Search

It was evaluated the floristic similarity between two Atlantic Rainforest physiognomies in Brazilian coast area, herein called Restinga and Lowland forests. The hypothesis was that, due the differences in geomorphologic processes, these forests would differ on soil physical and chemical properties, floristic composition, live above-ground biomass and litterfall production. It was sampled 1 ha (100 × 100 m) for each site located in Ubatuba, São Paulo state, SE Brazil. Within each hectare it was recorded trees with DBH > 4.8 cm in all 10 × 10 m contiguous plots, and collected soil and litterfall samples. The cluster and ordination analyses indicated the two communities as distinct groups considering soil and floristic composition, agreeing with the initial hypothesis. Species diversity was higher (p < 0.0001) in the Lowland forest (H' = 4.00 nats.individual-1) than in the Restinga (H' = 3.38 nats. individual-1). However, litterfall production and biomass did not differ (p > 0.05) between the two forests. This apparent paradox could be explained assuming that, since different species establish themselves in the Restinga or Lowland forests and find a favorable spectrum of conditions and resources, they would tend to persist and to develop in that place; even so the edaphic conditions differ between the Restinga and Lowland forests, each species could respond in a particular way to these variations, and then both forests could reach similar values of biomass and litterfall production. It is probable that the environmental filter conditioned by soils has being important for the strong floristic segregation between these two forests.

Copyright of Biota Neotropica (Edicao em Iingles) is the property of Biota Neotropica and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Ambiente e Água is the property of Revista Ambiente e Agua and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Abstract: We evaluated how land use change affected the nitrogen cycle and greenhouse gas fluxes. We measured soil temperature and water-filled pore space (WFPS), as well as nitrate and ammonium concentrations, mineralization and nitrification rates, and flux of CH4, CO2 and N2O in soils of pasture catchment and in soils of a forest catchment located on the north coast of the State of São Paulo. The main vegetation type in the forest catchment is primary Atlantic Montane Forest, while the pasture is an unfertilized 40-year old area planted with Brachiaria humidicola. Four plots were used for monthly sampling in each land use for an entire year. Soil temperature was always higher in pasture than in forest soils, while WFPS was lower in the pasture in relation to forest soils. Pasture soils were a weak source of CH4 during the winter months and a less strong sink of methane than the forest soils during the rainy summer months of the year. The annual median CH4 uptake was −1.8±1.0mgm−2 d−1 in the forest in contrast to −0.6±0.9mgm−2 d−1 in pasture soils. CO2 emissions were similar in the winter, but higher in the summer months in pasture soils in relation to forest soils. The annual median flux in the forest was 4.2±1.5μmolm−2 s−1 and increased in the pasture to 6.5±2.9μmolm−2 s−1. In contrast, N2O fluxes were smaller in the pasture (0.3±0.7ngcm−2 h−1) than in forest soils (0.5±0.5ngcm−2 h−1). [Copyright &y& Elsevier]