Next Article in Journal
Indicators of the Psychosocial and Physiological Effects of Forest Therapy: A Systematic Review
Previous Article in Journal
Genetic Analysis of the Cultivars of Ping’ou Hybrid Hazelnut (C. heterophylla Fisch. × C. avellana L.) in China Based on SSR Markers
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Forests
Volume 14
Issue 7
10.3390/f14071406
forests-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Floristic Composition, Structure, and Aboveground Biomass of the Moraceae Family in an Evergreen Andean Amazon Forest, Ecuador

by
Walter García-Cox
1,*,
Rolando López-Tobar
1,
Robinson J. Herrera-Feijoo
1,*,
Aracely Tapia
2,
Marco Heredia-R
3,
Theofilos Toulkeridis
4 and
Bolier Torres
5,6
1
Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias y Forestales, Universidad Técnica Estatal de Quevedo (UTEQ), Quevedo Av. Quito km, 1 1/2 Vía a Santo Domingo de los Tsáchilas, Quevedo 120550, Ecuador
2
Gobierno Autónomo Descentralizado Provincial de Napo (GADPN), Tena 150150, Ecuador
3
Facultad de Ciencias Pecuarias y Biológicas, Universidad Técnica Estatal de Quevedo (UTEQ), Quevedo Av. Quito km, 1 1/2 Vía a Santo Domingo de los Tsáchilas, Quevedo 120550, Ecuador
4
Department of Earth Sciences and Construction, University of the Armed Forces ESPE, Av. General Rumiñahui S/N, Sangolquí 171103, Ecuador
5
Facultad de Ciencias de la Vida, Universidad Estatal Amazónica (UEA), Puyo 160101, Ecuador
6
Ochroma Consulting and Services, Puerto Napo, Tena 150150, Ecuador
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Forests 2023, 14(7), 1406; https://doi.org/10.3390/f14071406
Submission received: 28 April 2023 / Revised: 8 June 2023 / Accepted: 12 June 2023 / Published: 10 July 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Forest Ecology and Management)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The current study determined the floristic composition, structure, and aboveground biomass (AGB) of the individuals of the Moraceae family. This occurred in order to value them as a source of biomass carbon, which itself is dependent on the altitudinal gradient (601–1000 m.a.s.l.) in the evergreen foothill forest of the Ecuadorian Amazon. The study encountered 117 individuals belonging to the Moraceae family, which was grouped into 32 species. Hereby, the most abundant were the genus Ficus sp., with 9.40% relative abundance, Brosimun alicastrum with 6.84%, and Aucleopsis sp. with 5.98%. Forest structural characteristics, such as the horizontal and vertical structure, diameter at breast height (DBH), and the diameter of the tree crown, were considered for the analysis. The horizontal profile determined that the crowns of the species of the Moraceae family cover approximately 16.43% of the upper canopy within the sampling unit area. The trees of the Moraceae family have a carbon capture capacity in the projected AGB per hectare of 35.09 (Mg ha−1), with the Ficus cuatracasana Dugand species being the species with the highest projected capture per hectare, with 15.737 (Mg ha−1). These results highlight the relevance of similar studies assessing the carbon accumulation capacity of species from other families, emphasizing high commercial value species due to their timber resource.

1. Introduction

The tropical forests located in the Amazon basin are areas of great relevance due to their biological diversity, especially with regard to the richness of plant species [1,2,3,4,5,6]. It is very important to highlight that these forests have been estimated to contain about 43% of all existing tree species [7]. Additionally, these forests play a fundamental role in the conservation of biodiversity and in mitigating the effects of climate change as it is estimated that they have the capacity to capture around 13% of the total annual emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) generated by human activities at a global level [8]. Therefore, several studies have demonstrated that forests located in tropical regions provide various alternatives in terms of planning and applying sustainable strategies for forest conservation [9].
These forests exhibit remarkable biomass productivity and represent a substantial proportion of the total carbon and nutrient stocks [10,11,12]. Biomass, a crucial element in ecosystems, results from the balance between the productivity rate, which includes photosynthesis and seed germination, and the losses caused by respiration and mortality [13,14]. In this context, the quantification of biomass plays a crucial role by the providing relevant information required to understand the responses of vegetation to climate and environmental changes at the local and global levels [15,16,17]. Specifically, biomass estimates in tropical forests are essential for assessing forest carbon stocks and air emissions related to deforestation and land cover change, as well as their global implications [18,19,20,21]. Several studies have indicated that the estimation of carbon stocks, for example, provides useful indicators of environmental change and ecological functioning [22,23,24].
Information on the level of tree biomass production is insufficient in most tropical regions, which restricts efforts to assess and conserve these ecosystems [25,26,27]. In addition, comprehensive studies addressing biomass production and its influence on carbon stocks are still lacking [28,29]. This limitation can be attributed, in part, to the scarcity of estimates of live biomass and the marked variability observed between different regions [30,31]. Therefore, it is essential to perform more detailed and systematic research to better understand the patterns of biomass production in tropical forests in order to effectively support the valuation and conservation of these valuable ecosystems [28].
In Ecuador, very few studies have focused on the estimation of the biomass area in forest ecosystems. These forest ecosystems are a large part of those developed in the Andes and the Ecuadorian Amazonian lowlands [32,33,34,35]. Particularly in the Amazon region, these investigations have examined the variation in tree communities and their contributions to biomass and carbon storage in the elevation gradient [33,34,35,36], reporting that the Fabaceae and Moraceae families have the highest species richness. Regarding the Moraceae family, it comprises approximately 1100 species and 40 genera [37,38,39,40]. This family stands out for its abundance of individuals and the richness of species [36,41,42]. Therefore, researchers suggest that the Moraceae family is one of the ten families with the largest number of tree species in the world and that their species are highly conspicuous elements in the Amazon [4,43]. In addition, the Moraceae family is recognized for the high economic value of its timber species [44,45] and its medicinal uses [46,47], while its fruits are food for a wide variety of frugivores, which benefits the natural succession dynamics of forests [48,49]. Furthermore, for Gentry [50] and Ter Steege et al. [51], Amazonian soils belonging to the Neotropics have a favorable biological quality that make them easier for families such as the Moraceae to become one of the most diverse and abundant [52,53,54]. This coincides with Torres et al. [33], who suggested that the Moraceae and Fabaceae families were the most species-rich, based on a study conducted in a piedmont evergreen forest of the Ecuadorian Amazon [55,56,57]. However, there have been few research efforts on this family in Amazonian forests, as well as little research on the richness and structure at the botanical family level [58,59].
In Ecuador, Caranqui [60] conducted a comparative study between two localities on the Ecuadorian coast and one locality in the Amazon region, with a focus on plant formations that are within the category of lowland evergreen forests. From his results, it can be deduced that they obtained a record of 156 species, corresponding to 39 botanical families, registering the Moraceae family as the most diverse, with 18 identified species. Nonetheless, little is known about their contribution as the species with the greatest timber potential [61]. The contribution of these species to carbon sequestration has not been studied to date, but these forests may act as important carbon sinks.
The present study considers the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve (SBR) as a sampling area, which was recognized as a biosphere reserve by UNESCO in 2000, and later by the Ecuadorian government in 2002. The SBR is made up of around one million ha of native forest (53%), secondary forest (28%), and grasslands (9%) [62]. Its core area is the Sumaco Napo Galeras National Park (PNSNG), which covers 205.751 ha [63]. This reserve has been widely studied as it is recognized as a megadiverse area due to its biological richness [1,64] and, additionally, for the multiple environmental services it provides as a carbon sink [34,65]. However, despite its great importance for biological conservation and in the mitigation of the effects of climate change [66], the SBR is threatened due to the alteration of its habitat caused by high rates of deforestation, changes in the use of the land [67,68,69,70,71], and even illegal mining [72,73]. In the SBR, deforestation is particularly associated with wood carving for the establishment of agricultural crops and intensive livestock [34,74,75]. In terms of deforestation, between 2008 and 2013, the SBR lost 93,853 hectares of native forest. This represents a 10.8% shift to other land uses in a 5-year period, with a deforestation rate of 2.16% across the SBR [76].
Considering the ecological changes and the increase in the rate of deforestation in the aforementioned region, the main purpose of this research was to understand the contribution of species belonging to the Moraceae family to carbon storage in the country, especially in the Amazon region of Ecuador. To this end, three specific objectives were set out. Firstly, we sought to characterize the geographical distribution of the Moraceae family in the Ecuadorian continental territory. Secondly, the floristic composition and the structure of the species belonging to this family were determined. Finally, we focused on quantifying the amount of stored biomass (AGB) in the species of the Moraceae family.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Geographic Setting

The study was conducted to the south of the RBS in an Evergreen Andean Amazon Forest in Ecuador (Figure 1). The predominant ecosystem is the montane evergreen forest (BsMn01) [62], where the temperature ranges between 18 °C and 22 °C, with a precipitation average of 2939 mm and a relative humidity of 89% [77]. Within the RBS appears an active volcano with a unique plant diversity [78,79]. Six protected areas overlap in the RBS (Table 1), as registered in the National System of Protected Areas of Ecuador (SNAP), in addition to many other similar areas [80,81,82,83].

2.2. Geographical Distribution of the Moraceae Family

The georeferenced and validated records of the Moraceae family were obtained from the Botanical Information and Ecology Network (BIEN) database. They are reported in botanical specifications as they are of crucial importance to clarifying the taxonomy of plants and their main habitats [84], which provides a great potential for the conservation of species [85,86,87]. To ensure the quality of the presence records, the cleaning protocol of Cobos et al. [88] was applied; that is, the records that presented the same geographic coordinates and with less than two decimal places were eliminated in order to improve the spatial precision of the recorded data.
All the records collected were projected using a WGS 84 datum and from the intersection between the points and the vector layers of Ecuador and its regions. The number of records of the presence of the Moraceae family were estimated, and the intersect and zonal functions of the Terra package were used as developed for R [89]. In order to estimate the environmental conditions linked to the records of the presence of the Moraceae family in Ecuador, all the points were used as a mask to extract the values of three variables: mean annual temperature (bio1), annual precipitation (bio12), and altitude. The climatic variables used in this analysis were obtained from Worldclim version 2 at a resolution of 2.5 arc-minutes (25 km2) [77]. For the variable altitude, the digital terrain model (DTM) was used with a resolution of 250 m, derived from the Radar Shuttle Topographic Mission (RSTM) [90]. Finally, the environmental values obtained were represented individually by means of a frequency diagram with their respective mode value in order to identify the environmental preferences where the Moraceae family has a greater representativeness in the presence records.

2.3. Floristic Composition, Structure and Carbon Stored in the Biomass of the Species of the Moraceae Family

Temporary transects generally used in rapid exploratory sampling, called Gentry-type sampling [91,92], were installed, modifying the original 500 × 2 m plots to 100 × 10 m plots, where each plot was 0.1 ha. All the species of the Moraceae family were inventoried, marked, measured, and collected. The dasometric variables were recorded as height and diameter for those greater than 10 cm, while for those less than 10 cm, the number of individuals was recorded.

2.4. Data Analysis

The data analysis was divided into two sections: the description of the floristic composition and describing the contribution to carbon absorption of the Moraceae family. This has been realized by means of an allometric equation for forests, using the Excel version 18.0.

2.4.1. Floristic Composition

The characterization of the species of the Moraceae family was conducted from the comparison of the botanical collections available in the Amazon Herbarium of the Amazon State University in Pastaza, located in central Ecuador. This process allowed us to define the floristic diversity of this family, as well as determining the relative abundance, through a predefined equation [93]:
AR = #   Ind   species #   total   individuals × 100

2.4.2. Horizontal and Vertical Structure

The horizontal structure of the forest according to the altitudinal gradient was determined based on the calculation of the following dasometric and ecological parameters:
Basal area
Basal area = 0.7854 × (DAP)2
where:
DAP = Diameter at breast height (1.30 m)
Volume
Volume = Ab × h × ff
where:
Ab = basal area
h = height
ff = form factor
Relative dominance
DR = basal   area   sp total   basal   area × 100

2.4.3. Ecologically Important Value Index

For the graphic representation of the horizontal and vertical structure of the forest, the ArcGis version 10.2 computer tool was used. This allowed the distribution of individuals within the transect, according to the variables (x; y), taken in the field.
IVI = Ab Rel + Dom Rel

2.4.4. Floristic Richness

The Margalef index is based on the relationship between the number of species and the total number of individuals observed. It increases with the increasing sample size [94].
D = S − 1   ln N
where:
S = number of species
N = total number of individuals

2.4.5. Species Diversity

The Shannon-Wiener (H′) measures the average degree of uncertainty in order to predict the species to which an individual taken at random within the MUs belongs.
H ′ = − ∑ ( p i × l o g   p i l o g   2 )
where:
Σ = number of species
Pi = proportion of individuals of the species i
The higher the value of H′, the greater the diversity of species.

2.4.6. Aboveground Biomass Carbon

To estimate the carbon stock of the aerial biomass, an allometric equation was used, applied to the tree measurements, and generated for tropical humid forest conditions [95].
AGB = (p × exp(−1.499 + (2.148 In (D)) + (0.207 × In (D)2) − (0.0281 × In (D)3)) 0.001
where:
AGB = Above ground biomass (tree)
p = is the density of Wood (g/cm3).
D = is the diameter at breast height (cm).

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Geographical Distribution and Environmental Preferences of the Moraceae Family in Continental Ecuador

There are 43,449 records of the Moraceae family distributed on the five continents (Figure 2B), of which 783 have been registered thus far in continental Ecuador. They are distributed in the regions Amazon, Andean highlands, and Coastal lowland with 460, 173, and 150 records, respectively (Figure 2A).
From the estimation of the environmental preferences based on the presence records and environmental data, it is estimated that individuals belonging to the Moraceae family occupy a wide range of environmental conditions. For example, it is estimated that it could be found in areas characterized by altitudinal ranges between 1 and 3435 m.a.s.l. The values observed for the mean temperature are between 9.9 and 25.8 °C, while the observed annual precipitation in the forecast areas ranged between 250 and 4379 mm (Figure 3).

3.2. Composition and Structure (Horizontal and Vertical)

Due to the wide range of diameters of the trees of the Moraceae family, five diameter classes were established, where the largest number of these trees are concentrated in the first class, which ranges between 10.0 and 20.0 cm DAP, grouping 56.4% of the total number of individuals. The second diameter class (20.01 to 30.0 cm) groups 26.5% of the trees, followed by the class of 30.01 to 40.0 cm with a representativeness of 8.5%. Finally, the last two diameter classes group 4.3% of the trees, with five individuals each (Figure 4).
This behavior is the typical resemblance to an inverted “j”, which highlights the heterogeneity of the forest, composed of individuals with disetanic ages and with ample potential for natural regeneration and self-preservation. This trend is similar to that previously obtained in an analysis of the structure of the species of the Arecaceae family in an evergreen Piedmont forest in the province of Napo (central Ecuadorian Amazon) [96]. These authors determined that the largest number of individuals was grouped in the diameter class of 0–10 cm with a representativeness of 86.6%.
The horizontal profile of the species of the Moraceae family of transect number 11—located between 801–900 m.a.s.l., whose crowns are marked with red borders (Figure 5)—are distributed along the transect, demonstrating that they develop dispersedly, covering an approximate area of 164 m2, which represents around 16.43% of the total area of the transect. In addition, we noted the important coverage of the species of the Arecaceae family; despite its low abundance, the species Iriartea deltoidea has a crown diameter of up to 12 m. The clearings that are evident are due to the non-existence of nine individuals that were considered in the first data collection that was recorded. Their absence is attributed to ecological factors typical of the forest as they are dead due to their age, or failing that, they have fallen. Within the forest, there are individuals with diameters less than 10 cm DAP, but these were excluded in the present study. Finally, certain clearings may also be from treetops that are outside of the transect area.
In the vertical profile of the forest (Figure 6), it is observed that the individuals of the Moraceae family are distributed in the upper, middle, and lower strata. The species Brosimun lactescens (S. Moore) C.C. Berg predominates in the upper canopy, while Maquira guianensi subsp costaricana (Standl.) C. C. Berg, Sorocea steinbachii C. C. Berg, Pseudolmedia sp., and Ficus sp. trees are stagnated in the lower canopy. This behavior is attributed to ecological factors typical of the forest, such as competition between trees of other species and families for the nutrients available in the soil and due to competition for the light factor. These are key elements for their development, as well as due to the morphological and genetic characteristics of each species.

3.3. Ecological Importance Value Index (IVI)

Considering the percentage values of the ecological parameters, Ficus sp. is registered as the most important, with 23.96 of IVI, followed by Ficus cuatrecasana Dugand with 20.56 of IVI; in the decreasing measure range, Brosimun lactescens (S.Moore) C.C. Berg with 11.81, Naucleopsis sp., with 11.33, Brosimun alicastrum with 10.82 of IVI, while the remaining species register a value of less than 10.00 of IVI (Table 2).
The species with the lowest determined importance value index is Sorocea muriculata Miq., with an IVI of 1.04. These results corroborate the proposal of Patiño et al. [97], who also determined it as the species with the lowest IVI, with a value of 0.11, as realized within five transects established between 600 and 700 m of altitude in a piedmont evergreen forest of the Napo province of the Ecuadorian Amazon.
Fundamental studies have been performed in the tropical forests of South America [98]. Three types of forests of the Caparú Biological Station in Colombia were analyzed, in two of which the Moreaceae family is among the most important, with 118, 9 and 93.7 of IVI in the Colina and Terraza forests, respectively, and occupying, in the same order, the second and fifth places in terms of ecological importance. In the same study, at the species level, Brosimun lactescens (S.Moore) C.C. Berg holds the sixth place of ecological importance within the forest of the Hill, with 35.2 of IVI. The species Brosimun utile is also registered within the 15 most important species in the terrace forest, with an IVI of 36.6. This reflects the wide distribution of species of the Moraceae family in Neotropical forests.

3.4. Floristic Wealth

3.4.1. Relative Abundance

A total of 117 trees with a DBH ≥ 10 cm were distinguished as belonging to the Moraceae family, which correspond to 32 identified species. A group of 23 individuals was determined as unidentified species because they lacked fertile botanical samples that allow them to be identified with the use of the Amazon Herbarium collection. The species identified with the greatest abundance were Ficus sp. with an abundance of 9.24%, Brosimun alicastrum with 6.72%, Naucleopsis sp. with 5.88%, and Calliandra carbonaria, Sorocea sp. Sorocea steinbachii C.C.Berg with 5.04% (Figure 7). In a previous study [97], it has been stated that the Moracacea family presented itself as one of the most diverse, with 7.14%, with the species Brosimun alicastrum being the most abundant, with seven individuals within a floristic study of five transects of 1000 m2 in an evergreen foothill forest at an altitude of between 600 and 700 in the province of Napo.
The Moraceae family is widely distributed in the tropical and subtropical region; therefore, between 2009 and 2010, the status of the populations of the genera Ficus, Maclura, and Brosimun in the mineral ecological reserve of Nuestra Señora de la Candelaria in Sinaloa, Mexico, was evaluated. This is an area in which five study routes were established, between 400 and 800 m above sea level, where the species Brosimun alicastrum registered the highest abundance with 71.81%, followed by Maclura tinctoria with 17.02%, and Ficus mexicana with 4.26% [99]. On the other hand, Calzadilla-Tomianovich and Cayola [100] analyzed the floristic composition and structure of an Amazonian foothill forest in the Madidi Integrated Management Area in La Paz, Bolivia, at an altitude of 360 m above sea level, where the Moraceae family is the second most abundant, with 33 individuals. There, they have been distributed in eight species, where among the species that were determined are Ficus cuatrecasana Dugand, Pseudolmedia laevis (Ruiz and Pav.) J.F. Macbr., and Clarisia biflora (Ruiz and Pav.), among others.

3.4.2. Dominance

It was determined that within the ten most dominant species of the Moraceae family, the species Ficus cuatrecasana Dugand predominates with a relative abundance of 18.85%, where only two individuals were recorded. Its high dominance is due to the fact that they have a basal area of 1.24 m2. Ficus sp., with 0.96 m2, occupy the second place in dominance with 14.56%. In third place appears the species Brosimun utile with 0.66 m2, representing 10.10%. It is followed by Naucleopsis sp. with 0.35 m2 (5.35%), Ficus guianensis Des. ex. Ham with 0.30 m2 (4.55%), Brosimun alicastrum with 0.26 m2 (3.98%), Sorocea sp with 0.20 m2 (3.10%), Clarisia racemosa Ruiz and Pav. with 0.19 m2 (2.94%), and Batocarpus orinocensis Karts with 0.19 m2 (2.87%).
Compared to the aforementioned study [100], the species Ficus cautrecasana Dugand does not appear among the most dominant due to a single recording of a unique individual, with a basal area of 0.009 m2, equivalent to 0.032%. The species with the least dominance is Sorecea muriculata Miq., with 0.012 m2, which represents 0.19%. The dominance value of this species is similar to that determined by Patiño et al. [97], ranking as the least dominant species—with 0.01 m2, equivalent to 0.09%—within a study performed between 601 and 700 m.a.s.l. in an evergreen foothill forest in the province of Napo.

3.5. Diversity Indices

Applying the Shannon diversity equation, which measures specific biodiversity, we determined that the diversity index of the Moraceae family is 4.35. This index corroborates the high diversity that exists in the montane evergreen forests of the Ecuadorian Amazon. Our result is higher than that obtained by Estrella [101], who determined an index of 3.71 in 20 MUs established in a lowland evergreen forest of the Ecuadorian Amazon. However, it is also interpreted as a region of high floristic diversity. On the other hand, the Margalef index, or specific diversity index, was determined based on the number of individuals of different species. The calculation of this parameter yielded a value of 6.51, which allowed us to determine the high biodiversity of the existing forest species in the studied vegetation cover.

3.6. Accumulated Aboveground Biomass of the Moraceae Family

The accumulated aboveground biomass (AGB) of the species of the Moraceae family is reflected in a total average of 36.09 Mg ha−1 along the altitudinal gradient. There is wide variability in the average accumulation of aerial biomass between the four floors, with the highest carbon concentration on floor 3 (801–900 m) with 74.63 Mg ha−1, while the lowest carbon concentration has been determined to be on floor 1 (601–700 m) with 16.45 Mg ha−1 (Table 3).
The species with the highest carbon accumulation in the biomass is Ficus cuatrecasana Dugand, which, despite only registering two individuals, registered an AGB of 157.36 Mg ha−1, followed by Ficus sp., with an AGB of 90 Mg ha−1. The species Brosimun utile reflects important carbon accumulation values, reporting 59.98 Mg ha−1 of AGB (Figure 7).
Based on the realized calculation, it was determined that the species of the Moraceae family reported along the altitudinal gradient of the evergreen foothill forest accumulate a total of 35.09 Mg ha−1. Nonetheless, in a comparative analysis with the data itself, considering the abundance by diameter class and the AGB, it was determined that the relationships of their projections are not proportional. This occurred in the view that the accumulated Biomass values will not always be a function of the number of individuals by diameter class (Figure 8). Such is the case that the present investigation reflected the highest concentration of AGB in individuals with a DBH equal to or greater than 50 cm, accumulating a total of 24.16 Mg ha−1, with five individuals. This same number of trees constitute the class from 40.1–50.0 cm DAP, reflecting the lowest accumulation of AGB with a value of 7.82 Mg ha−1. The diameter class of 10.0–20.0 cm DAP, despite having the highest number of individuals, only accumulates an ABG of 11.16 (Mg ha−1).

3.7. Limitations and Future Research

One of the main limitations of the study lies in the sample size, due to the use of a reduced number of transects and sampling plots. In addition, as the focus is solely on the SBR, the generalizability of the findings to other forest types or geographic regions is limited. To overcome these limitations, it is suggested to expand the sample size by conducting additional sampling of the Moraceae family in different regions of Ecuador, other than the Amazon. This would allow us to obtain a broader and more diverse view of the distribution, composition, and structure of the Moraceae family in the country, as well as to evaluate possible geographic variations in its aerial biomass and conservation.

4. Conclusions

The floristic composition of the Moraceae family is made up of 32 species, distributed in 117 individuals that cover the 20 transects established between 601 and 1000 m.a.s.l. The genus Ficus sp. is the most abundant, registering 11 individuals, equivalent to 9.40% of relative abundance. At the structural level, the species Ficus cuatracasana Dugand behaved as the most dominant, achieving a position based on its basal area, but not based on the number of individuals, being also the species with the second highest index of importance value, preceded by Ficus sp.
The horizontal and vertical profiles indicated the homogeneous distribution of the trees of the Moraceae family along the altitudinal gradient, grouping in greater quantities in the diameter class of 10.0 to 20.0 cm DBH. This is due to the heterogeneous nature of the forest in terms of the diversity and age of its individuals. It was possible to estimate the area of coverage of the crowns of all the individuals of the Moraceae family, covering approximately 16.4% in relation to the sampling area. The transect with the largest number of individuals of the family was selected and it was projected with an accurate approximation of the distribution of the trees, which directly affects the capture of carbon in the aerial biomass.
By applying an allometric equation, it was determined that the 117 individuals of the Moraceae family present an AGB accumulation of 35.06 Mg ha−1. These data will serve as a starting point for future research and projects aimed at the protection and conservation of native forest cover.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, W.G.-C., M.H.-R. and B.T.; methodology, W.G.-C. and B.T.; software, R.J.H.-F., A.T., and R.L.-T.; validation, W.G.-C., B.T. and M.H.-R.; formal analysis, W.G.-C. and B.T.; investigation, W.G.-C., B.T., R.L.-T., M.H.-R., R.J.H.-F. and T.T.; data curation R.L.-T., A.T. and T.T.; writing—original draft preparation, W.G.-C., M.H.-R., T.T., R.J.H.-F., A.T. and R.L.-T.; writing—review and editing, W.G.-C., B.T., R.J.H.-F., T.T., M.H.-R. and R.L.-T.; supervision, W.G.-C. and B.T. All authors have been involved in developing, writing, commenting, editing, and reviewing the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

This is not applicable as the data is not in any data repository of public access; however, if editorial committees need access, we will happily provide them with it. Please use this email: wgarciac@uteq.edu.ec.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Faculty of Agricultural and Forestry Sciences, Quevedo State Technical University (UTEQ).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Noroozi, J.; Talebi, A.; Doostmohammadi, M.; Rumpf, S.B.; Linder, H.P.; Schneeweiss, G.M. Hotspots within a Global Biodiversity Hotspot-Areas of Endemism Are Associated with High Mountain Ranges. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. Raven, P.H.; Gereau, R.E.; Phillipson, P.B.; Chatelain, C.; Jenkins, C.N.; Ulloa Ulloa, C. The Distribution of Biodiversity Richness in the Tropics. Sci. Adv. 2020, 6, eabc6228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Ulloa Ulloa, C.; Acevedo-Rodríguez, P.; Beck, S.; Belgrano, M.J.; Bernal, R.; Berry, P.E.; Brako, L.; Celis, M.; Davidse, G.; Forzza, R.C. An Integrated Assessment of the Vascular Plant Species of the Americas. Science 2017, 358, 1614–1617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Ter Steege, H.; Pitman, N.C.A.; Sabatier, D.; Baraloto, C.; Salomão, R.P.; Guevara, J.E.; Phillips, O.L.; Castilho, C.V.; Magnusson, W.E.; Molino, J.-F. Hyperdominance in the Amazonian Tree Flora. Science 2013, 342, 1243092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Guevara Andino, J.E.; Pitman, N.C.A.; Ulloa Ulloa, C.; Romoleroux, K.; Fernández-Fernández, D.; Ceron, C.; Palacios, W.; Neill, D.A.; Oleas, N.; Altamirano, P. Trees of Amazonian Ecuador: A Taxonomically Verified Species List with Data on Abundance and Distribution. Ecology 2019, 100, e02894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Ter Steege, H.; Prado, P.I.; de Lima, R.A.F.; Pos, E.; de Souza Coelho, L.; de Andrade Lima Filho, D.; Salomão, R.P.; Amaral, I.L.; de Almeida Matos, F.D.; Castilho, C.V. Biased-Corrected Richness Estimates for the Amazonian Tree Flora. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 10130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Cazzolla Gatti, R.; Reich, P.B.; Gamarra, J.G.P.; Crowther, T.; Hui, C.; Morera, A.; Bastin, J.-F.; De-Miguel, S.; Nabuurs, G.-J.; Svenning, J.-C. The Number of Tree Species on Earth. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2022, 119, e2115329119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. da Rosa, C.M.; Marques, M.C.M. How Are Biodiversity and Carbon Stock Recovered during Tropical Forest Restoration? Supporting the Ecological Paradigms and Political Context Involved. J. Nat. Conserv. 2021, 65, 126115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Koch, A.; Kaplan, J.O. Tropical Forest Restoration under Future Climate Change. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2022, 12, 279–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Pan, Y.; Birdsey, R.A.; Fang, J.; Houghton, R.; Kauppi, P.E.; Kurz, W.A.; Phillips, O.L.; Shvidenko, A.; Lewis, S.L.; Canadell, J.G. A Large and Persistent Carbon Sink in the World’s Forests. Science 2011, 333, 988–993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Harris, N.L.; Gibbs, D.A.; Baccini, A.; Birdsey, R.A.; De Bruin, S.; Farina, M.; Fatoyinbo, L.; Hansen, M.C.; Herold, M.; Houghton, R.A. Global Maps of Twenty-First Century Forest Carbon Fluxes. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2021, 11, 234–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Armstrong McKay, D.I.; Staal, A.; Abrams, J.F.; Winkelmann, R.; Sakschewski, B.; Loriani, S.; Fetzer, I.; Cornell, S.E.; Rockström, J.; Lenton, T.M. Exceeding 1.5 C Global Warming Could Trigger Multiple Climate Tipping Points. Science 2022, 377, eabn7950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Fahey, T.J.; Knapp, A.K. Principles and Standards for Measuring Primary Production; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2007; ISBN 0198037724. [Google Scholar]
  14. Zhang, Y.; Liang, S.; Yang, L. A Review of Regional and Global Gridded Forest Biomass Datasets. Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 2744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Chapman, M.; Walker, W.S.; Cook-Patton, S.C.; Ellis, P.W.; Farina, M.; Griscom, B.W.; Baccini, A. Large Climate Mitigation Potential from Adding Trees to Agricultural Lands. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2020, 26, 4357–4365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ali, A.; Lin, S.; He, J.; Kong, F.; Yu, J.; Jiang, H. Big-sized Trees Overrule Remaining Trees’ Attributes and Species Richness as Determinants of Aboveground Biomass in Tropical Forests. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2019, 25, 2810–2824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Duncanson, L.; Armston, J.; Disney, M.; Avitabile, V.; Barbier, N.; Calders, K.; Carter, S.; Chave, J.; Herold, M.; Crowther, T.W. The Importance of Consistent Global Forest Aboveground Biomass Product Validation. Surv. Geophys. 2019, 40, 979–999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Li, Y.; Brando, P.M.; Morton, D.C.; Lawrence, D.M.; Yang, H.; Randerson, J.T. Deforestation-Induced Climate Change Reduces Carbon Storage in Remaining Tropical Forests. Nat. Commun. 2022, 13, 1964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Melito, M.; Arroyo-Rodríguez, V.; Metzger, J.P.; Cazetta, E.; Rocha-Santos, L.; Melo, F.P.L.; Santos, B.A.; Magnago, L.F.S.; Hernández-Ruedas, M.A.; Faria, D. Landscape Forest Loss Decreases Aboveground Biomass of Neotropical Forests Patches in Moderately Disturbed Regions. Landsc. Ecol. 2021, 36, 439–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Qin, Y.; Xiao, X.; Wigneron, J.-P.; Ciais, P.; Brandt, M.; Fan, L.; Li, X.; Crowell, S.; Wu, X.; Doughty, R. Carbon Loss from Forest Degradation Exceeds That from Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2021, 11, 442–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Vashum, K.T.; Jayakumar, S. Methods to Estimate Above-Ground Biomass and Carbon Stock in Natural Forests-a Review. J. Ecosyst. Ecography 2012, 2, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Poorter, L.; van der Sande, M.T.; Thompson, J.; Arets, E.J.M.M.; Alarcón, A.; Álvarez-Sánchez, J.; Ascarrunz, N.; Balvanera, P.; Barajas-Guzmán, G.; Boit, A. Diversity Enhances Carbon Storage in Tropical Forests. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2015, 24, 1314–1328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Duffy, J.E.; Godwin, C.M.; Cardinale, B.J. Biodiversity Effects in the Wild Are Common and as Strong as Key Drivers of Productivity. Nature 2017, 549, 261–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Ali, A. Forest Stand Structure and Functioning: Current Knowledge and Future Challenges. Ecol. Indic. 2019, 98, 665–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Herold, M.; Carter, S.; Avitabile, V.; Espejo, A.B.; Jonckheere, I.; Lucas, R.; McRoberts, R.E.; Næsset, E.; Nightingale, J.; Petersen, R. The Role and Need for Space-Based Forest Biomass-Related Measurements in Environmental Management and Policy. Surv. Geophys. 2019, 40, 757–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Ma, Z.; Chen, H.Y.H.; Bork, E.W.; Carlyle, C.N.; Chang, S.X. Carbon Accumulation in Agroforestry Systems Is Affected by Tree Species Diversity, Age and Regional Climate: A Global Meta-analysis. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2020, 29, 1817–1828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Panwar, P.; Mahalingappa, D.G.; Kaushal, R.; Bhardwaj, D.R.; Chakravarty, S.; Shukla, G.; Thakur, N.S.; Chavan, S.B.; Pal, S.; Nayak, B.G. Biomass Production and Carbon Sequestration Potential of Different Agroforestry Systems in India: A Critical Review. Forests 2022, 13, 1274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Araujo, E.C.G.; Sanquetta, C.R.; Dalla Corte, A.P.; Pelissari, A.L.; Orso, G.A.; Silva, T.C. Global Review and State-of-the-Art of Biomass and Carbon Stock in the Amazon. J. Environ. Manag. 2023, 331, 117251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Asner, G.P.; Powell, G.V.N.; Mascaro, J.; Knapp, D.E.; Clark, J.K.; Jacobson, J.; Kennedy-Bowdoin, T.; Balaji, A.; Paez-Acosta, G.; Victoria, E. High-Resolution Forest Carbon Stocks and Emissions in the Amazon. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2010, 107, 16738–16742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Gao, Y.; Lu, D.; Li, G.; Wang, G.; Chen, Q.; Liu, L.; Li, D. Comparative Analysis of Modeling Algorithms for Forest Aboveground Biomass Estimation in a Subtropical Region. Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Fassnacht, F.E.; Hartig, F.; Latifi, H.; Berger, C.; Hernández, J.; Corvalán, P.; Koch, B. Importance of Sample Size, Data Type and Prediction Method for Remote Sensing-Based Estimations of Aboveground Forest Biomass. Remote Sens. Environ. 2014, 154, 102–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. González-Jaramillo, V.; Fries, A.; Zeilinger, J.; Homeier, J.; Paladines-Benitez, J.; Bendix, J. Estimation of above Ground Biomass in a Tropical Mountain Forest in Southern Ecuador Using Airborne LiDAR Data. Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Torres, B.; Vasseur, L.; López, R.; Lozano, P.; García, Y.; Arteaga, Y.; Bravo, C.; Barba, C.; García, A. Structure and above Ground Biomass along an Elevation Small-Scale Gradient: Case Study in an Evergreen Andean Amazon Forest, Ecuador. Agrofor. Syst. 2020, 94, 1235–1245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Torres, B.; Bravo, C.; Torres, A.; Tipán-Torres, C.; Vargas, J.C.; Herrera-Feijoo, R.J.; Heredia-R, M.; Barba, C.; García, A. Carbon Stock Assessment in Silvopastoral Systems along an Elevational Gradient: A Study from Cattle Producers in the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve, Ecuadorian Amazon. Sustainability 2023, 15, 449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Maza, B.; Rodes-Blanco, M.; Rojas, E. Aboveground Biomass Along an Elevation Gradient in an Evergreen Andean–Amazonian Forest in Ecuador. Front. For. Glob. Chang. 2022, 5, 738585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. García Cox, W.O. Composición Florística de la Familia Moraceae, Como Fuente de Carbono Aéreo en la Gradiente Altitudinal de un Bosque Siempreverde, Piemontano de la Amazonia Ecuatoriana, Año 2018. Master’s Thesis, Universidad Técnica Estatal de Quevedo, Quevedo, Ecuador, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  37. Clement, W.L.; Weiblen, G.D. Morphological Evolution in the Mulberry Family (Moraceae). Syst. Bot. 2009, 34, 530–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Berg, C.C. Moraceae Diversity in a Global Perspective. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Plant Diversity and Complexity Patterns—Local, Regional and Global Dimensions, International Symposium Held at the Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters in Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark, 25–28 May 2003; Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2005; pp. 423–440. [Google Scholar]
  39. Zerega, N.J.C.; Clement, W.L.; Datwyler, S.L.; Weiblen, G.D. Biogeography and Divergence Times in the Mulberry Family (Moraceae). Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2005, 37, 402–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Kumar, M.; Sharma, I.; Verma, P.K.; Singh, B.J.; Singh, R.; Upadhyay, S.K. A Study on Diversity and Distribution of Ficus L. (Dicotyledonae: Moraceae) Species at Forest Research Institute (FRI), Dehradun (Uttarakhand), India. J. Appl. Nat. Sci. 2021, 13, 552–560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Ramírez, F.C.; Castillo, G.A.; Flores, Y.; Galván, O.F.; Riveros, L.; Sáenz, L.H. Composición, Estructura e Importancia Ecológica de Las Moraceae En Un Bosque Residual de Ucayali, Perú. Rev. For. Perú 2021, 36, 247–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Gardner, E.M.; Garner, M.; Cowan, R.; Dodsworth, S.; Epitawalage, N.; Arifiani, D.; Baker, W.J.; Forest, F.; Maurin, O.; Zerega, N.J.C. Repeated Parallel Losses of Inflexed Stamens in Moraceae: Phylogenomics and Generic Revision of the Tribe Moreae and the Reinstatement of the Tribe Olmedieae (Moraceae). Taxon 2021, 70, 946–988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Vásquez, R.; Rojas, R.; Monteagudo, A.M.; Valenzuela, L.G.; Huamantupa, I. Catalogo de Los Arboles Del Perú. Q’ueña Rev. De La Soc. Botánica Cusco 2018, 9, 1. [Google Scholar]
  44. Daïnou, K.; Laurenty, E.; Mahy, G.; Hardy, O.J.; Brostaux, Y.; Tagg, N.; Doucet, J. Phenological Patterns in a Natural Population of a Tropical Timber Tree Species, Milicia Excelsa (Moraceae): Evidence of Isolation by Time and Its Interaction with Feeding Strategies of Dispersers. Am. J. Bot. 2012, 99, 1453–1463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Daïnou, K.; Mahy, G.; Duminil, J.; Dick, C.W.; Doucet, J.-L.; Donkpégan, A.S.L.; Pluijgers, M.; Sinsin, B.; Lejeune, P.; Hardy, O.J. Speciation Slowing down in Widespread and Long-Living Tree Taxa: Insights from the Tropical Timber Tree Genus Milicia (Moraceae). Heredity 2014, 113, 74–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Nair, N.; Yadav, S.; Biharee, A.; Prathap, V.M.; Majeed, J. Updated Ethnobotanical Notes, Phytochemistry and Phytopharmacology of Plants Belonging to the Genus Morus (Family: Moraceae). Phytomed. Plus 2021, 2, 100120. [Google Scholar]
  47. Shi, Y.; Mon, A.M.; Fu, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, C.; Yang, X.; Wang, Y. The Genus Ficus (Moraceae) Used in Diet: Its Plant Diversity, Distribution, Traditional Uses and Ethnopharmacological Importance. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2018, 226, 185–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Alegría Meneses, D.O. Influencia de la Disponibilidad de Frutos (Familia Moraceae) en las Dinámicas de Fisión-Fusión de Ateles Chamek (Humboldt, 1812) en el Parque Nacional de Manu. Master’s Thesis, Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina, Lima, Peru, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  49. Sánchez, M.D. World Distribution and Utilization of Mulberry, Potential for Animal Feeding. In Proceedings of the FAO Electronic Conference on Mulberry for Animal Production (Morus1-L) 1, Citeseer. 2000, Volume 111. Available online: https://www.cabdirect.org/globalhealth/abstract/20023111035 (accessed on 20 March 2023).
  50. Gentry, A.H. Changes in Plant Community Diversity and Floristic Composition on Environmental and Geographical Gradients. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 1988, 75, 1–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Ter Steege, H.; Sabatier, D.; Castellanos, H.; Van Andel, T.; Duivenvoorden, J.; De Oliveira, A.A.; Ek, R.; Lilwah, R.; Maas, P.; Mori, S. An Analysis of the Floristic Composition and Diversity of Amazonian Forests Including Those of the Guiana Shield. J. Trop. Ecol. 2000, 16, 801–828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Schöngart, J.; Wittmann, F.; Worbes, M.; Piedade, M.T.F.; Krambeck, H.-J.; Junk, W.J. Management Criteria for Ficus Insipida Willd. (Moraceae) in Amazonian White-Water Floodplain Forests Defined by Tree-Ring Analysis. Ann. For. Sci. 2007, 64, 657–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. Terborgh, J.; Andresen, E. The Composition of Amazonian Forests: Patterns at Local and Regional Scales. J. Trop. Ecol. 1998, 14, 645–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Burn, M.J.; Mayle, F.E. Palynological Differentiation between Genera of the Moraceae Family and Implications for Amazonian Palaeoecology. Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol. 2008, 149, 187–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Phillips, O. Ficus Insipida (Moraceae): Ethnobotany and Ecology of an Amazonian Anthelmintic. Econ. Bot. 1990, 44, 534–536. [Google Scholar]
  56. Nascimento, M.T.; Proctor, J.; Villela, D.M. Forest Structure, Floristic Composition and Soils of an Amazonian Monodominant Forest on Maracá Island, Roraima, Brazil. Edinburgh J. Bot. 1997, 54, 1–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Bravo, A.; Harms, K.E. The Biogeography of Sodium in Neotropical Figs (Moraceae). Biotropica 2017, 49, 18–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Rezende, G.M.; Vieira, D.L.M. Forest Restoration in Southern Amazonia: Soil Preparation Triggers Natural Regeneration. For. Ecol. Manag. 2019, 433, 93–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Coomes, D.A.; Grubb, P.J. Amazonian Caatinga and Related Communities at La Esmeralda, Venezuela: Forest Structure, Physiognomy and Floristics, and Control by Soil Factors. Vegetatio 1996, 122, 167–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Caranqui, J. Composición y Diversidad de Especies Arbóreas En Transectos de Localidades Del Bosque Siempreverde de Tierras Bajas Del Ecuador. Enfoque UTE 2015, 6, 96–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Mejía, E.; Pacheco, P. Forest Use and Timber Markets in the Ecuadorian Amazon; CIFOR: Bogor, Indonesia, 2014; Volume 111, ISBN 6021504143. [Google Scholar]
  62. MAATE Interactive Map of MAATE. Available online: http://ide.ambiente.gob.ec/mapainteractivo/ (accessed on 23 February 2023).
  63. Coloma-Santos, A. Parque Nacional Sumaco Napo-Galeras. In Guía Patrimonio Areas Naturales Protegidas Ecuador; Ecol. y MAE, Ed.; Ministerio del Ambiente: Quito, Ecuador, 2007; pp. 219–224. [Google Scholar]
  64. Myers, N.; Mittermeier, R.A.; Mittermeier, C.G.; Da Fonseca, G.A.B.; Kent, J. Biodiversity Hotspots for Conservation Priorities. Nature 2000, 403, 853–858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Torres, B.; Günter, S.; Acevedo-Cabra, R.; Knoke, T. Livelihood Strategies, Ethnicity and Rural Income: The Case of Migrant Settlers and Indigenous Populations in the Ecuadorian Amazon. For. Policy Econ. 2018, 86, 22–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Trew, B.T.; Maclean, I.M.D. Vulnerability of Global Biodiversity Hotspots to Climate Change. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2021, 30, 768–783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Noh, J.K.; Echeverria, C.; Gaona, G.; Kleemann, J.; Koo, H.; Fürst, C.; Cuenca, P. Forest Ecosystem Fragmentation in Ecuador: Challenges for Sustainable Land Use in the Tropical Andean. Land 2022, 11, 287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Kleemann, J.; Zamora, C.; Villacis-Chiluisa, A.B.; Cuenca, P.; Koo, H.; Noh, J.K.; Fürst, C.; Thiel, M. Deforestation in Continental Ecuador with a Focus on Protected Areas. Land 2022, 11, 268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Ferrer Velasco, R.; Lippe, M.; Fischer, R.; Torres, B.; Tamayo, F.; Kalaba, F.K.; Kaoma, H.; Bugayong, L.; Günter, S. Reconciling Policy Instruments with Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation: Cross-Scale Analysis of Stakeholder Perceptions in Tropical Countries. Sci. Rep. 2023, 13, 2180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Torres, B.; Fischer, R.; JC, V.; Günter, S. Deforestación en Paisajes Forestales Tropicales del Ecuador: Bases Científicas Para Perspectivas Políticas; Universidad Estatal Amazónica—Instituto Johann Heinrich von Thünen: Puyo, Ecuador, 2020; 172p. [Google Scholar]
  71. Sierra, R. Patrones y Factores de Deforestación en el Ecuador Continental, 1990–2010. In Y un Acercamiento a Los Próximos 10 Años; Conservacion Internacional Ecuador y Forest Trends: Quito, Ecuador, 2013; 57p. [Google Scholar]
  72. Villacís, S.; Ochoa, J.; Borja, M.O.; Josse, C.; Finer, M.M. Minería Ilegal en la Amazonía Ecuatoriana; Amazon Conservation Association: Washington, DC, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  73. Mestanza-Ramón, C.; Cuenca-Cumbicus, J.; D’Orio, G.; Flores-Toala, J.; Segovia-Cáceres, S.; Bonilla-Bonilla, A.; Straface, S. Gold Mining in the Amazon Region of Ecuador: History and a Review of Its Socio-Environmental Impacts. Land 2022, 11, 221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Torres, B.; Vasco, C.; Günter, S.; Knoke, T. Determinants of Agricultural Diversification in a Hotspot Area: Evidence from Colonist and Indigenous Communities in the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve, Ecuadorian Amazon. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  75. Torres, B.; Espinoza, Í.; Torres, A.; Herrera-Feijoo, R.; Luna, M.; García, A. Livelihood Capitals and Opportunity Cost for Grazing Areas’ Restoration: A Sustainable Intensification Strategy in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Animals 2023, 13, 714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. MAATE Sistema Nacional de Indicadores Ambientales y Sostenibilidad (SINIAS). Available online: http://sinias.ambiente.gob.ec:8099/proyecto-sinias-web/estadisticasAmbientales.jsf?menu=01 (accessed on 20 March 2023).
  77. Fick, S.E.; Hijmans, R.J. WorldClim 2: New 1-km Spatial Resolution Climate Surfaces for Global Land Areas. Int. J. Climatol. 2017, 37, 4302–4315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Toulkeridis, T.; Zach, I. Wind Directions of Volcanic Ash-Charged Clouds in Ecuador–Implications for the Public and Flight Safety. Geomat. Nat. Hazards Risk 2017, 8, 242–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  79. Lozano, P.; Cabrera, O.; Peyre, G.; Cleef, A.; Toulkeridis, T. Plant Diversity and Composition Changes along an Altitudinal Gradient in the Isolated Volcano Sumaco in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Diversity 2020, 12, 229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Guascal, E.; Rojas, S.; Kirby, E.; Toulkeridis, T.; Fuertes, W.; Heredia, M. Application of Remote Sensing Techniques in the Estimation of Forest Biomass of a Recreation Area by UAV and RADAR Images in Ecuador. In Proceedings of the 2020 Seventh International Conference on eDemocracy & eGovernment (ICEDEG), Buenos Aires, Argentina, 22–24 April 2020; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2020; pp. 183–190. [Google Scholar]
  81. Basantes, J.; Padilla-Almeida, O.; Toulkeridis, T.; Ordoñez, E.; Zapata-Vela, J.; Zapata-Vela, A.C.; Rojas, S. Dasometric Analysis Applying Terrestrial Laser Scanner and Conventional Techniques for the Estimation of Aboveground Biomass in a Forest of the Inter-Andean Valley in Ecuador. In Proceedings of the 2019 Sixth International Conference on eDemocracy & eGovernment (ICEDEG), Quito, Ecuador, 24–26 April 2019; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2019; pp. 334–337. [Google Scholar]
  82. Herrera-Feijoo, R.J.; Torres, B.; López-Tobar, R.; Tipán-Torres, C.; Toulkeridis, T.; Heredia-R, M.; Mateo, R.G. Modelling Climatically Suitable Areas for Mahogany (Swietenia Macrophylla King) and Their Shifts across Neotropics: The Role of Protected Areas. Forests 2023, 14, 385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Zapata, J.; Galarza, J.; Yánez, M.; Toulkeridis, T.; Zapata, A.; Ordoñez, E. Determination of the Natural Plant Coverage of the Eloy Alfaro Canton Based on GIS, NW Ecuador. In Proceedings of the 2020 Seventh International Conference on eDemocracy & eGovernment (ICEDEG), Buenos Aires, Argentina, 22–24 April 2020; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2020; pp. 175–182. [Google Scholar]
  84. Maitner, B.S.; Boyle, B.; Casler, N.; Condit, R.; Donoghue, J.; Durán, S.M.; Guaderrama, D.; Hinchliff, C.E.; Jørgensen, P.M.; Kraft, N.J.B. The Bien r Package: A Tool to Access the Botanical Information and Ecology Network (BIEN) Database. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2018, 9, 373–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  85. Albani Rocchetti, G.; Armstrong, C.G.; Abeli, T.; Orsenigo, S.; Jasper, C.; Joly, S.; Bruneau, A.; Zytaruk, M.; Vamosi, J.C. Reversing Extinction Trends: New Uses of (Old) Herbarium Specimens to Accelerate Conservation Action on Threatened Species. New Phytol. 2021, 230, 433–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Lang, P.L.M.; Willems, F.M.; Scheepens, J.F.; Burbano, H.A.; Bossdorf, O. Using Herbaria to Study Global Environmental Change. New Phytol. 2019, 221, 110–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  87. Nic Lughadha, E.; Walker, B.E.; Canteiro, C.; Chadburn, H.; Davis, A.P.; Hargreaves, S.; Lucas, E.J.; Schuiteman, A.; Williams, E.; Bachman, S.P. The Use and Misuse of Herbarium Specimens in Evaluating Plant Extinction Risks. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 2019, 374, 20170402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Cobos, M.E.; Jiménez, L.; Nuñez-Penichet, C.; Romero-Alvarez, D.; Simões, M. Sample Data and Training Modules for Cleaning Biodiversity Information. Biodivers. Inform. 2018, 13, 49–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  89. Hijmans, R.J.; Bivand, R.; van Etten, J.; Forner, K.; Ooms, J.; Pebesma, E. Package ‘Terra’. 2022. Available online: https://github.com/rspatial/terra (accessed on 20 March 2023).
  90. Rodriguez, E.; Morris, C.S.; Belz, J.E. A Global Assessment of the SRTM Performance. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 2006, 72, 249–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  91. Gentry, A.H. Patterns of Neotropical Plant Species Diversity. In Evolutionary Biology; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1982; pp. 1–84. [Google Scholar]
  92. Phillips, O.L.; Miller, J. Global Patterns of Forest Diversity: The Dataset of Alwyn H. Gentry. Monogr. Syst. Bot. 2002, 89, 1–319. [Google Scholar]
  93. Cerón, C.E. Manual de Botánica Ecuatoriana Sistemática y Métodos de Estudio; Universidad Central de Ecuador: Quito, Ecuador, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  94. Margalef, R. Information Theory in Biology. Gen. Syst. Yearb. 1958, 3, 36–71. [Google Scholar]
  95. Chave, J.; Andalo, C.; Brown, S.; Cairns, M.A.; Chambers, J.Q.; Eamus, D.; Fölster, H.; Fromard, F.; Higuchi, N.; Kira, T. Tree Allometry and Improved Estimation of Carbon Stocks and Balance in Tropical Forests. Oecologia 2005, 145, 87–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. García-Quintana, Y.; Arteaga-Crespo, Y.; Torres-Navarrete, B.; Bravo-Medina, C.; Robles-Morillo, M. Biomasa Aérea de Familias Botánicas En Un Bosque Siempreverde Piemontano Sometido a Grados de Intervención. Colomb. For. 2021, 24, 45–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Patiño, J.; Lozano, P.; Tipán, C.; Navarrete, H.; López, R.; Asanza, M.; Torres, B. Composición Florística y Estructura de Un Bosque Siempreverde Piemontano de 600 a 700 m Snm En La Cuenca Del Río Piatúa, Napo, Ecuador. Rev. Amaz. Cienc. Tecnol. 2015, 4, 166–214. [Google Scholar]
  98. Cano Schütz, A. Diversidad y Composición Florística de Tres Tipos de Bosque En La Estación Biológica Caparú, Vaupés, Colombia. Colomb. Forestal 2009, 12, 63–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Magallanes, A.B.; Rocha, Y.R.; Terán, F.A. Distribución y Abundancia de Las Especies Arbóreas de La Familia Moraceae En La Reserva Ecológica Del Mineral de Nuestra Señora de La Candelaria, Cosalá, Sinaloa. In La Investigación Científica, Tecnológica y Social en La UAS; Universidad Autonoma de Sinaloa: Sinaola, Mexico, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  100. Calzadilla-Tomianovich, M.H.; Cayola, L. Estructura y Composición Florística de Un Bosque Amazónico de Pie de Monte, Área Natural de Manejo Integrado Madidi, La Paz-Bolivia. Ecol. Boliv. 2006, 41, 117–129. [Google Scholar]
  101. Estrella Caicedo, L.A. Diversidad Florística, Concentración de Biomasa Aérea y Carbono (c) En Un Bosque Siempre Verde Tierras Bajas de 300 a 400 Msnm., En La Amazonía Ecuatoriana. Master’s Thesis, Universidad Técnica Estatal de Quevedo, Quevedo, Ecuador, 2016. [Google Scholar]
Forests 14 01406 g001 550
Figure 1. Geographic location of the study plots of the Moraceae family in an Evergreen Andean Amazon Forest, inside the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve, in northeastern Ecuador.
Figure 1. Geographic location of the study plots of the Moraceae family in an Evergreen Andean Amazon Forest, inside the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve, in northeastern Ecuador.
Forests 14 01406 g001
Forests 14 01406 g002 550
Figure 2. Geographic distribution of the records of the Moraceae family by regions of Ecuador (A) and worldwide (B).
Figure 2. Geographic distribution of the records of the Moraceae family by regions of Ecuador (A) and worldwide (B).
Forests 14 01406 g002
Forests 14 01406 g003 550
Figure 3. Environmental preferences of the Moraceae family in continental Ecuador.
Figure 3. Environmental preferences of the Moraceae family in continental Ecuador.
Forests 14 01406 g003
Forests 14 01406 g004 550
Figure 4. Distribution of individuals of the Moraceae family by diameter class, in the piedmont evergreen forest in the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve of the Ecuadorian Amazon.
Figure 4. Distribution of individuals of the Moraceae family by diameter class, in the piedmont evergreen forest in the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve of the Ecuadorian Amazon.
Forests 14 01406 g004
Forests 14 01406 g005 550
Figure 5. Distribution of individuals (transects) of the Moraceae family in the horizontal profile of the piedmont evergreen forest in the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve of the Ecuadorian Amazon.
Figure 5. Distribution of individuals (transects) of the Moraceae family in the horizontal profile of the piedmont evergreen forest in the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve of the Ecuadorian Amazon.
Forests 14 01406 g005
Forests 14 01406 g006 550
Figure 6. Distribution of individuals (transects) of the Moraceae family in the horizontal profile of the piedmont evergreen forest in the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve of the Ecuadorian Amazon.
Figure 6. Distribution of individuals (transects) of the Moraceae family in the horizontal profile of the piedmont evergreen forest in the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve of the Ecuadorian Amazon.
Forests 14 01406 g006
Forests 14 01406 g007 550
Figure 7. Species of the Moraceae family with the highest AGB per hectare of the piedmont evergreen forest in the RBS of the Ecuadorian Amazon.
Figure 7. Species of the Moraceae family with the highest AGB per hectare of the piedmont evergreen forest in the RBS of the Ecuadorian Amazon.
Forests 14 01406 g007
Forests 14 01406 g008 550
Figure 8. Abundance and Aerial Biomass by diameter class of the piedmont evergreen forest in the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve of the Ecuadorian Amazon.
Figure 8. Abundance and Aerial Biomass by diameter class of the piedmont evergreen forest in the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve of the Ecuadorian Amazon.
Forests 14 01406 g008
Table
Table 1. Protected areas that overlap in the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve of the Ecuadorian Amazon.
Table 1. Protected areas that overlap in the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve of the Ecuadorian Amazon.
Protected ÁreaExtension (ha)Year of CreationOverlapping Area in RBS (%)
Cayambe Coca National Park403,10317 November 19708.57
Sumaco National Park205,2492 March 1994100
Antisana Ecological Reserve120,00021 July 19932.65
Colonso Chalupas Biological Reserve93,1633 April 20140.51
LLanganates National Park219,70018 January 19968.57
Table
Table 2. Individuals (N° Ind), basal area (BA), abundance (Abund), dominance (Dom) and IVI.
Table 2. Individuals (N° Ind), basal area (BA), abundance (Abund), dominance (Dom) and IVI.
SpeciesN° IndBAAbund (%)Dom (%)IVI
1Ficus sp.110.969.4014.5623.96
2Ficus cuatracasana Dugand21.241.7118.8520.56
3Brosimum lactescens (S. Moore) C.C. Berg20.671.7110.1011.81
4Naucleopsis sp.70.355.985.3511.33
5Brosimum alicastrum80.266.843.9810.82
6Sorocea sp.60.205.133.108.22
7Sorocea steinbachii C. C. Berg60.165.132.437.56
8Batocarpus orinocensis Karst.50.194.272.877.14
9Ficus guianensis Des. ex. Ham30.302.564.557.12
10Calliandra carbonaria60.115.131.746.86
Table
Table 3. Average Carbon of the Aboveground Biomass of the species of the Moraceae family of the piedmont evergreen forest in the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve of the Ecuadorian Amazon.
Table 3. Average Carbon of the Aboveground Biomass of the species of the Moraceae family of the piedmont evergreen forest in the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve of the Ecuadorian Amazon.
VariableAverage by Altitudinal Gradients
P1
(601–700)		P2
(701–800)		P3
(801–900)		P4
(901–1000)		Average (601–1000)
AGB (Mg ha−1)12.3436.2174.6317.0635.09
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

García-Cox, W.; López-Tobar, R.; Herrera-Feijoo, R.J.; Tapia, A.; Heredia-R, M.; Toulkeridis, T.; Torres, B. Floristic Composition, Structure, and Aboveground Biomass of the Moraceae Family in an Evergreen Andean Amazon Forest, Ecuador. Forests 2023, 14, 1406. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14071406

AMA Style

García-Cox W, López-Tobar R, Herrera-Feijoo RJ, Tapia A, Heredia-R M, Toulkeridis T, Torres B. Floristic Composition, Structure, and Aboveground Biomass of the Moraceae Family in an Evergreen Andean Amazon Forest, Ecuador. Forests. 2023; 14(7):1406. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14071406

Chicago/Turabian Style

García-Cox, Walter, Rolando López-Tobar, Robinson J. Herrera-Feijoo, Aracely Tapia, Marco Heredia-R, Theofilos Toulkeridis, and Bolier Torres. 2023. "Floristic Composition, Structure, and Aboveground Biomass of the Moraceae Family in an Evergreen Andean Amazon Forest, Ecuador" Forests 14, no. 7: 1406. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14071406

APA Style

García-Cox, W., López-Tobar, R., Herrera-Feijoo, R. J., Tapia, A., Heredia-R, M., Toulkeridis, T., & Torres, B. (2023). Floristic Composition, Structure, and Aboveground Biomass of the Moraceae Family in an Evergreen Andean Amazon Forest, Ecuador. Forests, 14(7), 1406. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14071406

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop