Soil water-holding capacity and monodominance in Southern Amazon tropical forests

Background and aims: We explored the hypothesis that low soil water-holding capacity is the main factor driving the monodominance of Brosimum rubescens in a monodominant forest in Southern Amazonia. Tropical monodominant forests are rare ecosystems with low diversity and high dominance of a single tree species. The causes of this atypical condition are still poorly understood. Some studies have shown a relationship between monodominance and waterlogging or soil attributes, while others have concluded that edaphic factors have little or no explanatory value, but none has accounted for soil-moisture variation other than waterlogging. This study is the first to explicitly explore how low soil water-holding capacity influences the monodominance of tropical forests. Methods: We conducted in situ measurements of vertical soil moisture using electrical resistance collected over 1 year at 0–5; 35–40 and 75–80 cm depths in a B. rubescens monodominant forest and in an adjacent mixed-species forest in the Amazon-Cerrado transition zone, Brazil. Minimum leaf water potential (Ψmin) of the seven most common species, including B. rubescens, and soil water-holding capacity for both forests were determined. Results: The vertical soil moisture decay pattern was similar in both forests for all depths. However, the slightly higher water availability in the monodominant forest and Ψmin similarity between B. rubescens and nearby mixed forest species indicate that low water-availability does not cause the monodominance. Conclusions: We reject the hypothesis that monodominance of B. rubescens is primarily determined by low soil water-holding capacity, reinforcing the idea that monodominance in tropical forests is not determined by a single factor

Anthropogenic disturbance in tropical forests can double biodiversity loss from deforestation

© 2016 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved. Concerted political attention has focused on reducing deforestation, and this remains the cornerstone of most biodiversity conservation strategies. However, maintaining forest cover may not reduce anthropogenic forest disturbances, which are rarely considered in conservation programmes. These disturbances occur both within forests, including selective logging and wildfires, and at the landscape level, through edge, area and isolation effects. Until now, the combined effect of anthropogenic disturbance on the conservation value of remnant primary forests has remained unknown, making it impossible to assess the relative importance of forest disturbance and forest loss. Here we address these knowledge gaps using a large data set of plants, birds and dung beetles (1,538, 460 and 156 species, respectively) sampled in 36 catchments in the Brazilian state of Pará. Catchments retaining more than 69-80% forest cover lost more conservation value from disturbance than from forest loss. For example, a 20% loss of primary forest, the maximum level of deforestation allowed on Amazonian properties under Brazil's Forest Code, resulted in a 39-54% loss of conservation value: 96-171% more than expected without considering disturbance effects. We extrapolated the disturbance-mediated loss of conservation value throughout Pará, which covers 25% of the Brazilian Amazon. Although disturbed forests retained considerable conservation value compared with deforested areas, the toll of disturbance outside Pará's strictly protected areas is equivalent to the loss of 92,000-139,000 km2 of primary forest. Even this lowest estimate is greater than the area deforested across the entire Brazilian Amazon between 2006 and 2015 (ref. 10). Species distribution models showed that both landscape and within-forest disturbances contributed to biodiversity loss, with the greatest negative effects on species of high conservation and functional value. These results demonstrate an urgent need for policy interventions that go beyond the maintenance of forest cover to safeguard the hyper-diversity of tropical forest ecosystems

Asrama Mahasiswa di Malang

Sebagai kota kedua terbesar di Jawa Timur setelah Kota Surabaya, Malang merupakan kota pendidikan, pariwisata dan perdagangan yang telah berkembang pesat dari tahun ke tahun yang dapat dilihat dari bertambahnya jumlah pengunjung baik yang berkunjung hanya sekedar untuk rekreasi atau untuk menetap (misalnya bekerja dan kuliah). Bertambahnya tempat tinggal sementara seperti Losmen, Kos, apartemen, hotel, dan perumahan serta bertambahnya jumlah transportasi semuanya itu berjalan sangat pesat. Dengan adanya potensi yang besar ini, para mahasiswa yang menempuh kuliah di berbagai universitas negeri dan swasta di kota Malang semakin meningkat. Mereka membutuhkan tempat tinggal yang: 1. Dekat dengan pusat kota 2. Dekat ke kampus 3. Modern, bersih dan privacy Meningkatnya sektor pendidikan di kota Malang menyebabkan munculnya banyak tempat tinggal sewa baik berupa rumah kos atau rumah kontrakan yang berada di sekitar lokasi kampus. Dengan demikian para mahasiswa cenderung untuk tinggal di sekitar lokasi kampus agar lebih dekat dengan kampus, sehingga lama – kelamaan mengakibatkan harga rumah sewa atau rumah kontrakan menjadi semakin mahal serta membuat lahan semakin menyempit sehingga harga lahan menjadi sangat mahal akibat terus bertambahnya tempat tinggal di sekitar daerah kampus. Melihat hal diatas dapat disimpulkan bahwa wadah atau hunian yang dapat menampung kebutuhan tempat tinggal yang dekat dengan pusat pendidikan dengan fasilitas akomodasi yang memadai adalah Asrama Mahasiswa. Asrama mempunyai harga sewa yang tinggi jika dibandingkan dengan jenis sarana hunian mahasiswa lainnya seperti rumah kos dan rumah kontrakan. Hal ini dikarenakan adanya beberapa faktor yang menguntungkan bagi penghuni yang tidak didapati pada bentuk hunian lainnya. Faktor – faktor tersebut antara lain: 1. Kemudahan 2. Kepraktisan 3. Kenyamanan 4. Privacy yang tinggi, serta 5. Kelayakan ekonom

Electroweak parameters of the z0 resonance and the standard model

Contains fulltext : 124399.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access