. F., Jones, J. L., & Bennett, B. C. (1986). The Fakahatchee Strand.Palmetto, (Summer), 3-6.Austin, D. F., Jones, J. L., & Bennett, B. C. (1990a). Endangered plants ofFakahatchee Strand State Preserve. Rhodora, 92(869), 27-35.Austin, D. F., Jones, J. L., & Bennet, B. C. (1990b). Vascular plants ofFakahatchee Strand State Preserve. Florida Scientist, 53(2), 89-117.Brown, C. A. (1984). Morphology and biology of cypress trees. In K. C. Ewel, &H. T. Odum (Eds.), Cypress swamps (pp. 16-24). Gainesville: UniversityPresses of Florida.Burns, L. A. (1986). Productivity and water relations in the Fakahatchee Strand ofsouth Florida. In K. C. Ewel, & H. T. Odum (Eds.), Cypress Swamps (pp.318-333). Gainesville, FL: University Presses of Florida.Carter, M. R., Burns, L. A., Cavinder, T. R., Dugger, K. R., Fore, P. L., Hicks, D.B., et al. (1973). Ecosystems analysis of the Big Cypress Swamp andEstuaries No. EPA 904/9-74-002). Atlanta, GA: US Environmental ProtectionAgency.Clarke, K. R., & Gorley, R. N. (2006). Primer V6: User Manual/Tutorial. Plymouth,United Kingdom: Primer-E Ltd.Clements, F. E. (1916). Plant succession; an analysis of the development ofvegetation. Washington: Carnegie Institute of Washington.Clements, F. E. (1936). Nature and structure of the climax. Journal of Ecology,24, 252-284.Cook, E. R. (1985). A time series analysis approach to tree ring standardization.Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Arizona, School of Renewable Natural


47Resources, Tucson, AZ. Retrieved 2008 from Proquest Dissertation andTheses databaseDale, E. E., Ware, S., & Waitman, B. (2007). Ordination and classification ofbottomland forests in the lower Mississippi alluvial plain. Castanea, Vol.72,no.2, 105-115.Duever, M. J., & Riopelle, L. A. (1984). Tree-ring analysis in the OkefenokeeSwamp No. Okefenokee Ecosystems Investigations, Publication No. 30).Athens, GA: University of Georgia.Duever, M. J., Carlson, J. E., Meeder, J. F., Duever, L. C., Gunderson, L. H.,Riopelle, L. A., et al. (1986). The Big Cypress National Preserve. New York,NY: National Audubon Society.Duever, M. J., & McCollom, J. M. (1993). Hurricane Hugo effects on old-growthfloodplain forest communities at Four Holes Swamp, South Carolina.General Technical Report SO, (93), 197-202.Duever, M. J., Meeder, J. F., & Duever, L. C. (1984). Ecosystems of the BigCypress Swamp. In K. C. Ewel, & H. T. Odum (Eds.), Cypress Swamps (pp.294-303). Gainesville, FL: University of Florida Press.Duever, M. J. (2005). Big Cypress regional ecosystem conceptual ecologicalmodel. Wetlands, 25(4), pp.Ewel, K. C., & Mitsch, W. J. (1978). The effects of fire on species composition incypress dome ecosystems. Florida Scientist, 41, 25-31.Ewel, K. C., Davis, H. T., & Smith, J. E. (1989). Recovery of Florida cypressswamps from clearcutting. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry, 13(3), 123-126.Ewel, K. C., & Parendes, L. A. (1984). Usefulness of annual growth rings ofcypress trees (Taxodium distichum) for impact analysis. Tree Ring Bulletin, ,39-43.Florida Division of Forestry. Picayune Strand State Forest., March 24, 2008, fromwww.fl-dof.com/state_forests/picayune_strand.htmlFlorida State Parks. (2005). Florida online park guide. Retrieved 3/22, 2008, fromhttp://www.floridastateparks.org/FindaPark-Proc.cfmFritts, H. C. (1966). Growth-rings of trees: Their correlation with climate. Science,154(3752), 973-979.


48Gleason, H. A. (1927). Further views on the succession-concept. Ecology, 8(3),229-326.Gresham, C. A., Williams, T. M., Lipscomb, D. J. (1991). Hurricane Hugo winddamage to southeastern U.S. coastal forest tree species. Biotropica, 23(4A),420-426.Grissino-Mayer, H. D. (2001). Evaluating crossdating accuracy: A manual andtutorial for the computer program COFECHA. Tree-Ring Research, 57(2),205-221.Gunderson, L. H. (1978). Regeneration of cypress, Taxodium distichum andTaxodium ascendens, in logged and burned cypress strands at CorkscrewSwamp Sanctuary, Florida. In H. T. Odom, & K. C. Ewel (Eds.), CypressWetlands For Water Management; Reycling and Conservation. FourthAnnual Report To National Science Foundation (pp. 595-681). Gainesville,FL: Center For Wetlands.Gunderson, L. H. (1984). Regeneration of cypress in logged and burned strandsat Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary, Florida. In K. C. Ewel, & H. T. Odum (Eds.),Cypress Swamps (pp. 349-357). Gainesville, FL: University of Florida Press.Halpern, C. B. (1988). Early successional pathways and the resistance andresilience of forest communities. Ecology, 69(6), 1703-1715.Hingtgen, T., Duever, M. J., Alvarez, K. C., Owen, M., & DuToit, C. (2004).Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park; pre-restoration hydrologicalcharacteristics (Technical Report. Osprey, FL: Florida Park Service, ParksDistrict 4 Administration.Jones, J. L. (1983). An ecological study of the Florida royal palm, Roystoneaelata (bartram) F. harper. Unpublished Master of Science, Florida AtlanticUniversity, Boca Raton, FL.Key, J. G., Everham, E. M., Ceilley, D. W., Thomas, B. L., & Leisure, R. (InPress). Surface and groundwater dynamics of a cypress swamp in anurbanizing watershed. Florida Scientist,Lodge, T. E. (2005). The Everglades Handbook: Understanding the Ecosystem(2nd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Margalef, R. (1963). On certain unifying principles in ecology. The AmericanNaturalist, 97(897), 357-374.Margalef, R. (1969). Diversity and stability: A practical proposal and a model ofinterdependence. Brookhaven Symposia in Biology, 22, 25-37.


49Marois, K. C., & Ewel, K. C. (1983). Natural and management-related variation incypress domes. Forest Science, 29(3), 627-640.McCollom, J. M. (1990). Forest structure and succession over a ten year periodin six undisturbed south Florida plant communities. unpublished Master ofScience thesis, School of Natural Resources, University of Arizona,Retrieved 2008 from Proquest Dissertation and Theses databaseMcCollom, J. M., Neuman, L., & Duever, M. (1985). Tree ring analysis at LakeHatchineha (Technical Report. Tallahassee, FL: Florida Department ofNatural Resources.McElroy, W. J., & Alvarez, K. C. (1975). Final Report On the Augmentation OfSurficial Flow Through the Fakahatchee Strand, Collier County, Florida(Technical Report No. Water Resources Report Number 2). Tallahasee, FL:FLDER & FLDNR.Mitsch, W. J., & Gosselink, J. G. (2000). Wetlands (Third Edition). New York, NY:John Wiley & Sons.Monk, C. D. (1968). Successional and environmental relationships of the forestvegetation of north central Florida. The American Midland Naturalist, 79(2),441-457.Myers, R. L., & Ewel, J. J. (Eds.). (1990). Ecosystems of Florida. Gainesville, FL:University Presses of Florida.Odum, H. T., Odum, E. C., & Brown, M. T. (1998). Environment and society inFlorida. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.O’Neill, R. V. (2001). Is it time to bury the ecosystem concept? Ecology, 82(12),3275-3284.Pickett, S. T. A., & White, P. S. (1985). Patch dynamics: A synthesis. In S. T. A.Pickett, & P. S. White (Eds.), The Ecology Of Natural Disturbance and PatchDynamics (pp. 371-384). San Diego, CA: Academic Press, Inc.Pickett, S. T. A. (1976). Succession: an evolutionary interpretation. TheAmerican Naturalist, 110(971), 107-119.Putz, F. E., & Sharitz, R. R. (1991). Hurricane damage to old-growth forest inCongaree Swamp National Monument, South Carolina, U.S.A. CanadianJournal of Forest Research = Journal Canadien De Recherche Forestiere,21(12), 1765-1770.


50Ratard, M. A. (2004). Factors affecting growth and regeneration of baldcypress ina South Carolina tidal freshwater swamp. Unpublished Ph.D., ClemsonUniversity,Ricklefs, R. E., (1990). Ecology (Third Edition). New York, NY: W. H. Freemanand Company.Sall, J., Creighton, L., & Lehman, A. (2007). JMP Start Statistics: A Guide ToStatistics and Data Analysis Using JMP (4th Edition). Cary, NC: SASInstitute, Inc.South Florida Water Management District. (2008). 2008 south FloridaEnvironmental Report. West Palm Beach, FL: Author.Speer, J. H. (In Press. 2010). Fundamentals Of Tree Ring Research. Tucson,AZ: University of Arizona Press.Spencer, D. R., Perry, J. E., Siberhorn, G. M. (2001). Early secondarysuccession in bottomland hardwood forests of southeastern Virginia.Environmental Management, 27(4), 559-570.Stahle, D. W., Cleaveland, M. K., & Hehr, J. G. (1985). A 450-year droughtreconstruction for Arkansas, United States. Nature, 316(6028), 530-532.Stahle, D. W., Cook, E. R., & White, J. W. C. (1985). Tree-ring dating ofbaldcypress and the potential for millennia-long chronologies in thesoutheast. American Antiquity, 50(4)Stahle, D. W., & Cleaveland, M. K. (1996). Large-scale climatic influences onbaldcypress tree growth across the southeastern United States; climaticvariations and forcing mechanisms of the last 2000 years. NATO ASISeries.Series I: Global Environmental Change, 41, 125-140.Stokes, M. A., & Smiley, T. L. (1996). An Introduction To Tree-Ring Dating.Tucson, AZ: The University of Arizona Press.Swayze, L. J., & McPherson, B. F. (1977). The Effect Of the Faka-Union CanalSystem On Water Levels In the Fakahatchee Strand, Collier County, Florida(Technical Report No. USGS/WRI-77-61). Tallahassee, FL: U.S. GeologicSurvey.Terwilliger, V. J., & Ewel, K. C. (1986). Regeneration and growth after loggingFlorida pondcypress domes. Forest Science, 32(2), 493-506.Townend, J. (2002). Practical Statistics For Environmental and BiologicalScientists. West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.


51U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region IV. (1999). South Florida Multi-SpeciesRecovery Plan: A Species Plan, An Ecosystem Approach. (TechnicalAgency Draft No. I 49.108:SP 3/2/CD)U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.Retrieved from http://purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS545USDA Forest Service. (February 2009). USDA Forest Service - NortheasternArea. Retrieved March 1, 2009, fromhttp://www.na.fs.fed.us/spfo/pubs/silvics_manual/table_of_contents.htmWhite, P. S., & Pickett, S. T. A. (1985). Natural disturbance and patch dynamics:An introduction. In S. T. A. Pickett, & P. S. White (Eds.), The Ecology ofNatural Disturbance and Patch Dynamics (pp. 3-13). San Diego, CA:Academic Press, Inc.Whitley, W. J. (1991). The distribution of plant communities in FakahatcheeStrand State Preserve, Florida. Master of Science Thesis, Florida AtlanticUniversity, Retrieved 2008 from Proquest Dissertation and Theses databaseYoung, P. J., Megonigal, J. P., Sharitz, R. R., & Day, F. P. (1993). False ringformation in baldcypress (Taxodium distichum) saplings under two floodingregimes. Wetlands, 13(4), 293-298.


52APPENDIX 1Total basal area (cm 2 ) and change between 1989and 2008 for each woody species for eachtransect and species key.T1total BA89total BA08 ∆ T2total BA89total BA08 ∆ACERUB 2516.5 823.6 -1692.9 ACERUB 7575.7 2546.1 -5029.6ANNGLA 706.3 960.0 253.6 ANNGLA 49.7 16.0 -33.7CHRICA 0.0 268.6 268.6 BACHAL 21.1 0.0 -21.1FICAUR 239.4 326.2 86.8 CEPOCC 3.0 0.0 -3.0FRACAR 1919.2 1702.1 -217.1 CHRICA 0.2 861.8 861.6ILECAS 1088.6 1149.9 61.4 FICAUR 306.0 239.7 -66.3PERPAL 748.6 1094.2 345.6 FRACAR 6125.5 10149.4 4023.8PSYSUL 0.2 0.0 -0.2 ILECAS 160.6 0.0 -160.6QUELAU 6497.9 6201.7 -296.3 MYRCER 12.7 0.0 -12.7RAPPUN 169.8 238.3 68.4 PERPAL 0.6 0.0 -0.6SABPAL 361.1 585.3 224.3 PSYSUL 0.3 0.0 -0.3TAXDIS 5712.0 10102.0 4390.0 RAPPUN 0.0 1.0 1.0SABPAL 976.5 5917.9 4941.4TAXDIS 2382.8 5454.6 3071.8T3total BA89total BA08 ∆ T4total BA89total BA08 ∆ACERUB 4205.6 0.0 -4205.6 ACERUB 3879.5 203.6 -3675.9ANNGLA 872.0 217.4 -654.6 ANNGLA 827.9 819.8 -8.1BACSPP 0.5 0.5 0.0 ARDESC 192.3 443.2 250.9CHRICA 15.8 527.9 512.0 BURSIM 3771.8 4551.4 779.6FICAUR 636.7 502.5 -134.2 CHRICA 0.0 180.1 180.1FRACAR 7806.0 10602.8 2796.8 CHROLI 0.0 0.4 0.4ILECAS 323.6 203.9 -119.7 EUGAXI 57.8 287.9 230.2ITEVIR 4.6 160.4 155.7 FICAUR 772.0 257.9 -514.1MYRCER 11.6 0.0 -11.6 FRACAR 4811.5 6414.2 1602.6PERPAL 163.1 380.6 217.5 ILECAS 1574.5 1805.0 230.5PSYNER 15.5 0.0 -15.5 ITEVIR 8.1 2.9 -5.1PSYSUL 6.4 0.4 -6.0 PERPAL 350.3 22.1 -328.2QUELAU 5361.5 4104.2 -1257.3 PSYNER 27.5 31.5 4.0RAPPUN 129.7 394.5 264.8 PSYSUL 2.4 1.0 -1.4SABPAL 32.4 0.0 -32.4 QUELAU 10.2 0.0 -10.2SCHTER 0.0 19.0 19.0 RAPPUN 85.7 230.3 144.6TAXDIS 2072.3 7763.3 5691.0 SABPAL 12.6 1418.6 1406.1XIMAME 0.0 76.5 76.5 SIDSAL 218.4 523.4 305.0TAXDIS 839.6 1968.9 1129.3ZANFAG 176.1 0.0 -176.1


ACERUB Acer rubrum Red MapleANNGLA Annona glabra Pond AppleARDESC Ardisia escallonioides MarlberryBACHSP Baccharis species FalsewillowBURSIM Bursera simaruba Gumbo limboCEPOCC Cephalanthus occidentalis ButtonbushCHRICA Chrysobalanus icaco CocoplumCHROLI Chrysophyllum oliviforme SatinleafEUGAXI Eugenia axillaris White StopperFICAUR Ficus aurea Strangler FigFRACAR Fraxinus caroliniana Pop AshILECAS Ilex casseine Dahoon HollyITEVIR Itea virginica Virginia WillowMYRCER Myrica cerifera Wax MyrtlePERPAL Persea palustris Swamp BayPSYNER Psychotria nervosa Wild CoffeePSYSUL Psychotria sulzneri Shortleaf Wild CoffeeQUELAU Quercus laurifolia Laurel OakRAPPUN Rappanea punctata MyrsineSABPAL Sabal palmetto Sabal PalmSCHTER Schinus terebinthifolia Brazilian PepperSIDSAL Sideroxylon salicifolium Willow BusticTAXDIS Taxodium distichum CypressXIMAME Ximenia americana Hog PlumZANFAG Zanthoxylum fagara Wild Lime53


54APPENDIX 2Pop ash chronologies produced by ARSTAN.Year raw std res ars1940 1.41 1.007 1.009 1.0161941 1.605 1.035 1.034 1.0531942 1.428 0.994 0.944 0.981943 1.1 0.938 0.936 0.941944 1.323 1.198 1.272 1.2591945 1.128 0.806 0.765 0.891946 0.742 0.598 0.695 0.6591947 1.738 1.117 1.335 1.1991948 0.565 0.475 0.359 0.4591949 1.135 0.559 0.719 0.4951950 1.76 1.092 1.222 1.0151951 2.438 1.436 1.346 1.3641952 1.385 0.598 0.458 0.6291953 1.775 0.734 0.914 0.7651954 2.248 1.067 1.137 1.0471955 1.99 1.538 1.507 1.541956 1.049 0.937 0.829 1.0771957 1.648 0.974 0.919 0.9651958 1.674 0.901 0.921 0.9181959 0.709 0.547 0.582 0.5591960 1.093 0.683 0.869 0.6891961 0.969 0.66 0.837 0.7141962 1.525 0.788 0.795 0.6831963 1.723 1.049 1.096 0.9711964 1.916 1.071 1.016 1.0161965 2.376 1.274 1.249 1.2681966 2.752 1.6 1.494 1.6241967 2.064 1.147 0.892 1.1771968 2.785 1.597 1.4 1.491969 2.024 1.14 0.899 1.1261970 2.052 1.212 1.141 1.2091971 1.174 0.706 0.567 0.6711972 1.042 0.631 0.78 0.6491973 1.312 0.699 0.873 0.7321974 1.047 0.625 0.724 0.621975 1.381 0.862 1.012 0.8591976 2.793 1.679 1.725 1.6761977 2.283 1.365 1.065 1.3721978 2.109 1.261 1.097 1.2721979 0.89 0.584 0.518 0.649


1980 2.059 1.257 1.406 1.2651981 1.5 0.893 0.735 0.8641982 0.34 0.228 0.325 0.2781983 1.812 1.107 1.398 1.0961984 1.204 0.727 0.671 0.7261985 0.678 0.414 0.533 0.4261986 1.118 0.691 0.939 0.7021987 1.189 0.755 0.883 0.7661988 1.184 0.732 0.831 0.7411989 0.47 0.295 0.416 0.3161990 1.172 0.739 1.055 0.7691991 2.173 1.365 1.456 1.3681992 2.161 1.301 1.161 1.3341993 2.137 1.361 1.247 1.4051994 1.42 0.928 0.816 1.0061995 1.856 1.162 1.22 1.2361996 1.494 0.957 0.869 0.9851997 0.531 0.364 0.335 0.3411998 1.43 0.929 1.195 0.921999 0.871 0.587 0.598 0.5752000 0.403 0.281 0.457 0.2842001 1.295 0.841 1.132 0.8332002 2.345 1.435 1.441 1.382003 3.233 1.985 1.757 1.9352004 2.269 1.426 0.996 1.4162005 1.567 1.042 0.886 1.082006 1.984 1.291 1.264 1.3112007 2.022 1.315 1.179 1.3282008 1.585 1.019 0.853 1.00955


56APPENDIX 3Aerial photographs of Fakahatchee Strand from 1940, 1953, and 2004. 1940and 1953 aerial photographs courtesy Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park,2004 aerial photographs courtesy Florida Department of EnvironmentalProtection, LABINS; all maps created by Brenda Thomasa. Transects 3 (center) and 4 (to the left). Note the tram roads through the centerand bottom as well as the gouge tracks to the right. These tracks were createdwhen large cypress logs were drug by chain to a central location on a tram to beloaded onto a narrow gage railroad and hauled out of the swamp. The dot in thecenter represents park well 18.


57b. Transect location on 1940 aerial photograph. Note the dark closed canopy ofthe central cypress/mixed hardwood strand, the lighter mono-specific cypresscommunities to either side of the central strand, and the very light prairie to thewest.


58c. Transect location on 1953 aerial photograph. The closed canopy of the strandhas been effectively clear cut. Arrows indicate the boundaries of the severe firethat followed logging.


59d. Transect location on 2004 aerial photograph. The canopy of the system isclosing as the plant communities recover.


60APPENDIX 4Similarity percentages for each transect comparing 1989 and 2008 basal areameasurements.1. Collapsed transect dataSIMPER - Similarity Percentages - species contributionsFactor GroupsSample Clusters1989-T1 12008-T1 11989-T2 31989-T3 31989-T4 22008-T4 22008-T2 42008-T3 4Group 1Average similarity: 81.80Species Av.Abund Av.Sim Contrib% Cum.%QUELAU 6349.79 28.57 34.93 34.93TAXDIS 7906.98 26.31 32.17 67.09FRACAR 1810.67 7.84 9.59 76.68ILECAS 1119.25 5.01 6.13 82.81ACERUB 1670.04 3.79 4.64 87.45PERPAL 921.40 3.45 4.22 91.67Group 3Average similarity: 66.03Species Av.Abund Av.Sim Contrib% Cum.%FRACAR 6965.78 31.20 47.25 47.25ACERUB 5890.64 21.42 32.44 79.68TAXDIS 2227.55 10.55 15.98 95.67Group 2Average similarity: 70.14Species Av.Abund Av.Sim Contrib% Cum.%FRACAR 5612.85 26.16 37.30 37.30BURSIM 4161.63 20.51 29.24 66.54ILECAS 1689.76 8.56 12.21 78.75TAXDIS 1404.27 4.57 6.51 85.26ANNGLA 823.82 4.46 6.36 91.61Group 4Average similarity: 65.37


61Species Av.Abund Av.Sim Contrib% Cum.%FRACAR 10376.08 40.48 61.93 61.93TAXDIS 6608.98 21.76 33.28 95.212. Transect 1SIMPER - Similarity Percentages - species contributionsFactor GroupsSample T1 Clusters1989-1 22008-1 21989-2 22008-2 21989-3 22008-3 21989-4 22008-4 21989-5 32008-5 31989-7 32008-7 31989-8 32008-8 31989-6 12008-6 1Group 2Average similarity: 63.19Species Av.Abund Av.Sim Contrib% Cum.%TAXDIS 1740.17 57.67 91.26 91.26Group 3Average similarity: 44.47Species Av.Abund Av.Sim Contrib% Cum.%QUELAU 1972.61 29.49 66.32 66.32FRACAR 437.27 9.21 20.71 87.03PERPAL 280.30 1.37 3.07 90.10Group 1Average similarity: 81.02Species Av.Abund Av.Sim Contrib% Cum.%ILECAS 991.81 51.81 63.94 63.94ANNGLA 539.60 27.12 33.47 97.423. Transect 2 with sabal palmSIMPER - Similarity Percentages - species contributionsFactor GroupsSample T2 Clusters


621989-1 12008-1 11989-2 12008-2 11989-3 12008-3 11989-4 12008-4 11989-5 12008-5 11989-6 12008-6 11989-7 11989-8 12008-8 11989-9 12008-9 11989-10 12008-10 12008-7 2Group 1Average similarity: 38.72Species Av.Abund Av.Sim Contrib% Cum.%FRACAR 856.57 20.85 53.86 53.86ACERUB 524.62 10.59 27.36 81.23TAXDIS 383.17 6.00 15.51 96.74Group 2Less than 2 samples in group4. Transect 2 without sabal palmSIMPER - Similarity Percentages - species contributionsFactor GroupsSample T2 clusters no sabal1989-1 12008-1 11989-2 12008-2 11989-3 12008-3 11989-4 12008-4 11989-5 12008-5 11989-10 12008-10 11989-6 22008-6 21989-7 22008-7 21989-8 22008-8 21989-9 22008-9 2Group 1Average similarity: 59.03Species Av.Abund Av.Sim Contrib% Cum.%FRACAR 1287.57 50.70 85.90 85.90ACERUB 267.30 5.20 8.80 94.70


63Group 2Average similarity: 44.58Species Av.Abund Av.Sim Contrib% Cum.%ACERUB 864.26 23.97 53.76 53.76TAXDIS 659.78 17.89 40.14 93.905. Transect 3SIMPER - Similarity Percentages - species contributionsFactor GroupsSample T3 Clusters1989-1 12008-1 11989-2 12008-2 11989-3 12008-3 11989-4 11989-6 11989-7 12008-7 12008-8 12008-9 12008-4 22008-5 21989-9 21989-10 22008-10 21989-5 32008-6 31989-8 3Group 1Average similarity: 53.34Species Av.Abund Av.Sim Contrib% Cum.%FRACAR 1330.43 49.98 93.70 93.70Group 2Average similarity: 52.74Species Av.Abund Av.Sim Contrib% Cum.%QUELAU 1798.28 46.80 88.74 88.74FRACAR 289.25 3.96 7.50 96.24Group 3Average similarity: 33.57Species Av.Abund Av.Sim Contrib% Cum.%TAXDIS 2362.55 17.22 51.30 51.30ACERUB 622.13 8.81 26.24 77.54FRACAR 332.49 3.80 11.31 88.85FICAUR 143.50 2.85 8.49 97.33


646. Transect 4SIMPER - Similarity Percentages - species contributionsFactor GroupsSample T4 Clusters1989-1 12008-1 11989-2 12008-2 11989-3 12008-3 11989-4 12008-4 11989-5 12008-5 11989-6 12008-6 11989-7 22008-7 21989-8 22008-8 2Group 1Average similarity: 33.53Species Av.Abund Av.Sim Contrib% Cum.%FRACAR 935.48 26.29 78.42 78.42ILECAS 281.63 2.80 8.35 86.77ACERUB 340.25 1.68 5.00 91.77Group 2Average similarity: 35.21Species Av.Abund Av.Sim Contrib% Cum.%BURSIM 2080.82 28.40 80.67 80.67ARDESC 139.24 2.94 8.34 89.01RAPPUN 55.35 1.32 3.76 92.77


65APPENDIX 5SIMPROF test results1. Transect totals – Simprof testSimprof ParametersPermutations for mean profile: 1000Simulation permutations: 999Significance level: 5%Resemblance:Analyse between: SamplesResemblance measure: S17 Bray Curtis similarityCombining1+5 -> 9 at 81.84+8 -> 10 at 70.142+3 -> 11 at 66.036+7 -> 12 at 65.3711+12 -> 13 at 54.879+13 -> 14 at 48.9310+14 -> 15 at 43.4; Pi: 1.53 Sig(%):86.42. Transect 1 - Simprof testSimprof ParametersPermutations for mean profile: 1000Simulation permutations: 999Significance level: 5%Resemblance:Analyse between: SamplesResemblance measure: S17 Bray Curtis similarityCombining1+8 -> 17 at 85.663+17 -> 18 at 82.62+4 -> 19 at 82.0211+12 -> 20 at 81.02; Pi: 0Sig(%): 1005+6 -> 21 at 77.2914+15 -> 22 at 67.787+21 -> 23 at 67.6718+19 -> 24 at 66.589+10 -> 25 at 66.3222+25 -> 26 at 59.9323+24 -> 27 at 54.96; Pi: 1.56 Sig(%):58.513+26 -> 28 at 47.6416+28 -> 29 at 20.53; Pi: 4.07 Sig(%):28.227+29 -> 30 at 17.91; Pi: 4.63 Sig(%):0.520+30 -> 31 at 6.71; Pi: 4.64 Sig(%): 0.33. Transect 2 - Simprof testSimprof ParametersPermutations for mean profile: 1000Simulation permutations: 999Significance level: 5%Resemblance:Analyse between: SamplesResemblance measure: S17 Bray Curtis similarity


66Combining4+6 -> 21 at 95.482+21 -> 22 at 92.4713+17 -> 23 at 88.1110+19 -> 24 at 82.061+3 -> 25 at 80.5415+23 -> 26 at 77.0122+25 -> 27 at 73.378+20 -> 28 at 70.49+24 -> 29 at 67.565+7 -> 30 at 67.1516+18 -> 31 at 62.1228+30 -> 32 at 56.0927+32 -> 33 at 53.512+29 -> 34 at 4726+31 -> 35 at 43.8534+35 -> 36 at 40.4411+36 -> 37 at 29.4633+37 -> 38 at 26.53; Pi: 2.84 Sig(%):7.314+38 -> 39 at 16.55; Pi: 2.84 Sig(%):4.44. Transect 2 without sabal palm – SimprofSimprof ParametersPermutations for mean profile: 1000Simulation permutations: 999Significance level: 5%Resemblance:Analyse between: SamplesResemblance measure: S17 Bray Curtis similarityCombining4+6 -> 21 at 95.482+21 -> 22 at 92.4713+17 -> 23 at 88.088+20 -> 24 at 83.1310+19 -> 25 at 82.933+5 -> 26 at 82.451+22 -> 27 at 80.1415+23 -> 28 at 77.0416+18 -> 29 at 74.8311+14 -> 30 at 68.719+25 -> 31 at 67.9926+31 -> 32 at 65.077+32 -> 33 at 61.2224+27 -> 34 at 59.1428+29 -> 35 at 51.5433+34 -> 36 at 50.58; Pi:1.64 Sig(%): 28.512+35 -> 37 at 35.4730+37 -> 38 at 31.32; Pi:4.56 Sig(%): 13.536+38 -> 39 at 25.05; Pi:3.06 Sig(%): 4.55. Transect 3 - Simprof testSimprof ParametersPermutations for mean profile: 1000Simulation permutations: 999Significance level: 5%Resemblance:Analyse between: SamplesResemblance measure: S17 Bray Curtis similarityCombining3+6 -> 21 at 87.5217+19 -> 22 at 81.812+21 -> 23 at 80.451+14 -> 24 at 77.1918+24 -> 25 at 76.74


674+23 -> 26 at 68.737+11 -> 27 at 66.8810+20 -> 28 at 64.0226+27 -> 29 at 61.638+22 -> 30 at 57.8313+25 -> 31 at 57.165+31 -> 32 at 539+15 -> 33 at 50.1929+32 -> 34 at 48.828+30 -> 35 at 44.3216+34 -> 36 at 38.8812+33 -> 37 at 25.2636+37 -> 38 at 19.4135+38 -> 39 at 15.48; Pi: 2.1 Sig(%):22.26. Transect 4 - Simprof testSimprof ParametersPermutations for mean profile: 1000Simulation permutations: 999Significance level: 5%Resemblance:Analyse between: SamplesResemblance measure: S17 Bray Curtis similarityCombining5+6 -> 17 at 89.527+9 -> 18 at 8613+14 -> 19 at 81.161+2 -> 20 at 76.554+17 -> 21 at 73.620+21 -> 22 at 65.1210+11 -> 23 at 52.513+22 -> 24 at 45.9315+16 -> 25 at 43.0312+23 -> 26 at 38.6418+26 -> 27 at 35.558+27 -> 28 at 24.4819+25 -> 29 at 21.76; Pi: 3.04 Sig(%):32.824+28 -> 30 at 20.22; Pi: 2.91 Sig(%):15.129+30 -> 31 at 1.8; Pi: 2.86 Sig(%): 3.1


68APPENDIX 6Cluster diagrams of transect totals and individual transects. Significant clusters are indicated bythick black lines. Non-significant clusters are indicated by thin black lines.1. Cluster of transect basal area totals.2. Cluster of transect 1 basal area totals.


693. Cluster of transect 2 basal area totals.4. Cluster of transect 2 basal area totals without sabal palm.


705. Cluster of transect 3 basal area totals.6. Cluster of transect 4 basal area totals.


71APPENDIX 7Equations and R 2 values for significant relationships between environmentalvariables and selected chronologies.Environmental Variable Chronology Equation R 2Mean Annual Water Level T2-1 Residual y=0.0069x+1.7321 0.1974Mean Annual Water Level T2-1 ARSTAN y=0.0091x+1.9788 0.248Mean Annual Water Level #18 Residual y=0.0841x+2.1352 0.1677Mean Annual Water Level #18 ARSTAN y=0.1251x+2.6935 0.2676Mean Annual Water Level #20 Residual y=0.0864x+2.3874 0.1932Mean Annual Water Level #20 ARSTAN y=0.1219x+2.9632 0.2772May Precipitation FSPSP Office Residual y=0.0744x+0.8267 0.4243May Precipitation FSPSP Office ARSTAN y=0.073x+0.8597 0.2749


72APPENDIX 8 – 2008 raw diameter data from each transect.Transect 1PlotTree# Species dbhxcoord.ycoord.commentsA 6 ANNGLA-STEM 1 3.4 0.7 1.6A 6 ANNGLA-STEM 2 0.9 0.7 1.6A 6 ANNGLA-STEM 3 2.2 0.7 1.6A 6 ANNGLA-STEM 4 1.8 0.7 1.6A 6 ANNGLA-STEM 5 1.7 0.7 1.6A 22 CHRICA 0.8 2.5 0.3A 14 FICAUR 6.2 1.6 0 EPIPHYTICA 21 FICAUR-STEM 1 10.3 1.6 0 EPIPHYTICA 25 FICAUR-STEM 1 4.2 4 1.7A 21 FICAUR-STEM 2 3.1 1.6 0A 25 FICAUR-STEM 2 8.2 4 1.7A 21 FICAUR-STEM 3 2.1 1.6 0A 21 FICAUR-STEM 4 5 1.6 0A 5 ILECAS-STEM 1 1.2 0.3 2.7A 5 ILECAS-STEM 2 1.3 0.3 2.7A 5 ILECAS-STEM 3 2.1 0.3 2.7A 12 PERPAL 3.7 1.5 3.6A 23 PERPAL 2.9 4 4A 13 PERPAL-STEM 1 1.1 2 4.7A 13 PERPAL-STEM 2 1.1 2 4.7A 15 RAPPUN 1.1 1.5 0.1 EPIPHYTICA 17 RAPPUN 10.5 1.7 0.2 EPIPHYTICA 19 RAPPUN 1.4 1.6 0 EPIPHYTICA 24 RAPPUN 1.4 2 1A 2 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.9 1 4.3A 4 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.6 0.5 4A 7 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.6 0.7 0.5A 9 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.7 1.4 1.4A 10 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.8 1.4 0.6A 2 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.7 1 4.3A 4 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.7 0.5 4A 7 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.9 0.7 0.5A 9 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1 1.4 1.4A 10 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.7 1.4 0.6A 2 RAPPUN-STEM 3 1.5 1 4.3A 4 RAPPUN-STEM 3 0.7 0.5 4A 7 RAPPUN-STEM 3 1.6 0.7 0.5A 10 RAPPUN-STEM 3 1.2 1.4 0.6A 2 RAPPUN-STEM 4 2.7 1 4.3A 4 RAPPUN-STEM 4 1 0.5 4


A 10 RAPPUN-STEM 4 1.6 1.4 0.6A 2 RAPPUN-STEM 5 2.2 1 4.3A 1 TAXDIS 20.1 0 5A 3 TAXDIS 22.9 1.4 4A 11 TAXDIS 11 1.3 3A 16 TAXDIS 18.3 3 4.7A 18 TAXDIS 18.2 2.5 2.5A 20 TAXDIS 13.8 2.5 0.4B 1 ANNGLA 1.7 0.6 2.8B 7 ANNGLA-STEM 1 2.9 3.9 2B 7 ANNGLA-STEM 2 2.7 3.9 2B 7 ANNGLA-STEM 3 0.9 3.9 2B 2 TAXDIS 13.8 1 3.8B 3 TAXDIS 16.4 0.5 2.2B 4 TAXDIS 24.6 2.8 3.8B 5 TAXDIS 28.8 1.7 1.5B 6 TAXDIS 14.2 3.5 1.5C 3 CHRICA-STEM 1 4.4 3.5 2.6C 11 CHRICA-STEM 1 3.9 0.6 4.2C 3 CHRICA-STEM 10 1.1 3.5 2.6C 11 CHRICA-STEM 10 0.7 0.6 4.2C 3 CHRICA-STEM 11 0.7 3.5 2.6C 11 CHRICA-STEM 11 1 0.6 4.2C 3 CHRICA-STEM 12 1 3.5 2.6C 11 CHRICA-STEM 12 4.6 0.6 4.2C 3 CHRICA-STEM 13 1.2 3.5 2.6C 11 CHRICA-STEM 13 3.3 0.6 4.2C 3 CHRICA-STEM 14 3.5 3.5 2.6C 3 CHRICA-STEM 15 1.4 3.5 2.6C 3 CHRICA-STEM 2 1 3.5 2.6C 11 CHRICA-STEM 2 2.5 0.6 4.2C 3 CHRICA-STEM 3 6.4 3.5 2.6C 11 CHRICA-STEM 3 1.1 0.6 4.2C 3 CHRICA-STEM 4 2.1 3.5 2.6C 11 CHRICA-STEM 4 3.2 0.6 4.2C 3 CHRICA-STEM 5 1.5 3.5 2.6C 11 CHRICA-STEM 5 1 0.6 4.2C 3 CHRICA-STEM 6 0.8 3.5 2.6C 11 CHRICA-STEM 6 0.8 0.6 4.2C 3 CHRICA-STEM 7 1.6 3.5 2.6C 11 CHRICA-STEM 7 1.1 0.6 4.2C 3 CHRICA-STEM 8 1.2 3.5 2.6C 11 CHRICA-STEM 8 0.8 0.6 4.2C 3 CHRICA-STEM 9 0.7 3.5 2.6C 11 CHRICA-STEM 9 0.9 0.6 4.2C 10 FICAUR 3.2 0.3 4.7C 1 TAXDIS 15.7 3 2.5C 2 TAXDIS 18.6 4 2.573


C 4 TAXDIS 20.4 4.5 0.6C 5 TAXDIS 9.8 2.4 4.8C 6 TAXDIS 4 0.9 4C 7 TAXDIS 31.8 0.4 4.6D 5 ANNGLA-STEM 1 2.3 3.5 2.5D 5 ANNGLA-STEM 2 2.8 3.5 2.5D 2 FRACAR-STEM 1 3.8 3.9 4.2D 2 FRACAR-STEM 2 3.3 3.9 4.2D 2 FRACAR-STEM 3 6.9 3.9 4.2D 2 FRACAR-STEM 4 14 3.9 4.2D 1 TAXDIS 16.7 0.7 4.2D 3 TAXDIS 24.7 2 3D 4 TAXDIS 19.5 2.5 0.1E 11 CHRICA-STEM 1 2.7 3 2.5E 12 CHRICA-STEM 1 3.7 2.6 2.4E 13 CHRICA-STEM 1 2.1 2.5 2.5E 13 CHRICA-STEM 10 0.8 2.5 2.5E 13 CHRICA-STEM 11 1 2.5 2.5E 13 CHRICA-STEM 12 2 2.5 2.5E 11 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.2 3 2.5E 12 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.2 2.6 2.4E 13 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.2 2.5 2.5E 12 CHRICA-STEM 3 1.5 2.6 2.4E 13 CHRICA-STEM 3 0.6 2.5 2.5E 12 CHRICA-STEM 4 0.8 2.6 2.4E 13 CHRICA-STEM 4 0.5 2.5 2.5E 12 CHRICA-STEM 5 1.4 2.6 2.4E 13 CHRICA-STEM 5 1.5 2.5 2.5E 12 CHRICA-STEM 6 3 2.6 2.4E 13 CHRICA-STEM 6 1.7 2.5 2.5E 13 CHRICA-STEM 7 0.6 2.5 2.5E 13 CHRICA-STEM 8 0.5 2.5 2.5E 13 CHRICA-STEM 9 1.1 2.5 2.5E 9 RAPPUN 2.2 2.8 3.5E 7 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.2 4.9 2.6 EPIPHYTICE 8 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.2 4.8 3 EPIPHYTICE 7 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.7 4.9 2.6 EPIPHYTICE 8 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.2 4.8 3 EPIPHYTICE 8 RAPPUN-STEM 3 1.3 4.8 3 EPIPHYTICE 8 RAPPUN-STEM 4 0.5 4.8 3 EPIPHYTICE 1 TAXDIS 25.1 0 3E 2 TAXDIS 7.8 1.8 1E 3 TAXDIS 4.7 3 1E 4 TAXDIS 10.1 2.7 1.4E 5 TAXDIS 7.4 4.8 0.2E 6 TAXDIS 13.8 4.6 2E 10 TAXDIS 9.2 2.8 2.8F 5 ACERUB 29.2 2.5 0.374


F 6 ANNGLA 1.2 3.3 4.1 UNCERTAIN ID; DEADF 11 ANNGLA 2.1 4.2 2.6F 2 FRACAR 16 0 3F 9 FRACAR 10.1 3.2 2.3F 3 QUELAU 24.1 1.7 5 UNCERTAIN ID; DEADF 7 RAPPUN 0.6 2.3 0.2F 10 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.7 2.6 0.2F 10 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.5 2.6 0.2F 1 TAXDIS 11.7 1 4.5F 4 TAXDIS 7 2.3 4.2F 8 TAXDIS 16.5 3.5 2.5F 12 TAXDIS 7 3.6 0.4F 13 TAXDIS 8.1 3.6 0F 14 TAXDIS 9.8 4 0.3G 5 ANNGLA 3.6 0.5 1G 8 ANNGLA 3.8 3 2.5G 10 ANNGLA-STEM 1 3.4 4.7 2.6G 13 ANNGLA-STEM 1 1.7 3.5 4G 10 ANNGLA-STEM 2 1.5 4.7 2.6G 13 ANNGLA-STEM 2 3.4 3.5 4G 10 ANNGLA-STEM 3 1 4.7 2.6G 4 CHRICA-STEM 1 1.1 0 2.6G 11 CHRICA-STEM 1 1.3 4.5 3.5G 11 CHRICA-STEM 10 1 4.5 3.5G 11 CHRICA-STEM 11 0.9 4.5 3.5G 4 CHRICA-STEM 2 1 0 2.6G 11 CHRICA-STEM 2 2 4.5 3.5G 4 CHRICA-STEM 3 0.8 0 2.6G 11 CHRICA-STEM 3 2 4.5 3.5G 4 CHRICA-STEM 4 0.8 0 2.6G 11 CHRICA-STEM 4 1.1 4.5 3.5G 11 CHRICA-STEM 5 2.8 4.5 3.5G 11 CHRICA-STEM 6 1.4 4.5 3.5G 11 CHRICA-STEM 7 0.6 4.5 3.5G 11 CHRICA-STEM 8 0.8 4.5 3.5G 11 CHRICA-STEM 9 0.7 4.5 3.5G 12 FRACAR 8.7 4 4G 1 TAXDIS 14.8 0 1G 2 TAXDIS 3.1 1 3G 3 TAXDIS 7.7 0.2 2.5G 6 TAXDIS 2.6 1.1 1G 7 TAXDIS 17.8 2.5 2G 9 TAXDIS 16.1 3.7 1G 14 TAXDIS 8.9 2.5 4.6H 2 ANNGLA 4.1 0 0.5H 7 ANNGLA 4.5 2.9 4.5H 8 ANNGLA 4 2.3 0.5H 9 ANNGLA 2.7 3.5 0.175


H 11 PERPAL 2.2 4.1 2.4H 1 TAXDIS 18.6 1 4H 3 TAXDIS 10.5 0.9 3.1H 4 TAXDIS 14.3 0.2 2.2H 5 TAXDIS 8.8 1.2 3H 6 TAXDIS 5.4 2.4 2.4H 10 TAXDIS 9.5 4.6 0.3I 8 ACERUB 14 4.8 3I 6 QUELAU 60.5 2.4 2.1I 3 RAPPUN 2.6 2.3 1.8I 4 RAPPUN 1.1 2.3 1.9I 5 RAPPUN 2.1 2.5 2I 7 RAPPUN 1.2 2.6 2.5I 1 TAXDIS 16.5 0.1 0.1I 2 TAXDIS 22.4 0.8 2.1I 9 TAXDIS 14.1 2.5 5I 10 TAXDIS 1.1 4.9 0J 3 CHRICA-STEM 1 0.9 3.5 1.3J 6 CHRICA-STEM 1 1 3.6 1.4J 7 CHRICA-STEM 1 3 3.9 1.5J 3 CHRICA-STEM 2 0.5 3.5 1.3J 6 CHRICA-STEM 2 0.8 3.6 1.4J 7 CHRICA-STEM 2 2.3 3.9 1.5J 7 CHRICA-STEM 3 0.9 3.9 1.5J 7 CHRICA-STEM 4 0.8 3.9 1.5J 7 CHRICA-STEM 5 1.1 3.9 1.5J 7 CHRICA-STEM 6 1.1 3.9 1.5J 7 CHRICA-STEM 7 1.4 3.9 1.5J 7 CHRICA-STEM 8 1.3 3.9 1.5J 7 CHRICA-STEM 9 1.5 3.9 1.5J 4 FRACAR-STEM 1 6.5 2.8 0J 5 FRACAR-STEM 1 6.9 3 0J 4 FRACAR-STEM 2 5.8 2.8 0J 5 FRACAR-STEM 2 4.1 3 0J 2 RAPPUN 2.5 0.6 2.6 EPIPHYTICJ 8 RAPPUN 0.9 4 0.2J 1 TAXDIS 29.4 2.5 3K 2 ANNGLA-STEM 1 3.2 1.7 0K 6 ANNGLA-STEM 1 12.2 1.4 1.5 CHECK LOCATIONK 7 ANNGLA-STEM 1 4.8 3.5 1.3K 2 ANNGLA-STEM 2 3.8 1.7 0K 6 ANNGLA-STEM 2 7.4 1.4 1.5K 7 ANNGLA-STEM 2 8.7 3.5 1.3K 2 ANNGLA-STEM 3 10.4 1.7 0 CHECK THIS IDK 7 ANNGLA-STEM 3 4.8 3.5 1.3K 7 ANNGLA-STEM 4 1.5 3.5 1.3K 7 ANNGLA-STEM 5 5.8 3.5 1.3K 7 ANNGLA-STEM 6 5.6 3.5 1.376


K 3 PERPAL 6.5 2.5 0.3 EPIPHYTICK 1 QUELAU 15.5 2 2.9K 5 QUELAU 16.7 1.4 1.5K 4 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.1 5 3.5 EPIPHYTICK 4 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.8 5 3.5K 4 RAPPUN-STEM 3 1 5 3.5K 4 RAPPUN-STEM 4 1.3 5 3.5L 6 ANNGLA-STEM 1 5.5 4 4L 6 ANNGLA-STEM 2 5.3 4 4L 6 ANNGLA-STEM 3 2.3 4 4L 6 ANNGLA-STEM 4 3.7 4 4L 6 ANNGLA-STEM 5 4.9 4 4L 6 ANNGLA-STEM 6 8.8 4 4 DEADL 6 ANNGLA-STEM 7 4.8 4 4L 6 ANNGLA-STEM 8 3.3 4 4L 1 FICAUR 2.6 0.2 1.5L 7 ILECAS 8 4.9 3L 5 ILECAS-STEM 1 25.3 3.3 2.1L 5 ILECAS-STEM 2 17.5 3.3 2.1 DEADL 5 ILECAS-STEM 3 14.3 3.3 2.1L 3 PERPAL 1.7 0.5 2.5L 2 PERPAL-STEM 1 1.3 0.2 2.5L 4 PERPAL-STEM 1 0.9 3.4 2L 2 PERPAL-STEM 2 1.6 0.2 2.5L 4 PERPAL-STEM 2 1.2 3.4 2L 2 PERPAL-STEM 3 3.7 0.2 2.5L 2 PERPAL-STEM 4 8.2 0.2 2.5M 9 CHRICA-STEM 1 2.6 1.5 5M 9 CHRICA-STEM 10 0.7 1.5 5M 9 CHRICA-STEM 11 0.7 1.5 5M 9 CHRICA-STEM 12 1 1.5 5M 9 CHRICA-STEM 13 1.8 1.5 5M 9 CHRICA-STEM 14 0.6 1.5 5M 9 CHRICA-STEM 15 1.6 1.5 5M 9 CHRICA-STEM 16 0.7 1.5 5M 9 CHRICA-STEM 17 1.1 1.5 5M 9 CHRICA-STEM 18 0.5 1.5 5M 9 CHRICA-STEM 2 2.4 1.5 5M 9 CHRICA-STEM 3 2.7 1.5 5M 9 CHRICA-STEM 4 5.3 1.5 5M 9 CHRICA-STEM 5 1.3 1.5 5M 9 CHRICA-STEM 6 1.1 1.5 5M 9 CHRICA-STEM 7 1.4 1.5 5M 9 CHRICA-STEM 8 2.2 1.5 5M 9 CHRICA-STEM 9 0.7 1.5 5M 5 FRACAR 9 1 1.9M 6 PERPAL 0.9 0.8 2M 7 PERPAL 7 0.7 2.377


M 4 PERPAL-STEM 1 3.2 1.5 2.3M 8 PERPAL-STEM 1 2.1 1.5 3.5M 4 PERPAL-STEM 2 3.5 1.5 2.3 DEADM 8 PERPAL-STEM 2 3.8 1.5 3.5M 8 PERPAL-STEM 3 0.9 1.5 3.5M 8 PERPAL-STEM 4 18.8 1.5 3.5M 8 PERPAL-STEM 5 27.8 1.5 3.5M 2 RAPPUN 0.7 3.4 0.8M 11 RAPPUN 1.5 2.4 4.7M 12 RAPPUN 2.5 2.4 3.6M 1 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.9 3.5 0.7M 3 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.5 2.3 1.9M 10 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.7 2.4 5 EPIPHYTICM 1 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1 3.5 0.7M 3 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.2 2.3 1.9M 10 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.8 2.4 5 EPIPHYTICM 1 RAPPUN-STEM 3 1.4 3.5 0.7M 3 RAPPUN-STEM 3 1.8 2.3 1.9M 10 RAPPUN-STEM 3 0.8 2.4 5 EPIPHYTICM 1 RAPPUN-STEM 4 1.3 3.5 0.7M 3 RAPPUN-STEM 4 5.4 2.3 1.9M 10 RAPPUN-STEM 4 0.9 2.4 5 EPIPHYTICM 1 RAPPUN-STEM 5 1.3 3.5 0.7M 10 RAPPUN-STEM 5 1.5 2.4 5 EPIPHYTICM 10 RAPPUN-STEM 6 5.2 2.4 5 EPIPHYTICN 4 ANNGLA-STEM 1 4 2.8 4.4N 5 ANNGLA-STEM 1 0.8 3.4 3.3N 4 ANNGLA-STEM 2 3.7 2.8 4.4N 5 ANNGLA-STEM 2 0.9 3.4 3.3N 4 ANNGLA-STEM 3 2.2 2.8 4.4N 5 ANNGLA-STEM 3 5 3.4 3.3N 4 ANNGLA-STEM 4 7.4 2.8 4.4N 5 ANNGLA-STEM 4 4.6 3.4 3.3N 4 ANNGLA-STEM 5 3.5 2.8 4.4N 4 ANNGLA-STEM 6 3.3 2.8 4.4N 2 FRACAR-STEM 1 12.1 2.7 2N 2 FRACAR-STEM 2 10.5 2.7 2N 2 FRACAR-STEM 3 12.3 2.7 2N 9 ILECAS 6.5 4.8 2.5N 8 ILECAS-STEM 1 11.5 4.8 4.9N 8 ILECAS-STEM 2 1.4 4.8 4.9N 8 ILECAS-STEM 3 1.1 4.8 4.9N 8 ILECAS-STEM 4 1.1 4.8 4.9N 8 ILECAS-STEM 5 1.6 4.8 4.9N 8 ILECAS-STEM 6 1.5 4.8 4.9N 8 ILECAS-STEM 7 0.7 4.8 4.9N 8 ILECAS-STEM 8 1 4.8 4.9N 8 ILECAS-STEM 9 0.6 4.8 4.978


79N 3 PERPAL 3 2.7 4.5N 12 QUELAU 56 4.5 0.5N 10 RAPPUN 0.7 4.6 0.4N 11 RAPPUN 1.1 4.6 0.5N 1 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.7 0.1 0.1N 6 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.7 4.2 4.1N 7 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.7 4.3 4.3N 13 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.4 4.4 0.3N 1 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.3 0.1 0.1N 6 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.5 4.2 4.1N 7 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.2 4.3 4.3N 13 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.8 4.4 0.3N 6 RAPPUN-STEM 3 0.8 4.2 4.1N 7 RAPPUN-STEM 3 0.7 4.3 4.3N 7 RAPPUN-STEM 4 1.4 4.3 4.3O 5 ANNGLA-STEM 1 4 4.9 0.1O 8 ANNGLA-STEM 1 7 2.5 5O 5 ANNGLA-STEM 2 3.7 4.9 0.1O 8 ANNGLA-STEM 2 0.6 2.5 5O 5 ANNGLA-STEM 3 7.6 4.9 0.1O 8 ANNGLA-STEM 3 1.4 2.5 5O 8 ANNGLA-STEM 4 2.4 2.5 5O 8 ANNGLA-STEM 5 0.9 2.5 5O 2 FRACAR-STEM 1 9.5 1.5 0.2O 3 FRACAR-STEM 1 13.1 2.5 0.2O 6 FRACAR-STEM 1 10.5 4.8 2.5O 2 FRACAR-STEM 2 10 1.5 0.2O 3 FRACAR-STEM 2 5.1 2.5 0.2O 6 FRACAR-STEM 2 0.9 4.8 2.5O 6 FRACAR-STEM 3 5.2 4.8 2.5O 6 FRACAR-STEM 4 7.1 4.8 2.5 DEADO 4 ILECAS 7.5 2.5 1.1O 1 RAPPUN-STEM 1 2 0 0.4O 7 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.9 0.5 4.5O 1 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.9 0 0.4O 7 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.5 0.5 4.5P 3 FICAUR 11.4 0.9 3.4TREE PRONE; TAKEN AT2M ABOVEP 1 FRACAR-STEM 1 8 4.1 1.8 IF TREE WERE STANDINGP 2 FRACAR-STEM 1 8.5 3.5 2P 1 FRACAR-STEM 2 7.1 4.1 1.8P 2 FRACAR-STEM 2 8.5 3.5 2P 4 PERPAL 2 3.6 3P 5 RAPPUN-STEM 1 2.5 0.8 3P 5 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.8 0.8 3P 6 SABPAL 27.3 0.5 3.1


80Transect 2PlotTree# Species dbhxcoord.ycoord. commentsA 1 FRACAR 15.1 2 4.5A 2 FRACAR 13.4 1.7 0A 3 FRACAR 19 3 2A 4 FRACAR 11.4 3 4A 5 FRACAR 18.2 3.1 4.1A 6 FRACAR 10.2 4.4 1A 7 FRACAR 8.8 3.3 0.3B 1 FRACAR-STEM 1 11.6 0.5 3B 1 FRACAR-STEM 2 14 0.5 3 DEADB 1 FRACAR-STEM 3 15.8 0.5 3B 1 FRACAR-STEM 4 15.3 0.5 3B 2 TAXDIS 13.5 5 3B 3 FRACAR 13.8 3.5 1.5B 4 FRACAR 13.9 4 0.5B 5 FICAUR 0.7 2 0.7 EPIPHYTICB 6 FICAUR 1.3 4.4 1.8 EPIPHYTICB 7 FICAUR 1.5 4.4 2.6 EPIPHYTICC 1 FRACAR 7 1.5 0.5 DEADC 2 FRACAR 12.8 1.7 1.3C 3 FRACAR 9 0 3C 4 FRACAR 8.1 2.5 2C 5 FRACAR 20.6 3.2 0.3C 6 FRACAR 8.4 3.3 3C 7 FRACAR 5.7 3.5 3.5 DEADC 8 FRACAR 11.5 4.4 3.2C 9 FRACAR 15.9 4 5C 10 FICAUR 1.8 4.6 0.2 EPIPHYTICD 1 FRACAR 22 0 1.5D 2 FRACAR-STEM 1 8.5 0.5 4D 2 FRACAR-STEM 2 9 0.5 4D 3 FRACAR 13.5 2 0.5D 4 FRACAR 7.8 3.5 0D 5 FRACAR 16.1 4.6 0.6D 6 FRACAR 16.7 3.1 1.7D 7 FRACAR 9.5 3.3 2.2D 8 FRACAR 20.8 3.3 3.8D 9 FRACAR 8.9 4.7 4E 1 FRACAR 13 1 1.7E 2 ACERUB 5 0.2 4.8E 3 FRACAR 10.3 1.7 5E 4 FRACAR 6.3 2 1.2 DEADE 5 FRACAR 4.6 3.1 2E 6 FRACAR 22 3.2 2.1E 7 FRACAR 7.7 3.3 3.6 DEADE 8 FRACAR 8 4.3 4.4E 9 FRACAR 7.9 4.5 2.7 DEADE 10 FRACAR 10.3 4.7 2.5


E 11 FRACAR 3.8 4.7 0.5 DEADF 1 FRACAR 14.5 0.1 0.1F 2 FRACAR 10.9 0.7 0.1F 3 FRACAR 6.8 0.1 0.7 DEAD-SPROUTF 4 FRACAR 9.1 0.1 2F 5 FRACAR 11 0.1 3.8F 6 FRACAR 15.9 1 4F 7 FRACAR 11.8 1.7 1F 8 FICAUR 0.7 2 1.1 EPIPHYTICF 9 FRACAR 14.4 3.5 0.8F 10 FRACAR 9 3.4 0.9F 11 FRACAR 5.1 3.6 0.7 DEAD-SPROUTF 12 FRACAR 8.4 4.3 3F 13 TAXDIS 17.5 4 3.1F 14 FRACAR 11.8 4.3 3.4F 15 FRACAR 14.6 4.9 4.4F 16 FRACAR 12 3.5 3G 1 FRACAR 12.3 2.5 2.2G 2 FRACAR 15.7 2 3.2G 3 FRACAR 9.4 4.3 5G 4 FRACAR 11.9 4.7 4.2G 5 TAXDIS 7.2 4.5 0.2H 1 FRACAR 12.8 2 1H 2 FICAUR 4.2 2.5 0 EPIPHYTICH 3 FRACAR 11.8 2 2H 4 TAXDIS 18.5 2.3 5H 5 FRACAR-STEM 1 13.4 3.4 3.6H 5 FRACAR-STEM 2 11.6 3.4 3.6H 6 ACERUB 20.3 3.5 3.6H 7 FRACAR 16 3.6 3.5I 1 TAXDIS 6 1.4 3I 2 FRACAR-STEM 1 6 2.5 0.6I 2 FRACAR-STEM 2 14.4 2.5 0.6 DEADI 2 FRACAR-STEM 3 4.9 2.5 0.6I 3 CHRICA-STEM 1 0.6 4.8 2.3I 3 CHRICA-STEM 2 1 4.8 2.3I 3 CHRICA-STEM 3 3 4.8 2.3I 3 CHRICA-STEM 4 4.3 4.8 2.3I 3 CHRICA-STEM 5 0.8 4.8 2.3I 3 CHRICA-STEM 6 0.8 4.8 2.3I 4 CHRICA 1.7 4.4 2.4J 1 FRACAR 11.2 2.5 0.1J 2 ACERUB 8.4 2.5 1.5J 3 TAXDIS 21 0 1.2J 4 ACERUB 11.5 2.8 4.5J 5 ANNGLA 1 2.7 4.4J 6 ANNGLA 0.9 4 4.3K 1 ACERUB 20 0 2.7K 2 ACERUB 10.9 0.4 3.5K 3 ANNGLA 1.7 2.8 181


K 4 ANNGLA 0.6 3 2.5L 1 ANNGLA-STEM 1 3 1.5 3.5L 1 ANNGLA-STEM 2 2.5 1.5 3.5L 2 CHRICA-STEM 1 3.2 2.5 4L 2 CHRICA-STEM 2 4.3 2.5 4L 2 CHRICA-STEM 3 3.5 2.5 4L 3 SABPAL 42 4.8 0.1M 1 SABPAL 5.2 1.4 1.4M 2 SABPAL 17.2 1.5 1.5M 3 SABPAL 5.8 1.6 1.6M 4 SABPAL 35 2.4 1M 5 ACERUB 14 2.5 1M 6 TAXDIS 25.7 1.5 1.6M 7 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.9 2.4 1.7M 7 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.7 2.4 1.7M 8 CHRICA 1.6 2.5 1.4M 9 CHRICA 2.5 4.5 4.8M 10 CHRICA 2.8 3.9 4.9M 11 TAXDIS 7 5 3M 12 CHRICA 4 3 4.9N 1 SABPAL 30.4 0.7 1N 2 ACERUB 34.8 1.6 1 DEAD; UNCERTAIN IDN 3 TAXDIS 13.5 3 1N 4 TAXDIS 18.4 2.6 2.5N 5 CHRICA-STEM 1 6 1.6 4.7N 5 CHRICA-STEM 2 2.1 1.6 4.7N 6 CHRICA-STEM 1 2.5 2.7 4.9N 6 CHRICA-STEM 2 2.6 2.7 4.9N 6 CHRICA-STEM 3 4.1 2.7 4.9N 7 TAXDIS 30.3 4.8 4.8N 8 SABPAL 7 4.7 3.2O 1 CHRICA 2.5 1.5 0O 2 SABPAL 16.7 1.6 0O 3 SABPAL 27.7 0 3.5 DBHO 4 TAXDIS 12 1.5 5O 5 CHRICA 4.7 2.5 2O 6 FICAUR 12.7 5 5O 7 SABPAL 24 4.7 3.1O 8 SABPAL 21 5 2.9O 9 FRACAR 25 3 0.1 2 STEMS FUSEDP 1 CHRICA 3.1 1.5 3.7P 2 TAXDIS 6.7 1 3.5P 3 CHRICA-STEM 1 3.7 0.7 3P 3 CHRICA-STEM 2 3.2 0.7 3P 3 CHRICA-STEM 3 3.2 0.7 3P 4 CHRICA-STEM 1 1.5 1.4 2.5P 4 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.4 1.4 2.5P 5 CHRICA 3.3 1.5 1.7P 6 CHRICA 1.1 1.7 1.3P 7 TAXDIS 22.5 1.5 1.282


P 8 CHRICA 2.2 2.5 0.9P 9 TAXDIS 9.4 3.3 0.7P 10 CHRICA-STEM 1 1.4 3.7 0.7P 10 CHRICA-STEM 2 3.4 3.7 0.7P 11 CHRICA 3.5 4.3 0.3P 12 TAXDIS 4.5 3.5 1.7P 13 TAXDIS 8.4 4 1.8P 14 TAXDIS 17 4.3 1.9P 15 CHRICA 2.9 3.2 1.7P 16 CHRICA-STEM 1 0.9 3 3.3P 16 CHRICA-STEM 2 0.8 3 3.3P 17 CHRICA 20 4.2 3.3P 18 CHRICA 7.5 4.1 3.1P 19 CHRICA 1.6 4.2 2.6P 20 CHRICA 1.8 4.6 3.1P 21 CHRICA 3 4.6 3.2Q 1 CHRICA 4.3 1.9 1.8Q 2 CHRICA 2.2 2 1.7Q 3 FICAUR 7.9 2 2.7Q 4 TAXDIS 23.4 4.3 0.5Q 5 TAXDIS 21.7 4.4 0.6Q 6 SABPAL 9.8 4 0.8Q 7 CHRICA 4.8 3.3 4.8Q 8 ACERUB 26 3.5 4.9Q 9 SABPAL 13 4.8 4.5Q 10 CHRICA-STEM 1 2.5 5 1.5Q 10 CHRICA-STEM 2 4.9 5 1.5Q 10 CHRICA-STEM 3 2.8 5 1.5Q 10 CHRICA-STEM 4 2.6 5 1.5Q 11 FICAUR-STEM 1 6.3 4.4 4.3Q 12 FICAUR-STEM 2 4 4.4 4.3R 1 FRACAR 13.5 0.5 4.8R 2 FRACAR-STEM 1 14.8 3 5R 2 FRACAR-STEM 2 8.5 3 5R 3 FRACAR 16.9 4.6 5R 4 CHRICA-STEM 1 3 2.8 2.1R 4 CHRICA-STEM 2 5 2.8 2.1R 5 SABPAL 29.8 4 0.5R 6 FRACAR 10.9 5 0.4S 1 FRACAR-STEM 1 14.2 0.5 0.7S 1 FRACAR-STEM 2 12.6 0.5 0.7S 1 FRACAR-STEM 3 0.7 0.5 0.7S 2 CHRICA 3.3 1.2 3S 3 CHRICA 1.7 1.2 3.2S 4 CHRICA 1.9 1.5 1.5S 5 CHRICA-STEM 1 1.8 1.8 2S 5 CHRICA-STEM 2 2.8 1.8 2S 5 CHRICA-STEM 3 1.8 1.8 2S 6 TAXDIS 17 2 2.8S 7 TAXDIS 28.8 2.5 383


84S 8 FRACAR-STEM 1 7.6 4.7 2.8S 8 FRACAR-STEM 2 10.5 4.7 2.8S 9 TAXDIS 11.7 4 4.5S 10 FRACAR 10.8 3.1 2.9Transect3Plot Tree # Species dbh x coord. y coord. commentsA 1 FRACAR 12 1.7 4A 2 FRACAR 24.8 2.3 2.7A 3 FRACAR-STEM 1 4.4 0.7 1.5A 3 FRACAR-STEM 2 4.8 0.7 1.5A 3 FRACAR-STEM 3 10.9 0.7 1.5A 4 FRACAR-STEM 1 12.1 0.7 1A 4 FRACAR-STEM 2 14 0.7 1A 5 FRACAR 9.1 2.5 1.5A 6 FRACAR 9.7 2.8 2.2A 7 FRACAR 10.1 4 1.5A 8 FRACAR 11.3 4.3 1.3A 9 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.5 4.9 5A 9 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1 4.9 5A 9 RAPPUN-STEM 3 1.5 4.9 5A 9 RAPPUN-STEM 4 1.3 4.9 5A 9 RAPPUN-STEM 5 2.5 4.9 5A 9 RAPPUN-STEM 6 1.5 4.9 5A 9 RAPPUN-STEM 7 1.8 4.9 5A 9 RAPPUN-STEM 8 1.5 4.9 5A 9 RAPPUN-STEM 9 3.75 4.9 5B 1 FRACAR-STEM 1 13.2 1.5 1.7B 1 FRACAR-STEM 2 7 1.5 1.7B 2 FRACAR-STEM 1 20.2 1 0.5B 2 FRACAR-STEM 2 11.2 1 0.5B 3 ITEVIR 3.8 2.3 2.4B 4 CHRICA-STEM 1 2 3.4 0.8B 4 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.6 3.4 0.8B 4 CHRICA-STEM 3 2 3.4 0.8B 4 CHRICA-STEM 4 1.3 3.4 0.8B 4 CHRICA-STEM 5 1.8 3.4 0.8B 4 CHRICA-STEM 6 1.5 3.4 0.8B 4 CHRICA-STEM 7 1.8 3.4 0.8B 4 CHRICA-STEM 8 1.9 3.4 0.8B 4 CHRICA-STEM 9 2.1 3.4 0.8B 4 CHRICA-STEM 1.5 3.4 0.810B 4 CHRICA-STEM 1.5 3.4 0.811B 4 CHRICA-STEM 3.2 3.4 0.812B 4 CHRICA-STEM 1.6 3.4 0.813B 4 CHRICA-STEM 1.3 3.4 0.8


8514B 4 CHRICA-STEM 2.4 3.4 0.815B 5 FRACAR 11 4.4 3B 6 FRACAR 9.3 4.8 3.4B 7 CHRICA 1.7 4 1C 1 FRACAR 9.1 1.5 0.5C 2 FRACAR 6.1 3.4 0.2C 3 ITEVIR-STEM 1 2.3 3.5 3.4C 3 ITEVIR-STEM 2 2.3 3.5 3.4C 4 ITEVIR 7.3 3.5 3.5D 1 FRACAR-STEM 1 18.1 0 2 knot at 1.3m, stem 1&2 inplot CD 1 FRACAR-STEM 2 17.5 0 2 stem 1&2 in plot CD 1 FRACAR-STEM 3 14.9 0 2D 1 FRACAR-STEM 4 32.3 0 2D 1 FRACAR-STEM 5 18.2 0 2D 1 FRACAR-STEM 6 7.3 0 2D 1 FRACAR-STEM 7 5.2 0 2D 1 FRACAR-STEM 8 4.9 0 2D 1 FRACAR-STEM 9 10.8 0 2D 2 FRACAR 9.5 4 1.8D 3 FRACAR 9.9 4.9 2.4E 1 FRACAR 10.9 0.1 2.3 DEADE 2 FRACAR-STEM 1 11.8 1.5 0E 2 FRACAR-STEM 2 9.2 1.5 0E 3 FRACAR-STEM 1 15.2 1.5 2E 3 FRACAR-STEM 2 14.9 1.5 2E 3 FRACAR-STEM 3 19.6 1.5 2F 1 FRACAR 14.2 0.3 1.3F 2 FRACAR 7.5 0.7 0F 3 FRACAR-STEM 1 22.7 1.2 0.7F 3 FRACAR-STEM 2 7.6 1.2 0.7F 3 FRACAR-STEM 3 11.7 1.2 0.7F 4 FRACAR 16.7 1.8 0F 5 FRACAR 13 3.5 1F 6 ANNGLA-STEM 1 3.5 5 1F 6 ANNGLA-STEM 2 4 5 1F 7 FRACAR-STEM 1 7.8 3.7 4F 7 FRACAR-STEM 2 6.7 3.7 4F 7 FRACAR-STEM 3 10.3 3.7 4G 1 FRACAR-STEM 1 16.7 1.5 1.3G 1 FRACAR-STEM 2 10.7 1.5 1.3G 2 RAPPUN-STEM 1 2.8 1.7 4.6G 2 RAPPUN-STEM 2 2.8 1.7 4.6G 3 PERPAL 1.8 1.8 4.6G 4 FRACAR-stem 1 20.8 4.8 4.3H 1 TAXDIS 52.5 0.2 0.2H 2 FRACAR 2.5 0.2 2.1H 3 CHRICA-STEM 1 2.4 1.5 4.5H 3 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.5 1.5 4.5H 3 CHRICA-STEM 3 1.7 1.5 4.5


H 4 FRACAR 14.6 2.5 3.2H 5 ITEVIR-STEM 1 1 2.4 3.3H 5 ITEVIR-STEM 2 1.4 2.4 3.3H 5 ITEVIR-STEM 3 0.9 2.4 3.3H 5 ITEVIR-STEM 4 1.1 2.4 3.3H 5 ITEVIR-STEM 5 0.9 2.4 3.3H 5 ITEVIR-STEM 6 1.6 2.4 3.3H 6 ANNGLA-STEM 1 5 3 3.2H 6 ANNGLA-STEM 2 2.6 3 3.2H 7 QUELAU 28.9 4.9 3.5H 8 CHRICA 2.4 4.7 3.5H 9 CHRICA-STEM 1 1.3 4.8 1.5H 9 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.8 4.8 1.5H 10 TAXDIS 18.4 1.3 0.3H 11 FICAUR 3.8 2.5 0.3H 12 CHRICA 1.3 2 4.8I 1 FRACAR-STEM 1 15.4 0.8 0I 1 FRACAR-STEM 2 6.2 0.8 0I 2 PERPAL 3.4 0 1.8I 3 CHRICA 3.2 0.8 3I 4 CHRICA-STEM 1 1.4 0.3 3I 4 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.3 0.3 3I 5 FICAUR-STEM 1 6.3 1.5 3.3I 5 FICAUR-STEM 2 3.5 1.5 3.3I 5 FICAUR-STEM 3 3.3 1.5 3.3I 6 QUELAU 45.7 2 5 DEAD-PROSTRATE;I 7 CHRICA-STEM 1 1.4 1.3 2.5 DAMAGED IN WILMA?I 7 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.6 1.3 2.5I 7 CHRICA-STEM 3 1.6 1.3 2.5I 7 CHRICA-STEM 4 4.2 1.3 2.5I 8 CHRICA-STEM 1 1.1 1.6 2.8I 8 CHRICA-STEM 2 3.4 1.6 2.8I 8 CHRICA-STEM 3 1.5 1.6 2.8I 8 CHRICA-STEM 4 3.7 1.6 2.8I 9 CHRICA 1.7 1.8 2.5I 10 CHRICA-STEM 1 2.3 2.3 2.3I 10 CHRICA-STEM 2 3.1 2.3 2.3I 10 CHRICA-STEM 3 3.7 2.3 2.3I 11 CHRICA-STEM 1 1.2 2.3 0.4I 11 CHRICA-STEM 2 0.6 2.3 0.4I 11 CHRICA-STEM 3 0.7 2.3 0.4I 11 CHRICA-STEM 4 2.1 2.3 0.4I 12 CHRICA-STEM 1 1.3 4.3 2.4I 12 CHRICA-STEM 2 0.8 4.3 2.4I 12 CHRICA-STEM 3 0.7 4.3 2.4I 12 CHRICA-STEM 4 1.5 4.3 2.4I 12 CHRICA-STEM 5 0.6 4.3 2.4I 12 CHRICA-STEM 6 1.2 4.3 2.4I 13 FICAUR-STEM 1 9.3 5 4.3I 13 FICAUR-STEM 2 8.4 5 4.3J 1 ANNGLA 10.3 1.5 0.8J 2 CHRICA-STEM 1 7.5 3.6 0.786


J 2 CHRICA-STEM 2 2.1 3.6 0.7J 2 CHRICA-STEM 3 3.1 3.6 0.7J 2 CHRICA-STEM 4 1.2 3.6 0.7J 2 CHRICA-STEM 5 3.8 3.6 0.7J 2 CHRICA-STEM 6 1 3.6 0.7J 2 CHRICA-STEM 7 4.3 3.6 0.7J 2 CHRICA-STEM 8 2.1 3.6 0.7J 2 CHRICA-STEM 9 1.9 3.6 0.7J 3 ILECAS 8.8 3.4 0J 4 RAPPUN 1.2 4 2.5J 5 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.7 4.3 3.2J 5 RAPPUN-STEM 2 2.5 4.3 3.2J 6 ITEVIR-STEM 1 2 3.3 4J 6 ITEVIR-STEM 2 2.1 3.3 4J 6 ITEVIR-STEM 3 1 3.3 4J 6 ITEVIR-STEM 4 1.2 3.3 4J 6 ITEVIR-STEM 5 1.2 3.3 4J 6 ITEVIR-STEM 6 1.2 3.3 4J 6 ITEVIR-STEM 7 1.1 3.3 4J 6 ITEVIR-STEM 8 0.9 3.3 4J 6 ITEVIR-STEM 9 0.6 3.3 4J 7 ITEVIR-STEM 1 1.3 2.5 4J 7 ITEVIR-STEM 2 1 2.5 4J 7 ITEVIR-STEM 3 1.5 2.5 4J 7 ITEVIR-STEM 4 1.4 2.5 4J 7 ITEVIR-STEM 5 1.1 2.5 4J 7 ITEVIR-STEM 6 1 2.5 4J 7 ITEVIR-STEM 7 0.7 2.5 4J 7 ITEVIR-STEM 8 0.7 2.5 4J 7 ITEVIR-STEM 9 0.6 2.5 4J 7 ITEVIR-STEM 10 0.7 2.5 4J 8 ANNGLA 9.1 2.7 3.5J 9 ITEVIR-STEM 1 1.4 2 3.6J 9 ITEVIR-STEM 2 1.1 2 3.6J 9 ITEVIR-STEM 3 1.6 2 3.6J 9 ITEVIR-STEM 4 1.6 2 3.6J 9 ITEVIR-STEM 5 2.2 2 3.6J 10 CHRICA-STEM 1 1 0 3.7J 10 CHRICA-STEM 2 1 0 3.7J 10 CHRICA-STEM 3 0.6 0 3.7J 10 CHRICA-STEM 4 2 0 3.7J 10 CHRICA-STEM 5 0.9 0 3.7J 10 CHRICA-STEM 6 0.9 0 3.7K 1 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.7 0 4K 1 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.9 0 4K 1 RAPPUN-STEM 3 1.2 0 4K 2 RAPPUN 1.2 0.5 4.5K 3 ITEVIR 0.6 0.8 4.5K 4 CHRICA 1.8 0.7 3.5K 5 QUELAU-STEM 1 35.5 1.6 1.8K 5 QUELAU-STEM 2 1.1 1.6 1.8K 6 PERPAL-STEM 1 1 2.5 087


K 6 PERPAL-STEM 2 1.7 2.5 0K 6 PERPAL-STEM 3 1.5 2.5 0K 7 ILECAS-STEM 1 4.8 4.8 1.3K 7 ILECAS-STEM 2 2.6 4.8 1.3K 7 ILECAS-STEM 3 7.6 4.8 1.3L 1 ITEVIR 3.2 1 1.3L 2 CHRICA-STEM 1 2.9 1.3 0L 2 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.6 1.3 0L 3 FRACAR-STEM 1 6 4 2L 3 FRACAR-STEM 2 13 4 2L 4 FICAUR 9.4 3 3L 5 ITEVIR-STEM 1 1.3 4.5 4.5L 5 ITEVIR-STEM 2 1 4.5 4.5L 5 ITEVIR-STEM 3 1 4.5 4.5L 5 ITEVIR-STEM 4 1 4.5 4.5L 5 ITEVIR-STEM 5 3.1 4.5 4.5L 6 FRACAR 3.1 4 3.6L 7 RAPPUN-STEM 1 3.1 4.1 3.5L 7 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.7 4.1 3.5M 1 TAXDIS 82.4 0.5 0.5 2 FUSED STEMSM 2 ILECAS 9.5 0.4 4M 3 FRACAR-STEM 1 9.8 3.7 4.7M 3 FRACAR-STEM 2 18.9 3.7 4.7M 3 FRACAR-STEM 3 9.8 3.7 4.7M 4 XIMAME-STEM 1 6.7 4 3.5M 4 XIMAME-STEM 2 4.1 4 3.5M 4 XIMAME-STEM 3 5.7 4 3.5M 5 RAPPUN 5.7 3 2M 6 FRACAR 11.7 3 0M 7 ILECAS-STEM 1 1.7 4.7 0.2M 7 ILECAS-STEM 2 1.2 4.7 0.2N 1 FRACAR 3.9 2.6 4N 2 ITEVIR-STEM 1 0.6 3.6 3.3N 2 ITEVIR-STEM 2 1.2 3.6 3.3N 2 ITEVIR-STEM 3 0.8 3.6 3.3N 2 ITEVIR-STEM 4 1.8 3.6 3.3N 2 ITEVIR-STEM 5 1.3 3.6 3.3N 2 ITEVIR-STEM 6 1.7 3.6 3.3N 2 ITEVIR-STEM 7 1.1 3.6 3.3N 2 ITEVIR-STEM 8 1.9 3.6 3.3N 2 ITEVIR-STEM 9 1.3 3.6 3.3N 3 FICAUR 3 4.6 3N 4 ITEVIR-STEM 1 1.3 4.6 2.5N 4 ITEVIR-STEM 2 1 4.6 2.5N 4 ITEVIR-STEM 3 1 4.6 2.5N 4 ITEVIR-STEM 4 0.9 4.6 2.5N 4 ITEVIR-STEM 5 1.1 4.6 2.5N 5 PSYSUL 0.7 4.5 2.4N 6 FRACAR 2.4 4 1.8N 7 FRACAR-STEM 1 6.4 3.5 1.5N 7 FRACAR-STEM 2 18.6 3.5 1.5N 8 PERPAL 1.6 1.7 4.588


O 1 FRACAR-STEM 1 19.2 1.3 1.3O 1 FRACAR-STEM 2 3.2 1.3 1.3O 1 FRACAR-STEM 3 4 1.3 1.3O 1 FRACAR-STEM 4 1.8 1.3 1.3O 2 FRACAR 6.1 0.7 2O 3 CHRICA-STEM 1 7 3.7 3O 3 CHRICA-STEM 2 7.1 3.7 3O 3 CHRICA-STEM 3 5.5 3.7 3O 3 CHRICA-STEM 4 4.2 3.7 3O 4 FRACAR 8.3 2 4.7O 5 FRACAR 17.7 1.6 4O 6 PERPAL-STEM 1 4.1 5 4.2O 6 PERPAL-STEM 2 1.6 5 4.2P 1 RAPPUN 2.1 1 4.7P 2 PERPAL-STEM 1 9.1 1.3 4.4P 2 PERPAL-STEM 2 9.3 1.3 4.4P 2 PERPAL-STEM 3 7.4 1.3 4.4P 3 FICAUR-STEM 1 9.2 1.5 2P 3 FICAUR-STEM 2 7.5 1.5 2P 4 RAPPUN-STEM 1 2.1 1.5 2P 4 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.8 1.5 2P 5 FICAUR 4 1 3.8P 6 FICAUR 5.7 0.2 4.1P 7 FRACAR-STEM 1 13.2 3.7 1P 7 FRACAR-STEM 2 10.8 3.7 1P 8 ITEVIR-STEM 1 1.5 3.7 4.6P 8 ITEVIR-STEM 2 1.7 3.7 4.6P 8 ITEVIR-STEM 3 2.6 3.7 4.6P 8 ITEVIR-STEM 4 0.9 3.7 4.6P 8 ITEVIR-STEM 5 0.8 3.7 4.6P 8 ITEVIR-STEM 6 1 3.7 4.6P 9 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1 DIDN'T GET MAPPEDP 9 RAPPUN-STEM 2 2.2Q 1 FICAUR-STEM 1 2.5 1.5 4.5Q 1 FICAUR-STEM 2 2 1.5 4.5Q 2 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1 3.7 3.7Q 2 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.5 3.7 3.7Q 3 RAPPUN 1 1.5 3.5Q 4 RAPPUN 0.7 2 3Q 5 RAPPUN 2.4 2 2.8Q 6 PERPAL-STEM 1 4.2 2 2.7Q 6 PERPAL-STEM 2 3 2 2.7Q 6 PERPAL-STEM 3 10.5 2 2.7Q 7 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.5 4.5 4Q 7 RAPPUN-STEM 2 3.5 4.5 4Q 8 PERPAL 1.3 4.5 4Q 9 RAPPUN 1.2 4.5 3.9Q 10 RAPPUN 0.5 3.5 3Q 11 RAPPUN 2.6 3 3Q 12 CHRICA-STEM 1 3.2 2.3 1.5Q 12 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.2 2.3 1.5Q 12 CHRICA-STEM 3 0.8 2.3 1.589


Q 12 CHRICA-STEM 4 0.7 2.3 1.5Q 12 CHRICA-STEM 5 0.8 2.3 1.5Q 12 CHRICA-STEM 6 0.7 2.3 1.5Q 13 RAPPUN-STEM 1 2.3 2.3 1.5Q 13 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.7 2.3 1.5Q 14 CHRICA 2.3 4 0.8Q 15 RAPPUN 4 4.8 2R 1 FICAUR 8.7 0.3 2R 2 RAPPUN 0.9 0.3 2R 3 FRACAR-STEM 1 13.9 3 2R 3 FRACAR-STEM 2 7.5 3 2R 3 FRACAR-STEM 3 0.6 3 2R 4 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.8 1.5 3R 4 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.9 1.5 3R 5 CHRICA-STEM 1 1.6 1.5 1.2R 5 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.6 1.5 1.2R 5 CHRICA-STEM 3 1.3 1.5 1.2R 5 CHRICA-STEM 4 5.9 1.5 1.2R 6 RAPPUN 1.1 4 0.5R 7 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.3 4.3 0.7R 7 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.7 4.3 0.7R 8 QUELAU 1.9 3 5S 1 ITEVIR-STEM 1 2.3 0 1.5S 1 ITEVIR-STEM 2 1.3 0 1.5S 1 ITEVIR-STEM 3 1.3 0 1.5S 1 ITEVIR-STEM 4 0.8 0 1.5S 1 ITEVIR-STEM 5 1.2 0 1.5S 1 ITEVIR-STEM 6 1.4 0 1.5S 1 ITEVIR-STEM 7 1.7 0 1.5S 2 FICAUR 2.8 2 2S 3 FRACAR-STEM 1 4.9 2.6 0.5S 3 FRACAR-STEM 2 23.7 2.6 0.5S 5 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.8 5 2 HEAD HIGH ON LARGETAXDIS STUMPS 5 RAPPUN-STEM 2 4 5 2 HEAD HIGH ON LARGETAXDIS STUMPS 6 RAPPUN-STEM 1 3.2 5 3S 6 RAPPUN-STEM 2 3.5 5 3S 7 CHRICA-STEM 1 2.9 4.5 4S 7 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.8 4.5 4S 8 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.9 4.6 4.7S 8 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.8 4.6 4.7S 9 CHRICA-STEM 1 1.2 2 5S 9 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.1 2 5S 9 CHRICA-STEM 3 1.4 2 5S 9 CHRICA-STEM 4 1.3 2 5S 9 CHRICA-STEM 5 5.6 2 5S 9 CHRICA-STEM 6 6.5 2 5S 9 CHRICA-STEM 7 3.7 2 5S 10 CHRICA-STEM 1 2.1 5 3.9S 10 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.4 5 3.9T 1 PERPAL-STEM 1 2.7 0.7 0.590


91T 1 PERPAL-STEM 2 2.4 0.7 0.5T 2 RAPPUN 4.1 1.6 1.7T 3 RAPPUN-STEM 1 5 2 2T 3 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.2 2 2T 3 RAPPUN-STEM 3 0.7 2 2T 3 RAPPUN-STEM 4 0.7 2 2T 3 RAPPUN-STEM 5 1.3 2 2T 3 RAPPUN-STEM 6 2.3 2 2T 3 RAPPUN-STEM 7 1.9 2 2T 3 RAPPUN-STEM 8 1.3 2 2T 3 RAPPUN-STEM 9 0.7 2 2T 3 RAPPUN-STEM 0.7 2 210T 3 RAPPUN-STEM 2.6 2 211T 3 RAPPUN-STEM 1.7 2 212T 3 RAPPUN-STEM 0.8 2 213T 4 RAPPUN 1.2 2.1 1.8T 5 RAPPUN-STEM 1 3.1 1.6 1.8T 5 RAPPUN-STEM 2 2.9 1.6 1.8T 6 RAPPUN 0.7 1.5 2T 7 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.8 2 2.5T 7 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.8 2 2.5T 8 RAPPUN-STEM 1 3.9 0.8 3T 8 RAPPUN-STEM 2 4 0.8 3T 9 RAPPUN 2 1 3T 10 RAPPUN 2 0.7 2.9T 11 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.5 1.1 3.2T 11 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.5 1.1 3.2T 12 RAPPUN 0.7 1.2 3.4T 13 RAPPUN 0.6 1.1 3.5T 14 RAPPUN 1.3 0.6 3.5T 15 RAPPUN 0.7 1 3.7T 16 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.6 DIDN'T GET MAPPEDT 16 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.1T 17 FRACAR 20.2 0.4 4.9T 18 RAPPUN 1.8 0.2 4.8T 19 RAPPUN 0.5 2 3.5T 20 RAPPUN 0.6 1.9 3.4T 21 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.6 3.8 3.3T 21 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.8 3.8 3.3T 21 RAPPUN-STEM 3 1.4 3.8 3.3T 22 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.1 3.6 2T 22 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.7 3.6 2T 22 RAPPUN-STEM 3 0.6 3.6 2T 22 RAPPUN-STEM 4 1.1 3.6 2T 22 RAPPUN-STEM 5 1.1 3.6 2T 23 RAPPUN-STEM 1 2.5 3.7 1.6T 23 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.8 3.7 1.6T 23 RAPPUN-STEM 3 1 3.7 1.6T 23 RAPPUN-STEM 4 0.6 3.7 1.6


T 23 RAPPUN-STEM 5 1.4 3.7 1.6T 23 RAPPUN-STEM 6 1.8 3.7 1.6T 24 RAPPUN 1 3.5 0.5T 25 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.6 3.6 0.4T 25 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.6 3.6 0.4T 26 RAPPUN 1.3 3.3 1.3T 27 RAPPUN 1.3 3 1.3T 28 RAPPUN 0.7 3.7 1U 1 PERPAL-STEM 1 6.3 1.7 1.2U 1 PERPAL-STEM 2 3 1.7 1.2U 1 PERPAL-STEM 3 1.8 1.7 1.2U 1 PERPAL-STEM 4 2.4 1.7 1.2U 1 PERPAL-STEM 5 0.7 1.7 1.2U 1 PERPAL-STEM 6 0.8 1.7 1.2U 2 CHRICA 3.1 1.1 0.6U 3 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.6 1 2.7U 3 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.5 1 2.7U 4 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.5 1.6 3U 4 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.5 1.6 3U 5 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.1 1.5 3.3U 5 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.8 1.5 3.3U 6 RAPPUN 1.6 1.4 3.2U 7 RAPPUN 2.6 1.5 3.6U 8 XIMAME 1.8 1.5 4U 9 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.7 0.3 4.8U 9 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.1 0.3 4.8U 10 RAPPUN 2 1.3 4.9U 11 RAPPUN 1.7 1.6 4.8U 12 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.8 1.7 4.9U 12 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.5 1.7 4.9U 13 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.4 2.8 4.9U 13 RAPPUN-STEM 2 2.5 2.8 4.9U 14 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.3 2.1 4.7U 14 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.7 2.1 4.7U 15 RAPPUN-STEM 1 3.1 2 4.5U 15 RAPPUN-STEM 2 4 2 4.5U 17 SCHTER-STEM 1 3 2.8 3.7U 17 SCHTER-STEM 2 3.9 2.8 3.7U 18 FICAUR 5 3.1 5U 19 CHRICA 0.8 3.6 1.2U 20 FRACAR 10.1 3.1 2.1V 1 FRACAR 14.5 1 0.6V 2 QUELAU 32.2 2.5 2V 3 ANNGLA 0.5 0.9 0.5V 4 FRACAR-STEM 1 2.1 0.8 1.5V 4 FRACAR-STEM 2 1 0.8 1.5V 5 CHRICA-STEM 1 1.5 0.9 1.5V 5 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.3 0.9 1.5V 5 CHRICA-STEM 3 2.2 0.9 1.5V 6 ANNGLA-STEM 1 1.5 1 3.8V 6 ANNGLA-STEM 2 1 1 3.8V 7 ANNGLA 1.8 0.3 4.792


93V 8 CHRICA 1.5 2 2.7V 9 PERPAL-STEM 1 1.8 4 2V 9 PERPAL-STEM 2 1.6 4 2V 9 PERPAL-STEM 3 1.2 4 2V 10 BACSPP 0.8 4 0V 11 ANNGLA 4.6 2.7 3V 12 RAPPUN 2.8 3.1 3.2V 13 RAPPUN 1.3 3 2.8V 14 RAPPUN 4.6 2.8 3.8V 15 CHRICA-STEM 1 1.3 3.3 4.6V 15 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.1 3.3 4.6V 16 RAPPUN 2 3 4.5V 17 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.5 3.2 4.2V 17 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.3 3.2 4.2Transect 4PlotTree# Species dbhxcoord.ycoord. commentsA 1 FRACAR 6.7 0.0 4.0A 2 FRACAR-STEM 1 10.1 2.0 5.0A 2 FRACAR-STEM 2 9.1 2.0 5.0 DEAD-WILMA?A 2 FRACAR-STEM 3 8.4 2.0 5.0 DEAD-WILMA?A 3 ANNGLA-STEM 1 3.8 3.5 2.0A 3 ANNGLA-STEM 2 3.3 3.5 2.0A 3 ANNGLA-STEM 3 7.8 3.5 2.0TREE 2 & 3 HAVE ACERUBON TOP,B 1 TAXDIS 48.8 0.0 5.0 BLOWN DOWN BY WILMA?B 2 RAPPUN-STEM 1 2.7 1.5 2.0B 2 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.9 1.5 2.0B 2 RAPPUN-STEM 3 0.8 1.5 2.0B 2 RAPPUN-STEM 4 0.5 1.5 2.0B 2 RAPPUN-STEM 5 0.6 1.5 2.0B 2 RAPPUN-STEM 6 0.6 1.5 2.0B 2 RAPPUN-STEM 7 1.0 1.5 2.0B 2 RAPPUN-STEM 8 0.6 1.5 2.0B 3 ANNGLA-STEM 1 6.2 2.5 0.0B 3 ANNGLA-STEM 2 6.0 2.5 0.0B 3 ANNGLA-STEM 3 2.8 2.5 0.0B 3 ANNGLA-STEM 4 5.9 2.5 0.0B 3 ANNGLA-STEM 5 6.2 2.5 0.0B 3 ANNGLA-STEM 6 6.7 2.5 0.0B 4 ANNGLA-STEM 1 5.5 5.0 0.0B 4 ANNGLA-STEM 2 5.4 5.0 0.0B 4 ANNGLA-STEM 3 5.3 5.0 0.0B 4 ANNGLA-STEM 4 2.2 5.0 0.0B 5 FRACAR-STEM 1 11.6 4.7 1.5B 5 FRACAR-STEM 2 6.2 4.7 1.5B 5 FRACAR-STEM 3 5.2 4.7 1.5B 5 FRACAR-STEM 4 12.0 4.7 1.5B 5 FRACAR-STEM 5 9.0 4.7 1.5


94B 5 FRACAR-STEM 6 11.0 4.7 1.5B 5 FRACAR-STEM 7 11.8 4.7 1.5B 5 FRACAR-STEM 8 13.2 4.7 1.5B 5 FRACAR-STEM 9 8.9 4.7 1.5B 5 FRACAR-STEM 10 8.4 4.7 1.5B 5 FRACAR-STEM 11 9.3 4.7 1.5B 6 ANNGLA-STEM 1 4.9 4.5 1.3B 6 ANNGLA-STEM 2 5.4 4.5 1.3B 7 ANNGLA 5.4 4.6 1.7B 8 FRACAR 19.0 3.7 4.7B 9 FRACAR 13.7 3.9 4.8C 1 PSYSUL 0.6 0.9 0.2C 2 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.7 1.5 0.1C 2 RAPPUN-STEM 2 0.8 1.5 0.1C 2 RAPPUN-STEM 3 1.4 1.5 0.1C 2 RAPPUN-STEM 4 1.2 1.5 0.1C 3 HIPVOL-STEM 1 0.8 1.4 0.2C 3 HIPVOL-STEM 2 0.6 1.4 0.2C 4 FICAUR 4.1 1.3 0.4C 5 ANNGLA-STEM 1 6.1 2.0 3.0C 5 ANNGLA-STEM 2 4.5 2.0 3.0C 5 ANNGLA-STEM 3 7.3 2.0 3.0C 5 ANNGLA-STEM 4 6.9 2.0 3.0C 5 ANNGLA-STEM 5 1.0 2.0 3.0C 6 FRACAR-STEM 1 15.4 4.0 4.0C 6 FRACAR-STEM 2 12.8 4.0 4.0C 6 FRACAR-STEM 3 9.1 4.0 4.0C 6 FRACAR-STEM 4 12.2 4.0 4.0C 6 FRACAR-STEM 5 12.6 4.0 4.0C 6 FRACAR-STEM 6 10.3 4.0 4.0C 7 HIPVOL 1.2 4.1 0.1C 8 FRACAR 17.4 4.4 0.3C 9 ANNGLA 9.1 4.5 0.2C 10 ANNGLA 8.3 4.3 0.1D 1 ANNGLA-STEM 1 5.3 0.5 2.0D 1 ANNGLA-STEM 2 4.5 0.5 2.0D 1 ANNGLA-STEM 3 5.3 0.5 2.0D 1 ANNGLA-STEM 4 3.5 0.5 2.0D 2 FRACAR 16.7 2.0 0.0D 3 ANNGLA 8.0 2.1 0.2D 4 ANNGLA 3.1 2.3 0.1D 5 FRACAR 16.1 4.0 4.6D 6 ANNGLA-STEM 1 6.8 3.8 4.9D 6 ANNGLA-STEM 2 7.9 3.8 4.9E 1 FRACAR 8.1 0.5 3.7E 2 FICAUR-STEM 1 4.6 2.6 3.7E 2 FICAUR-STEM 2 4.6 2.6 3.7E 2 FICAUR-STEM 3 4.6 2.6 3.7LONG DEAD-BEFOREWILMALONG DEAD-BEFOREWILMALONG DEAD-BEFOREWILMA


95E 2 FICAUR-STEM 4 3.8 2.6 3.7LONG DEAD-BEFOREWILMAE 2 FICAUR-STEM 5 1.5 2.6 3.7LONG DEAD-BEFOREWILMAE 2 FICAUR-STEM 6 1.5 2.6 3.7LONG DEAD-BEFOREWILMAE 3 FRACAR 16.5 3.6 4.7E 4 FRACAR 16.3 1.5 1.5E 5 FRACAR-STEM 1 10.1 1.5 0.5E 5 FRACAR-STEM 2 7.7 1.5 0.5E 5 FRACAR-STEM 3 14.4 1.5 0.5E 5 FRACAR-STEM 4 9.8 1.5 0.5E 6 FRACAR 12.5 2.6 0.0E 7 HIPVOL 1.7 2.8 3.9E 8 FRACAR 8.1 3.3 3.3E 9 FRACAR 4.7 3.2 3.3E 10 FRACAR-STEM 1 7.5 3.5 3.0E 10 FRACAR-STEM 2 6.7 3.5 3.0E 11 ITEVIR 0.7 1.7 0.5F 1 FRACAR 18.1 0.5 4.8F 2 FRACAR-STEM 1 4.0 0.4 4.7F 2 FRACAR-STEM 2 4.8 0.4 4.7F 3 FRACAR-STEM 1 13.3 4.0 4.0F 3 FRACAR-STEM 2 6.0 4.0 4.0F 4 FRACAR 15.2 2.2 4.0F 5 FRACAR 5.4 3.0 4.5F 6 FRACAR 11.5 3.0 3.0F 7 FRACAR 11.5 3.0 1.5F 8 FRACAR 8.9 3.6 1.4F 9 ANNGLA 0.7 3.6 0.0G 1 FRACAR 9.8 0.3 4.0G 2 ANNGLA 3.1 1.3 3.0G 3 FICAUR 3.8 2.0 0.0G 4 RAPPUN-STEM 1 2.6 3.0 0.1G 4 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.6 3.0 0.1G 4 RAPPUN-STEM 3 1.4 3.0 0.1G 4 RAPPUN-STEM 4 1.3 3.0 0.1G 4 RAPPUN-STEM 5 1.1 3.0 0.1G 4 RAPPUN-STEM 6 0.9 3.0 0.1G 4 RAPPUN-STEM 7 1.6 3.0 0.1G 5 FICAUR 3.0 3.2 3.4G 6 ARDESC 3.4 3.2 0.7G 7 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.4 3.4 1.0G 7 RAPPUN-STEM 2 2.1 3.4 1.0G 7 RAPPUN-STEM 3 2.5 3.4 1.0G 8 RAPPUN 1.2 4.5 1.5G 9 RAPPUN-STEM 1 2.4 DID NOT GET MAPPEDG 9 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.5 DID NOT GET MAPPEDG 9 RAPPUN-STEM 3 3.0 DID NOT GET MAPPEDG 10 RAPPUN 2.0 3.0 5.0G 11 CHRICA-STEM 1 2.0 DID NOT GET MAPPED


96G 11 CHRICA-STEM 2 4.3 DID NOT GET MAPPEDG 11 CHRICA-STEM 3 1.5 DID NOT GET MAPPEDG 11 CHRICA-STEM 4 1.2H 1 FRACAR-STEM 1 18.0 0.0 3.5H 1 FRACAR-STEM 2 5.4 0.0 3.5H 2 ILECAS-STEM 1 12.3 4.5 5.0H 2 ILECAS-STEM 2 1.3 4.5 5.0H 2 ILECAS-STEM 3 0.9 4.5 5.0H 2 ILECAS-STEM 4 3.1 4.5 5.0H 3 TAXDIS 11.2 0.0 0.0H 4 SABPAL 42.5 1.5 0.3MEASURE DIAMETER ATBASEH 5 ILECAS 7.4 4.0 4.0H 6 HIPVOL 0.7 4.3 3.7H 7 RAPPUN 0.6 4.3 3.7H6-H10 EPIPHYTICALLYON STUMPH 8 FICAUR 2.2 4.3 3.7H6-H10 EPIPHYTICALLYON STUMPH6-H10 EPIPHYTICALLYH 9 RAPPUN 1.3 4.3 3.7H 10 RAPPUN 1.4 4.3 3.7I 1 FRACAR 13.2 2.5 0.8I 2 FRACAR 10.9 2.5 1.6I 3 FICAUR-STEM 1 7.5 1.5 4.0I 3 FICAUR-STEM 2 8.3 1.5 4.0I 3 FICAUR-STEM 3 8.7 1.5 4.0I 4 HIPVOL 2.9 1.5 3.9I 5 FRACAR 19.5 4.0 4.0I 6 CHRICA-STEM 1 2.9 4.8 3.5I 6 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.2 4.8 3.5I 6 CHRICA-STEM 3 1.9 4.8 3.5I 6 CHRICA-STEM 4 1.5 4.8 3.5I 6 CHRICA-STEM 5 1.1 4.8 3.5I 6 CHRICA-STEM 6 1.2 4.8 3.5I 7 FRACAR-STEM 1 6.8 4.0 1.0I 7 FRACAR-STEM 2 9.0 4.0 1.0J 1 ILECAS-STEM 1 16.9 3.0 1.2J 1 ILECAS-STEM 2 16.2 3.0 1.2J 1 ILECAS-STEM 3 25.8 3.0 1.2J 1 ILECAS-STEM 4 0.7 3.0 1.2J 1 ILECAS-STEM 5 0.9 3.0 1.2J 1 ILECAS-STEM 6 1.4 3.0 1.2J 1 ILECAS-STEM 7 0.7 3.0 1.2J 1 ILECAS-STEM 8 9.4 3.0 1.2J 2 FRACAR 11.9 5.0 4.0J 3 ILECAS-STEM 1 16.2 1.0 5.0J 3 ILECAS-STEM 2 17.5 1.0 5.0J 3 ILECAS-STEM 3 6.0 1.0 5.0J 3 ILECAS-STEM 4 9.3 1.0 5.0K 1 FRACAR 17.7 1.0 3.5ON STUMPH6-H10 EPIPHYTICALLYON STUMP


K 2 ITEVIR 1.8 DID NOT GET MAPPEDL 1 FRACAR 13.5 1.2 2.0L 2 HIPVOL 2.4 1.3 2.3L 3 HIPVOL 3.3 1.4 2.3L 4 ARDESC 2.5 4.2 4.2L 5 EUGAXI 2.2 3.0 4.7L 6 PSYNER 1.1 4.3 3.7L 7 PSYNER-STEM 1 0.8 4.5 3.5L 7 PSYNER-STEM 2 1.5 4.5 3.5L 8 EUGAXI 1.2 3.5 4.7L 9 CHRICA 0.6 4.1 2.2L 10 RAPPUN 0.9 3.0 4.5L 11 PSYNER 0.6 4.3 2.2L 12 RAPPUN 3.6 3.4 4.5L 13 ILECAS-STEM 1 8.2 3.5 1.5L 13 ILECAS-STEM 2 2.8 3.5 1.5L 13 ILECAS-STEM 3 2.8 3.5 1.5L 13 ILECAS-STEM 4 0.4 3.5 1.5L 14 PERPAL 5.3 4.5 0.5L 15 CHRICA-STEM 1 5.2 4.7 0.5L 15 CHRICA-STEM 2 3.0 4.7 0.5L 15 CHRICA-STEM 3 1.9 4.7 0.5L 15 CHRICA-STEM 4 2.2 4.7 0.5L 16 ACERUB 16.1 4.7 0.3M 1 ARDESC 1.6 0.5 0.5M 2 ARDESC-STEM 1 1.1 0.2 0.8M 2 ARDESC-STEM 2 1.0 0.2 0.8M 3 ARDESC-STEM 1 1.7 0.3 4.3M 3 ARDESC-STEM 2 1.9 0.3 4.3M 4 ARDESC 1.2 0.4 0.4M 5 ARDESC 1.2 0.5 4.2M 6 EUGAXI-STEM 1 1.0 1.5 4.0M 6 EUGAXI-STEM 2 0.6 1.5 4.0M 7 ARDESC 0.9 1.0 4.8M 8 ARDESC 0.9 1.1 4.8M 9 CHRICA-STEM 1 0.8 2.0 4.6M 9 CHRICA-STEM 2 1.0 2.0 4.6M 10 PSYNER 1.1 0.7 4.0M 11 EUGAXI 3.8 0.5 4.0M 12 RAPPUN 3.6 0.7 3.0M 13 ARDESC 6.3 0.3 3.0M 14 VITIS SP. 3.6 0.3 2.9M 15 SIDSAL 1.0 0.8 1.0M 16 ARDESC 2.0 3.6 3.6M 17 PSYNER-STEM 1 1.6 0.4 1.0M 17 PSYNER-STEM 2 0.5 0.4 1.0M 17 PSYNER-STEM 3 0.5 0.4 1.0M 18 ARDESC 2.0 4.0 4.0M 19 PSYNER 0.5 0.7 1.5M 20 SIDSAL 1.2 4.5 4.597


M 21 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.1 1.7 0.5M 21 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.0 1.7 0.5M 22 CHRICA-STEM 1 1.7 4.7 4.5M 22 CHRICA-STEM 2 2.6 4.7 4.5M 23 CHRICA 2.7 1.3 1.2M 24 ARDESC 3.5 4.3 4.4M 25 ARDESC 3.4 4.5 4.0M 26 ARDESC 3.0 1.8 1.5M 27 ARDESC 5.4 1.7 1.8M 28 ARDESC 1.5 4.5 2.5M 29 ARDESC 1.1 4.5 2.0M 30 ARDESC-STEM 1 1.0 1.9 1.7M 30 ARDESC-STEM 2 1.0 1.9 1.7M 31 EUGAXI 0.7 4.7 1.7M 32 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.0 3.0 1.0M 32 RAPPUN-STEM 2 4.5 3.0 1.0M 33 PSYNER-STEM 1 0.8 4.0 1.5M 33 PSYNER-STEM 2 1.5 4.0 1.5M 34 PSYNER 0.8 4.0 0.6M 35 EUGAXI 1.3 1.2 1.5M 36 PSYNER 0.6 1.2 0.7M 37 EUGAXI-STEM 1 8.0 4.8 0.1M 37 EUGAXI-STEM 2 9.0 4.8 0.1M 38 RAPPUN 4.5 3.5 0.0M 39 ARDESC 3.5 4.8 0.2N 1 EUGAXI 2.5 0.5 0.6N 2 EUGAXI 1.5 0.0 1.3N 4 PSYNER-STEM 1 0.8 0.3 1.8N 4 PSYNER-STEM 2 1.0 0.3 1.8N 5 ARDESC-STEM 1 1.6 1.0 3.0N 5 ARDESC-STEM 2 1.2 1.0 3.0N 6 BURSIM 23.5 1.5 0.0N 7 BURSIM 30.4 1.5 0.0N 65 BURSIM 34.5 1.5 0.0N 66 BURSIM 21.6 1.5 0.0N 67 BURSIM 21.6 1.5 0.0N 68 BURSIM 19.3 1.5 0.0N 69 BURSIM 31.8 1.5 0.0N 8 ARDESC 4.2 1.0 2.0N 9 SIDSAL 25.7 3.0 0.5N 10 SIDSAL 1.7 1.5 2.7N 11 ARDESC-STEM 1 1.9 1.3 3.8N 11 ARDESC-STEM 2 0.5 1.3 3.8N 11 ARDESC-STEM 3 0.5 1.3 3.8N 12 VITIS SP. 6.2 3.0 0.4N 13 EUGAXI-STEM 1 0.9 2.5 0.0N 13 EUGAXI-STEM 2 0.9 2.5 0.0N 14 ARDESC 0.9 2.6 0.0N 15 PSYNER 1.0 3.3 0.4N 16 RAPPUN 2.4 4.5 0.598


N 17 EUGAXI 2.0 2.7 3.5N 18 EUGAXI 1.7 2.6 4.6N 19 EUGAXI 1.0 2.3 3.8N 20 EUGAXI 1.2 3.6 0.5N 21 CHROLI 0.7 4.0 0.5N 22 EUGAXI 1.5 2.5 4.0N 23 ARDESC-STEM 1 1.0 4.5 1.5N 23 ARDESC-STEM 2 3.6 4.5 1.5N 24 ARDESC 4.5 1.7 3.0N 25 ARDESC-STEM 1 0.9 4.5 2.0N 25 ARDESC-STEM 2 2.1 4.5 2.0N 26 ARDESC 2.0 2.5 3.0N 27 RAPPUN 0.9 4.5 2.3N 28 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.0 2.5 2.8N 28 RAPPUN-STEM 2 4.5 2.5 2.8N 28 RAPPUN-STEM 3 1.2 2.5 2.8N 29 RAPPUN 1.8 5.0 2.5N 30 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.8 5.0 3.0N 30 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.1 5.0 3.0N 31 PSYNER-STEM 1 0.9 1.3 1.3N 31 PSYNER-STEM 2 0.5 1.3 1.3N 31 PSYNER-STEM 3 0.5 1.3 1.3N 31 PSYNER-STEM 4 0.5 1.3 1.3N 32 ARDESC 3.9 4.7 3.7N 33 ARDESC 3.6 4.0 4.0N 34 EUGAXI 0.9 3.6 3.0N 35 PSYNER-STEM 1 0.8 1.3 0.5N 35 PSYNER-STEM 2 0.5 1.3 0.5N 36 ARDESC 1.7 3.6 2.0N 37 ARDESC 3.5 3.6 1.5N 38 EUGAXI 0.9 0.4 0.3N 39 EUGAXI 1.7 3.7 2.0N 40 EUGAXI 1.9 4.5 4.6N 41 EUGAXI 1.6 4.7 4.6N 42 EUGAXI 2.8 4.6 4.5N 43 EUGAXI 1.0 2.5 2.4N 44 EUGAXI 1.2 2.6 2.7N 45 EUGAXI 1.2 2.6 2.7N 46 EUGAXI 1.2 2.6 2.7N 47 EUGAXI 1.2 2.6 2.7N 48 EUGAXI 1.2 2.6 2.7N 49 EUGAXI 1.2 2.6 2.7N 50 EUGAXI 2.2 2.7 2.5N 51 EUGAXI 1.3 3.8 5.0N 52 EUGAXI 2.0 4.0 5.0N 53 EUGAXI 0.6 4.2 5.0N 54 SIDSAL 0.6 3.0 3.8N 55 PSYSUL 0.5 4.4 4.4N 56 PSYNER 1.0 3.4 3.3N 57 PSYSUL 0.8 3.6 4.699


N 58 EUGAXI 1.1 2.5 4.3N 59 EUGAXI 1.1 2.4 4.7N 60 EUGAXI 1.0 2.4 4.5N 61 BURSIM 12.9 3.4 3.7N 62 EUGAXI 2.4 3.3 3.8N 63 ARDESC 6.7 2.5 2.0N 64 EUGAXI 2.5 2.5 3.5O 1 ARDESC 4.5 0.5 0.0O 2 ARDESC 1.7 0.0 0.6O 3 PSYNER 0.6 4.5 4.5O 4 ARDESC 4.2 0.5 1.0O 5 RAPPUN 1.9 4.5 4.3O 6 PSYNER 0.5 0.3 1.5O 7 RAPPUN 1.8 4.0 4.6O 8 EUGAXI 2.0 0.3 1.8O 9 RAPPUN 0.6 4.4 3.5O 10 RAPPUN 3.3 0.8 1.7O 11 RAPPUN 4.2 0.8 2.0O 12 EUGAXI 1.2 2.0 5.0O 13 EUGAXI 3.0 0.8 2.3O 14 EUGAXI 1.8 3.5 4.6O 15 ARDESC 1.2 0.3 2.0O 16 TAXDIS 13.6 3.8 3.0O 17 ARDESC 1.8 0.8 2.2O 18 RAPPUN 1.2 2.4 2.3O 19 EUGAXI 2.2 5.0 3.0O 20 ARDESC 1.2 0.3 2.8O 21 ARDESC-STEM 1 1.6 4.4 0.8O 21 ARDESC-STEM 2 1.7 4.4 0.8O 21 ARDESC-STEM 3 1.9 4.4 0.8O 22 ARDESC 1.3 3.5 0.7O 23 ARDESC 1.6 0.5 3.5O 24 ARDESC 3.0 2.7 3.0O 25 PSYNER 2.2 3.3 0.3O 26 ARDESC-STEM 1 1.2 3.2 0.5O 26 ARDESC-STEM 2 1.0 3.2 0.5O 27 RAPPUN 1.9 2.0 3.2O 28 ARDESC-STEM 1 3.2 2.6 1.5O 28 ARDESC-STEM 2 1.8 2.6 1.5O 28 ARDESC-STEM 3 1.7 2.6 1.5O 29 ARDESC-STEM 1 7.3 0.3 3.3O 29 ARDESC-STEM 2 1.2 0.3 3.3O 30 PSYNER-STEM 1 0.6 1.6 1.4O 30 PSYNER-STEM 2 0.8 1.6 1.4O 30 PSYNER-STEM 3 1.1 1.6 1.4O 31 EUGAXI 2.1 1.0 4.0O 32 RAPPUN 6.2 0.7 4.0O 33 BURSIM 25.4 1.0 0.0O 34 VITIS SP. 2.1 0.5 4.0O 35 ARDESC 3.0 3.5 2.5100


O 36 ARDESC 1.1 0.5 4.3O 37 SIDSAL 0.5 0.7 4.4O 38 EUGAXI 3.0 0.6 4.6O 39 ARDESC 1.1 0.3 4.8O 40 EUGAXI 2.3 0.4 5.0O 41 EUGAXI 2.5 0.6 5.0O 42 EUGAXI 2.3 0.3 5.0O 43 EUGAXI 1.6 0.8 5.0O 44 EUGAXI 1.5 1.3 4.8O 45 EUGAXI 2.9 1.3 4.5O 46 EUGAXI 0.5 1.3 4.3O 47 ARDESC 2.1 1.5 4.2O 48 VITIS SP. 1.0 1.9 5.0P 1 RAPPUN 2.6 0.4 4.6P 2 PSYNER 0.8 0.5 5.0P 3 EUGAXI 2.8 0.5 4.6P 4 ARDESC 1.0 5.0 4.2P 5 RAPPUN 1.6 1.2 5.0P 6 PSYNER 1.2 1.5 4.7P 7 ARDESC-STEM 1 3.1 4.2 4.2P 7 ARDESC-STEM 2 1.1 4.2 4.2P 7 ARDESC-STEM 3 1.0 4.2 4.2P 7 ARDESC-STEM 4 1.1 4.2 4.2P 7 ARDESC-STEM 5 1.2 4.2 4.2P 7 ARDESC-STEM 6 1.2 4.2 4.2P 7 ARDESC-STEM 7 0.7 4.2 4.2P 8 CHRICA 7.4 2.7 5.0P 9 CHRICA 7.7 3.5 4.2P 10 ARDESC 2.5 3.5 5.0P 11 XIMAME 0.5 4.4 4.2P 12 ARDESC 5.4 4.0 5.0P 13 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.0 4.7 5.0P 13 RAPPUN-STEM 2 2.6 4.7 5.0P 13 RAPPUN-STEM 3 1.3 4.7 5.0P 14 EUGAXI 2.0 3.5 3.3P 15 PSYNER 2.0 3.0 3.3P 16 VITIS SP. 3.8 2.7 3.5P 17 ARDESC 2.4 4.0 0.0P 18 EUGAXI 3.4 3.7 0.0P 19 EUGAXI 1.5 2.4 3.0P 20 ARDESC 2.0 2.4 2.5P 21 ARDESC 1.0 2.4 2.2P 22 RAPPUN-STEM 1 0.5 1.8 2.6P 22 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.0 1.8 2.6P 22 RAPPUN-STEM 3 1.2 1.8 2.6P 22 RAPPUN-STEM 4 1.4 1.8 2.6P 23 RAPPUN-STEM 1 1.5 1.4 1.3P 23 RAPPUN-STEM 2 1.0 1.4 1.3P 23 RAPPUN-STEM 3 1.2 1.4 1.3P 23 RAPPUN-STEM 4 2.2 1.4 1.3101


P 23 RAPPUN-STEM 5 1.0 1.4 1.3P 24 EUGAXI 1.5 0.8 2.2P 25 ARDESC 2.4 2.0 0.0P 27 ARDESC 1.2 1.4 2.4P 28 RAPPUN 0.9 1.4 1.6P 29 ARDESC-STEM 1 1.0 1.5 0.9P 29 ARDESC-STEM 2 2.1 1.5 0.9P 30 ARDESC 1.3 1.5 1.6P 31 ARDESC-STEM 1 1.8 1.5 1.1P 31 ARDESC-STEM 2 2.0 1.5 1.1P 32 CHRICA 2.7 1.4 0.5P 33 ARDESC 1.5 1.5 1.8P 34 RAPPUN 1.5 1.7 1.8P 35 PSYNER-STEM 1 1.7 0.0 1.5P 35 PSYNER-STEM 2 1.5 0.0 1.5P 36 PSYNER 1.5 0.3 1.2P 37 ARDESC-STEM 1 1.8 1.0 2.2P 37 ARDESC-STEM 2 1.1 1.0 2.2P 38 ARDESC 2.3 1.0 1.5P 39 EUGAXI 3.2 1.0 1.3P 40 EUGAXI 4.1 1.1 1.3P 41 ARDESC 1.0 1.0 1.0102


103APPENDIX 9 - Current transect locationEntry point on:Transect Janes Scenic Drive N25 58.7951 W81 23.871Transect Janes Scenic Drive N25 58.7932 W81 24.249Transect West Main Tram N25 58.7793 W81 25.193Transect West Main Tram N25 58.7784 W81 25.324Entry point from Janes Scenic Dr. and West Main Tram for each transect.Location NW corner SW corner NE corner SE cornerTransect from well 20 N25 58.921 N25 58.880 N25 58.919 N25 58.8761 320m E & 170m N W81 23.861 W81 23.873 W81 23.856 W81 23.869Transect from well 20 N25 58.848 N25 58.847 N25 58.828 N25 58.8222 260mW & 60mN W81 24.254 W81 24.252 W81 24.202 W81 24.204Transect from well 18 N25 58.876 N25 58.876 N25 58.877 N25 58.8733 50m W & 150m N W81 25.223 W81 25.223 W81 25.155 W81 25.155Transect from well 18 N25 58.835 N25 58.793 N25 58.838 N25 58.7924 270m W & 40m N W81 25.309 W81 25.319 W81 25.307 W81 25.316Directions to each transect from park wells as well as GPS locations of thecorners of each transect.Each transect is permanently marked with four foot rebar at the corners as wellas every 20 meters along one side.

More magazines by this user
Similar magazines