Correo Electrónico
DNINFOA - SIA
Bibliotecas
Convocatorias
Identidad U.N.
Published
Mamíferos silvestres en plantaciones forestales: ¿Una oportunidad para su conservación?
Wild mammals in tree plantations: an opportunity for their conservation?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15446/caldasia.v43n2.85471Keywords:
Andes Centrales, bosques plantados, diversidad verdadera, región Caribe (es)Central Andes, tree plantations, Caribe region, true diversity (en)
Downloads
Additional Files
Las plantaciones forestales son monocultivos que han venido en aumento a nivel mundial. Estos sistemas son menos diversos en comparación con bosques originales, pero pueden aportar a la conservación de la biodiversidad ya que son usadas por muchas especies, incluso algunas amenazadas. Este potencial debe evaluarse en cada localidad. En este trabajo se registró la abundancia relativa y se midió la diversidad verdadera de mamíferos terrestres, arborícolas y voladores, en cinco núcleos forestales de coníferas y de teca en las regiones Andina y Caribe de Colombia, y se comparó con coberturas nativas aledañas. El 78 % y 71 % de los mamíferos presentes en los sitios visitados fueron registrados al interior de las plantaciones de coníferas y teca, respectivamente. Al interior de ambos tipos de plantaciones se encontraron especies amenazadas como Leopardus tigrinus y Saguinus oedipus. Los perfiles de diversidad fueron similares entre bosques y plantaciones en casi todos los grupos. Hubo diferencias significativas solo para los mamíferos terrestres en las plantaciones de coníferas. Se encontraron diferencias en la abundancia relativa entre ambas coberturas para todos los grupos con una tendencia a menor abundancia en las plantaciones, lo cual indica que estas ofrecen un hábitat de menor calidad para los mamíferos silvestres, pero las plantaciones visitadas distan de ser “desiertos verdes” y por el contrario mostraron que son sistemas diversos. La riqueza de especies y la presencia de especies amenazadas son atributos que deben ser incluidos en los planes de manejo forestal y en el diseño del paisaje regional.
Forest plantations are monocultures that have been increasing worldwide. These systems are less diverse compared to original forest, but they may contribute to the conservation of local biodiversity since these are used by many species, even some of conservation concern. The relative abundance and the true diversity were measured for volant and non-volant medium and large mammals in five tree plantations projects in the Andean and Caribbean regions of Colombia, and compared with native forest. 78 % and 71 % of the mammals present in the five localities were registered inside the coniferous and teak plantations, respectively. Threatened species such as Leopardus tigrinus and Saguinus Oedipus, were found in both types of tree plantations. The diversity profiles were similar between the native forest and tree plantations in almost all groups, only terrestrial mammals in coniferus plantations had significant differences. Differences in relative abundance between both forest and plantations were found for all mammal groups. We observed lower mammalian abundance in the tree plantations, which indicates that these modified ecosystems provide lower quality habitat for mammals, but there were far from being “green deserts”, on the contrary they were diverse systems. Species richness and the presence of threatened species are attributes that must be included in plantation management plans and in regional landscape designs.
References
Aubin I, Messier C, Bouchard A. 2008. Can plantations develop understory biological and physical attributes of naturally regenerated forests? Biol. Conserv. 141(10):2461–2476. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.007
Begotti RA, dos Santos Pacífico E, de Barros Ferraz SF, Galetti M. 2018. Landscape context of plantation forests in the conservation of tropical mammals. J. Nat. Conserv. 41: 97–105. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2017.11.009
Bilder CR, Loughin TM. 2014. Analysis of categorical data with R. USA: CRC Press
Bowyer JL. 2006. Forest plantations, threatening or saving natural forest? Arborvitae 31:8–9.
Bremer LL, Farley KA. 2010. Does plantation forestry restore biodiversity or create green deserts? A synthesis of the effects of land-use transitions on plant species richness. Biodivers. Conserv. 19(14):3893–3915. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-010-9936-4
Brockerhoff EG, Ecroyd CE, Leckie AC, Kimberley MO. 2003. Diversity and succession of adventive and indigenous vascular understorey plants in Pinus radiata plantation forests in New Zealand. For. Ecol. Manag. 185(3):307–326. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(03)00227-5
Brockerhoff EG, Jactel H, Parrotta JA, Ferraz SFB. 2013. Role of eucalypt and other planted forests in biodiversity conservation and the provision of biodiversity-related ecosystem services. For. Ecol. Manag. 301:43–50. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2012.09.018
Campos BM, Charters JD, Verdade LM. 2018. Diversity and distribution patterns of medium to large mammals in a silvicultural landscape in south-eastern Brazil. iForest 11(6): 802-808. doi: https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor2721-011
Carnus JM, Parrotta J, Brockerhoff EG, Arbez M, Jactel H, Kremer A, Lamb D, O’Hara K, Walters B. 2006. Planted forests and biodiversity. J. For. 104(2):65–77.
Carretero X, Guzman-Caro D, Stevenson PR. c2020. Aotus brumbacki. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2020: e.T39915A17923405. [Revisada en: 04 mar 2021]. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2020-2.RLTS.T39915A17923405.en
Castaño-Uribe C, González-Maya JF, Zárrate-Charry D, Ange-Jaramillo C, Vela-Vargas IM. 2013. Plan de Conservación de Felinos del Caribe colombiano: Los felinos y su papel en la planificación regional integral basada en especies clave. Santa Marta: Fundación Herencia Ambiental Caribe, ProCAT Colombia, The Sierra to Sea Institute.
[CDB] Convention on Biological Diversity. 2010. Strategic plan for biodiversity 2011–2020 and the Aichi targets “Living in Harmony with Nature”. , Montreal: Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity..
Chao A, Gotelli NJ, Hsieh TC, Sander EL, Ma KH, Colwell RK, Ellison AM. 2014. Rarefaction and extrapolation with Hill numbers: a framework for sampling and estimation in species diversity studies. Ecol. Monogr. 84(1):45–67. doi: https://doi.org/10.1890/13-0133.1
Cruz P, Iezzi ME, De Angelo C, Varela D, Di Bitetti MS, Paviolo A. 2018. Effects of human impacts on habitat use, activity patterns and ecological relationships among medium and small felids of the Atlantic Forest. PLoS ONE 13(8):e0200806. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0200806
Cultid-Medina C, Escobar F. 2019. Pautas para la estimación y comparación estadística de la diversidad biológica (qD). En: Moreno CE, editor. La biodiversidad en un mundo cambiante: Fundamentos teóricos y metodológicos para su estudio. Estado de Hidalgo/Libermex, Ciudad de México: Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Hidalgo.
Debinski DM, Holdt RD. 2000. A survey and overview of habitat fragmentation experiments. Conserv. Biol. 14(2):342-355. doi: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.98081
Díaz MM, Solari S, Aguirre LF, Aguiar L, Barquez RM. 2016. Clave de identificación de los murciélagos de Sudamérica. 2nd ed. Tucumán, Argentina: Yerba Buena.
Díaz-Pulido A, Payán Garrido CE. 2012. Manual de fototrampeo: una herramienta de investigación para la conservación de la biodiversidad en Colombia. Bogotá: Ministerio de Ambiente y Desarrollo Sostenible: Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt: Panthera Colombia.
Durán SM, Kattan GH. 2005. A Test of the Utility of Exotic Tree Plantations for Understory Birds and Food Resources in the Colombian Andes1: Tree Plantations as Wildlife Habitat. Biotropica 37(1):129–135. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7429.2005.03207.x
Emmons L, Feer F. 1999. Mamíferos de los bosques húmedos de América tropical: una guía de campo. Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia: Editorial F.A.N.
[FAO] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2020. Global forest resources assessment 2020. Key findings. Roma: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO forestry paper).
[FAO] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2010. Evaluación de los recursos forestales mundiales 2010. Roma, Italia: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Feldhamer G, Drickamer L, Vessey S, Merritt J, Krajewski C. 2015. Mammalogy. Adaptation, Diversity, Ecology. Fourth edition. Baltimore: Johns Hopkings University Press.
Felton A, Knight E, Wood J, Zammit C, Lindenmayer D. 2010. A meta-analysis of fauna and flora species richness and abundance in plantations and pasture lands. Biol. Conserv. 143(3):545–554. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2009.11.030
Fergnani PN, Ruggiero A. 2015. Ecological Diversity in South American Mammals: Their Geographical Distribution Shows Variable Associations with Phylogenetic Diversity and Does Not Follow the Latitudinal Richness Gradient. PLoS ONE. 10(6): e0134651. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0128264
Gardner AL, editor. 2008. Mammals of South America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
González-Maya JF, Víquez-R LR, Arias-Alzate A, Belant JL, Ceballos G. 2016. Spatial patterns of species richness and functional diversity in Costa Rican terrestrial mammals: implications for conservation. Jeschke J, editor. Divers. Distrib. 22(1):43–56. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12373
Gullison RE. 2003. Does forest certification conserve biodiversity? Oryx. 37(2):153–165. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605303000346
Hartley MJ. 2002. Rationale and methods for conserving biodiversity in plantation forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 155(1–3):81–95. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00549-7
Heer K, Albrecht L, Kalko EKV. 2010. Effects of ingestion by neotropical bats on germination parameters of native free-standing and strangler figs (Ficus sp., Moraceae). Oecologia 163(2):425–435. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-010-1600-x
Hill MO. 1973. Diversity and evenness: a unifying notation and its consequences. Ecology 54(2):427–432. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/1934352
Hsieh TC, Ma KH, Chao A. 2016. iNEXT: an R package for rarefaction and extrapolation of species diversity (Hill numbers). Methods Ecol. Evol. 7(12): 1451–1456. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12613
Iezzi ME, Cruz P, Varela D, De Angelo C, Di Bitetti MS. 2018. Tree monocultures in a biodiversity hotspot: impact of pine plantations on mammal and bird assemblages in the Atlantic Forest. For. Ecol. Manag. 424: 216–227. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2018.04.049
Jost L. 2006. Entropy and diversity. Oikos 113(2): 363–375. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2006.0030-1299.14714.x
Link A, Mittermeier RA, Urbani B. c2019. Aotus griseimembra. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2019: e.T1807A17922228. [Revisada en: 05 mar 2021]. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-2.RLTS.T1807A17922228.en
Loyn RH, McNabb EG, Macak P, Noble P. 2007. Eucalypt plantations as habitat for birds on previously cleared farmland in south-eastern Australia. Biol. Conserv. 137(4):533–548. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2007.03.012
Michalski F, Peres C. 2005. Anthropogenic determinants of primate and carnivore local extinctions in a fragmented forest landscape of southern Amazonia. Biol. Conserv. 124(3): 383–396. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2005.01.045
Ministerio de Ambiente y Desarrollo Sostenible. 2017. Resolución 1912. República de Colombia.
Mittermeier RA, Link A, Rosales-Meda M, Moscoso P, de la Torre S, Méndez-Carvajal P, Palacios E, Lynch AJ. c2020. Cebus capucinus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2020: e.T81257277A17938441. [Revisada en: 15 feb 2021]. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2020-3.RLTS.T81257277A17938441.en
Morales RM, Armenteras PD. 2013. Estado de conservación de los bosques de niebla de los Andes colombianos, un análisis multiescalar. Bol. Cient. Mus. His. Nat. 17(1):64–72.
Moreno CE, Barragán F, Pineda E, Pavón NP. 2011. Reanálisis de la diversidad alfa: alternativas para interpretar y comparar información sobre comunidades ecológicas. Rev. Mex. Biodivers. 82(4):1249–1261. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.22201/ib.20078706e.2011.4.745
Ogden J, Braggins J, Stretton K, Anderson S. 1997. Plant species richness under Pinus radiata stands on the Central North Island Volcanic Plateau, New Zealand. New Zeal. J. Ecol. 21(1):17–29.
Pardo LE, Roque FO, Campbell MJ, Younes N, Edwards W, Laurance WF. 2018. Identifying critical limits in oil palm cover for the conservation of terrestrial mammals in Colombia. Biol. Conserv. 227:65–73. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2018.08.026
Paviolo A, Cruz P, Iezzi ME, Pardo JM, Varela D, De Angelo C, Benito S, Vanderhoeven E, Palacio L, Quiroga V, Arrabal JP, Costa S, Di Bitetti MS. 2018. Barriers, corridors or suitable habitat? Effect of monoculture tree plantations on the habitat use and prey availability for jaguars and pumas in the Atlantic Forest. Forest. Ecol. Manag. 430(2018):576–586. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2018.08.029
Pawson SM, Ecroyd CE, Seaton R, Shaw WB, Brockerhoff EG. 2010. New Zealand’s exotic plantation forests as habitat for threatened indigenous species. New Zeal J. Ecol. 34:342–355.
Potton C. 1994. A public perception of plantation forestry. N. Z. J. For. Sci. 39(2): 2–3.
R Core Team. 2020. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Ramírez PA, Simonetti JA. 2011. Conservation opportunities in commercial plantations: The case of mammals. J. Nat. Conserv. 19(6):351–355. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2011.06.003
Ramírez-Chaves HE, Suárez-Castro AF, González-Maya JF. 2016. Cambios recientes a la lista de los mamíferos de Colombia. Mammal. Notes 3(1-2):1–9. doi: https://doi.org/10.47603/manovol3n1.1-9
Ramírez-Chaves HE, Castro AFS. 2017. Mamíferos de Colombia. Bogotá: Sociedad Colombiana De Mastozoología.
Rodríguez V, Defler TR, Guzman-Caro D, Link A, Mittermeier RA, Palacios E, Stevenson PR. c2020. Saguinus oedipus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2020: e.T19823A115573819. [Revisada en: 15 feb 2021]. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2020-2.RLTS.T19823A115573819.en
Rusch V, Vila A, Lantshner MV. 2007. La conservación de la biodiversidad en ambientes bajo uso forestal. Rev. Aso. For. Arg. 4–18.
Sánchez-Londoño JD. 2017. Diversidad y uso de hábitat de carnívoros (Carnivora) en un paisaje periurbano en la cordillera central de Colombia [Tesis de Maestria]. [Bogotá D.C., Colombia]: Universidad Nacional de Colombia.
Saravia-Ruiz P, Sánchez-Londoño JD. 2016. Efectos del establecimiento de plantaciones forestales sobre aves y mamíferos en los Andes Centrales de Colombia [Tesis de pregrado]. [Medellín, Colombia]: Universidad CES.
Simonetti JA, Grez AA, Estades CF. 2013. Providing Habitat for Native Mammals through Understory Enhancement in Forestry Plantations: Plantation Understory as Habitat. Conserv. Biol. 27(5):1117–1121. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12129
Sodhi NS, Ehrlich PR, editors. 2010. Conservation biology for all. Oxford. New York: Oxford University Press (Oxford biology).
Solari S, Muñoz-Saba Y, Rodriguez-Macheda J, Defler T, Ramírez-Chaves H, Trujillo F. 2013. Riqueza, endemismo y conservación de los mamíferos de Colombia. Mastozool. Neotropica. 20(2):301–365.
Stephens SS, Wagner MR. 2007. Forest Plantations and Biodiversity: A Fresh Perspective. J. Forest. 105(6):307–313.
Stewart C. 2010. The HCV approach. En: Sheil D, Douglas, Francis EP, Roderick J, editors. Biodiversity conservation in certified forests. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Tropenbos International. p. 144–147.
van Kujik M, Zagt RJ, Putz FE. 2009. Effects of certification on forest biodiversity. Report commissioned by Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL). Wageningen, The Netherlands: Tropenbos International.
Wainwright M. 2002. The natural history of Costa Rican mammals. Miami, USA: A Zona Tropical Publication.
Wijesinghe MR, de Silva VR. 2012. Conservation value of forest plantations: A study of four timber species in Sri Lanka. JTFE. 2(1):36–47. doi: https://doi.org/10.31357/jtfe.v2i1.566
Wilson DE, Cole RF, Nichols JD, Foster MS. 1996. Measuring and monitoring biological diversity. Standard methods for mammals. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.
Zar J H. 2010. Bioestatistical analysis (5th edition). USA: Northern Illinois University.
How to Cite
APA
ACM
ACS
ABNT
Chicago
Harvard
IEEE
MLA
Turabian
Vancouver
Download Citation
CrossRef Cited-by
1. Rodrigo Severo Arce Rojas. (2024). Contribuciones de los principios agroecológicos a la sustentabilidad de las plantaciones forestales con fines comerciales. Siembra, 11(2), p.e6747. https://doi.org/10.29166/siembra.v11i2.6747.
2. Claudio M. Monteza‐Moreno, Mark N. Grote, Jefferson S. Hall, Patrick A. Jansen. (2024). Tropical timber plantations as habitat for ground‐dwelling mammals: A camera‐trapping assessment in Central Panama. Biotropica, 56(4) https://doi.org/10.1111/btp.13352.
Dimensions
PlumX
Article abstract page views
Downloads
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Caldasia
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
