The effect of different cutting intensities of mangrove grey trees (Avicennia marina (Forssk.) Vierh.) on the reproduction and the growth of stand

Document Type : Complete scientific research article

Authors

1 Research Assistant Professor, Natural Resources Research Department, Hormozgan Province Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Center, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization, Bandar Abbas, Iran.

2 Research Division of Natural Resources, Golestan. Agriculture and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Gorgan, Iran

3 Research Instructor, Natural Resources Research Department, Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Center, Hormozgan Province, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization, Bandar Abbas, Iran.

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Mangroves are one of the most important and effective cover of mandabi ecosystems, which are evergreen and resistant to salinity and grow in the coastal areas of tropical and subtropical regions, so that they can adapt to the conditions like high salinity, wind, anaerobic soil environment and tides with high height. Despite the many environmental services, these forests are considered as threatened ecosystems in tropical and subtropical regions, which are very vulnerable to human activities and climate changes and are exposed to a threat. During the recent centuries, the destruction of mangrove habitats as a result of coastal development, pollution, aquaculture, logging and exploitation and fuel supply has been done more intensively and has led to a drastic reduction in the area of the mangrove ecosystem. One of the most important human threats in the mangrove forests of Hormozgan province is especially the cutting of mangroves by local people in order to raise livestock. The percentage of importance of cutting in Hormozgan is much higher than other threats, so the purpose of this research is to investigate the effect of different intensities of cutting on the reproductive and growth characteristics of forest stand.
Materials and methods: The location of the project was (an area 180 meters long along the coast and the length of the mangrove forest, along the highest and lowest tide levels). This design was carried out in a completely randomized design with 4 treatments and 10 replications in plots 40 meters long and 25 meters wide along the slope of coastal lands. In each plot along its diameter, 10 mangrove trees whose crown diameter was more than 2 meters were selected and cutting treatments with percentages (zero, 10, 20 and 30%) were implemented on the sample trees (40 sample trees). It is worth mentioning that the diameter at a height of 30 cm and the height of the sample trees, the reproduction status around the sample trees, the diameter and height of the surrounding trees, the sample trees before cutting and 5 years after cutting were measured and it was compared using one-way analysis of variance.
Results: The results showed that the height and diameter growth rate of the sample trees was the highest in the control treatment with values of 0.45 meters and 2.37 centimeters, and significantly more than the 20% treatment (0.23 meters and 0.94 cm) and 30% treatment (0.17 meters and 0.52 cm). Also, the reproduction rate around the sample trees was significantly reduced by cutting. The reproduction rate was the highest in the control treatment with 0.093 seedlings per square meter, while the lowest value (0.031 seedlings per square meter) was observed in the 30% cutting treatment. It is worth mentioning that 10, 20 and 30% cutting was observed in the control treatments, respectively, with the number of 0, 3, 5 and 8 diebacked seedlings≤ 5 cm, during 5 years. In examining the effect of cutting on the growth of trees around the sample tree, no significant effect was observed.
Conclusion: Overall, the results of this research showed that grey mangrove trees are very sensitive to human intervention and cutting and react strongly. This reaction was shown in the field of the habitat in the form of a decrease in vegetative characteristics and seedling production around the cut trees.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

1.Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O’Neill, R.V., and Paruelo, J. 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature. 387: 253-260.
2.Glaser, M. 2003. Interrelations between mangrove ecosystems, local economy ad social sustainability in Caete´ Estuary, North Brazil. Wetland Ecology Management. 11: 265-272.
3.Ghosh, S., Bakshi, M., Bhattacharyya, S., Nath, B., and Chaudhuri, P. 2015. A Review of threats and vulnerabilities to mangrove habitats: With Special Emphasis on East Coast of India. J. of Earth Science Climate Change. 64: 1-9.
4.Spalding, M., McIvor, A., Tonneijck, F.H., Tol, S., and van Eijk, P. 2014. Mangroves for coastal defense. Guidelines for coastal managers & policy makers. Published by Wetlands International and The Nature Conservancy. 42p.
5.Ellison, J., and Zouh, I. 2012. Vulnerability to climate change of Mangroves: Assessment from Cameroon, Central Africa. Biology. 1: 617-638.
6.Blasco, F., Saenger, P., and Janodet, E. 1996. Mangroves as indicators of coastal change. Southern Cross University e-Publications, Australia. 12p.
7.Duke, N.C., Bell, A., Lawn, Pedersen, D., and Roelfsema, C.M. 2003. Report on preliminary investigations of the cause of Mangrove Dieback at Luggage point. Marine Botany Group Centre for Marine Studies.The University of Queensland. Austrelia.
8.FAO. 2003. Status and trends in mangrove area extent world-wide. By Wilkie, M.L., Fortuna, S., Forest Resources Assessment Working Paper No. 63. (Forest Resources Division of the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations).
9.Yaqubzadeh, M., Salman Mahiini, R., Mikaili, A., Danehkar, A., and Moslehi, M. 2021. Prioritization of environmental hazards of mangrove forests in Hormozgan province. J. of Natural Environment Hazards. 30: 10. 68-82. (In Persian)
10.Hosseinzadeh Monfared, S., Tohidianfar, Y., Ahmadnia Mutlaq, H., and Ahmadi, M. 2007. Mangrove forests; Its distribution, importance and threats in Iran, the first regional conference on inland aquatic ecosystems of Iran. Bushehr. Islamic Azad University, Bushehr branch, pp. 1-6.
11.Moslehi, M. 2017. Ecological value of endangered mangrove forests.
12.Dehghanipour, M., and Mashayekhizadeh, A. 2015. Investigating the current situation and threats to the largest forest reserve and threats to the largest mangrove forest reserve in Iran. The third national conference of student scientific associations of agriculture and natural resources. Karaj. Agriculture and Natural Resources Campus of Tehran University.
13.Walters, B.B. 2005. Ecological effects of small-scale cutting of Philippine mangrove forests. Forest Ecology and Management. 206: 331-348.
14.Ghosh, A., Schmidt, S., Fickert, T., and Nüsser M. 2015. The Indian sundarban Mangrove forests: History, Utilization, Conservation Strategies and Local Perception. Diversity. 7: 149-169.
15.Kanti Paul, D., Pramanick, P., Zaman, S., and Mitra, A. 2021. Threats to mangrove ecosystem of Indian Sundarbans: A quantative stakeholder-oriented approach. Natural resources And Their Ecosystem Services. II: 144-152. 
16.Libreros, J., and Ruiz, K. 2021. Theratened mangrove in the anthropcene: Habitat fragmentation in urban costalscapes of Pelliciera Spp. (Tetrameristaceae) in Northern South America. Frontiers in Marine Science. 8: 1-15.
17.Ranjbar, A., Ghahremani, L., and Porhashmi, M. 2012. The consequences of cutting (top branching) on the biometric characteristics of the Oak tree (Quercus libani Oliv.) in the forests of Baneh city. Iran Forest and Poplar Research. 20: 4. 578-594. 
18.Spalding, M.D., Kainuma, M., and Collins, L. 2010. World Atlas of Mangroves. 319p.
19.Danehkar, A., and Jalali, S.G. 2005. Investigating the structure of mangrove forests in Khmer and Qeshm basins (Hormozgan province) using transect statistics. Research and Construction in Natural Resources. 67: 18-24.
20.Moslehi, M. 2022. The effect of different cropping intensities on vegetative and reproductive characteristics of mangrove forests in Khamir region. Research Project. AREEO.
21.Komiyama, A., Ong, J.E., and Poungparn, S. 2008. Allometry, biomass, and productivity of mangrove forests: a review. Aquatic Botany. 89: 128-137.
22.Primavera, J.H. 1998. Mangroves as nurseries: shrimp populations in mangrove and non-mangrove habitats. Estuar. Coast Shelf Science. 46: 457-464.
23.Yaqubzadeh, M., Salman Mahiini, R., Moslehi, M., Mikaili, A., and Danehkar, A. 2021. Investigating the role of dock on vegetative and reproductive characteristics of mangrove grey trees (Avicennia marina (Forssk.) Vierh). 3: 28. 244-256.
24.Yaqubzadeh, M., Salman Mahiini, R., Mikaili, A., Danehkar, A., and Moslehi, M. 2021. Investigating the effect of shrimp farm effluent on vegetative and reproductive characteristics of Avicennia marina (Forssk.) mangrove trees. Vierh. Iranian Forest Magazine. 3: 13. 271-284.
25.Simon, N.L., and Raffaelli, D. 2012. Assessing ecosystem effects of small-scale cutting of Cameroon mangrove forests. J. of Ecology and Natural Environment. 4: 5. 126-134.
26.Medina-Irizarry, D.N., and Andrue, G.M. 2022. The impacts of trimming mangroves. IFAS Extension. University of Florida. 4p.
27.Othman, M.A. 1994. Value of mangroves in Coastal protection. Hydrobiologia. 285: 277-282.
28.Clarke, P.J., and Allaway, W.G. 1993. The regeneration niche of the grey mangrove (Avicennia marina): effects of salinity, light and sediment factors on establishment, growth and survival in the field. Oecologia. 93: 548-556.
29.Minchinton, T.E. 2001. Canopy and substratum heterogeneity influence recruitment of the mangrove Avicennia marina. J. of Ecology. 89: 888-902.
30.Snedaker, S.C., and Lahmann, E.J. 1988. Mangrove understory absence: a consequence of evolution? J. of Tropical Ecology. 4: 311-314.
31.Smith III, T.J. 1992. Forest structure. In: Robertson, A.I., Alongi, D.M. (Eds.), Tropical Mangrove Ecosystems. American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC. pp. 101-136.
32.Roth, L.C. 1992. Hurricanes and mangrove regeneration: effects of Hurricane Joan, October, on the vegetation of Isla del Venado, Bluefields, Nicaragua. Biotropica. 24: 375-384.
33.Eusebio, M.A., Tesoro, F.O., and Cabahug, D.M. 1986. Environmental impact of timber harvesting on mangrove ecosystem in the Philippines. In: National Mangrove Committee (Ed.), Mangroves of Asia and the Pacific: Status and Management. Natural Resources Management Center, Ministry of Natural Resources, Quezon City, Philippines. pp. 337-354.
34.Ewel, K.C., Zheng, S., Pinzon, Z., and Bourgeois, J.A. 1998. Environmental effects of canopy gap formation in high-rainfall mangrove forests. Biotropica. 30: 510-518.
35.Nurkin, B. 1994. Degradation of mangrove forests in South Sulawesi, Indonesia. Hydrobiologia. 285: 271-276.
36.Pinzon, Z.S., Ewel, K.C., and Putz, F.E. 2003. Gap formation and forest regeneration in a Micronesian mangrove forest. J. of Tropical Ecology. 19: 143-153.
37.Tsuda, S., Kikuchi, T., Mochida, Y., and Yamanaka, M. 1995. A rapid investigation on gap size of mangrove forest and seedling population on Kosrae Island, Micronesia. In: Kikuchi, T. (Ed.), Rapid Sea Level Rise and Mangrove Habitat. Man and the Biosphere and Institute for Basin Ecosystem Studies, Gifu University, Gifu, Japan, pp. 49-50.
38.Rocha da Silva, N., and Maiab, R. 2019. Evaluation of the growth and survival of mangrove seedling under different light intensities: Simulating the effect of mangrove deforestation. Revista Árvore. 43: 3. 1-11.
39.Hajbi, A., Moslehi, M., and Hosni, M. 2019. A practical guide for the production and planting of mangrove and chandel seedlings in the southern coasts of Iran. Technical magazine. Agricultural Education and Extension Research Organization, Forestry and Pasture Research Institute. 24p.
Journal of Wood and Forest Science and Technology
Volume 30, Issue 1
March 2023
Pages 141-156

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics