Multifaceted Assessment of Amazonian Tree Diversity Reveals Pervasive Impacts of Human Modification.
Uloženo v:
| Název: | Multifaceted Assessment of Amazonian Tree Diversity Reveals Pervasive Impacts of Human Modification. |
|---|---|
| Autoři: | Berenguer E; Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.; Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK., Nunes CA; Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.; Ecologia Aplicada, Departamento de Ecologia e Conservação, Universidade Federal de Lavras, Lavras, Brazil., Aguirre-Gutiérrez J; Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.; Leverhulme Centre for Nature Recovery, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK., Ferreira J; Embrapa Amazônia Oriental, Belém, Brazil., Malhi Y; Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.; Leverhulme Centre for Nature Recovery, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK., Aragão LEOC; Earth Observation and Geoinformatics Division, National Institute for Space Research (INPE), São José dos Campos, Brazil.; College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK., Esquivel-Muelbert A; Department of Plant Sciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK., Figueiredo AES; Coordination of Environmental Dynamics, National Institute for Amazonian Research, Manaus, Brazil., Hawes JE; Institute of Science and Environment, University of Cumbria, Ambleside, UK., Joly CA; Departamento de Biologia Vegetal, Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, Brazil., Quesada CA; Coordination of Environmental Dynamics, National Institute for Amazonian Research, Manaus, Brazil., de Seixas MMM; Embrapa Amazônia Oriental, Belém, Brazil., Vieira I; Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Belém, Pará, Brazil., Barlow J; Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK. |
| Zdroj: | Global change biology [Glob Chang Biol] 2025 Nov; Vol. 31 (11), pp. e70595. |
| Způsob vydávání: | Journal Article |
| Jazyk: | English |
| Informace o časopise: | Publisher: Blackwell Pub Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 9888746 Publication Model: Print Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1365-2486 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 13541013 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Glob Chang Biol Subsets: MEDLINE |
| Imprint Name(s): | Publication: Original Publication: Oxford, UK : Blackwell Science, 1995- |
| Výrazy ze slovníku MeSH: | Biodiversity* , Trees*/classification , Conservation of Natural Resources* , Forests*, Phylogeny ; Brazil ; Humans ; Rainforest |
| Abstrakt: | Tropical forests harbour the majority of tree species on the planet but are increasingly subjected to deforestation and human-driven disturbances. Understanding how human modifications impact various facets of diversity-i.e., taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic-is crucial, as their responses can differ significantly. Additionally, the influence of species dominance and individual size class on the recovery trajectories of future forests is often overlooked. Here, we address these knowledge gaps by comparing the taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversities of large (≥ 10 cm DBH) and small (≤ 2 cm DBH < 10 cm DBH) trees in undisturbed and human-modified Amazonian forests, considering different weights of species dominance using Hill Numbers. We sampled 25,313 large and 30,070 small trees across 215 forest plots distributed in two different regions of Eastern Amazonia and representing a range of human modification (i.e., undisturbed, logged, logged-and-burned, and secondary forests). Our findings indicate that human modifications significantly reduce the taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversities of both large and small trees, regardless of dominance weightings. Secondary forests exhibited the lowest alpha-diversity and were the most dissimilar to undisturbed forests, while logged-and-burned forests were as distinct from undisturbed forests as they were from secondary forests across all diversity facets. Taxonomic and functional diversity showed similar sensitivity to human modification, while phylogenetic diversity was the least sensitive in alpha-diversity but equally sensitive in community composition analyses. Overall, we showed that human modification explained 55% of the effect size variation found in alpha-diversity and 42% of that found in community composition, with diversity facet, tree size and dominance weighting explaining either ≤ 5%. Given the deleterious impacts of human modification on the diversity of tropical forests, it is imperative to protect remaining undisturbed areas from selective logging and wildfires. Nevertheless, even disturbed primary forests still harbour more taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic diversity than secondary forests. (© 2025 The Author(s). Global Change Biology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.) |
| References: | Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2013 Apr 22;368(1619):20120166. (PMID: 23610172) Proc Biol Sci. 2001 Nov 7;268(1482):2211-20. (PMID: 11674868) Ecol Appl. 2018 Dec;28(8):1998-2010. (PMID: 29999560) Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Dec 20;102(51):18502-7. (PMID: 16339903) Trends Ecol Evol. 2021 Jun;36(6):545-555. (PMID: 33685660) Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022 Jul 5;119(27):e2202310119. (PMID: 35759674) Ecol Lett. 2015 Oct;18(10):1108-18. (PMID: 26299405) Glob Chang Biol. 2014 Dec;20(12):3713-26. (PMID: 24865818) Nat Commun. 2020 Jul 3;11(1):3346. (PMID: 32620761) J Anim Ecol. 2024 Apr;93(4):501-516. (PMID: 38409804) Sci Adv. 2016 May 13;2(5):e1501639. (PMID: 27386528) PeerJ. 2021 May 25;9:e11414. (PMID: 34113487) Bioinformatics. 2008 Sep 15;24(18):2098-100. (PMID: 18678590) Science. 2023 Jan 27;379(6630):eabp8622. (PMID: 36701452) Sci Rep. 2016 Sep 08;6:32017. (PMID: 27605501) Nature. 2007 Feb 15;445(7129):757-60. (PMID: 17301791) Ecol Lett. 2012 Jul;15(7):637-48. (PMID: 22583836) Nature. 2011 Sep 14;478(7369):378-81. (PMID: 21918513) Nat Ecol Evol. 2025 Feb;9(2):282-295. (PMID: 39658586) Biom J. 2008 Jun;50(3):346-63. (PMID: 18481363) Nat Commun. 2021 Mar 19;12(1):1785. (PMID: 33741981) Carbon Balance Manag. 2017 Dec;12(1):3. (PMID: 28413847) Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022 Feb 8;119(6):. (PMID: 35101981) Nat Commun. 2015 Apr 28;6:6857. (PMID: 25919449) Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Jul 27;118(30):. (PMID: 34282005) New Phytol. 2019 Mar;221(4):1853-1865. (PMID: 30238458) Ecology. 2016 Oct;97(10):2772-2779. (PMID: 27859119) Ecol Appl. 2019 Dec;29(8):e01996. (PMID: 31495013) Glob Chang Biol. 2019 Jan;25(1):39-56. (PMID: 30406962) Proc Biol Sci. 2013 Nov 06;280(1773):20132236. (PMID: 24197410) Nat Ecol Evol. 2021 Jun;5(6):757-767. (PMID: 33795854) Nat Commun. 2018 Jul 23;9(1):2888. (PMID: 30038259) Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Nov 20;104(47):18555-60. (PMID: 18003934) Science. 2013 Oct 18;342(6156):1243092. (PMID: 24136971) Glob Chang Biol. 2020 Dec;26(12):7006-7020. (PMID: 32969561) Am Nat. 2006 Dec;168(6):796-804. (PMID: 17109321) Glob Chang Biol. 2020 May;26(5):2956-2969. (PMID: 32022338) Trends Ecol Evol. 2013 Apr;28(4):199-204. (PMID: 23218499) Trends Ecol Evol. 2009 Sep;24(9):505-14. (PMID: 19595476) Nature. 2018 Jul;559(7715):517-526. (PMID: 30046075) Ecol Lett. 2010 Aug 1;13(8):1030-40. (PMID: 20545736) Glob Chang Biol. 2025 Nov;31(11):e70595. (PMID: 41208718) Ecology. 2010 Jan;91(1):299-305. (PMID: 20380219) |
| Grant Information: | SEG:02.08.06.005.00 Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária; 443849/2024-2 Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico; 574008/2008-0 Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico; 17-023 Darwin Initiative; Nature Conservancy; 88887.469205/2019-00 Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior; RPG-2024-342 Leverhulme Trust; NE/F01614X/1 Natural Environment Research Council; NE/G000816/1 Natural Environment Research Council; NE/K016431/1 Natural Environment Research Council; NE/S01084X/1 Natural Environment Research Council; NE/T011084/1 Natural Environment Research Council; NE/X015262/1 Natural Environment Research Council; NE/X019039/1 Natural Environment Research Council; NE/Z504191/1 Natural Environment Research Council; RG\R1\251370 Royal Society; 12/51872-5 São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP Biota Project ECOFOR); BNP Paribas Foundation for Climate and Biodiversity Initiative; DEFRA's Global Centre on Biodiversity for Climate programme |
| Contributed Indexing: | Keywords: Amazon; biodiversity; degradation; dominance; fire; hill numbers; human‐modified‐tropical forests; logging; secondary forests; trees Local Abstract: [Publisher, Portuguese] As florestas tropicais abrigam a maioria das espécies de árvores do planeta, mas estão cada vez mais sujeitas ao desmatamento e a distúrbios causados por atividades humanas. Compreender como as modificações antrópicas afetam diferentes facetas da biodiversidade—isto é, taxonômica, funcional e filogenética—é fundamental, uma vez que suas respostas podem diferir significativamente. Além disso, a influência da dominância das espécies e da classe de tamanho dos indivíduos nas trajetórias de recuperação das florestas é frequentemente negligenciada. Neste estudo, abordamos essas lacunas de conhecimento comparando as diversidades taxonômica, funcional e filogenética de árvores grandes (DAP ≥ 10 cm) e pequenas (2 cm ≤ DAP < 10 cm) em florestas amazônicas intactas e aquelas modificadas por atividades humanas, considerando diferentes ponderações de dominância de espécies por meio dos Números de Hill. Para isso, nós amostramos 25.313 árvores grandes e 30.070 árvores pequenas em 215 parcelas florestais distribuídas em duas regiões distintas da Amazônia Oriental, representando diferentes níveis de modificação antrópica (incluindo florestas intactas, com exploração de madeira, com exploração de madeira e queimadas, e florestas secundárias). Nossos resultados indicam que as modificações humanas reduzem significativamente as diversidades taxonômica, funcional e filogenética, tanto de árvores grandes quanto pequenas, independentemente das ponderações de dominância. As florestas secundárias apresentaram a menor diversidade alfa e foram as mais distintas das florestas intactas, enquanto as florestas exploradas e queimadas mostraram‐se tão diferentes das florestas intactas quanto das florestas secundárias em todas as facetas de diversidade. A diversidades taxonômica e funcional exibiram sensibilidade semelhante às modificações humanas, enquanto a diversidade filogenética foi a menos sensível em termos de diversidade alfa, mas igualmente sensível nas análises de composição das comunidades. De modo geral, demonstramos que as modificações humanas explicaram 55% da variação no tamanho do efeito observado na diversidade alfa e 42% daquela observada na composição das comunidades, enquanto a faceta da diversidade, o tamanho das árvores e a ponderação por dominância explicaram ≤ 5%. Diante dos impactos deletérios das modificações humanas sobre a diversidade das florestas tropicais, é imperativo proteger as áreas intactas remanescentes contra a exploração seletiva e os incêndios florestais. Ainda assim, as florestas primárias degradadas mantêm maior diversidade taxonômica, funcional e filogenética do que as florestas secundárias. |
| Entry Date(s): | Date Created: 20251110 Date Completed: 20251112 Latest Revision: 20251112 |
| Update Code: | 20251113 |
| PubMed Central ID: | PMC12598522 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/gcb.70595 |
| PMID: | 41208718 |
| Databáze: | MEDLINE |
Full Text Finder 
Nájsť tento článok vo Web of Science | Abstrakt: | Tropical forests harbour the majority of tree species on the planet but are increasingly subjected to deforestation and human-driven disturbances. Understanding how human modifications impact various facets of diversity-i.e., taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic-is crucial, as their responses can differ significantly. Additionally, the influence of species dominance and individual size class on the recovery trajectories of future forests is often overlooked. Here, we address these knowledge gaps by comparing the taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversities of large (≥ 10 cm DBH) and small (≤ 2 cm DBH < 10 cm DBH) trees in undisturbed and human-modified Amazonian forests, considering different weights of species dominance using Hill Numbers. We sampled 25,313 large and 30,070 small trees across 215 forest plots distributed in two different regions of Eastern Amazonia and representing a range of human modification (i.e., undisturbed, logged, logged-and-burned, and secondary forests). Our findings indicate that human modifications significantly reduce the taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversities of both large and small trees, regardless of dominance weightings. Secondary forests exhibited the lowest alpha-diversity and were the most dissimilar to undisturbed forests, while logged-and-burned forests were as distinct from undisturbed forests as they were from secondary forests across all diversity facets. Taxonomic and functional diversity showed similar sensitivity to human modification, while phylogenetic diversity was the least sensitive in alpha-diversity but equally sensitive in community composition analyses. Overall, we showed that human modification explained 55% of the effect size variation found in alpha-diversity and 42% of that found in community composition, with diversity facet, tree size and dominance weighting explaining either ≤ 5%. Given the deleterious impacts of human modification on the diversity of tropical forests, it is imperative to protect remaining undisturbed areas from selective logging and wildfires. Nevertheless, even disturbed primary forests still harbour more taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic diversity than secondary forests.<br /> (© 2025 The Author(s). Global Change Biology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.) |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1365-2486 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/gcb.70595 |