Do Community-Managed Forests Work? A Biodiversity Perspective

Community-managed reserves (CMRs) comprise the fastest-growing category of protected areas throughout the tropics. CMRs represent a compromise between advocates of nature conservation and advocates of human development. We ask whether CMRs succeed in achieving the goals of either. A fixed reserve area can produce only a finite resource supply, whereas human populations exploiting them tend to expand rapidly while adopting high-impact technologies to satisfy rising aspirations. Intentions behind the establishment of CMRs may be admirable, but represent an ideal rarely achieved. People tied to the natural forest subsist on income levels that are among the lowest in the Amazon. Limits of sustainable harvesting are often low and rarely known prior to reserve creation or respected thereafter, and resource exhaustion predictably follows. Unintended consequences typically emerge, such as overhunting of the seed dispersers, pollinators, and other animals that provide services essential to perpetuating the forest. CMRs are a low priority for governments, so mostly operate without enforcement, a laxity that encourages illegal forest conversion. Finally, the pull of markets can alter the “business plan” of a reserve overnight, as inhabitants switch to new activities. The reality is that we live in a hyperdynamic world of accelerating change in which past assumptions must continually be re-evaluated

Do Community-Managed Forests Work? A Biodiversity Perspective

Community-managed reserves (CMRs) comprise the fastest-growing category of protected areas throughout the tropics. CMRs represent a compromise between advocates of nature conservation and advocates of human development. We ask whether CMRs succeed in achieving the goals of either. A fixed reserve area can produce only a finite resource supply, whereas human populations exploiting them tend to expand rapidly while adopting high-impact technologies to satisfy rising aspirations. Intentions behind the establishment of CMRs may be admirable, but represent an ideal rarely achieved. People tied to the natural forest subsist on income levels that are among the lowest in the Amazon. Limits of sustainable harvesting are often low and rarely known prior to reserve creation or respected thereafter, and resource exhaustion predictably follows. Unintended consequences typically emerge, such as overhunting of the seed dispersers, pollinators, and other animals that provide services essential to perpetuating the forest. CMRs are a low priority for governments, so mostly operate without enforcement, a laxity that encourages illegal forest conversion. Finally, the pull of markets can alter the “business plan” of a reserve overnight, as inhabitants switch to new activities. The reality is that we live in a hyperdynamic world of accelerating change in which past assumptions must continually be re-evaluated

The 'island syndrome' is an alternative state

Aim: In the half-century since publication of the Theory of Island Biology, ecologists have come to recognize the importance of predation as a decisive determinant of alternate states in many ecosystems. Island species are notorious for their vulnerability to introduced predators, yet the strength of island predator regimes has not been fully incorporated into our understanding of the forces that structure island consumer communities. Location: The Greater and Lesser Antilles. Taxon Birds and Anolis lizards. Methods: Field surveys of sclerophyll and rainforest sites on islands ranging in size from 3.5 km(2) Terre-de-Haut to 76,000 km(2) Hispaniola. Results: Evidence gathered in the 1970s and 1980s shows that Antillean anoles live at higher densities on fewer resources, grow more slowly, reproduce later and live longer than mainland counterparts in conformity with the 'island syndrome'. Data from this period show that Antillean bird communities display density overcompensation, community saturation, size-structured foraging guilds, low species diversity and low species packing, all traits consistent with the island syndrome and a regime of low predation and intense competition. Mainland species and communities display none of these features. Main conclusions: I propose that the island syndrome is an alternative state that distinguishes low-predation island communities from high-predation mainland counterparts. It follows that strong mainland predation regimes tend to prevent island species from colonizing. Conversely, invasion-resistant, size-structured island communities, despite low species diversity, prevent mainland species from colonizing islands. These predictions are experimentally testable with Anolis lizards and, if confirmed, could set island biogeography on a new course

Rarity of monodominance in hyperdiverse Amazonian forests.

Tropical forests are known for their high diversity. Yet, forest patches do occur in the tropics where a single tree species is dominant. Such "monodominant" forests are known from all of the main tropical regions. For Amazonia, we sampled the occurrence of monodominance in a massive, basin-wide database of forest-inventory plots from the Amazon Tree Diversity Network (ATDN). Utilizing a simple defining metric of at least half of the trees ≥ 10 cm diameter belonging to one species, we found only a few occurrences of monodominance in Amazonia, and the phenomenon was not significantly linked to previously hypothesized life history traits such wood density, seed mass, ectomycorrhizal associations, or Rhizobium nodulation. In our analysis, coppicing (the formation of sprouts at the base of the tree or on roots) was the only trait significantly linked to monodominance. While at specific locales coppicing or ectomycorrhizal associations may confer a considerable advantage to a tree species and lead to its monodominance, very few species have these traits. Mining of the ATDN dataset suggests that monodominance is quite rare in Amazonia, and may be linked primarily to edaphic factors

The functional response of a generalist predator

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

A comparison of the seasonal movements of tiger sharks and green turtles provides insight into their predator-prey relationship

During the reproductive season, sea turtles use a restricted area in the vicinity of their nesting beaches, making them vulnerable to predation. At Raine Island (Australia), the highest density green turtle Chelonia mydas rookery in the world, tiger sharks Galeocerdo cuvier have been observed to feed on green turtles, and it has been suggested that they may specialise on such air-breathing prey. However there is little information with which to examine this hypothesis. We compared the spatial and temporal components of movement behaviour of these two potentially interacting species in order to provide insight into the predator-prey relationship. Specifically, we tested the hypothesis that tiger shark movements are more concentrated at Raine Island during the green turtle nesting season than outside the turtle nesting season when turtles are not concentrated at Raine Island. Turtles showed area-restricted search behaviour around Raine Island for ~3–4 months during the nesting period (November–February). This was followed by direct movement (transit) to putative foraging grounds mostly in the Torres Straight where they switched to area-restricted search mode again, and remained resident for the remainder of the deployment (53–304 days). In contrast, tiger sharks displayed high spatial and temporal variation in movement behaviour which was not closely linked to the movement behaviour of green turtles or recognised turtle foraging grounds. On average, tiger sharks were concentrated around Raine Island throughout the year. While information on diet is required to determine whether tiger sharks are turtle specialists our results support the hypothesis that they target this predictable and plentiful prey during turtle nesting season, but they might not focus on this less predictable food source outside the nesting season

Identifying keystone plant resources in an Amazonian forest using a long-term fruit-fall record

Abstract: The keystone plant resources (KPR) concept describes certain plant species in tropical forests as vital to community stability and diversity because they provide food resources to vertebrate consumers during the season of scarcity. Here, we use an 8-y, continuous record of fruit fall from a 1.44-ha mature forest stand to identify potential KPRs in a lowland western Amazonian rain forest. KPRs were identified based on four criteria: temporal non-redundancy; year-to-year reliability; abundance of reproductive-size individuals and inferred fruit crop size; and the variety of vertebrate consumers utilizing their fruit. Overall, seven species were considered excellent KPRs: two of these belong to the genus Ficus, confirming that this taxon is a KPR as previously suggested. Celtis iguanaea (Cannabaceae) -a canopy liana -has also been previously classified as a KPR; in addition, Pseudomalmea diclina (Annonaceae), Cissus ulmifolia (Vitaceae), Allophylus glabratus (Sapindaceae) and Trichilia elegans (Meliaceae) are newly identified KPRs. Our results confirm that a very small fraction (<5%) of the plant community consistently provides fruit for a broad set of consumers during the period of resource scarcity, which has significant implications for the conservation and management of Amazonian forests

Variation in stem mortality rates determines patterns of above-ground biomass in Amazonian forests: implications for dynamic global vegetation models

Understanding the processes that determine above-ground biomass (AGB) in Amazonian forests is important for predicting the sensitivity of these ecosystems to environmental change and for designing and evaluating dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs). AGB is determined by inputs from woody productivity [woody net primary productivity (NPP)] and the rate at which carbon is lost through tree mortality. Here, we test whether two direct metrics of tree mortality (the absolute rate of woody biomass loss and the rate of stem mortality) and/or woody NPP, control variation in AGB among 167 plots in intact forest across Amazonia. We then compare these relationships and the observed variation in AGB and woody NPP with the predictions of four DGVMs. The observations show that stem mortality rates, rather than absolute rates of woody biomass loss, are the most important predictor of AGB, which is consistent with the importance of stand size structure for determining spatial variation in AGB. The relationship between stem mortality rates and AGB varies among different regions of Amazonia, indicating that variation in wood density and height/diameter relationships also influences AGB. In contrast to previous findings, we find that woody NPP is not correlated with stem mortality rates and is weakly positively correlated with AGB. Across the four models, basin-wide average AGB is similar to the mean of the observations. However, the models consistently overestimate woody NPP and poorly represent the spatial patterns of both AGB and woody NPP estimated using plot data. In marked contrast to the observations, DGVMs typically show strong positive relationships between woody NPP and AGB. Resolving these differences will require incorporating forest size structure, mechanistic models of stem mortality and variation in functional composition in DGVMs

Phylogenetic diversity of Amazonian tree communities

Aim: To examine variation in the phylogenetic diversity (PD) of tree communities across geographical and environmental gradients in Amazonia. Location: Two hundred and eighty-three c. 1 ha forest inventory plots from across Amazonia. Methods: We evaluated PD as the total phylogenetic branch length across species in each plot (PDss), the mean pairwise phylogenetic distance between species (MPD), the mean nearest taxon distance (MNTD) and their equivalents standardized for species richness (ses.PDss, ses.MPD, ses.MNTD). We compared PD of tree communities growing (1) on substrates of varying geological age; and (2) in environments with varying ecophysiological barriers to growth and survival. Results: PDss is strongly positively correlated with species richness (SR), whereas MNTD has a negative correlation. Communities on geologically young- and intermediate-aged substrates (western and central Amazonia respectively) have the highest SR, and therefore the highest PDss and the lowest MNTD. We find that the youngest and oldest substrates (the latter on the Brazilian and Guiana Shields) have the highest ses.PDss and ses.MNTD. MPD and ses.MPD are strongly correlated with how evenly taxa are distributed among the three principal angiosperm clades and are both highest in western Amazonia. Meanwhile, seasonally dry tropical forest (SDTF) and forests on white sands have low PD, as evaluated by any metric. Main conclusions: High ses.PDss and ses.MNTD reflect greater lineage diversity in communities. We suggest that high ses.PDss and ses.MNTD in western Amazonia results from its favourable, easy-to-colonize environment, whereas high values in the Brazilian and Guianan Shields may be due to accumulation of lineages over a longer period of time. White-sand forests and SDTF are dominated by close relatives from fewer lineages, perhaps reflecting ecophysiological barriers that are difficult to surmount evolutionarily. Because MPD and ses.MPD do not reflect lineage diversity per se, we suggest that PDss, ses.PDss and ses.MNTD may be the most useful diversity metrics for setting large-scale conservation priorities

Asian elephants as ecological filters in Sundaic forests

Megaherbivores exert strong top-down influence on the ecosystems they inhabit, yet little is known about the foraging impacts of Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) on the structure of Southeast Asia’s rainforests. Our goal was to document Asian elephants’ dietary composition, selectivity, and foraging impacts in a Sundaic rainforest and test whether these differed between habitats. We conducted controlled direct observations of five wild-born captive elephants feeding on six plant types (bamboo, grass, monocot herbs, palms, lianas, and trees) of different age 2 in two habitats (mature vs. early successional forest) in Krau, Peninsular Malaysia. Palms, trees, and lianas formed the bulk of the elephants’ diet. In the mature forest, elephants showed a strong preference for monocots (preference ratio, PR = 5.1), particularly large palms (PR = 5.4), while trees were negatively selected (PR = 0.14). Conversely, in early successional habitats, large tree saplings were positively selected (PR = 1.6). Elephants uprooted (30%) and broke the main stem (30%) of the dicot trees, mainly large saplings, that they handled. Tree saplings broken by elephants had an average diameter of 1.7 ± 1.1 cm (up to 7 cm), with breaks happening at 1.1 ± 0.5 m of height. We estimated that, in a year, an elephant could damage (i.e., either uproot or break) around 39,000 tree saplings if it fed entirely in mature forest, and almost double the number (73,000) if it fed solely in early successional habitats. Assuming a density of 0.05–0.18 elephants/km2, elephant foraging could damage 0.2–0.6% of the tree sapling population per year. Slow growth rates of understory plants in mature forests could result in negative feedbacks, whereby elephants suppress palms, other monocots, and highly preferred tree species. Alternatively, elephants may initiate positive feedbacks by impeding succession along forest edges and in semi-open environments, thereby increasing the size of gaps and the availability of their preferred foodplants. Overall, our results show that Asian elephants act as ecological filters by suppressing the plants they prefer in Southeast Asia’s rainforests