People’s Forest Dependence: A Case Study of Similipal Biosphere Reserve, India

A forest, as a rich ecosystem, is the source of livelihood of a large number of people residing in its fringe areas. Forest dwellers’ dependence on the forest varies across forest zones due to several factors, such as natural features and socio-economic-demographic characteristics of the people in different zones. Using econometric tools, this study evaluates the forest dependence of people residing in and around the Similipal Biosphere Reserve in India, constructs an index, and determines key factors affecting the extent of the forest dependence. The study explores household size and non-forest income as sources of alternative livelihood. Forest-zonal characteristics have significant impact on determining the extent of the forest dependence. People’s forest dependence is likely to be more in the periphery compared to the core zone. Therefore, in any initiative for reducing people’s forest dependence, zone-wise differentiation is needed to ensure sustainable development.

Hummingbird–Plant Interactions Are More Specialized in Forest Compared to Coffee Plantations

Deforestation transforms habitats, displacing vertebrates and the other dimensions of biodiversity they support through their interactions. Few empirical studies have quantified the effect deforestation has on vertebrate–pollinator interaction networks. Here we quantify how hummingbird–plant networks change in relation to hummingbird diversity across a deforestation gradient. We found that, overall, hummingbird–plant interactions were significantly more specialized in forests and specialized interactions decayed rapidly with the loss of tree cover at small spatial scales. Hummingbird species interaction specialization was also higher in forest habitats compared to coffee plantations, but we found no support for a morphological hummingbird trait that predicted interaction specialization or forest dependence. Finally, we developed spatially explicit models for quantifying impacts of land-use decisions on hummingbird species and the biodiversity they support. These tools can be used to identify and prioritize important habitats for conservation activities, like creating new protected areas and improving agricultural lands for biodiversity.

Bird Functional Traits Respond to Forest Structure in Riparian Areas Undergoing Active Restoration

Monitoring wildlife responses is essential to assess restoration projects. Birds are widely used as bioindicators of ecosystem restoration, but most studies use only taxonomic descriptors to compare categories of reference and restoring sites. Here, we used forest structure as a continuous predictor variable to evaluate avifaunal taxonomic and functional indicators in riparian forest reference and restoration sites on southeastern Brazil. Reference sites were riparian forest remnants, and restoration sites were pasture before seedling reintroduction. Forest structure variables (mean tree height, canopy depth, mean diameter at breast height, basal area, tree layering, tree density, and grass cover) were reduced into two axes using a Principal Component Analysis (PCA), Forest Axis 1 (tree biomass vs. grass cover) and Forest Axis 2 (canopy depth vs. tree density). Bird species were classified in relation to five functional categories (i.e., diet, foraging stratum, nest height, cavity dependence for nesting, and forest dependence). Forest Axis 1 influenced the functional diversity of bird assemblages and the relative abundance within levels of each functional category (except for nest height). The relative abundance of all functional categories combined was also affected by Forest Axis 2. Therefore, forest structure affected the predominant functional traits of bird species in riparian sites under restoration. Sites with higher tree biomass were the richest, with canopy birds that were insectivores and frugivores of high forest dependence, whereas more open sites were associated with birds of low forest dependence and ground-foraging insectivores. Forest structures of similar-aged sites were strongly variable, due to natural and anthropic disturbances, so restoration age was a poor indicator of forest development. These unpredictable disturbances can change the development of sites under restoration, so that forest structure can be a better descriptor of the trajectory of these ecosystems.