Floristic Diversity and Stand Structure of the Ngambe-Ndom-Nyanon Communal Forest, Littoral Region of Cameroon

The present study aimed to contribute to the sustainable management of the Ngambe-Ndom-Nyanon communal forest in Cameroon. Thus, an evaluation of the floristic diversity and stand structure of the forest was carried out. By using systematic sampling, a diverse inventory of the plant species was carried out, taking into account the dendrometric measurements of all the species present in the forest (trees, shrubs, herbs). Data were analyzed with Microsoft Excel software to bring out curves and histograms. This software also made it possible to produce tables and also to come up with different diversity indexes. A total of 19,007 individuals from 395 plant species grouped into 99 families were identified in the area. The family Euphorbiaceae was the most represented. Species dominated in this stand were Uapaca guineensis and Pycnanthus angolensis with 9% and 6% of individuals identified. The result of the Shannon index showed that all the strata in the forest are diversified with the highest values in the adult secondary forest (FSA) with indices of 4.74, followed by young secondary forest (FSJ) and the secondary forest (FS) with indice respectively 4.68 and 4.61. The values of the Sorensen index show that 100% of species are common in the young secondary forest (FSJ) and the adult secondary forest (FSA). In the same forest, the FSA and Swamp with FSJ and Swamp have just 15% of species in common respectively. This diversified forest stand projects an inverted J structure, thus testifying to its strong potential for stems of the future. According to the research objectives, some measures were proposed for sustainable management of this forest, such as the reforestation of areas degraded by agricultural activities and the promotion of agroforestry practices by using trees with the high fertilizing potential to improve agricultural yields while preserving the trees in place.

Species Composition and Stand Structure of Primary and Secondary Moist Evergreen Forests in the Tanintharyi Nature Reserve (TNR) Buffer Zone, Myanmar

The habitat structure and floristic composition examined for this study are of great importance, providing a scientific baseline of information for developing a biodiversity database and in supporting crucial information for the management decision-making process of the buffer zones. The primary objective of this study was to examine the current status of species composition and stand structure of moist evergreen forests distributed in the TNR buffer zone. Forest inventory was conducted in the primary moist evergreen forest (~1 ha) and secondary moist evergreen forest (~1 ha). In the TNR buffer zone, 83 species belonging to 31 families in the primary moist evergreen forest and 86 species belonging to 32 families in the secondary moist evergreen forest were found. The most dominant families in the primary moist evergreen forest were Dipterocarpaceae, Sapindaceae, Meliaceae, Myrtaceae, and Myristicaceae;at species level;this forest was composed of Nephelium lappaceum, Myristica malabarica, Nephelium laurium, Aglaia andamanica, and Diospyros peregrine. The most dominant families in the secondary moist evergreen forest were Myrtaceae, Sapindaceae, Euphorbiaceae, Myristicaceae, and Lauraceae, while Nephelium lappaceum, Syzygium claviflorum, Syzygium sp-1, Eugenia oblate, and Myristica angustifolia were the most dominant at the species level. The results of S?rensen’s similarity index based on common species (Ks) and the similarity index based on species dominance (Kd) were observed at about 55% and 75% between the primary and secondary moist evergreen forests. The basal area (51.39 m2.ha-1) of the primary moist evergreen forest was higher than that (44.50 m2.ha-1) of the secondary moist evergreen forest. Between these two forest types, the Shannon-Wiener, the Simpson and the Evenness indices were not significantly different at (p < 0.05). The total number of trees per hectare (n/ha) of the primary and secondary moist evergreen forests were 910 (±184) and 991 (±183). ?