DIVERSITY, DISTRIBUTION AND SUSTAINABILITY OF WESTERN HIMALAYAN HIGHLAND FLORA OF AZAD JAMMU AND ,

By

SHAMSHAD AZIZ

(Regd. No. 2005-Gmdg-6028)

Session: 2014-2017

Department of Botany Faculty of Sciences UNIVERSITY OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR, DIVERSITY, DISTRIBUTION AND SUSTAINABILITY OF WESTERN HIMALAYAN HIGHLAND FLORA OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR, PAKISTAN

By

Shamshad Aziz

(Regd. No. 2005-Gmdg-6028)

A Thesis

Submitted in partial fulfillment of requirement for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

in

Botany

Session: 2014-2017

Department of botany Faculty of Sciences UNIVERSITY OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZAFFARABAD

ii

Certificate of Approval This is to certify that the research work presented in this thesis “Diversity,

Distribution and Sustainability of Western Himalayan Highland Flora of Azad

Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan” was conducted by Shamshad Aziz under the supervision of Dr. Hamayun Shaheen. No part of this thesis has been submitted anywhere else for any other degree. This thesis is submitted to the Department of

Botany, University of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Muzaffarabad in any fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of doctor of Philosophy in field of Botany, Department of Botany, University of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Muzaffarabad.

Student name: ______Signature:______

Examination Committee: a) External Examiner 1: Name Signature:______(Designation & Office Address) …………………………………. …………………………………. b) External Examiner 2: Name Signature:______(Designation & Office Address) …………………………………. …………………………………. c) Internal Examiner 1: Name Signature:______(Designation & Office Address) …………………………………. …………………………………. Supervisor Name Signature: ______Dr. Hamayun Shaheen

Name of Head of Department: Signature: ______Dr. Rehana kauser

Name of Dean Signature: ______Prof. Dr. Muhammad Qayyum Khan

Director Advanced Studies & Research Signature: ______

iii

CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ……………………………………………………….….………….ix

LIST OF FIGURES….……………………………………….…………………………x

LIST OF APPENDICES ………………………………………………………………xi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ……………………………………..…………………….xii ABSTRACT ………………………………………………………………………...... xiv 1. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………...1 1.1. ECOLOGICAL ZONES AND DOMINANT VEGETATION TYPES OF AJK………………………………………………………………………...5 1.2. SOCIOECONOMIC INDICATORS AND FLORAL DIVERSTY…...….6 1.3. THREATS TO THE WESTERN HIMALAYAN HIGHLAND VEGETATION……………………………………………………………8 1.4. JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY………………………………………9 1.5. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES……………………………………………....11 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE……………………………. ………12 2.1. ECOLOGICAL FACTORS CONTROLLING HIMALAYAN HIGHLAND VEGETATION…………………………………………....14 2.2. CLIMATE CHANGE AND ALPINE VEGETATION…………………18 2.3. ECOSYSTEM SERVICES PROVIDED BY HIGHLANDS OF THE HIMALAYAS…………………………………..………………………..22 2.4. THREATS TO THE FLORAL DIVERSITY OF HIMALAYAN SUB ALPINE AND ALPINE VEGETATION………………………………..28 2.5. OVERVIEW OF PREVIOUS VEGETATION STUDIES………………31 3. MATERIALS AND METHODS ………………………………….34 3.1. STUDY AREA…………………………………………………………...34 3.2. CLIMATE………………………………………………………………..41 3.3. EDAFHIC FACTORS………………………………..………………….41 3.4. HYDROLOGY…………………………………………………………...42 3.5. SAMPLING METHODOLOGY……………………………...... 42 3.6. PHYTOSOCIOLOGICAL ATTRIBUTES………………………………43 3.7. PHYTOSOCIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS………………………………...44

iv

3.8. DIVERSITY INDICES………………………………………………….47 3.9. COMPONENTS OF DIVERSITY………………………………………47 3.10. ASPECT………………………………………………………………….48 3.11. SLOPE……………………………………………………………………49 3.12. GRAZING INTENSITY…………………………………………………49 3.13. SOIL EROSION…………………………………………………………48 3.14. BIOLOGICAL SPECTRUM…………………………………………….50 3.15. ECOSYSTEM SERVICES FROM WESTERN HIMALAYAN HIGH LANDS………………………………………………………..……….. ..50 3.16. SOCIOECONOMIC VARIABLES MEASURED……………..………..50 3.17. METHODS USED FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF MEDICINAL OF THE AREA…………………………………………………………..52 3.18. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS…………………………………………….52 4. RESULTS …………………………………...……………………...53 4.1. FLORISTIC COMPOSITION…………………………………………...53 4.2. DOMINANT SPECIES BASED UPON IMPORTANCE VALUES…...93 4.3. BIOLOGICAL SPECTRUM…………………………………………….94 4.4. PHYTOSOCIOLOGICAL ATTRIBUTES OF THE SUB ALINE AND ALPINE FLORA…………………………………………………………95 4.5. DIVERSITY INDICES………………………………………………….96 4.6. Polygonum - Rheum - Astragalus Community (Community 1)………...100 4.7. Myricaria - Carex - Sewerttia Community (Community 2)……………102 4.8. Salix - Polygonum - Senecio Community (Community 3)……………..104 4.9. Rosa – Artemisia – Pedicularis Community (Community 4)…………..106 4.10. Juniperus - Rosa – Artemisia Community (Community 5)…………….108 4.11. Betula - Fragaria – Impatiens Community (Community 6)……………111 4.12. Carex – Caltha- Trifolium Community (Community 7)………………..113 4.13. Betula – Saussuria-Senecio Community (Community 8)………………114 4.14. Bistorta – Geranium - Aconitum Community (Community 9)…………117 4.15. Bistorta - Sibbaldia –Geum Community (Community 10)……………..118 4.16. Bistorta - Potentilla - Sibbaldia Community (Community 11)………...120 4.17. Bistorta–Thymus- Corydalis Community (Community 12)………….…122 4.18. Juniperus- Rosa- Lonicera Community (Community 13) ……………..124

v

4.19. Rhododendron - Swertia –Juniperus Community (Community 14)…... 126 4.20. Rubus - Abies- Picea Community (Community 15)………………….. .128 4.21. Pinus- Indigofera-Viburnum Community (Community 16)……...…….130 4.22. Juniperus- Aconitum- Agrorstis Community (Community 17)………….132 4.23. Betula - Salix - Juniperus Community (Community 18)……………….134 4.24. Betula -Lonicera- Juniperus Community (Community 19)……………136 4.25. Artemisia- Abies- Betula Community (Community 20) ……………….138 4.26. Pinus-Berberis -Lonicera Community (Community 21)……………….139 4.27. Abies – Berberis – Viburnum Community (Community 22)……….. …142 4.28. Abies - Picea –Juniperus Community (Community 23)………………..144 4.29. Abies -Rosa - Viburnum Community (Community 24)…………………146 4.30. Bistorta - Rhododendron - Juniperus Community (Community 25)…...148 4.31. Gaultheria - Sibbaldia - Geum Community (Community 26)………….150 4.32. Juniperus - Sibbaldia - Anaphalis Community (Community 27)………152 4.33. Rhododendron- Potentilla - Cassiope Community (Community 28)...... 154 4.34. Rhododendron- Bistorta - Poa Community (Community 29)……….....156 4.35. Salix -Betula –Sibbaldia Community (Community 30)………………...157 4.36. Anaphalis–Poa- Poa Community (Community 31) ……………………159 4.37. Allium- Bistorta- Rheum Community (Community 32)………………...161 4.38. Sibbaldia – Gaultheria - Salix Community (Community 33) ………….162 4.39. Sibbaldia - Pedicularis - Lagotis Community (Community 34)………..164 4.40. Abies - Skimmea-Juniperus Community (Community 35)……………..165 4.41. Abies- Potentilla - Fragaria Community (Community 36)…………….167 4.42. Viburnum- Festuca - Lonicera Community (Community 37)………….169 4.43. Lonicera - Berberis -Juniperus Community (Community 38) ………...171 4.44. Abies – Primula-Erigeron Community (Community 39)………………173 4.45. Viburnum- Berberis- Salix Community (Community 40)………………175 4.46. Abies - Viburnum-Trillium Community (Community 41)……………...177 4.47. Viburnum- Juniperus - Lonicera Community (Community 42)………..179 4.48. Salix - Lonicera -Viburnum Community (Community 43) …………….181 4.49. Pinus-Abies-Viburnum Community (Community 44)………………….183 4.50. Salix - Junperus - Pennaisetum Community (Community 45)…………185 4.51. Juniperus - Rosa - Lonicera Community (Community 46)…………….187 4.52. Juniperus -Potentilla -Primula Community (Community 47)………….189

vi

4.53. Salix - Pinus- Prunus Community (Community 48)……………………191 4.54. Poa- Osmunda – Salix Community (Community 49) ………………….193 4.55. Salix - Juniperus – Epilobium Community (Community 50)……………195 4.56. Juniperus - Bergenia - Berberis Community (Community 51)………...197 4.57. Salix- Viburnum - Pseudomerntensia Community (Community 52)…...199 4.58. Sibbaldia - Viburnum –Carex Community (Community 53)…………...201 4.59. Viburnum - Thymus – Juniperus Community (Community 54)………...203 4.60. Potentilla- Rosa - Sibbaldia Community (Community 55)…………….205 4.61. Salix -Sibbaldia- Fragaria Community (Community 56) ……………..208 4.62. ECOSYSETEM SERVICES OF HIGHLAND FLORA IN AJK………210 4.62.1. Socioeconomic Attributes of the local population………………….210 4.62.2. Medicinal Used by Local People…………………………….211 4.62.3. Wild Vegetables Used………………………………………………221 4.62.4. Mushroom Extraction……………………………………………….222 4.63. VILLAGE WISE ANALYSIS OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES……….224 4.64. FODDER AND FOR AGE COLLECTED FROM FOREST AND GRASS LANDS…………………………………………………...... 239 4.65. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS……………………………………………243 4.66. PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS……………………………..244 4.67. CLUSTER ANALYSIS……………………………………………...…247 5. DISCUSSION……………………………………………..……....253 5.1. FLORISTIC COMPOSITION…………………………………………252 5.2. BIOLOGICAL SPECTRUM OF THE HIGHLAND FLORA………..255 5.3. PHYTOSOCIOLOGICAL ATTRIBUTES OF THE PLANT COMMUNITIES……………………………………………………….256 5.4. DIVERSTY AND ITS COMPONENT………………………………..260 5.4.1. Species Richness…………………………………………………...262 5.4.2. Species Evenness……………………………………………………263 5.4.3. Community Maturity…………………………………………………...264 5.5. FUEL WOOD CONSUMPTION PATTERNS AND IMPACTS ON LOCAL FLORA………………………………………………………...265 5.6. INDIGENOUS ENTHOMEDICINAL UTILIZATIONS OF LOCAL FLORA……………………………………………………………….…267

vii

5.7. MUSHROOM EXTRACTION…………………………………………269 5.8. WILD VEGETABLES COLLECTION………………………………..261 5.9. HERD SIZE, GRAZING AREA AND FORAGE, FODDER COLLECTION………………………………………….……………....272 5.10. CONSERVATION STATUS OF THE LOCAL FLORA……………...274 CONCLUSION………………………………………………….………….280 RECOMENDATIONS…………………………………………………....282 REFRENCES………………………………………………….…..285 APPENDICES…………………………………………………….348

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Table.3.1: Geographical charecterstics of the investigated sites in the area……….………………………………………………………………………………37

Table 3.2: Daubenmire coverage classes for herbs and shrubs…………………………..45

Table.4.1: Floristic Composition, local name, IVI values, Habit and Biological Spectrum of vegetation of Subalpine and Alpine Zone of AJK………………………………….…55

Table.4.2: Quantitative Phytosociological attributes of the investigated communities….98

Table 4.59: Medicinal Plants, local names, parts used, and their remarks in Azad Jammu and Kashmir…………………………………………………………………………….214

Table 4.60: Socioeconomic parameters and fuel wood consumption pattern in local poplation of the study area…………………………………………………….……..…237

Table 4.61: Family size, Average land holding, herd size, available grazing area /grazing unit in the surveyed villages………………………………………………………….…238

ix

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3.1: Map of the study area (Right) and satellite Imagery of the sampling sites…36

Figure 4.1: Dominant families having largest species number in the study area………...54

Figure 4.2: Life form distribution of the local highland flora……………………………94

Figure 4.3: Leaf size class composition of local flora……………………………..…….95

Figure 4.4: Percentage of different Medicinal plant’s parts used as medicines………...213

Figure 4.5: Percentage dependency of the surveyed villages on medicinal plants…….213

Figure 4.6: Percentage of people’s using wild vegetables……………………………...222

Figure 4.7: Percentage of local population involved in mushroom extraction………....223

Figure 4.8: Fodder and forage utilization pattern in the villages of the study area….….243

Figure 4.9: Principle component analysis Biplot of the species and sites data matrices.346

Figure 4.10: Cluster analysis dendrogram of the investigated plant communities from the study area………………………………………………………………………..………252

x

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1:(A) Roscoea alpina (B) Malaxis muscifera (C) Astragalus rhizanthus (D) Maconopsis aculeata……………………………………………………..……………..349

Appendix 2: (E).Trolius acaulis F) Botrychium lunaria G) Aconitum violaceum H) Rosularia adenotricha……………………………………………………………….….350

Appendix 3: A) Trillium govanianum B) Bergenia stracheyi, C) Saussurea costus D) Geranium himalayense……………………………………………………………….....351

Appindix 4: E) Bistorta affinis F) Jurania macrocephala G) Arnebia benthamii H) Dioscorea deltoidea………………………………………………………………….....352

Appendix 5: (A) Cardamine sp B) Rheum sp C) Taraxacum sp D) Malva parviflor ….353

(Wild vegetables collection and drying)………………………………………………..354

Appendix 6: Wild vegetables collection………………………………………………..355

Appendix 7: (A) Berberis jaeschkeana B) Rosa macrophylla C) Fragaria nubicola D) Rubus idaeus………………………………………………………….…………….…...356

Appendix 8: (A) Gyromitra esculenta B) Hericium sp C) Morchella esculenta D) Coprinus sp………………………..…………………………………………………….357

Appendix 09: Fuel wood and Timber Extraction……………………………………….358

Appendix 10: Fodder Collection………………………………………………………..359

Appendix 11: Soil errosion and land degradation……………………………………...360

Appendix 12: Disturbances and ovegrazing in the investigated area…………………...361

Appendix 13: Deforestation…………………………………………………………….362

xi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Praise is to Allah, The Cherisher and Sustainer of the world, The Most Gracious,

The Most Merciful Who bestowed me with all His blessings without which I would not have been able to achieve anything in my life. Millionth gratitude to Allah for giving me strength and enabled me to complete this work successfully. Special praise and countless blessings of Allah may be upon Holy Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W.W), perfect of all human beings, enlightened and encouraged the people to seek knowledge for their whole life.

I would like to express my deep and sincere gratitude to my honorable supervisor

Assistant Prof. Dr. Hamayun Shaheen, for his continuous support, motivation, encouragement and providing friendly environment. His endless realms of knowledge and guidance helped me in every step of research and writing of this thesis. I would never be able to get a leaned supervisor and mentor like him.

I would like to highly acknowledge Dr. Zahid Ullah (University of Swat) for helping me in the identification of the local flora. I also pay my gratitude to my teachers

Dr. Ejaz Ul Islam Dar, Dr. Tariq Habib and Dr. Syeda Sadiqua Firdous under whose sincere guidance, valuable cooperation and obliging supervision this work was completed. I am extremely grateful to them for giving me their precious time and providing me all the facilities in his lab during my research work and writing stage.

I feel privileged and have great pleasure to place on record my sincere gratitude to

Dr. Rehana Kausar (Coordinator Department of Botany) and all staff members,

University of Azad Jammu & Kashmir Muzaffarabad under whose sincere guidance and obliging supervision this work was completed. I would also like to thank all my university teachers for enlightening me with jewels of knowledge and for their immense guidance and advice during my student life.

I am extremely grateful to my all Family members especially my Father in law,

Mother in law, brothers in law and sisters in law for giving me support all the time after

xii my marriage life. My heartfelt gratitude to my husband Mr. Shahid Rasheed for giving me his precious time and providing me all the facilities during my research work.

My deepest gratitude goes to my family for unflagging love and support throughout my life. I cannot gather words to thank my parents specially my mother for her endless love and affection. She always stands beside me in all ups and downs of life.

Thanks to my loving brothers (Abdul Majid Azad, Khalid Aziz, Abdul Wajid Aziz) and sisters (Samina Aziz, Shaheen Aziz, Thmeena Aziz, Naeema Aziz, Madiha Kalsoom

Azad) and all my cousins for their support, without their encouragement and understanding it would have been impossible for me to finish this work. May Allah keep them healthy and place them among His loved ones. Ameen. I feel great pleasure and honour to express cheerful thanks to my cousins Khwaja Awais Ahmed, Shafeeq Butt,

Safeer Butt and Attique Ud Din, Faizah Rasheed, Shahida Ghani and Nasreen Rustam for their cooperation during my research fields.

I am also thankful to my research fellows and friends (Allia Ashraf, Sobia Mumtaz,

Sidra Rafique, Sidra Nisar, Saima Khan, Nosheen Azhar, Nosheen Mumtaz, Sadia Aziz,

Saira Bashir, Ghazlaa Jabeen, Ghazlaa Shareef, Dr. Saima Ashraf, Dr. Aneela Ulfat,

Sonia Manzoor, Sumara Shafique, Hadia Altaf, Momna Abasi, Bulqees, Syeda Fatima

Gillani, Maryam Awan, Nuzhat Gillani), my colleagues, University fellows (especially,

Sahibzada Ateeq Ur Rehman, Farooq Ahmad, Muhammad Jamil, Shahnwaz Khan, Tariq

Saif Ullah, Karamat Hussain, Raja Waqar Ahmed Khan, Fazan Masood, Shakeel Awan,

Waqas Ahmed, Dr. Muhammad Nasir, Shezad Naseer Awan, Muhammad Asif Tahir, and Javed Qayyum Swati,), and all those who help me during my study period, for their cooperation and for their deep love which is everything my strength in weakness.

May the almighty Allah shower his blessing to all those who assisted me at different stages during my academic career.

Shamshad Aziz

xiii

ABSTRACT

Species composition and vegetation structure of Western Himalayan alpine and subalpine highlands are among the key components of regional biodiversity. The current research project was designed to investigate the species composition, distribution pattern, conservation status, ecosystem services and sustainability of sub alpine and alpine vegetation zones with reference to environmental and anthropogenic variables in the state of Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK), Pakistan. Field sampling was carried out at 56 sites in an altitudinal range of 2700 to 4400m in 5 districts of AJK following standard phytosociological protocols. Results revealed a total of 517 plant species recorded from the study area belonging to 78 families and 239 genera; including 9 trees, 51 shrubs, 48

Pteridophytes and 407 herbs. Highland flora showed overwhelming (63.05%) dominance of 14 plant families contributing 326 species out of the total 517 recorded species.

Asteraceae was the largest recorded family with 54 species followed by Rosaceae (37 species), Poaceae (35 species) and Lamiaceae (29 species). Analysis of the Biological spectrum of the highland flora revealed Hemicryptophytes as the dominant Life form with

211 species constituting 40.81 % of the local flora whereas Micorphylls were found to be the dominant leaf spectrum with 185 Species (35.78 %).

A total of 56 plant communities were established at the sampling sites on the basis of Importance Value Index (IVI) with Salix flabellaris as the most dominant plant species with an IVI of 11.31 followed by Juncus membraneous (10.03), Abies pindrow (9.21),

Betula utilus (8.02) and Pinus wallichiana (5.38). The average value of Simpson’s diversity index was calculated to be of 0.92 whereas Shannon-Weiner diversity index as

3.16 for the studied communities. The local flora exhibited an average Menhinick’s richness value of 2.26 with an evenness of 0.62. Plant communities showed an immature

xiv succession rate with a low value of community maturity index recorded as 19.13 % attributed to the anthropogenic disturbances and climatic harshness.

The contribution of ecosystem services provided by the alpine and subalpine in livelihood of local communities was assessed through socioeconomic surveys in ten remote valleys of AJK. Study area showed large family and herd sizes of 8.95 and 17.96 respectively with a small average land holding of 2.13 ha and an available grazing area of just 0.683. Data revealed 67 plant species having indigenous ethnomedicinal utilizations whereas 24 plant species were used for treatment of veterinary ailments. Wild vegetables were found to be an important component of local food with a total of 34 herb species whereas 53 plant species were recorded to be used as fodder. Collection and trade of 8 mushroom species, especially Morchella esculenta from the forest areas were identified as a significant source of income for locals. Local communities were totally dependent upon the forests for the fuel wood with an average annual consumption of 269 tons/ household.

Current study identified anthropogenic impacts including deforestation, overgrazing, overexploitation of medicinal plants and soil erosion as serious threats to the local plant biodiversity. A total of 45 plant species were found to be seriously threatened having very low (<0.05) IVI values in the area. Results of the study might be helpful for the researchers and policy makers to take steps for the conservation of threatened and rare species in the subalpine and alpine vegetation types. We recommend Improvement and implementation of local conservation strategies with an integrated approach involving the local community, government departments and researchers to protect these fragile but immensely important sub alpine and alpine vegetation ecosystems in western Himalayan region of AJK.

xv

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

The Himalayas with 21 vegetation types and 60 Eco region types are home to an

estimated 25,000 species of plants, equivalent to 10% of the world's total (Helmer et al.,

2002). Species composition and vegetation structure of Himalayan forest types are

among the key components of regional hotspot biodiversity. The alpine zone is a critical

repository of biodiversity, harboring high number of endemic and endangered species

(Korner, 2003). The alpine and sub-alpine zone of the Western Himalaya are much

more extensive in geographical coverage as compared to Eastern Himalayas (EH), as

reflected by the larger pool of vascular plants in the Western Himalayas (Rawat, 2007).

Plant biodiversity in the Himalayan Mountains is unique, especially in high

altitude areas where typically alpine and sub-alpine endemic floral elements are found.

The Himalayan sub-alpine and alpine vegetation is of great scientific interest and

importance for plant conservation (Singh et al., 2014). Hindu Kush Himalayan range

encompasses an extensive floral diversity, harboring 2500 out of the total of 10,700

Himalayan plant species. Ninety percent endemic plants of western Himalayas are

found here, with more than 20% having high medicinal value (Hamilton and Radford,

2007). HKH alpines are probably center of origin of important endemic taxa like

species of Androsace, Viola, Rhododendron, Saxifraga, Gentiana, Primula,

Lentopodium and Saussurea (Panthi et al., 2007).

Amongst all the eco-regions, those that occur within the Hindukush-Himalayas

are the richest from a floral perspective. About 2500 plant species have so far been

recorded from the Hindukush-Himalayas that include 90% of all the endemic plants,

reported from Pakistan (Sher and Hussain, 2009). In western Himalayas, about 80% of

1 the endemic flowering plants are confined to the northern and western mountains of

Pakistan and Kashmir. The phytodiversity hotspots of Pakistan are spread over 13 natural regions from alpine pastures to mangrove forest. Pakistan is divided into 9 ecological regions with about 6000 plant species. Out of this, 410 are endemic to

Pakistan while about 200 are believed to be threatened because of various reasons (Ali,

2008).

Analyses of vegetation structure includes the quantitative measurements of various components of vegetation like density, frequency, canopy cover, IVI values, diversity, and its components etc. (Ahmed et al., 2010; Shaheen et al., 2017). Variation in species diversity along different environmental gradients is a major field of ecological study in recent years and has been explained with reference to climate change impacts, productivity, biotic interaction and habitat heterogeneity of species

(Shaheen et al., 2012). Disturbance in vegetation pattern in any area leads to an imbalance of ecosystem functioning. Low fertility, altitude, and hydrology also have a contribution in distribution of vegetation structure. The distribution of vegetation in any region is strongly influenced by various parameters such as temperature, rainfall, blustery weather, remoteness, topography, soils, and seral development which rapidly change along the elevational gradient (Krauchi et al., 2000)

Western Himalayan Mountains are among the most fragile ecosystems on the planet. They are a rich source of biodiversity, water, providers of ecosystem services to the downstream communities and are home to some of the world’s most threatened and endemic species including medicinal plants, as well as to some of the poorest people who are dependent on the biological resources (Korner, 2003b; Shreshta et al., 2012;

Gairola et al., 2015; Shaheen et al., 2017). These ecosystems are the bases of sustainability in rural areas, both in temporary and permanent residents. About 10% of

2 the world’s population depends directly on mountain vegetation resources for their livelihood, wellbeing and an estimated 40% depends indirectly on mountain resources for water regulation, biodiversity, flood control, and recreation (MEA, 2005).

Vegetation diversity forms the foundation for sustainable development, constitutes the basis for environmental health; and is the source of economic and ecological security for our future generations. Himalayan vegetation diversity provides the assurance of food, many raw materials such as fiber for clothing, materials, for shelter, fertilizer, fuel and medicines, as well as source of work energy (IEA, 1998; Hein et al., 2006; Eriksson et al., 2009). In addition, it maintains the ecological balance between natural ecosystems and human dominated settlements, necessary for survival and Human wellbeing (Apieh et al., 2007, 2009; Hussain & Parven, 2009).

There is a strong relationship between plant diversity and ecosystem services

(Yawari and Shahgulzari, 2010). Degraded floral diversity and composition in mountain areas of Himalayas is an indicator of high intensity of anthropogenic disturbances and harsh climatic conditions which regularly disturbs the natural balance of delicate highland vegetation communities during the short growing season, thus preventing them from reaching an apex stage of community maturity (Schild and Sharma, 2011; Schild,

2016). Species diversity is a spatial form of textural diversity and can be treated both in structure and dynamics of vegetation stand. Higher species diversity value indicates the stability of vegetation structure in the area. Disturbance is the mean cause to reduce the vegetation diversity and plant growth (Iqbal et al., 2008).

Alpine plants are the most suitable indicators to assess the consequences of climate change in species distribution. Changing climate may shift the vegetation towards the elevation tops which may change the composition of the vegetation in near future (Singh et al., 2012). The elevation tops are the proper places, where the effects of

3

climate change can be compared and monitored to predict the future migration of plant

species. High altitudinal vegetation is directly influenced by global warming (Korner,

2003).

More than 6,000 species of species have been reported from

Pakistan (Ahmad, 2003). Wild plants are rapidly disappearing due to tremendous

increase in human population, urbanization, invasive species, illegal trade, habitat

fragmentation, over exploitation of natural resources, and the increased dependency of

the poor on the limited natural resources (Alam and Ali, 2009). The plant species have

been subjected to extraction for medicinal purpose, mining activities, such as for animal

hunting, harvesting vegetables and traditional medicines, and for spiritual or traditional

ceremonies. Anthropogenic activates like overgrazing, logging, deforestation, forest

fire, and encroachment are among the important factors that have negative impacts on

vegetation structure (Nazir et al., 2012). Poor socioeconomic conditions, population

explosion and lack of awareness in local inhabitants of forest surrounding areas are the

main threats for the depletion of forest diversity.

More than 60% of the Himalayan forests have been destroyed during the last

century (Todario et al., 2010). As a result of these anthropogenic activities, the rate of

plant extinction has reached one species per day. Biodiversity loss is one of the world’s

most pressing crises. It has been estimated that the current species extinction rate is

between 1,000 and 10,000 times higher than it would naturally be (IUCN, 2008). If the

trend remains constant, 60,000 to 100,000 plant species would disappear during the next

50 years (Pujol et al., 2006).

According to FAO (2015) the forest cover of Pakistan is only 2% whereas 4% of the country’s land is covered by cultivated trees, planted in gardens, cities, along rivers,

4 and canals other places and agricultural lands. Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) has forest area comprising only 12% of its total area (GOAJK, 2015). The coniferous forests in the hilly regions are the largest natural forest resources due to favorable ecological conditions (Siddiqui et al., 2009).

1.1. ECOLOGICAL ZONES AND DOMINANT VEGETATION TYPES OF AJK

The state of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan is comprisesd of an area of 5134 square miles with mainly hilly and mountainous landscape characterized by deep Valleys and undulating territory. Ecologically the region is divided into four zones namely Sub- tropical (360m-1300m), Temperate (1300m-2700m), Sub-alpine (2700m-3500m) and

Alpine (>3500m) region (Dar et al., 2012). Most of the state area is mountainous which is relatively unstable with low inherent productivity therefore most people base their livelihood on mountains for their sustainability.

Depending on the altitude that varies from 360m in the South to 6325m in the

North, Azad Jammu & Kashmir has a wide range of climatic conditions. The South has dry sub-tropical climate while the North has a most moist temperate climate with difference in floral biodiversity in the region. There is considerable variation in the rainfall pattern across different regions both in terms of amount and distribution. In the northern districts 50% precipitation occurs in the shape of snow fall (Rehman, 2004; Pak-

Met, 2017).

The vegetation of represents appreciably diverse types owing mainly to habitat diversity in different areas (Butt, 2006; Shaheen et al, 2011). Azad

Kashmir region is reported to harbor more than 1300 plant species most of which are specific to habitat and confined to upper hilly areas (Khan et al., 2016; Nasir and Ali,

1970-1979). Starting from lowland subtropical vegetation type these range from various temperate sites through sub-alpine to alpine floristic elements in the mountains of the

5

Himalaya. There is a great diversity of habitats and ecological zones in the region in the temperate conditions because of availability of moonsoon and diversity of aspects with changing topography. The temperate forests occur between 1600 - 2700 m and comprise usually the conifers such as Pinus wallichiana, Cedrus deodara, Abies pindrow, Picea smithiana and Taxus wallichiana with some associated broad-leaved trees and shrubs. In the dry temperate forest (1500-2500m), the principal components are Cedrus deodara and

Pinus wallichiana whereas the moist temperate forest (1700-3000m), the evergreen Oaks and Conifers dominate including Cedrus deodara, Abies pindrow, Padus cornuta, Picea smithiana, Quercus incana and Q. dilatata (Sharma et al., 2009; Ghimire et al., 2008;

Wang et al., 2007; Ahmad et al., 2010; Qamer et al., 2016).

In the sub-alpine forests (2700 - 3500 m), Abies pindrow dominates in the lower region followed by Picea smithiana and Pinus wallichiana, while natural stands of Birch

(Betula utilis) occur up to 3500 m, forming the timberline in the Western Himalaya

(Singh et al., 2012; Dar and Khuroo, 2013). Beyond the timberline; alpine scrub type vegetation occurs comprising mainly of species like Juniperus spp, Rhododendron spp,

Salix sp, Lonicera spp, Rosa spp and Cotoneaster spp at higher elevations (Dickore and

Nusser, 2000; Alam and Ali, 2009; Ali and Qaiser, 2010). The alpine meadows are composed of many perennial Mephytic herbs and some grasses such as species of

Primula, Aconitum, Anemone, Delphinium, Caltha, Cassiope, Fragaria, Fritillaria,

Saxifraga, Aquilegia, Rohodiola and Potentilla at altitudes between 3500m-4300m

(Kala, 2005; Shresheta et al., 2012; Sharma et al., 2014; Gairola et al., 2015; Korner,

2006).

1.2. SOCIOECONOMIC INDICATORS AND FLORAL DIVERSTY

Himalayan floral diversity is subjected to severe distruction due to poor socio-

economics, exponentially increasing population, lack of infrastructure, lack of

6

awareness about the usage pattern of natural resources, unavailability of alternate fuel

and energy sources in the rural mountain populations of the AJK (Kunwar & Sharma,

2004; Todario et al., 2010; Gairola et al., 2008, Shaheen et al., 2017). Huge Fuel wood

consumption by utilizing forest resources is a critical issue in rural areas of the area.

Because of the long winters and cold climate, people need large amounts of fuel wood

for energy (IEA, 1998; Bhatt et al., 1994; Cochard & Dar, 2014). This tremendous

demand of fuel wood has created serious pressure on the Himalayan forest (FAO,

2008).

Due to highly constrained environment and diversity in landscape facial appearance, little is known about taxonomic and functional components of diversity

(Pauli et al., 2007). Owing to these characteristics and anthropogenic activities like illegal trade of medicinal herbs, unscientific collection of natural resources, trampling, over grazing and browsing by local herders and nomads, the valuable species of the specific habitat from the Kashmir Alpines and Sub-alpines are disappearing (Todario et al., 2010;

Shameem et al., 2011; Shaheen et al., 2011, 2012; Nazir et al., 2012; Khan et al., 2014).

These potential threats must be investigated in a scientific manner and conservation procedures should be taken to sustain the biodiversity at higher elevations (Singh and

Rawat, 2012).

The worth of medicinal plants in regular healthcare practices provides clues to

latest areas of research and in biodiversity conservation (Abbasi et al., 2013). However,

information on the uses of plants for medicine is limited from the remote interior

valleys and local communities (Kharkwal et al., 2005; Khan et al., 2011, 2012, 2014).

Therefore the study on different aspects of plant resources should be promoted to revise

the diversity pattern, indigenous uses of medicinal plants (Khan et al., 2014), wild

plants as a food and fruit (Kala, 2007) and Moral’s contribution in economic

7

development of mountain people (Rasul, 2010). The threat categorization and

conservation prioritization of medicinal plants and other non-timber forest products in

high lands of Kashmir is another area yet to be explored.

1.3. THREATS TO THE WESTERN HIMALAYAN HIGHLAND VEGETATION

Himalayan Highland vegetation has long been threatened by a variety of

destructive agents. Natural threats are integral to play a role in vegetation dynamics

(Swift et al., 2004), including the frequency, intensity and timing of fire events, fungal

attack, parasites, erosion (Clift et al., 2008) wild animals, edaphic factors (Tiessen and

Wu, 2002; Dar, 2011), over grazing (Altesor et al., 2005; Mayer et al., 2009; Alam and

Ali, 2010), grass cutting, lopping, illicit felling (Gupta, 1978; Butt, 2006; Dar et al.,

2012; Shaheen et al., 2017; Dobson et al., 2006). Beside these factors some other issues

such as encroachment, ice storms and insect outbreaks are shifting towards the high

altitude as a result of human activities and global climate change like droughts, snowfall

(De Scally & Gardner, 1994), landslides and lightening (Nautiyal et al., 2004).

Floral Diversity of these fragile ecosystems is prone to damage by affecting

growth and survival patterns of vegetation (Carpenter, 2005; Kala, 2005; Gairola et al.,

2008; Sharma & Raina, 2013). Sustainability of natural flora and dependency level of

rural inhabitants for grazing, food and non-timber forest products is the elemental part

of research on floral biodiversity (Dvorsky et al., 2010; Gairola et al., 2015). Nomadic

pressure increases annually in the alpine pastures of the Himalayas without any proper

management practices, leading to the extinction of unique and endemic species which

are sensitive to pressure (Korner, 2003; Khan et al., 2014).

Measurement of floral variations to protect biodiversity from all threats must be

an integral part of sustainable natural resource management in Himalayas (Egoh et al.,

8

2008). Information about the vegetation diversity and distribution is essential for the

understanding of ecological constraints and establishment of management policies for

the conservation of floral diversity in the Himalayan regions (Peer et al., 2007;

Kharkwal, 2009).

1.4. JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY

Due to fragility and remoteness of the Himalayan Mountains in ,

the data about vegetation dynamics is limited. Literature review reveals that the

previous work done in AJK is localized and restricted to small areas, especially in

higher altitudes due to remoteness, inaccessibility and insecurity due to continued

military action along the between Pakistan and India (Dad & Khan,

2011). Earlier research has been conducted and clustered in few valleys in specific

fields of interests which do not cover the overall picture and dynamics of the western

Himalayan high land flora (Shaheen et al., 2012). Little has been done in assessment of

ecosystem services and their valuation in the forest surrounding mountain populations

(ICIMOD, 2009). Available literature on the western Himalayan plant diversity reflects

insufficient understanding of the natural dynamics of mountain ecosystems to come up

with solutions to the problems confronting the environment and people in the region

(Dar and Khuroo, 2013). Under the influence of climate change and human activities,

mountains are likely to experience wide ranging effects on the environment, natural

resources including biodiversity, and socioeconomic conditions of local inhabitants

(Dvorsky et al., 2011).

The summary of the previous work done on alpine and sub-alpine vegetation of

AJK is given as following. Forest resource utilization pattern in Machiara national park

in AJK was analyzed by Dar et al., (2012). However this study

lacks the detailed information about diversity distribution and sustainability of floral

9 diversity of the park. Preliminary assessment of the Phytodiversity of Pir Chinasi Hills in Muzaffarabad district was done by Malik et al., (2007). Limited information was included about sustainability and role of ecosystem services in livelihood in the study area. Malik (2005) conducted a study on Phytosociology from Ganga Choti and Bedori

Hills in . Shaheen et al., (2011) conducted a study on alpine pastures of

Bagh district focusing only on 4 sites with small geographic spread. The limitations of their study are reflected by low species count (56 Species) from the area. Habib et al.,

(2013), and Muslim and Sikandar (2010) had worked on the ethnobotany and

Phytosociology of valley. Shaheen et al., (2017) conducted a study on distribution and conservation status of Juniperus in Shounther valley (3300-3700m) in

Neelum district, focusing only on Juniperus.

The synthesis of literature reveals that the research activities were confined to

Phytosociology, Ethnobotany, and Forest resource utilization pattern with in limited altitudinal range at specific sites (Kala & Mathur, 2002; Rawat & Adhikari, 2005).

These studies with relatively low species counts (100-150 species/study) seem apparently unable to represent the diverse floristic wealth harbored by the vast Western

Himalayan highlands in sub alpine and alpine zones of Kashmir (Singh and Rawat,

2012).

Prevailing knowledge gaps emphasized the need for a better understanding of vegetation dynamics of western Himalayan in Azad Jammu and Kashmir, leading to the proposal and design of the current study. Current research proposal was designed to search the new avenues in the field of Ecology and picture out the whole flora of sub- alpine and alpine areas of Azad Kashmir. The study has been conducted in an altitudinal range of 2700m-4300m in diverse localities and habitats along with varying aspects and geography. In this exploration, vegetation along different altitudinal gradients, variable

10

aspects, changing slope degrees, and diverse habitats were examined in detail. It was

also intended to report the conservation status of vulnerable and threatened species of

the area.

1.5. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

1. To document the floristic composition of the vascular cryptogams and phanerogams

of Western Himalayan sub alpine and alpine zones of Azad Jammu and Kashmir by

developing complete floristic inventory.

2. To investigate the phytosociological attributes of the sub alpine and alpine vegetation

communities of Azad Jammu and Kashmir.

3. To analyze the effects of environmental and anthropogenic variables on vegetation

structure and distribution in the investigated area.

4. To evaluate the sustainability and conservation status of the sub alpine and alpine flora.

5. To quantify the contribution of the ecosystem services provided by local high land

flora in the livelihood of indigenous mountain populations of AJK.

11

Chapter 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Himalayan mountains have diverse vegetation synchronized with varied

Microclimatic and ecological conditions (Sharma et al., 2010). These mountain

highlands are the rich repositories of a broad floral range and are home to many of the

valuable and endangered plant species. Himalayan sub alpine and alpine ecosystems

harbor distinct biological communities and high level of endemism due to their diverse

topography and history. These fragile vegetation types have a major contribution

towords the mega-biodiversity of the world. Therefore, the conservation and scientific

management of this unique and precious biodiversity zone holds great significance for

socioeconomic development, environmental management and human wellbeing

(Ahmad et al., 2012).

Himalayan sub alpine and alpine ecosystems at higher elevations are a preferred habitat for the endemic Phytodiversity elements. Species of , Poaceae,

Rosaceae, Ranunculaceae, Fabaceae, and Polygonaceae are better adapted to the extreme conditions because of broader ecological amplitude. They seem to be restricted on the highest zones because of fruits with effective and adaptive dispersal mechanism, having better chances to reach distant suitable Mi sites (Nautiyal et al., 1997). The harsh environment of the high elevation region imposes great constraints on plants, which must cope with drought, acute temperature fluctuations, strong winds and cope with the higher altitudes and nutrient poor soils with a short growing period (Korner & Ohsawa, 2005).

Under these conditions, the competition among different species is generally very low and the vegetation in most cases are sparsely distributed with a greater number of

12 perennial, resistant and unpalatable species (Klimes and Dolezal, 2010; Korner et al.,

2011).

Environmental Conditions at high elevations are stressful and plants must be adapted to low temperature, short growing season, high radiation, strong desiccating wind, solifluction, frost, heavey snowfall poor soil and low air pressure (Korner, 2003b;

Yu at al., 2010; Shrestha et al., 2012). Plants of these typical indicator families growing at extreme altitudes are adapted to multiple stresses and some species are even restricted to the extreme conditions of the alpine zone in all regions of the world (Scherrer et al., 2011;

Gottfried et al., 2012). This situation helps in understanding of the dominance of a small number of angiosperm species.

Sub-alpine forests in the Himalayan region are dominated by coniferous or broad leaved deciduous plant species. This forest represents a transition (ecotone) between alpine grassland and temperate forest ecosystems on the earth (Shereshta et al., 2012).

With increasing altitude the dominant plant cover and its physical characteristics changes from a deciduous broad-leaved forest to conifer forest and to a woody shrub nature community and ultimately alpine meadows (Rawat, 2007). Ground surface of the sub- alpine forests receives low intensity light under the canopy whereas vegetation stands at higher altitudes due to open canopy receive plenty of light and contribute in rich floral diversity (Dolezal & Srutek, 2002; Gairola et al., 2008).

Floral Biodiversity is the totality of all the plant species at genetic, specific and

population level in a region. The knowledge of the floristic composition, vegetation

distribution pattern and floral diversity of an area is a perequisite for any ecological and

phytogeographical study and conservation management activities. The vegetation

structure is defined entirely by floristic composition and distribution pattern, and is

thought to be an ecological reality (Hussain et al., 2014). Understanding of plant life

13

structure is a pre-requisite to describe various ecological processes and also to model

the functioning and changing aspects of flora (Timilsina et al., 2007). The regional

patterns of species diversity and species richness are consequences of many interacting

factors, such as plant productivity, geographical area, evolutionary development,

regional species dynamics, regional species pool, environmental variations and human

activities (Criddle et al., 2003). Ecologists in many regions of the world have concluded

that moderate disturbance provides greater opportunity for species turnover,

colonization and maintenance of high species richness in the local floral composition

(Mishra et al., 2004).

Species diversity incorporates two components; evenness, how evenly abundance

or biomass is distributed among species; and richness, number of species per unit area

(Hamilton, 2008). Species richness of a taxon is not only sufficient to express diversity

but the equitability is also an important factor because communities however vary in

properties of the total importance of the species and share their functional contribution.

High evenness in any investigated site can increase invasion resistance, below-ground

productivity and reduce total extinction rates (Smith and Malthby, 2003).

2.1. ECOLOGICAL FACTORS CONTROLLING HIMALAYAN HIGHLAND

VEGETATION

The plant community of a region is a function of time, altitude, slope, latitude,

aspect, rainwater and moisture. These factors play a significant role in the formation of

plant populations and their composition. Plant communities and the fluctuation in

species diversity can result from differences in landform, slope gradient, slope aspect

and habitats variations caused by environmental features (Dickore and Nusser, 2000).

The regional patterns of species richness are a consequence of many interacting factors,

such as plant productivity, competition, geographical area, historical or evolutional

14 development, regional species pool, environmental variables and human activities

(Kharkwal et al., 2005).

Environment of high lands in the world mountain areas are changing both due to changes in land use and climate pattern. Changed environmental conditions can thus result in a change in species diversity. Gradients of moisture, snow cover duration and temperature are some of the key abiotic drivers of alpine plant species distribution

(When et al., 2014). Phytosociological attributes, including species richness, evenness, diversity, and maturity, respond significantly to environmental, as well as anthropogenic activities (Shaheen et al., 2011, 212, 2017).

The sub-alpine and alpine ecosystems of the western and eastern Himalayas are characterized by scanty rainfall, high ultraviolet (UV) radiation, high wind velocity, blizzards, low temperature and snowstorms (Shaheen et al., 2012, 2017). The plants of this zone show an adaptation to these conditions and are generally dwarfed, stunted, wooly or spiny, and develop a mosaic patch of different forms. They possess an early growth initiation with a tiny vegetative period ranging from several days to a few months (Khan et al., 2011). In mountains, vegetation diversity rapidly changes with elevation over relatively short horizontal distances. These areas are the most unique areas for detection of climate change and assessment of climate related impacts on the vegetation distribution pattern (Whiteman, 2000).

Temperature is an important limiting factor controlling the distribution, diversity, sustainability and community structure of plant life. Mean annual temperatures decrease with increase in elevation, more rapidly in summer than in winter in high elevation regions (Elmendorf et al., 2012; Walker et al., 2006). This altitude based temperature gradient is a vital factor shaping the vegetation types and determining their diversity and distribution (Khan, 2012). Temperature change can lead to increased stress in

15 plants, e.g. reduced tissue water status or changed photosynthesis efficiency, which can affect internal processes at different life stages. This can impact the distribution and abundance of plants, though the effects are likely to vary between species (When et al.,

2014).

The distribution of species richness along elevation gradients is governed by a series of interacting biological, climatic and historical factors (Colwell and Lees, 2000).

An altitudinal gradient contains varying climatic factors such as temperature, humidity and sunlight, and the change of these factors with increasing altitude is faster as that of the latitudinal gradient. With increasing elevation, the species diversity shows a negative correlation and a single-peak distribution in altitudinal distribution pattern of species can be appeared (Tang & Fang, 2004).

The aspect and slope also play a key role in determining the temperature regime and atmospheric pressure of any site. The north facing slopes of western Himalayas are reported to have a higher species richness due to higher moisture content and evapotranspiration as compared to drier south facing slopes (Panthi et al., 2007; Gairola et al., 2008). Aspect has significant influence on degree of slope declines. It is logical that mid-elevation areas with lower percent slope on a rough land would be subjected to higher rates of disturbance, as those areas would be most attractive for cultivation, development, construction and recreational activities. These sites might also be more attractive to grazing mammals (Oswalt et al., 2006).

Soil is an essential component that has supported all the life on earth and it also helps plant growth. Resources of soil in Himalayan high lands are limited and its physical and chemical properties are restricted mostly by humus and clay which influences the plant life structure and diversity. These factors are caused by unplanned

16

settlements, overgrazing, erosion, land sliding, habitat destruction, poverty and

anthropogenic activities (Khuroo et al., 2007; Shameem et al., 2011).

The alpine soils vary in texture, depth, stoniness and pH often within a few meters

(Peer et al., 2007). In such climates, most important cause of vegetation change pattern

is probably soil heterogeneity than climatic variation. The complex gradients in

disturbance regimes or edaphic conditions that are associated with topography provide

an opportunity to investigate mechanisms (Korner, 1999). At higher elevation

environmental specificity leads to common properties in all types of alpine soils. The

glaciation process strongly influences alpine soils. On Steep slopes soil is thin, regularly

reduced and in a constant process of transformation but on open grasslands deep layers

of soil are because of weatherable parent material (Dvorsky et al., 2011).

High organic matter and acidification are the general characteristics of alpine soil

origin. These fragile soil types are submitted to severe threats such as overgrazing,

freeze thaw, fragmentation of rocks, acid deposition and climate change. Glacier retreat,

cold climate and chemical weathering change the soil chemistry and dislocate the

incorporate material which leads to rapid soil development in the alpine belt as

compared to sub-alpine and mountain forests (Bockheim et al., 2000). Alpine soils often

have high organic matter content (>50 g / kg) at surface profile linked with abundant

belowground production of meadows. Soil faunal and microbial activities are reduced

in this region because of seasonal microlimatic conditions (Bartoli and Burtin, 1979).

Alpine soils play a major role in the functioning and conservation of the unique alpine ecosystem. The stability of the slope and threat of water erosion are the main factors controlling these poorly differentiated soils in the Alpine zone (Korner, 1999).

The occurrence of poorly drained soils in Alpine environment is common. Floral diversity

17 and distribution is a function of topography and show a morphology primarily determined by the effect of frost (Messerli and Ives, 1997).

The alpine soils are highly vulnerable to damage by natural and human activities.

Exposed soils are vulnerable to chemical weathering and erosion. As the soil freezes, fine needles of ice form in the surface soil, drying it out and pushing soil particles upwards.

When the ice melts in summer, this loose soil falls down the slope or may be removed by wind or water. This action is particularly severe on alpine soils when these are not protected by snow cover (Bhatt, 1988; Zobel and Singh, 1997).

Habitat conditions are considered to be strong drivers of alpine plant distribution and composition due to the tight coupling between harsh climatic conditions and plant physiology. In alpine areas where human interruption is minimal, physiological responses of the vegetation to abiotic stress gradients mainly shape the basic limits of species niches and conclude the upper elevational limit of floral distributions (Bowman et al., 1993).

The soils of alpine regions are fragile and subjected to severe environmental and anthropogenic threats, such as acid deposition, overgrazing and climate change. The alpine ecosystem experiences considerable day and night fluctuations in temperature with frequent night frost. In addition to the daytime cycles, deeper soil thawing and freezing may occur following seasonal rounds in temperate zones (Washington and DC.1999).

2.2. CLIMATE CHANGE AND ALPINE VEGETATION

Mountains are amongst the most vulnerable environments in the world that harbor

rich repositories of biodiversity. They provide natural resources to the lowland people

who live in the mountains and face increasing poverty (Beniston 2003; Root et al. 2003;

Chettri et al., 2010, 2014). These changes also affect the ability of biological systems to

support human needs and more specialized species are to be lost due to habitat

18 destruction in mountains (Vitousek et al., 1997; Shrestha et al., 1999; Liu and Chen

2000; Sodhi et al. 2004).

Alpine areas have been identified as one of the ecosystems most at risk due to climate change with average temperatures already increasing across mountain areas around the world (Gobiet et al., 2014; Cramer et al., 2014),). The net result of this warming is expected to reduce snowfall and initiate earlier snowmelt (Pederson et al.,

2013). In the last century, the Earth’s mean global surface temperature has increased considerably. Temperatures are expected to further increase in the next few years

(IPCC, 2013), particularly in high elevation and high latitude ecosystems of Himalayas, with important consequences for the survival of several endemic alpine plants

(Theurillat and Guisan, 2001). In response to climate warming, there are documented changes in phenology, physiology, distribution and seedling establishment of several alpine species in Himalayas (Mondoni et al., 2015).

Climate change can affect vegetation by altering the frequency, intensity, insect and pathogen outbreaks, hurricanes, windstorms, ice storms, or landslides duration, timing of fire, drought, and introduced species all over the world (Korner, 2003).

Climate change induces the range shift of sensitive plant species and changes the plant life composition on elevation tops. Studies on Himalayas effectively predict the influence of climate change on migration of woody species towards the edges (Auer et al., 2007; Frei et al., 2010; Gottfried et al., 2012).

The vegetation diversity is positively correlated with the changes in micro and macro environments, which are variable on different slope and in aspects. Plant life at high elevation is mostly governed by abiotic factors like air, heat, and snow fall

(Kammer and Mohl, 2002). Due to increasing world population and industrial

19

development, there is an increased emission of Green House Gases (GHGs). Beside

this, Use of fossil fuels, deforestation, burning and decay of biomass leads to higher

atmospheric CO2 concentration, which currently is around 406 ppm and is predicted to

increase to approximately 470 -570 ppm until year 2050 (IPCC, 2007). Due to these

changes Ecosystems and ecosystem services on higher elevations are adversly affected

by global climate change, both directly and indirectly (Tylianakis et al., 2008).

High mountain ecosystems are generally considered to be sensitive to climate warming. Therefore they appear to be useful ecological indicators (Poulenard et al.,

2003). Overall warming and associated changes in precipitation patterns and snow cover significantly influence alpine vegetation with change in diversity and abundance of certain species due to change in alpine soil (Steininger, 2002).

Existing observations indicated that the temperature is rising at a higher rate in Nepal and Chinese regions of the Himalayas as compared with the rest of Himalayas. A declining trend of monsoon in the western Indian Himalayas and an increasing trend in the eastern Indian Himalayas have been observed, whereas increasing precipitation and stream flow in many parts of Tibetan Plateau are noted. Glaciers in both the eastern and western Himalayas are mostly retreating. However, there is a clear gap in knowledge of economic impacts of climate change in the Himalayas (Schild, 2008; Xu et al., 2009).

The Himalayas play a key role on supporting the economy of South Asian countries which depend heavily on the Himalayas for hydropower, water supply, agriculture, and tourism (Gautam et al., 2013). Climate change changes the pattern and flows of Rivers in eastern and western Himalayas and affects lives and livelihood of over

300 million people (Schild, 2008). Through their massive fresh ice reserves, the

Himalayas influence flow of thousands of rivers and rivulets that converge into the main river systems such as the Brahmaputra (called Yarlung Zangbo in China), and the Indus

20 in Pakistan (Khattak et al., 2011). Climate change concerns in the Himalayas are many sided encompassing floods, droughts, landslides (Barnett et al., 2005), human health, biodiversity, endangered species, agriculture livelihood, and food security (Cruz et al.,

2007; Xu et al., 2009).

Temperature data in the Western Himalayas (a 0.9 °C rise over 102 years (1901-

2003) and Tibetan Plateau (0.5 °C average increase annually over 1971-2005 compared

to 1901-1960) region devastatingly show a warming trend. Although at different rates in

different periods depending on the regions and seasons (Brohan et al., 2006; Bhutiyani

et al., 2007; Singh et al., 2008; Diodato et al., 2011; Dimri and Dash, 2011).

Fowler and Archer (2005) reported the increasing trends in winter temperature

during 1961-2000 in the upper Indus basin (Pakistan) with varying warming rates of

0.07-0.51 °C/decade. Increasing winter maximum temperature in the upper Indus basin

was also reported by Khattak et al., (2011) who found an increasing warming trend of

0.45, 0.42, 0.23 °C/decade in Temperature maximum. Similar findings were reported by

Shrestha et al., (1999) for Nepalese Himalayas and Du et al. (2004); Liu and Chen,

(2000); Yao et al., (2004, 2008); Schickhoff et al., (2015) for the Tibetan Plateau.

This review on the current state of knowledge regarding sensitivity and response

of Himalayan flora to climates warming is based on extensive field observations.

Previous reported data show that Himalayan alpine plants respond to environmental and

climate change variables including elevation, precipitation, and biogeography. People

use alpine plants mostly for medicines and grazing. Climate change threatens rare,

endemic, and useful Himalayan plant species and is being monitored into the future

(Ataman et al., 2003; Xu et al., 2008; Salick et al., 2014)

21

Diversity in the Himalayan Mountains is sensitive to climatic changes and has different vulnerability onsets according to the species, the amplitude and the rate of climatic change. Due to climate change, the growth of many conifer species is increased in the western Himalayas (Singh and Rawat, 2012). Alpine plants are the most suitable indicators to assess the consequences of climate change in species distribution. Minor diversity in the vegetation of high altitudinal areas could be due to lower rate of evolution and diversification of community composition and severity in the environmental variables. Species diversity and concentration of dominance are generally inversely related (Walther et al., 2002). High mountain regions are extremely sensitive to climate change. Plants found in high mountain regions are generally long- lived species, but long-term changes in the climate are likely to affect their distribution and survival. A favorable climate contributing to long growing seasons advanced it in low altitudinal areas (Grau et al., 2005).

2.3. ECOSYSTEM SERVICES PROVIDED BY HIGHLANDS OF THE

HIMALAYAS

The mountain ecosystems of the Himalayas provides a range of basic provisional and regulatory services, including food, water, medicine, shelter, dyes, forage, fuel wood, timber water and air purification, climate regulation, waste disintegration, soil fertility and regeneration and biodiversity support. These services ultimately contribute to sustain agricultural and socioeconomic conditions of locals because most of the mountain people don’t have alternatives to fuel wood, timber wood and medical facilities due to remoteness and harsh cold climatic conditions at higher elevations

(Kremen, 2005; Boyd & Banzhaf, 2006; Zobel et al., 2006).

22

Himalayan ecosystem provides direct services by air quality regulation, waste treatment, water purification, regulation of water flows, moderation of extreme events

(Hein et al., 2006) soil erosion prevention, climate regulation, maintenance of soil fertility; pollination, seed dispersal, pest regulation, disease regulation (Gallai et al.,

2009); maintenance of life cycles of migratory species nutrient recycling, spiritual, religious and esthetic values; cultural diversity, recreation, ecotourism and educational values (Acharya et al., 2011).

Natural ecosystems regulate the climatic conditions such as rising temperature extremes weather events by carbon sequestration. Reserve and protected areas of vegetation are a source of industrial products such as waxes, oils, fragrance, dyes, latex, and rubber etc. (Singh, 2009). Himalayan Mountain communities are highly dependent on natural resources for the ecosystem services that they perform: provisioning services

(genetic resources, food, fiber, fresh water, etc.); regulating services (regulation of climate, water and human diseases); supporting services (productivity, soil fertility and nutrient cycling); and cultural services (spiritual enrichment, recreation, aesthetics, etc.

(MEA, 2003; Eriksson et al., 2009).

Sub-alpine and alpine areas of western Himalaya have been used by local habitant and herdsman for livestock grazing and browsing for many years. This also influences the plant community function and structure greatly (Schulze et al., 2005). Alpine grasslands and open pastures of high Kashmir Mountains contain abundant ground vegetation. They have the highest value as the foraging lands for wild life and local herders. The alpine flora consists of cushion plants, grasses, perennial forbs and small shrubs (Khan, 2003). Nutritional inadequacy and low water availability at higher elevations have been identified as a major limiting factor for the plant diversity of alpine areas (Dhar & Kachroo, 1983). Western Himalayan meadows are severely

23

degraded due to sedentary and nomadic livestock overgrazing. Due to large population

increases and increasing urbanization practices, grazing lands and existing reserve

forests are overburdened right now its look like impossible to reduce the grazing

pressure (Gupta, 1977; Bock et al., 1995).

The local and poor people obtained a variety of non-timber forest products (NTFPs).

Benefits obtained from nature are termed ecosystem services (De Groot et al., 2002;

MEA, 2003; Mooney et al., 2004; Butler & Kosura, 2006; Seppelt et al., 2011). Several previous studies have highlighted the threat to plant biodiversity and vegetation related ecosystem services as a result of over exploitation, misuse of natural resources, e.g. through forest cutting, livestock grazing, trampling and the collection of fodder, mushrooms, edible and medicinal plant species. Livestock rearing is the main contributor to livelihood of low income societies. These activities are alarming threats to the endemic and valuable flora (Dickore & Nusser, 2000; Carpenter et al., 2006; Boyd & Banzhaf,

2007; Ahmad et al., 2009; Signorini et al., 2009).

Forests produce timber for both commercial and non-commercial uses. The

World's annual industrial round wood production is estimated to be 1.52 billion m3, of which about 4/5th come from developing country forests. In rural areas of the Himalayas, most of the people directly depend upon the coniferous species for construction materials and burning. FAO (2001) statistics stated that in 1999; 1.75 billion m3 of wood was extracted for fuel wood and conversion to charcoal, about 90% of which was produced and consumed in developing countries. The International Energy Agency (1998) estimates that 11% of the world energy consumption comes from biomass, mainly fuel wood (IEA, 1998). Fuel wood is of major importance for poorer countries, and for the poor within those countries. Extraction rates may or may not be sustainable, depending on vegetation types and population of that region (Hein et al., 2006).The fuel consumption

24 pattern in Himalayan Region of Himachal Pradesh, India indicated that the major fuels used in rural and urban areas were electricity (100%) and wood (93.3%). In this region per capita household consumption of fuel wood was found to be 60.66 kg annually (Sood et al., 2014).

The Indian Forest Survey reported that about 70% of the Indian rural populations depend on firewood to meet their household energy needs. In Himalaya’s fuel wood consumption varies significantly from season to season. Fuel wood consumption from the

Indian forest ranged from a minimum 170 kg per day in summer to a maximum 450 kg/day in winter, giving an average annual consumption rate of 62.1 to 164.3 tons annually. This tremendous rate of fuel wood consumption resulted in deforestation and greenhouse gases emission. It has been estimated that biomass in the form of fuel wood only accounts for approximately 9% of total global energy consumption (Lindroos, 2011;

Kandel et al., 2016; Baqir et al., 2018). In central Himalayan mountain areas, 418.86 metric ton of fuel wood is consumed annually (Singh and Sundriyal, 2009).

In northern areas of Pakistan due to lack of household energy sources, like electricity and gas, fuel wood is an important component of daily life in Pakistan and it covers about 53% of total annual domestic energy needs (Ilyas, 2006). A study in Karak district of KPK showed an estimated quantity of fuel wood used about 323.75 kg/week.

According to the estimates, 70-79% of Pakistani households use fuel wood as a main source of energy (Hafeez, 2000; Siddiqui, 2000; Ali et al., 2016).

Due to unavailability of fuel resource such as electricity and LPG, huge quantities of valuable wood are used for meeting energy shortages in the rural areas of Pakistan.

During winter, the fuel wood consumption increases many folds as wood is used for cooking and heating the rooms as well. About 4809.86 tons of valuable wood quantity was found to be used for cooking and warming houses annually in 3 villages of district

25

Tank, Hindukush region of northern Pakistan (Hamayun et al., 2013). Preferred fuel wood species are Cedrus deodara, Quercus dilatata and Pinus willichiana in the region.

Dependency on fuel wood is expected to remain high in Pakistan in the near future

(Siddiqui and Amjad, 1993).

The high demand for household fuel wood requirements is supposed to be the basis of fast depletion of forests in the country. The deforestation rate in the country is estimated to be the second highest in the World (IUCN, 2002). Due to current population growth, population explosion, wood consumption may increase by 3 percent annually, if present scenarios persist within 10–15 years Pakistan’s forests may disappear because of continuous deforestation and over exploitation. A report on the consumption of fuel and timber wood in rural area of district tank showed that 90% of the rural people with different age group are depended upon firewood and consumed 18371 metric ton of wood annually (Badshah et al., 2014).

Non-wood forest products are a highly heterogeneous category; and in many cases play a prime place in rural people's livelihoods for products sold and self-consumption.

Non-wood forest products help people survive in the case of famines, emergencies, in periods between crop harvests, and in some cases they constitute the main source of income for landless or unemployed people (Dickore & Nusser, 2000; Ahmad et al.,

2009). Forests provide low cost building materials, income, fuel, food supplements, and traditional medicines. Cash income from the sale of NTFPs can be highly variable, however, even for the same resource category (Apiah et al., 2007). The floristic inventories and checklists play a significant role in providing information and understanding level of availability of mountain resources along with associated threats , their managements and its relationship with the mankind (Watson and Novelly, 2004).

26

Vegetation of Himalayan highlands is the main source of medicinal plants in all parts of the Himalayan regions. These plants occur naturally in the forests and pastures and are used as a basis for modern pharmaceuticals and therefore, are commonly exploited commercially (Olesen and Larsen, 2003). About 75-90% of the Himalayan rural population depends on herbal and traditional medicines and forest resources. The native people of highland areas extract the whole plant, thus rendering them threatened for next generations. Deforestation as well as the encroachment activities have resulted in the habitat destruction of these plant species, thus restrict the availability of these species in the natural habitats (Ali, 2008).

Himalayan forests have a great variety of wild vegetables and contribute significantly to the livelihood of local inhabitants in their surroundings. Wild vegetables are used as a food in the world for centuries. Wild vegetables are an important source of food in forest surrounding areas, especially in rural parts of the world (Modi et al., 2006).

People mostly use the wild vegetables as an important food. Wild vegetables increase the agro-biodiversity at the house hold level (Ertug, 2004). When different wild vegetables are cooked this contributes to diatory diversity of food contents. Wild vegetables can be dried after collection and can be kept for off season use in rural parts (Butt, 2006).

Mushroom collection plays a vital role in the economy of the local collectors of the Himalayan communities. Valuable mushrooms are collected in spring season from the forest and dried in open air, than sold in the market. Local inhabitants depend upon the forest resources, and also collect the minor forest produce (Kumar et al., 2011). Morel mushrooms are in high demand in foreign markets due to which local inhabitants of the area, exploit unscientifically this cash crop from the forest. India and Pakistan are major producing countries, each produce about 50 tons of dry Morales (Negi, 2006).

27

Foliage or plant life provides a potential source of forage for livestock grazing during all seasons round the year. Besides the local livestock grazing, a large numbers of nomads migrate to the alpine pastures of the Himalaya in summer (Qamar and Minhas,

2006; Khan et al., 2016). The grazers move their livestock higher and higher as the snow melts. The grazing in the high land flora is practiced heavily without having any concept of management or conservation of biodiversity (Sharma et al., 2014). Uncontrolled grazing disturbs the ground flora of these areas totally. High land vegetation provides a great diversity and high caloric contents of the vegetation in the pastures. Foliage provides a large quantity of herbaceous biomass for the livestock grazing (Chandra et al.,

2010; Khan et al., 2014).

2.4. THREATS TO THE FLORAL DIVERSITY OF HIMALAYAN SUB ALPINE

AND ALPINE VEGETATION

Floral diversity of sub alpine and alpine grass zone has long been threatened by a

variety of destructive agents. Anthropogenic and biotic disturbances such as

uncontrolled heavy grazing, browsing, trampling, and overexploitation of medicinal

plants possess the potential threats causing degradation and deterioration of pastures

and affecting the natural floral diversity and community structure of the sub-alpine and

alpine ecosystems (Shaheen et al., 2011, 2017; Singh et al., 2012). Among human

influence, commercial exploitation, agricultural expansion, forest fires, encroachments,

and grazing pressure are the important source of disturbance to the Himalayan floral

diversity. Human induced disturbances in the upper mountain zones have been reported

to alter the regeneration dynamics of sub-alpine forest and alpine grassland vegetation

communities (Gairola et al., 2010).

28

In Himalayas, habitat loss such as habitat degradation, destruction and simplification and fragmentation are serious problems, responsible for making the plant species critically endangered (Alam and Ali, 2010). If these circumstances continue, an irreversible loss of many species would occur in future, mainly of those which are found in Alpine and Sub alpine regions. Habitat fragmentation is the primary cause of species extinction in many areas (Sala et al., 2000).

Due to over use and unscientific collection, population of medicinal plants has become drastically reduced in Himalayan alpines. Forests and rangelands are the main habitats of medicinal plants in all parts of Himalayas, which have been commonly exploited for decades (Ahmad et al., 2008). Widespread collection of medicinal plants in different regions of the Himalayas has led to the loss of important species in the remote areas. There is a significant decrease in the amount of plant material a person can collect in a day (Alam and Belt, 2004).

Conservation status assessment of the Himalayan highland Endemic plants being more prone to extinction; should be top priority in ecosystem re-establishment programs (Khan et al., 2014). At this time, many of the developing countries lack the basic assessment data meeting international ethics. Even at global level, the red list data covers a small segment of the total species. For Pakistan, from among the 6000 vascular plant species, only 52 (0.09%) were assigned threat categories in some areas of the country (Abbas, 2010).

More than 10% of the flora of the Pakistan is assessed to be endangered (Shinwari et al., 2002). Shabbir and Jabeen, (2013) reviewed that 15% flora of the country is threatened and this figure included many endemic species. The information is incomplete on the conservation status of native plant species; however, there is a lot of

29 controversy about the conservation status of plant species in the available data mostly based upon personal observation, literature review, traditional knowledge and

Importance Value Index (Alam and Ali, 2009). Chaudhri and Qureshi (1991) reported

709 plants as threatened and endangered in Pakistan, whereas, Nasir (1991) reported

580 flowering plants as threatened. In contrast, more recently Ali and Qaiser, (2010) reported only 21 flowering plants that are threatened in Pakistan according to IUCN

Categories and Criteria. Khan et al., (2014) reported that out of 430 vascular plant 145 plant species are threatened, 30 are endangered, 68 are vulnerable and 47 are recorded as rare according to indigenous knowledge of locals in Poonch Valley, Azad Jammu and Kashmir (Chaudhri and Qureshi, 1991). WWF Pakistan (2003) has developed the area wise list of threatened plants as 168 from Baluchistan, 140 from Chitral, 104 from

Northern Pakistan, 80 from Kurram Valley, 46 from Azad Kashmir and 38 from

Kaghan and Hunza. Similarly a study on the Ethnomedicinal plants of Neelum Valley by Ahmad et al., (2012 ) revealed 5 plant species as critically endangered, 6 species as endangered, 10 species as vulnerable, 6 as rare and 11 as least concerned. This overview of floral diversity provided the bases for future research plans in the Azad

Kashmir.

Poor living conditions, population explosion, and lack of education and awareness in the local inhabitants of forest surrounding areas in rural areas are the main threats for the depletion of forest diversity. More than 60% of the Himalayan forests have been destroyed during the last century (Todario et al., 2010). Pakistan has less than

4 % of forest coverage with annual deforestation rate of 3%. Pakistani Himalayas have lost > 25% forest cover during last three decades (Ahmed et al., 2010). There is a need to integrate the livelihood of local human populations with conservation measures through participatory forest management in such a way so that the local inhabitants are

30

able to draw a large share of benefits from conservation of these forests (Sharma et al.,

2009). Long-term management and conservation strategies might have optimistic

outcomes for both maintaining and restoring Himalayan mountain biodiversity and

ecosystem services, which would also have a positive impact on the lowland

ecosystems by ensuring the flow of rivers and streams for irrigation of agricultural land

in lower areas (Singh et al., 2014).

Both natural as well as anthropogenic activities have an effect on species

diversity, population structure, and natural regeneration of plant life ecosystems. Flood,

fire, storms and the invasive species are among some natural causes whereas illegal

felling, misuse of forest resources, encroachment, and domestic grazing are some man-

induced causes affecting the natural vegetation in Himalayas (Gairola et al., 2015).

Excessive exploitation by the local communities, replacement of conifers and broad

leaved species has become a common and ever increasing phenomenon in the Western

Himalayan region (Jiangming et al., 2008). These forests have been burnt from time to

time by the local inhabitants in order to encourage growth of grasses. All the gentle and

accessible meadows in alpine and sub-alpine regions have undergone extensive habitat

degradation, with over 70% of the natural vegetation reported to have been lost in

Indian Himalayas (Singh and Rawat, 2012).

1.6. OVERVIEW OF PREVIOUS VEGETATION STUDIES

Dickore & Nusser (2000) described the Flora of Nanga Parbat (North Western

Himalaya, Pakistan) with remarks on vegetation dynamics. A total of 962 vascular plant species from 1100m-5300m elevational range were enumerated. They concluded that maximum plant diversity was observed in 2500m-3800m elevational gradient and suggested the urgent need of conservation in the Western Himalaya.

31

Mir et al., (2017) have studied Life form spectrum of vegetation in Betula forest stands at an altitude of 3000m-3600m in two years In Central and North Kashmir of

Western Himalayas. They have reported 155 plant species from the area. They reported that vegetation of the area is under severe anthropogenic pressure and vulnerable to climate change. They concluded that the distribution of vegetation the region is strongly influenced by various parameters which rapidly change along the elevational gradient on both southern eastern and on south western aspect.

Tambe and Rawat, (2010) recorded a total of 585 species of angiosperms within

the alpine and sub-alpine zone of Shikem Himalayas, India. The dominant families

were Asteraceae, Ranunculaceae, Poaceae, Scrophulariaceae, Cyperaceae and Rosaceae

with prominent genera as Pedicularis, Carex, Saxifraga and Rhododendron. The

keystone gymnosperms in the sub-alpine and alpine zones included Taxus baccata

subspecies wallichiana, Tsuga dumosa, Abies densa, Juniperus recurva, Juniperus

squamata, Juniperus indica, and Ephedra gerardiana.

Dar and Khuroo (2013) have investigated the Floristic Diversity in the Kashmir

Himalayas in valleys of Tilel, Guraiz, Keran and . The region falls within the

biogeography zone of the North-Western Himalaya in India, from 1300m-5420m. A

total of 2312 species of Bryophytes (210 spp), Fern and Fern allies (90 spp)

Angiosperms (2000 spp) and Gymnosperms (12 spp) were reported from the area.

Khan et al., (2102) conducted a detailed study on plant communities and vegetation ecosystem services in the Naran at an altitude of 2400m-4100m. A total of

198 plant species were recorded from the Valley. Indigenous ethno botanical knowledge was obtained to report the conservation status and estimation of ecosystem services in livelihood of locals.

32

Shaheen et al., (2011) analyzed Species Diversity, Community Structure, and

Distribution Patterns in Western Himalayan Alpine Pastures of Kashmir at an elevation of

2600m-3600m and reported 69 plant species. They showed a negative correlation between diversity and richness along altitudinal gradient and concluded that unpalatable species dominated under heavy grazing pressure in the area.

Noor and Khatoon (2013) analyzed the Vegetation Pattern and Soil Characteristics of Astor Valley Gilgit Baltistan, Pakistan. A total of 668 plant species were enlisted. They concluded that edaphic factors, altitudinal variation, soil texture and amount of organic matter were responsible for variation in vegetation. Here altitudinal variations alone possessed the distributional impacts on vegetation.

Shaheen et al., (2017) reported distribution pattern, conservation status, and associated flora of the Genus Juniperus in Sub-alpine Pastures of the Kashmir Himalayas in Neelum Valley. A total of 56 plant species were recorded from 3350m-3700m on

Northeast, Northwest and Southern aspects. Diversity and its components along with life form and Leaf size class were analyzed in this small geographic patch.

Dvorsky et al., (2010, 2011) investigated the Vegetation types of East Ladakh at an altitudinal range of 4180m-6060m in Jammu and Kashmir State, India. Species diversity and growth form composition along variable environmental gradients were documented indicating the impacts of climate change on mountain biodiversity. Soil moisture, salinity and altitude were identified as the controlling factors.

Ahmad et al., (2017) conducted Ethno pharmacological studies of indigenous plants in Kel village, NeelumValley Azad Kashmir and reported 50 medicinal plants belonging to 33 families used in 13 disease categories. They gave the status of rarity to the documented plants on the bases of indigenous knowledge about the usage pattern.

33

Chapter 3

MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1. STUDY AREA

3.1.1. Geography and Topography of Azad Jammu and Kashmir

The State of Azad Jammu and Kashmir is located between longitude 73◦ – 75◦ and latitude 33◦ – 36◦ in the western Himalayas. The region comprises an area of 5134 square miles. Population of the state is estimated to be 4.045 Million with an average growth rate of 2.69 annually (Rehman et al., 2017). Its landscape is mainly Hilly and Mountainous characterized by deep Valleys, rocky and undulating territory. At the South it is bounded by the district Gujrat of Punjab Province, on East by occupied Kashmir and Jammu

Region, on West by Kahota district, region and KPK. While upper Alpine region of Neelum is running parallel to and Astor site of Gilget Biltastan

(Rehman et al., 2017). Climate of the region is subtropical to humid type. Maximum average temperature recorded between 25°C -34°C and minimum average temperature ranges from 04 °C - 10°C in winter season (Pak-Met, 2017).

3.1.2. Study Area

The area under investigation lies in upper belt of Azad Jammu and Kashmir including district Neelum, Muzaffarabad, , Bagh and Haveli districts.

Topography of the area is mainly mountainous with terraces and deep incised valleys.

The ridges and valley are generally southeast-northwest parallel to the regional geological structures. District Neelum stretches over an area of 3621 Km2 at 34° 40̍ latitude North and 74°10̍ longitudes east having an altitudinal range of 1453m to -6325m. The population of the district is 0.163 million (Govt. of AJK, 2015). Muzaffarabad comprises an area of 1642 Km2 located on the bank of Jhelum and Neelum rivers between 34°20́ N and 73̊ 30 ̍ East longitudes. Altitude of the region ranges from 600 m to 4340 m. To the

34 north topography is characterized by steep mountains with elevations up to about 4,500m.

District Jhelum Valley has an altitudinal range of 900m-4000m at 34°10́ North Latitude and 73° 50̍east Longitude. The area is surrounded by Indian Held Kashmir on east and

North, whereas at west by Muzaffarabad and in South by district Bagh. .

3.1. 3. Distribution of the Sampling Sites in the Study Area

Upper mountain areas of Western Himalayan region of Azad Kashmir were selected to study the vegetation diversity patterns along with provisional services in Sub alpine (2700m-3500m) and Alpine (>3500m) region. Investigated districts were Neelum,

Muzaffarabad, Hattian, Bagh and Haveli. Upper parts of Machiara National Park, Peer

Chinasi to Peerhaseemar, and top Plateau of Neelum Valley, Ganga Choti, Bedori Range,

Haji Peer and Shero Dhara were included in sub-alpine forest and alpine belt in the western Himalaya.

A total of 56 plant communities were studied along different altitudinal gradients in sub-alpine and alpine areas. Out of these all sites 18 sites were taken at an elevational range of 3500 meters to 4070 meters that was purely of Alpine in nature. Remaining 38 sites investigated were of sub alpine type in an altitudinal variation of 2700m- 3450m.

In upper region of District Neelum, 28 sites at an altitudinal range of 2700m to

4170m were investigated thoroughly. Eleven sites of Machiara National Park and Peer

Chinasi were studied from Muzaffarabad district along variable altitudinal gradient of

2700m-3300m that was totally of sub-alpine forest. From district Hattian Balla 03 sites at

Sheesha Mali and 04 Sites from Leepa Valley at an altitudinal range of 2971m-3580m were studied during 2016 whereas 04 plant communities were reported from District

Bagh and Havali ranging from Ganga Chotti to Haji Peer along elevational range of 2846 meter to 3020 meter present in sub alpine belt of Western Himalaya.

35

Figure. 3.1: Map of the study area (Right) and satellite Imagery of the sampling sites.

36

Table.3.1 Geographical charecterstics of the investigated sites in the area

Altitude Site Site Name District (m) Longitude Latitude Aspect Slope Class 1 Shounther Bahak Neelum 3200 0740 52.8570 340 97.9041 Western facing 00- 300 2 Spoon Lake Neelum 3181 0740.52.4063 340 97.3994 Northern aspect 00- 300 Shounther Valley 3 South Neelum 3440 0740.51.6405 340 98.1739 Southern aspect 300 -600 Shounther Valley East facing 4 Bahak Neelum 3500 0740.50.7352 340 .98.0305 aspect 300 -600 Shounther Valley West facing 5 west Neelum 3650 0740.53.7320 340 99.6451 Aspect 600 -900 North facing 6 Shounther Bahak II Neelum 3250 0740.52.0697 340 96.6854 Aspect 300 -600 Exposed 7 Shounther camp Neelum 3150 0740.51.2926 340 97.3506 surface 00- 300 Shounther Valley North facing 8 North Neelum 3450 0740.51.5825 340 96.35478 Aspect 300 -600 Northern 9 Ratti Gali lake Neelum 3715 0740.05.6981 34◦82.5113 Aspect 00- 300 Northern 10 Ratti Gali Lake Top Neelum 3836 0740 05.9911 340 83.8051 Aspect 00- 300 Northern 11 Ratti Gali South Neelum 3842 0740.07.6548 340.83.715 Aspect 600 -900 Southern 12 Ratti Gali Top Neelum 3900 0740.06.4742 340.83.9340 Aspect 00- 300 Southern 13 Ratti Gali Rata Sar Neelum 3730 740.05.6981 340.83.0406 Aspect 300 -600 Southern 14 Ratti Gali Sar Neelum 3642 740 05.2435 340 83.4566 Aspect 00- 300

37

Altitude Site Site Name District (m) Longitude Latitude Aspect Slope Class Northern 15 Khawaja Seri Bahak Neelum 3069 0740.06.257 340.46.972 Aspect 00- 300 Khawaja Seri Kilwan Southern 16 Bahak Neelum 2700 0740 .06.870 340.91.972 Aspect 00- 300 Northern 17 Burjali Hill Neelum 3550 0740.08.745 340.66.989 Aspect 300 -600 18 Bujali forest Neelum 3323 0740.05.945 340.46.889 Western Aspect 00- 300 Northern 19 Burjan wali Bahak Neelum 3400 0740.08.784 340 80.889 Aspect 300 -600 Northern 20 Kilwan Bahak I Neelum 3165 0740.06.113 340.46.936 Aspect 300 -600 Southern 21 Kilwan Bahak II Neelum 3070 0740.06.113 340.46.936 Aspect 300 -600 22 Khawaja Seri Jangal Neelum 3040 0740 06.965 340.44.789 Eestern Aspect 00- 300 Northern 23 Chiria Bahak Neelum 2984 0730.50.690 340.42.160 Aspect 00- 300 South Estern 24 Chiria Naka Neelum 3112 0730.50.534 340.41.906 Aspect 00- 300 Southern 25 Gugshai Gali Neelum 3850 0730.48.611 340.41.659 Aspect 00- 300 26 Peeran Wali Bahak Neelum 3500 0730.49.931 340.42.229 Top platue 00- 300 Southern 27 Baboon Sar Neelum 3645 0730.49.612 340.41.837 Aspect 00- 300 Northern 28 Jugshai Top Neelum 3971 0730.48.766 340.41.465 Aspect 600 -900 Northern 29 Jabri Bahak Neelum 3920 0730.48.841 340.41.176 Aspect 300 -600

38

Altitude Site Site Name District (m) Longitude Latitude Aspect Slope Class Northern 30 Baboon Bahak Neelum 3230 730.83.7229 340.70.3124 Aspect 00- 300 31 Jabri Hill Neelum 4017 0730.48.741 340.41.397 Sunny slope 00- 300 Southern 32 Jabri Top Neelum 4070 0730.48.573 340.41.074 Aspect 300 -600 East South 33 Baboon Shaheed Neelum 3300 730.83.1748 340.69.9896 Aspect 300 -600 Baboon Choora 34 Medan Neelum 3700 730.82.6483 340.69.7071 Exposed area 00- 300 East facing 35 Perchinasi Ziarat Muzaffarabad 2820 0730.36.572 340. 23.196 Aspect 00- 300 South facing 36 Perchinasi Medan Muzaffarabad 2980 0730.36.632 340.23.123 Aspect 300 -600 Northern 37 PeerHaseemar Bahak Muzaffarabad 3080 0730.54.892 340.41.525 Aspect 300 -600 South facing 38 PeerHaseemar Ziarat Muzaffarabad 3150 0730.54.964 340.41.653 Aspesct 00- 300 North facing 39 Machiara Jangle Muzaffarabad 2915 0730.57.2376 340.56.9268 Aspect 00- 300 South facing 40 Machiara Bahak Muzaffarabad 3050 0730.56.5542 340.58.1268 Aspect 300 -600 Machiara Dana North East 41 Bahak Muzaffarabad 3070 0730.54.0511 340.56.9568 facing 600 -900 Machiara Dhaer East South 42 Bahak Muzaffarabad 3082 0730.90.510 340.96.914 facing 300 -600 North East 43 Machiara NP North Muzaffarabad 3115 0730.40.3920 340.55.8268 facing 300 -600

39

Altitude Site Site Name District (m) Longitude Latitude Aspect Slope Class Machiara NP Gali Northern 44 Bahak Muzaffarabad 3200 0730.51.3934 340.55.7318 Aspect 300 -600 Machiara NP Dana East facing 45 Top Muzaffarabad 3300 0730.50.1632 340.56.3813 Aspect 00- 300 Southern 46 Sheshamali Bahak Hattian Bala 3100 0730.79.1804 340.26.5266 Aspect 00- 300 Northern 47 Sheshamali Top Hattian Bala 3170 0730.78.3916 340.26.3501 Aspect 300 -600 Southern 48 Sheshamali South Hattian Bala 3240 0730.76.9639 340.27.0745 Aspect 600 -900 Northern 49 Brithwar Mor Hattian Bala 2971 0730.85.0961 340.25.3305 Aspect 00- 300 Northern 50 Brithwar Nalla Hattian Bala 3320 0730.85.7380 340.24.4370 Aspect 00- 300 51 Brithwar Top Hattian Bala 3580 0730.86.1072 340.24.3246 top Plateu 00- 300 Northern 52 Yadori Top Hattian Bala 3395 0730.95.7157 340. 26.6424 Aspect 300 -600 Southern 53 Ganga Chotti Bagh 2846 0730.77.8443 340.07.7019 Aspect 00- 300 Southern 54 Haji peer Bagh 2940 0740.06.1764 330.96.4379 Aspect 300 -600 Southern 55 Shero Dhara Bagh 3020 0740.00.6344 330.95.330 Aspect 600 -900 South facing 56 Shankh Bagh 2939 0730.99.7961 330.95.4397 Aspect 00- 300

40

3.2. CLIMATE

The climate of the study sites is of alpine and sub-alpine nature. Alpine zone of the region remains snow covered during winter months (October to March). Winter period experiences severe cold due to heavy precipitation which occurs in the form of snow fall and rain. Highest Rain fall occurs mostly in moonsoon at higher elevations

(Shaheen et al., 2012; Khan et al., 2016). The mean minimum and mean maximum temperature ranges from -10°C -10°C and, 15°C- 20°C in sub-alpine region respectively

(Singh & Rawat, 1999). Alpine region has a cold desert climate with heavy snowfall and freezing temperature. Mean summer temperature remains between 0°C to 10°C, while in winter it decreases sharply up to -30°C.

Mean annual precipitation ranges from 35-140 mm in moon soon free region. There are clear seasonal variations in this region. An average annual precipitation occurs from 900-

1300mm only in moon soon prevailing region (Khan et al., 2012; Pak-Met 2017; Shaheen et al., 2017).

The maximum amount of snow depth may exceed up to four meters in sub-alpine and alpine belt in February (Shaheen et al., 2012). There is a shortage of growing period in sub-alpine and alpine region. June to August is the main season for growth, with average daytime temperatures in the range of 15°C - 20°C in sub alpine and 07°C -09°C in alpine regions. Most of the life complete the life cycle only in three to four months of summer (Khan et al., 2012).

3.3. EDAFHIC FACTORS

Sub alpine and alpine soil properties alter the fertility level of soil and associated services in western Himalayan region. Edaphic factors such as soil type, soil texture and amount of organic matter are responsible for variation in vegetation dynamics and functioning of mountain ecosystems (Alien and Burns, 2000). Loamy and silty soil with

41 high percentage of organic matter and maximum water holding capacity are favorable conditions for thick vegetation cover in mountain region (Legros, 1992, Korner, 2003).

In sub alpine and alpine ecosystems diverse types of soil such as Sandy, Silty, Clayey

Loam and Loamy are present with high % age of CaCo3 and Organic Carbon. Due to porous nature, weathered soil of mountain region has maximum water holding capacity and acidic to somewhat alkaline in nature. PH of mountain soil increases due to dissolution of CaCo3 in rocky habitats. Mostly this value ranged from 5.35- 7.20

(Mancinelli, 1984; Korner, 1999; Steininger and Hannemann, 2002; Noor and Khatoon,

2013). Soil of highland areas is mostly degraded due to removal of nutrients by water erosion on ridges and exposed areas. Due to low temperature on mountains biological activity carried out by fungi, bryophytes, lichens and cyanobacteria is reduced which leads to infertility in these regions (Korner, 1999)

3.4. HYDROLOGY

Western Himalayan mountain region supplies freshwater to low land areas in the form of glaciers, avalanches, permafrost, glacial lakes, snow fall and rain fall. This melted waters feed the rivers or nallahs downstream of Azad Kashmir (Cochaard and Dar, 2014;

Pak-Met, 2017). Main rivers of the study area include Neelum, Jehlum and Poonch.

Several important tributaries are Shounther Nala, Gagai Nala, Surgan Nala, Jagran Nala,

Nala Mahal, Betar and Qazinag.

3.5. SAMPLING METHODOLOGY

3.5.1. Vegetation Sampling

A total of 56 sampling Sites were selected and quadrats were were locateted on the basis of altitudinal gradients and topographic features (Ahmed and Shaukat, 2012).

The present study was conducted in May, June, July, August and September of year 2016

-2017. In present study systematic quadrat method was used for vegetation sampling.

42

Square shape quadrates of 1 x 1 m 2, 5 x 5 m 2 and 20 x 20 m 2 were taken from each site for Herbs, Shrubs and Trees respectively in sub-alpine region (Walker et al., 2013).

A sum of 5 Quadrats for trees, 10 for shrubs and 15 for estimation of ground flora were taken from each site after 50 meters along altitudinal gradients in sub alpine region while 5 Quadrats for shrubs and 10 Quadrats for herbaceous vegetation were laid in alpine region. Geographical coordinates such as elevation, longitude, latitude, slope degree, topographic features and variable aspects were recorded with the help of Global positioning system. Soil erosion and grazing intensity classes were recorded from disturbed and undisturbed sites by visual observations following Shaheen et al., (2012).

Plants specimen were identified using flora of Pakistan, e flora of china, Flowers of India, Flowers of Himalaya, Published literature and by comparing with herbarium specimens present in different Herbaria (Nasir and Ali, 1970-1979; Ali & Qaisar, 1980-

1989). The identified plant specimens were deposited in the herbarium of Botany deportment of Azad Kashmir University (AKASH).

3.6. PHYTOSOCIOLOGICAL ATTRIBUTES

Following attributes were recorded from the investigated data;

1. Absolute Density and relative Density (Ahmed and Shaukat, 2012)

2. Absolute Frequency and relative Frequency

3. Cover / Basal area and relative Cover/ Basal area

4. Important Value Index (Muller-Dombois and Ellenberg, 1974).

5. Floristic composition (Families, Genera and total number of Species)

6. Diversity indices (Simpson and Shannon Index )

7. Diversity components (Evenness (Pielou, 1975), Richness (Minhinick,

(1964) and Degree of maturity (Pichi-Sarmolli, 1948)

8. Soil erosion classes

43

9. Grazing intensity classes

10. Habitat Type

11. Physiognomic attributes (Leaf size class, Life forms, Percentage leaf

Spectrum and life form Percentage (Raunkaer, (1934).

3.7. PHYTOSOCIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS

Phytosociology is the science of vegetation dynamics dealing with all the characteristics floral diversity including structure, composition, functions, and relationships of plants with each other (Gereig-Smith, 2010). Community is defined as the assemblage of plants living together in the same habitat or environment, interacting in many ways with one and other (Putman, 1994). Plant community is the determination of all prevailing conditions of that particular site (Daubenmire, 1959; Billings, 1972).

Following parameters of plant and vegetation communities were recorded during the current research according to Misra, (1968); Muller-Dombois and Ellenberg, (1974).

3.7.1. Density

Density refers to the total number of individual present in the particular area

under investigation (Simpson, 1949). Numerical expression is as

Total No of Individuals D = Total area Sampled

Density of dense grasses (Tussock/bunch grasses) was determined by bunch method and others were counted individually following Gonnet et al., (2003).

3.7.2. Frequency

With the help of frequency degree of distribution pattern of species in the studied site can be estimated (Ahmed et al., 2012). It tells that how species are dispersed homogeneously or heterogeneously in the given area. It is calculated as

44

No of Presence of a Species F = x 100 Total no of Quadrats

3.7.3. Canopy Cover

Cover is the ground surface area covered by herbs, shrubs and tree species. It could be a larger than the actual area because of overlapping of branching pattern (Braun-

Blanquet, 1932; Daubenmire, 1968). Cover of herbs and shrubby nature plant species was measured by using the six basic cover classes proposed by Daubenmire, (1968).

Classes, their range and mid points are as:

Table 3.2. Daubenmire coverage classes for herbs and shrubs Sr. No Class Range (cm) Average 01 0-5 2.5 02 5-25 30 03 25-50 37.5 04 50-75 62.5 05 75-95 85 06 95-100 97.5

Canopy cover for herbs and shrubs:

Sum of mid points of a Species Cover = Total No of Quadrats

Cover of tree species calculated by taking DBH (Diameter at breast hight) known as

Circumference following Misra, (1968); Muller-Dombois and Ellenberg, (1974).

Area covered by the tree species was estimated as

C = π D

C D= π A= π D

C2 퐴 = π 4

45

C2 퐴 = 3.14x4 C2 퐴 = 12.56x No of Quadrats x Size of Quadrats

Where as C represents the Circumferance, D (Diameter), r (Radius), A (Area)

3.7.4. Relative Density

It is referred to as percentage of individuals of each species that make a contribution to the total individuals in a stand or sampled area.

Density of one species R.D= x 100 Density of all species in a stand

3.7.5. Relative Frequency

Relative frequency of a species is a percentage of frequency of total frequency.

More percentage value determines the homogeneity among plant species in a stand.

Frequancy of one species R. F = x 100 Frequancy of all species in a stand

3.7.6. Relative Canopy Cover

It also gives the percentage of ground occupied by the presence of certain plant species

Cover of one species R. C C = x 100 Cover of all species in a stand

3.7.7. Importance Value Index

It determines the overall percentage contribution of all species in the investigated plant community. It is the sum of total Relative Density, Relative Frequency and Relative

Canopy Cover of one species. Two to three species having highest IVI values makes the community structure in that area (Muller-Dombois and Ellenberg, 1974).

46

Importance Value Index = Relative Density + Relative Frequency + Relative Canopy

Cover

3.8. DIVERSITY INDICES

Diversity is the variety of life at global, regional or local level. It depends upon many factors such as topography, ecological conditions, and availability of food in that environment. It measures the complexity and diversity of the studied community.

Simpson diversity index was calculated as

푛푖 (푛푖−1) 퐷 = ∑ Where 푁 (푁−1 푁) ni represented the total no of individuals of one species while N represented the total individuals of all species in a stand.

Shannon diversity index (1963) was measured as

H=∑ pi log pi Where

Pi = n/N, N = ∑ n = A total of all individuals in a stand n = Total number of individuals of a single species

3.9. COMPONENTS OF DIVERSITY

Species richness, species evenness and community maturity are the main components of diversity which were measured during the current research.

3.9.1. Menhinick Richness Index

Menhinick richness index is the total number of species present in a community.

Highest the number of species more the site is diverse (Menhinick, 1964).

S R = √N

47

Total number of species of a strand = S

Individuals all species of a strand = N

3.9.2. Evenness or Equitability

This determines the distribution pattern of different species in a stand. Uniform distributions of few species make a stand less diverse than that stand having equal distribution of all the species (Pielou, 1975).

Evenness or Equitability is calculated as:

H J = Log S

Shannon Index of diversity is represented by “H”, while total number of species of a stand was represented by “S”

3.9.3. Species Maturity

Maturity of a community refers to the equal distribution of all species. Generally its value lies in between 1 to 100. Highest values indicate the climax stage (maturity) of community while lowest stage indicates the regular disturbance in investigated area (Pichi-

Sarmolli, 1948). A community is reported to be mature if it has a value of 60% (Malik,

2005)

F Species maturity = Where S

“F “is the total frequency of the community and “S” is the total number of species in that community

48

3.10. ASPECT

There is a diversity of aspects such as North facing, South facing aspects, and south eastern, south western, and north eastern Aspect. These aspects produce significant impacts on diversity and distribution pattern of vegetation (Gairola et al., 2015).

Therefore these aspects were recorded from each investigated site.

3.11. SLOPE

Variable slope degree produces pronounced effects on floral diversity. Low slope degree increases the anthropogenic disturbances while higher slope degree reduces the pressure due to inaccessibility (Gairola et al., 2015, Shaheen et al., 2012). A total three slope degree classes were made during the study such as

Class 1: 1ᵒ-30ᵒ

Class 2: 31ᵒ-60ᵒ

Class 3: 60ᵒ-90ᵒ

3.12. GRAZING INTENSITY

Grazing pressure is a serious threat to the flora of any region. Intensive grazing increases the growth of less palatable or non-palatable species. To assess the impacts of grazing on vegetation dynamics grazing intensity on each stand was measured. For this reason three major grazing classes were made which are following;

Class 1: The area which is not gazed or slightly grazed.

Class 2: The area moderately grazed

Class 3: The area highly grazed and disturbed

3.13. SOIL EROSION

To evaluate the impacts of land sliding and soil erosion on removal of vegetation cover three erosion classes were recorded during vegetation analyses.

49

Class 1: No erosion or slightly eroded

Class 2: Moderate erosion

Class 3: Heavily eroded soil

3.14. BIOLOGICAL SPECTRUM

Life form and Leaf size class determine the environmental conditions of the area under study and it also elaborate the physiognomy of different plant species. For the estimation of life form and Leaf size class Raunkiaer‘s (1934) system of classification was used. Major Life form classes are Magaphanerophytes (Mp), Naphanerophytes (NP),

Chaemeophytes (Ch), Hemicrpteophytes (H), Therophytes (Th), Geophytes (G) and

Lianas (L).

3.14.1. Leaf Size Class

Six type of Leaf size class was recorded as, Leptohyllous (L), Nanophyllous (N),

Microphyllous (Mi), Mesophyllous (Me), Macrophyllous (Ma) and Megaphyllous (Mg) according to Raunkiar, (1956).

3.14.2. ECOSYSTEM SERVICES FROM WESTERN HIMALAYAN HIGH

LANDS

3.15. SOCIOECONOMIC VARIABLES

The assessment of economic status of local inhabitants was done in terms of land holdings, herd rearing, employment status and major sources of income. It is helpful to find out the dependency pattern of locals on highland flora (Mitchell, 1979). Ecosystem services such fuel wood consumption and non-timber forest products (NTFPs) such as fodder, medicinal plant usage, wild vegetables, morale collection and their contribution in livelihood of rural people of the study sites was measured following Acharya et al.,

(2011); Dar et al., (2012).

50

The role of floral diversity in livelihood support of rural people and impact of anthropogenic activities on ecosystem services in Sub-alpine and alpine vegetation; socioeconomic survey was quantified by Questionnaires based field surveys. Open ended

Questionnaires were given to obtain, correct estimation of forest ecosystem services and socioeconomic conditions of the locals around the investigated areas (Raymond et al.,

2009; Acharya et al., 2011). A questionnaire was designed to acquire the data from villagers about education level, family size, herd size; land holding and available grazing area (Bhatt et al., 1994; Shaheen et al., 2011, 2017).

Data about quantity of fuel wood consumption pattern in summer and winter season was obtained according to Ali and Benjaminsen, (2004). Finally the recoded data were compiled to estimate the average fuel wood consumption in metric ton per capita per day annually (Shaheen et al., 2011). Non timber forest products (NTFPs) included food, fruit, wild vegetables, edible mushrooms and Morales, fodder usage pattern and extraction practices and contribution of these resources in sustainability of local inhabitants was recorded during house hold survey following (Wangchuk et al., 2014).

A total of 16 villages were identified along each altitudinal zone and 20 household from each villages were interviewed freely. A total of 320 household were selected for this study in remote areas of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Anthropogenic threats such as deforestation activities, over use of natural resources, preferred fuel wood species, huge amount of timber and fuel wood consumption, over grazing and browsing, huge herd size along with low land holding for grazing purposes, logging and saw mill practices were recorded to assess the threats to the diversity and distribution of flora of western

Himalayan highlands in the region.

51

3.15.1. DOCUMENTATION OF ENTHNOBOTANICAL KNOWLEDGE FROM

THE LOCAL COMMUNITIES

Extraction and usage of wild medicinal plants in mountain people for curing of different diseases is a major practice (WHO, 2003). Wild medicinal plants play a significant role in poverty elimination and disease remediation. Medicinal plant wealth related questions were asked to assess the identification and usage pattern method by rural inhabitants. Major portion of structured questionnaire was focused upon those questions which were totally based to acquire the detailed inventory for medicinal plants.

A series of questions asked were focused upon the local name of medicinal plants, parts used and recipe, diseases cured, availability of the species, threats to the flora, preferences of use pattern, collection method and role of these herbs in livelihood of locals. Data about names and use of medicinal plants for veterinary practices was also the part of questionnaire. The informants were asked questions in local handko language regarding traditional knowledge about all these services (Mehmood et al., 2011, 2012; Cochaard and Dar, 2014).

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Statistical analysis was used to find the correlation between floral distribution and environmental variables. For this purpose various Multivariate ordination techniques including Principle component Analysis (PCA) and Cluster Analysis (CA) were applied

(Hill, 1980; Ter Barak, 2002). Past software version 3.06 was used for ordination analysis.

52

Chapter 4

RESULTS

4.1. FLORISTIC COMPOSITION

The flora of Western Himalayan High Lands of Azad Jammu and Kashmir consisted of 517 species belonging to 78 families and 239 genera. Of them 9 species were of trees, 51 were shrubs and 457 were herbaceous in nature. The floristic inventory also included 48 fern species i.e. Pteridophytes along with two species of fern allies belonging to the genus Equisetum (Table 4.1).

Dominant families with large number of species included Asteraceae with 54 species comprising10.44 % of the local flora. It was followed by Rosaceae (37 Spp, 7.15

%), Poaceae (35 Spp, 6.76 %) and Lamiaceae (29 Spp, 5.60 %) respectively. The co dominant families included Ranunculaceae with 26 species (5.02 %) followed by

Fabaceae (22 Spp, 4.25 %), Apiaceae (19 Spp, 03.68 %), Dryopteridaceae (18 Spp, 03.48

%), Boraginaceae and Polygonaceae each with (16 Spp, 3.09 %), Scrophulariaceae and

Caryophylaceae (14 Spp, 2.70 %), Primulaceae and Gentianaceae (13 Spp, 2.51 %).

These fourteen dominant families constituted 63.05% of the local flora having 326 species. Fifty three plant families were represented by 2-7 species whereas 21 Families were represented by only a single specific epithet (Fig.4.1).

53

21 Families having Asteraceae, 54, single species, 21, 10% 4% Poaceae, 35, 7% Roaceae, 37, 7% 44 Families having 2-7 species, 170, 33% Lamiaceae , 29, 6%

Ranunculaceae , 26, 5% Gentianaceae , 13, 3% Fabaceae , 22, 4% Primulaceae, 13, Apiaceae , 19, 4% 3% Caryophylaceae , 14, 3% Dryopteridaceae , Schrophluraceae, Polygonaceae , 16, Boraginaceae, 16, 3% 18, 3% 14, 3% 3% Figure 4.1. Dominant families having largest species number in the study area.

The dominant plant genera included Dryopteris with 11 species followed by Poa

(08 Spp), Astragalus, Potentilla Primula and Polystichum with (07 Spp) each Polygonum,

Cotoneaster, Lonicera and Pedicularis (06 Spp) each. Epilobium, Aconitum, Saxifraga,

Ranunculus, , Impatiens, Gentiana and Artemisia, Berberis, Arisaema and Nepeta were represented by 05 species each. The genera Allium, Viola, Iris, Gallium, Juncus,

Carex, Asplenium, Plantago, Anemone, Rhodiola, Silene, Taraxacum, Geranium,

Pennisetum, Androsace, Lindelofia, Leontopodium, Bistorta, Bupleurum, Adiantum,

Delphinium and Agrostis, Pseudomertensia were represented by 04 species each. The genera represented by 3 species each in the study area included Artemisia, Aster, Rheum,

Sedum, Senecio, Sibbaldia, Valeriana, Veronica, Viburnum, Cardamine, Rhododendron,

Rosa, Rubus, Rumex, Saussurea, Phlomis, Juniperus, Euphorbia, Festuca, Cystopteris,

Chaerophyllum, Clinopodium, Pleurospermum and Adiantum.

54

Table.4.1 Floristic Composition, local name, Importance Value Index, Habit and Biological Spectrum of vegetation of Sub-alpine and Alpine Zone of AJK

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 1. Abies pindrow Royle Pinaceae Rawer Tree Mp L 9.21

2. Acer caesium Wall. ex Brandis Aceraceae Tre Kana Tree Mp Ma 0.465

3. Acer cappadocicum Gled. Aceraceae Tre Kana Tree Mp Me 0.098

4. Achillea millefolium L. Asteraceae Sultani Boti Herb H Na 0.408

5. Aconitum ferox Wallich ex Seringe Ranunculaceae Patrees Herb G Mi 0.145

6. Aconitum heterophyllum Wall. ex Royle Ranunculaceae Patrees Herb G Mi 1.345

7. Aconitum laeve Royle Ranunculaceae Patrees Herb G Mi 0.241

8. Aconitum violaceum Jacq. Ranunculaceae Mohri Herb G Mi 0.059

9. Aconitun chyasmenthium Stapf ex HolMe Ranunculaceae Mohri Herb G Mi 1.879

10. Aconogonum alpiunm Schur Polygonaceae Chekroo Herb G Me 0.274

11. Aconogonum molle Hara Polygonaceae Pan Chola Herb G Me 0.747

12. Actaea spicata L. Ranunculaceae Muniri Herb H Ma 0.118

55

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 13. Adiantum capillus veneris L. Adiantaceae Kakwa Fern G Me 0.171

14. Adiantum pedatum L. Adiantaceae Kakwa Fern G Ma 0.354

15. Adiantum trichomanes D.Don Adiantaceae Fern G Ma 0.326

16. Adiantum caudatum L. Adiantaceae Kakwa Fern G Ma 0.184

17. Adiantum venustum D. Don Adiantaceae Kakwa Fern G Ma 0.184

18. Aegopodium alpestre Ledeb. Apiaceae Herb H Me 0.199

19. Aesculus indica (Colebr. ex Cambess.) 0.025 Hook. Hippocastanaceae Bun Khor Tree Mp Me

20. Agrimonia eupatoria L. Rosaceae Herb Th L 0.223

21. Agrimonia pilosa Ledeb. Rosaceae Herb H Na 0.049

22. Agrostis gigantea Roth Poaceae Gagoo Herb G L 0.279

23. Agrostis stolonifera L. Poaceae Gagoo Herb Th Na 0.229

24. Agrostis vernalis (M. Bieb.) Poir. Poaceae Ghaa Herb H L 1.151

25. Agrostis vinealis Schreb. Poaceae Ghaa Herb G L 0.101

26. Ainsliaea aptera DC. Asteraceae Herb H Me 0.873

27. Ainsliaea latifolia (D.Don) Sch.Bip. Asteraceae Nill Herb Th Me 0.535

56

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 28. Ajuga bracteosa Wallich ex Benth Lammiaceae Rattiboti Herb H Mi 0.076

29. Ajuga parviflora Benth. Lammiaceae Jan E Adam Herb H Me 0.205

30. Alcea rosea L. Malvaceae Gul E Khair Herb H Ma 0.217

31. Alchemilla trollii Rothm Rosaceae Herb H Me 0.115

32. Allardia tomentosa Decne. Asteraceae Herb H Na 0.131

33. Allium carolinianum DC. Amaryllidaceae Pyaz Herb G Na 0.102

34. Allium humile Kunth Amaryllidaceae Pyaz Herb G Na 1.919

35. Allium tuberosum Rottl. ex Spreng Amrylledaceae Jangli Piaz Herb G Na 0.354

36. Allium wallichii Kunth Amarylidaceae Mali Ka Piaz Herb G Na 0.091

37. Alopecurus himalaicus Hook.f. Poaceae Ghaa Herb G L 0.634

38. Anagallis arvensis L. Primulaceae Herb The L 0.011

39. Anaphalis boisseri Grgiadou Asteraceae Kali Noti Herb H Na 2.121

40. Anaphalis nepalensis (Spreng.) Hand.- 1.377 Mazz. Asteraceae Pely Boti Herb The Na

41. Anaphalis triplinervis (Sims) Sims ex 0.789 C.B.Clarke Asteraceae Chity Biti Herb The Na

57

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Specie Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 42. Androsace longifolia Turcz. Primulaceae Herb Th L 0.058

43. Androsace primuloides Duby Primulaceae Mameera Herb H Mi 0.184

44. Androsace rotundifolia Hardw. Primulaceae Herb Th L 0.026

45. Androsace sempervivoides Jacquem.ex 0.039 Duby Primulaceae Herb H Mi

46. Anemone obtusiloba D,Don Ranunculaceae Herb H Me 0.51

47. Anemone rupicola Cambess. Ranunculaceae Mohri Herb H Mi 0.114

48. Anemone tetrasepala Royle Ranunculaceae Herb H Ma 0.307

49. Anemone rivularis Buch.-Ham.ex DC. Ranunculaceae Herb H Mi 0.473

50. Angelica glauca Edgew. Apiaceae Chora Herb G Me 0.195

51. Anglica cyclocarpa (Norman) Cannon Apiaceae Murchar Herb G Ma 0.253

52. Apluda dahuricus L. Poaceae Ghaaa Herb H L 0.069

53. Apluda mutica L. Poaceae Ghaa Herb H L 0.051

54. Aquilegia fragrans Benth. Ranunculaceae Phkli Jar Herb H Na 0.236

55. Aquilegia nivalis Falc. ex Jackson Ranunculaceae Phkli Jar Herb H Na 0.257

56. Aquilegia pubiflora Wallich. ex Royle Ranunculaceae Phkli Jar Herb H Na 0.187

58

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 57. Arabis amplexicaulis Edgew. Bracicaceae Herb H L 0.324

58. Arisaema nepanthoides Martius ex Schott Araceae Sur Ganda Herb G Ma 0.084

59. Arisaema flavum Schott Araceae Sur Ganda Herb G Ma 0.568

60. Arisaema intermedium Blume Araceae Surganda Herb G Ma 0.224

61. Arisaema jacquemontii Blume. Araceae Sur Ganda Herb G Ma 0.135

62. Arisaema tortosum Schott Araceae Sur Ganda Herb G Ma 0.221

63. Arnebia benthamii I.M.Johnst. Boraginaceae Gaw Zuban Herb G Mi 0.226

64. Arnebia euchroma (Royle) I.M.Johnst. Boraginaceae Gaw Zuban Herb G Me 0.063

65. Artemisia absinthium L. Asteraceae Jahoo Herb H Me 2.069

66. Artemisia annua L. Asteraceae Jahoo Herb The Mi 0.712

67. Artemisia herba-alba Asso Asteraceae Jahoo Herb H Me 0.442

68. Artemisia japonica Thunb. Asteraceae Chita Jahoo Herb H Me 0.34

69. Artemisia maritima L. Asteraceae Sor Ganda Herb H Mi 0.168

70. Asparagus adscendens Roxb. Liliaceae Herb Chae Ma 0.187

59

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 71. Asplenium adiantum-nigrum L. Aspleniaceae Fern G Me 0.579

72. Asplenium fontanum (L.) Bernh. Aspleniaceae Fern G Me 0.174

73. Asplenium septentrionale (L.) Hoffman, Aspleniaceae Fern G L 0.356

74. Asplenium trichomanes L. Aspleniaceae Fern G Mi 0.437

75. Aster alpinus L. Asteraceae Poshgr Herb H Me 0.051

76. Aster falconeri (C.B.Clarke) Hutch. Asteraceae Herb H Mi 1.091

77. Aster himalaicus C.B.Clarke Asteraceae Herb H Mi 0.349

78. Astragalus candolleanus Royle ex Benth Fabaceae Miswak Herb H Me 0.418

79. Astragalus frigidus (L.) A.Gray Fabaceae Miswak Herb H Me 0.579

80. Astragalus himalayanus Klotzsch Fabaceae Miswak Herb Th Mi 0.457

81. Astragalus subumbellatus Klotzsch in 0.736 Klotzsch & Garcke Fabaceae Miswak Herb H Me

82. Astragalus grahamianus Benth. Fabaceae Herb G Me 0.151

83. Astragalus oplites Benth. ex R. Parker Fabaceae Herb G Me 0.061

84. Astragalus rhizanthus Benth. Fabaceae Herb G Me 0.049

60

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Specie Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 85. Athyrium filix-femina (L.) Bernh. Woodsiaceae Fern G Ma 0.173

86. Athyrium imbricatum Christ. Woodsiaceae Fern G Me 0.045

87. Athyrium wallichianum Ching. Bull. Fan 0.107 Mem. Woodsiaceae Fern G Me

88. Atropa acuminata Royle Solanaceae Lubar Herb Th Ma 0.111

89. Barleria cristata L. Acanthaceae Herb H Mi 0.052

90. Berberis aristata Roxb.ex DC Berberidaceae Kala Sumbal Shrub Np Na 0.828

91. Berberis jaeschkeana C.K. Schneider Berberidaceae Mali Ka Sumbl Shrub Np Na 2.618

92. Berberis lycium Royle Berberidaceae Pela Sumbal Shrub Np Na 0.212

93. Berberis aitchisonii Ahrendt Berberidaceae Sumbl Shrub Np Na 1.438

94. Berberis parkeriana C.K.Schneid. Berberidaceae Sumbl Shrub Np Na 0.188

95. Bergenia ciliata Sternb. Saxifragaceae Bat Bhewa Herb G Mi 0.229

96. Bergenia purpurascens Engle. Saxifragaceae Bat Bhewa Herb G Me 0.214

97. Bergenia stracheyi (Hook. f. & Thomson) 2.345 Engl. Saxifragaceae Bat Bhewa Herb G Ma

98. Betula utilus D.Don Betulaceae Bhurj Tree Mp Mi 8.025

61

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 99. Bistorta affinis Greene Polygonaceae Masloonr Herb H Mi 4.038

100. Bistorta amplexicaulis Greene Polygonaceae Masloonr Herb H Mi 4.579

101. Bistorta emodi (Meisn.) Petrov Polygalaceae Maslonr Herb G Mi 0.148

102. Bistorta vivipara (L.) Gray Polygalaceae Maslonr Herb G Mi 0.358

103. Blysmus compressus (L.) Panz. ex Link Cyperaceae Herb H L 0.227

104. Botrychium matricariifolium (Doll) A. 0.052 Braun ex W.D.J. Koch Ophioglossaceae Nill Fern H Mi

105. Bromus japonicus Thunb. ex Murr., Poaceae Gagoo Herb Th L 0.167

106. Bupleurum candollei Wall. ex DC Apiaceae Kali Boti Herb Th Mi 0.414

107. Bupleurum falcatum L. Apiaceae Mithi Jar Herb H Na 0.265

108. Bupleurum longicaule Wall. ex DC Apiaceae Mithi Jar Herb H Na 0.017

109. Bupleurum marginatum Wall ex DC. Apiaceae Mithi Jar Herb H Na 0.086

110. Calamagrostis epigejos (L.) Roth Poaceae Ghaa Herb G L 0.274

111. Calamintha umbrosa (M.Bieb.) Rchb. Lammiaceae Herb H Mi 0.114

112. Calanthe tricarinata Lindl. Lammiaceae Herb Th Mi 0.862

62

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 113. Caltha alba Jacq.ex Cart. Ranunculaceae Kakari Patra Herb H Mi 1.586

114. Campanula aristata Wallich Campanulaceae Herb H Na 0.042

115. Campanula cashmeriana Royle Campanulaceae Herb H Na 0.081

116. Campanula latifolia L. Campanulaceae Herb The Me 0.11

117. Capsella bursa-pastoris (L.) Medikus Bracicaceae Pan Pencha Herb Th Mi 0.097

118. Cardamine hirsuta L. Bracicaceae Herb Th Mi 0.272

119. Cardamine loxostemonides O.E.Schulz Bracicaceae Herb H Mi 0.19

120. Cardamine macrophylla Willd. Bracicaceae Herb H L 0.091

121. Carduus edelbergii Rech.f. Asteraceae Herb H Ma 0.02

122. Carduus nutans L. Asteraceae Kanda Herb Th Ma 0.469

123. Carex atrofusca Schkuhr Cyperaceae Deela Gha Herb H L 0.863

124. Carex buxbaumii Wahlenb. Cyperaceae Herb G L 1.408

125. Carex cardiolepis Nees, Cyperaceae Deela Gha Herb G L 0.041

126. Carex psychrophila Nees Cyperaceae Deela Gha Herb H L 1.559

127. Cassiope festigiata (Wallich)D.Don Ericaceae Herb H L 0.574

63

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 128. Ceterach officinarum Willd. Aspleniaceae Fern G Me 0.301

129. Chaerophyllum capnoides (Decne.) Benth. 0.834 ex C.B.Clarke Apiaceae Herb The Me

130. Chaerophyllum reflexum Aitch. Apiaceae Herb The Mi 0.098

131. Chaerophyllum villosum Wallich ex DC. Apiaceae Hasby Ki Jar Herb H Me 0.276

132. Cheilanthes persica (Bory) Mett. ex Kuhn, Pteridaceae Fern G Me 0.204

133. Chenopodium album L. Chenopodiaceae Bathwa Herb The Mi 0.075

134. Chenopodium phylloglossum L. Chenopodiaceae Bathwa Herb The Mi 0.026

135. Chenopodium foliosum Asch. Chenopodiaceae Bathwa Herb The Me 0.039

136. Chrysopogon gryllus (L.) Trin. Poaceae Ghaa Herb H L 0.387

137. Circaea alpina L. Onagraceae Herb G Mi 0.023

138. Clinopodium vulgare L. Lammiaceae Herb The Mi 0.295

139. Clinopodium piperitum (D.Don) Murata Lammiaceae Herb The Mi 0.02

140. 0.029 Clinopodium umbrosum (M.Bieb.) Kuntze Lammiaceae Herb The Mi

64

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 141. Codonopsis clematidea (Schrenk) Clarke Campanulaceae Herb Np Na 0.186

142. Codonopsis ovata Benth. Campanulaceae Herb H Na 0.034

143. Codonopsis viridis Wall. Campanulaceae Phakli Boti Herb The Na 0.061

144. Colutea multiflora Shap.ex Ali Fabaceae Herb H Mi 0.292

145. Cortia depressa (D.Don) Norman Apiaceae Jari Herb H Me 0.179

146. Cortusa brotheri Pax ex Lipsky Primulaceae Herb H Ma 0.317

147. Corydalis govaniana Wall. Papaveraceae Herb H Me 0.217

148. Corydalis stewartii Fedde Papaveraceae Herb H Me 0.597

149. Cotoneaster affinis Lindl. Rosaceae Loonri Shrub Np Mi 0.22

150. Cotoneaster bacillaris Wall.ex Lindl. Rosaceae Loonri Shrub Np Mi 0.206

151. Cotoneaster nummularioides Pojark. Rosaceae Loonri Shrub Np Mi 0.051

152. Cotoneaster acuminatus Wall.ex Lindl. Rosaceae Loonri Shrub Np Mi 0.488

153. Cotoneaster falconeri G.Klotz 0.159 Rosaceae Loonri Shrub Np Mi

154. Cotoneaster procumbens G.Klotz Rosaceae Loonri Shrub Np Mi 0.102

65

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 155. Crepis sancta (L.) Babc. Asteraceae Herb The Mi 0.094

156. Cryptogramma brunoniana Wall.ex Hook. Adiantaceae Fern G Mi 0.08

157. Cryptogramma stelleri (S. G. Gmel.) Pteridaceae Fern G Mi 0.02

158. Cuscuta europaea L. Convolvulaceae Neela Dhari Herb Lianas L 0.194

159. Cuscuta reflexa Roxb Convolvulaceae Neela Dhari Herb Lianas L 0.036

160. Cynoglossum zeylanicum Thunb.ex Lehm Boraginaceae Mali Ka Cheroo Herb H Mi 0.178

161. Cynoglosum lanceolatum Forssk. Boraginaceae Mali Ka Cheroo Herb H Mi 0.402

162. 0.06 Cystopteris dickieana R. Sim, Gard. Cystopteridaceae Fern G Mi

163. Cystopteris fragilis (L.) Bernh. Schrad. Cystopteridaceae Fern G Mi 0.04

164. 0.04 Cystopteris montana (L.) Bernh. Cystopteridaceae Fern G Mi

165. Dactylis glomerata L. Poaceae Ghaa Herb H L 0.094

166. Dactylorhiza hatagirea (D.Don) Soo Orchidaceae Nar Mada Herb G Mi 0.293

167. Delphinium denudatum Wall.ex Hook. f. & 0.141 Thoms. Ranunculaceae Herb H Mi

66

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 168. Delphinium nordhagenii Wendelbo Ranunculaceae Herb H Mi 0.111

169. Delphinium roylei Munz. Ranunculaceae Herb H Mi 0.132

170. Delphinium vestitum Wallich ex Royle Ranunculaceae Herb H Mi 0.068

171. Dianthus anatolicus Boiss. Caryophylaceae Herb The Mi 0.058

172. Dioscorea deltoidea Wall.ex Griseb. Dioscoraceae Kareens Herb Lianas Me 0.242

173. Diplazium maximum (D. Don) C. Chr. Woodsiaceae Fern G Ma 0.058

174. Dipsacus inermis Wallich Dipsacaceae Opulha Herb H Me 0.918

175. Draba cachemirica Gand. Bracicaceae Herb H Mi 0.158

176. Draba oreades Schrenk Bracicaceae Herb H Mi 0.24

177. Dracocephalum nutans L. Lamiaceae Herb H Mi 0.072

178. Dryopteris barbigera (T. Moore ex Hook.) 0.436 Kuntze, Dryopteridaceae Fern G Me

179. Dryopteris blanfordii subsp. blanfordii 0.07 (Hope) C.Chr.; Dryopteridaceae Fern G Ma

180. Dryopteris blanfordii subsp. 0.537 nigrosquamosa (Ching) Fraser-Jenk., Dryopteridaceae Fern G Ma

67

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 181. Dryopteris juxtaposita H. Christ, Bull. Dryopteridaceae Fern G Me 0.07

182. Dryopteris ramosa (Hope) C. Chr., Dryopteridaceae Fern G Ma 0.239

183. Dryopteris redactopinnata S.K. Basu & 0.074 Panigrahi, Dryopteridaceae Fern G Ma

184. Dryopteris stewartii Fraser-Jenk., Dryopteridaceae Fern G Ma 0.052

185. Dryopteris wallichiana (Spreng.) Hylander, Dryopteridaceae Fern G Me 0.02

186. Dryopteris filix-mas (L.) Schott Dryopteridaceae Langroo Fern G Ma 0.078

187. 0.623 Dryopteris marginata (C.B. Clarke) Christ Dryopteridaceae Langroo Fern G Ma

188. Dryopteris thelypteris (L.) A. Gray Dryopteridaceae Langroo Fern G Ma 0.199

189. Elsholtzia fruticosa (D.Don) Rehder Lammiaceae Herb H Mi 0.168

190. Elymus dahuricus Griseb. Poaceae Ghaa Herb H L 0.175

191. Ephedra gerardiana Wall.ex Stapf. Ephedraceae Shrub Chae L 0.309

192. 0.025 Epilobium angustifolium L. Onagraceae Naria Herb H Na

193. Epilobium laxum Royle Onagraceae Naria Herb H Mi 0.467

68

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 194. Epilobium parviflorum Schreb. Onagraceae Naria Herb H Mi 0.351

195. Epilobium royleanum Hausskn. Onagraceae Naria Herb H Mi 0.064

196. Epilobium wallichianum Hausskn. Onagraceae Naria Herb H Na 0.178

197. Equisetum arvense L. Equesetaceae Band Kiia Herb G Mi 0.694

198. Equisetum debile Roxb. ex Vaucher Equesetaceae Band Kiia Herb G Mi 0.13

199. Eremopoa altaica (Trin.) Roshev Poaceae Ghaa Herb Th Na 0.364

200. Erigeron bellidioides Benth. Ex C.B. 0.689 Clarke Asteraceae Herb Th Mi

201. Erysimum melicentae Dunn Bracicaceae Muneri Herb H L 0.064

202. Euphorbia hirta L. Euphorbiaceae Dohdal Herb Th Mi 0.179

203. 0.62 Euphorbia wallichii Hook. f. Euphorbiaceae Hervi Herb H Mi

204. Euphorbia stracheyi Boiss. Euphorbiaceae Dohdal Herb Th Mi 0.098

205. 0.786 Euphrasia himalayica Wettst. Scrophularaceae Herb H Na

206. Exacum tetragonum Roxb. 0.106 Gentianaceae Herb Th Mi

69

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 207. Fagopyrum esculentum Moench Polygonaceae Trumba Herb Th Me 0.83

208. Festuca hartmannii E.B.Alexeev Poaceae Ghaa Herb H L 1.533

209. Festuca kashmiriana Stapf Poaceae Ghaa Herb H L 0.297 210. Festuca lemanii T.Bastard Poaceae Ghaa Herb H L 0.411

211. Filago hurdwarica (Wall. ex DC.) 2.741 Wagenitz Asteraceae Herb Th Me

212. Filipendula ulmaria (L.) Maxim. Rosaceae Kasi Patra Herb H Ma 0.149

213. Fragaria nubicola (Hook. f.) Lindl. ex 2.475 Lacaita Rosaceae Khan Merchan Herb H Mi

214. Fritillaria roylei Hook. Liliaceae Jangli Thom Herb G Me 0.624

215. Galium asperuloides Edgew. Rubiaceae Herb Th Na 0.233

216. Galium boreale L. Rubiaceae Herb Th Na 3.135

217. Galium verum L. Rubiaceae Herb Th Na 0.978

218. Galium aparine L. Rubiaceae Herb Th Mi 0.392

219. Gaultheria trichophylla Royle Ericaceae Ferozi Boti Shrub Che L 0.15

220. Gentiana algida Pallas Gentianaceae Herb Th Na 0.245

70

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 221. Gentiana carinata (D.Don) Griseb. Gentianaceae Bhangri Herb Th Na 0.064

222. Gentiana depressa D.Don Gentianaceae Herb H Mi 0.057

223. Gentiana kurroo Royle Gentianaceae Bhangri Herb H Na 0.151

224. Gentiana phylocalyx C.B.Clarke Gentianaceae Herb Th Na 1.427

225. Gentiana venusta (G.Don)Griseb Gentianaceae Herb Th Mi 0.143

226. Gentianodes alii Omer & Qaiser Gentianaceae Bhangri Herb H Na 0.151

227. Geranium himalayense Klotzsch. Geraniaceae Ratan Jot Herb G Mi 1.852

228. Geranium nepalense Sweet Geraniaceae Ratan Jot Herb G Mi 0.633

229. Geranium pratense L. Geraniaceae Ratan Jot Herb G Mi 2.687

230. Geranium wallichianum D. Don Geraniaceae Ratan Jot Herb G Mi 0.426

231. Geum elatum Wall. ex G. Don Rosaceae Herb H Me 1.161

232. 0.545 Geum urbanum L. Rosaceae Herb H Me

233. Gnaphalium hypoleucum DC. Asteraceae Herb Th Mi 0.11

234. Gnephalium affine D.Don Asteraceae Herb H L 0.102

71

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 235. Gymnocarpium dryopteris (L.) Newman, Woodsiaceae Fern G Ma 0.472

236. Gypsophila cerastioides D. Don Caryophylaceae Herb H Na 0.058

237. Gypsophila oreades Hook. f. & Thom. Caryophylaceae Herb H Na 0.102

238. Habenaria pectinata D. Don Orchidaceae Nar Mada Herb G Mi 0.405

239. Hackelia uncinata Royle ex Benth.) 0.055 C.Fisher Boraginaceae Herb Th Mi

240. Hadysarum cacHirianum Benth. ex Baker Fabaceae Herb H Mi 0.489

241. Helictotrichon virescens Henrard Poaceae Ghaa Herb H L 0.12

242. Heracleum candicans Wall.ex DC. Apiaceae Palhar Herb G Ma 0.071

243. Hyoscyamus niger L. Solanaceae Herb Th Mi 0.066

244. 0.321 Hypericum perfotatum L. Hypericaceae Pelly Dudh Jari Herb H Na

245. Hypoxis aurea Lour. Hypoxidaceae Herb G Mi 0.073

246. 0.273 Impatiens brachycentra Kar. & Kir. Balsaminaceae Buntil Herb Th Mi

247. 0.75 Impatiens edgeworthii Hook. f. Balsaminaceae Buntil Herb Th Mi

72

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 248. Impatiens grandulifera Royal Balsaminaceae Buntil Herb Th Mi 0.934

249. Impatiens thomsonii Hook.f. Balsaminaceae Buntil Herb Th Mi 0.974

250. Impatiens bicolor Royle Balsaminaceae Buntil Herb Th Mi 0.335

251. Indegofera haterantha Wallich ex Brandis Fabaceae Kenthee Shrub H Mi 0.082

252. Indigofera himalayensis Ali Fabaceae Kanthee Shrub Np Me 0.115

253. Inula grandiflora Willd Asteraceae Poshgr Herb H Na 0.113

254. Inula orientalis Lam. Asteraceae Poshgr Herb H Ma 0.201

255. Inula royleana DC. Asteraceae Poshgr Herb H Me 0.218

256. Inula hookeri C.B.Clarke Asteraceae Poshgr Herb H Me 0.025

257. Inula spiraeifolia L. Asteraceae Poshgr Herb H Me 0.354

258. Iris decora Wallich Iridaceae Ghory Gha Herb G Me 0.817

259. Iris hookariana Foster Iridaceae Ghory Gha Herb G Me 0.319

260. Iris kashmiriana Baker Iridaceae Ghory Gha Herb G Mi 0.228

261. Iris lactea Pallas Iridaceae Ghory Gha Herb G Me 0.479

262. Isodon rugosus Codd Lammiaceae Piso Mar Shrub Np Mi 0.107

73

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 263. Jaeschkea oligosperma (Griseb.) Knobloch Gentianaceae Herb Th Na 0.258

264. Juncus articulatus Linn. Juncaceae Herb H L 0.864

265. Juncus himalensis Klotzsch Juncaceae Herb H L 0.315

266. Juncus membranaceus Royle Juncaceae Herb H L 10.03

267. Juncus thomsonii Buchenau Juncaceae Herb G L 0.472

268. Juniperus communis L. Cuperessaceae Bhanthri Shrub Np L 3.982

269. Juniperus excelsa M.Bieb. Cuperessaceae Bhanthri Shrub Np L 0.97

270. Juniperus squamata Buch. Ham. ex D. Don Cuperessaceae Kala Biar Shrub Np L 1.135

271. Jurania macrocephala C.B.Clarke Asteraceae Gugal Dhoop Herb G Me 0.398

272. Lindelofia longiflora var. falconeri Brand Boraginaceae Herb H L 0.644

273. Lagotis cashmeriana Rupr. Scrophularaceae Kali Hand Herb H Mi 0.384

274. Lamium album L. Lammiaceae Herb Th Mi 0.146

275. Lathyrus laevigatus (Waldst. & Kit.) Gren. Fabaceae Bun Phali Herb Th Mi 0.131

276. 0.244 Lathyrus pratensis L. Fabaceae Bun Phali Herb Th Mi

74

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 277. Lavatera kashmiriana Mast. Ranunculaceae Thndi Boti Herb H Na 0.055

278. Lentopodium himalayanum DC. Asteraceae Herb H L 0.055

279. Leontopodium leontopodinum Hand. - 0.059 Mazz. Asteraceae Herb H L

280. Leontopodium alpinum Colm.ex Cass. Asteraceae Herb H L 0.817

281. Leontopodium jacotianum Beauverd Asteraceae Herb H L 0.076

282. Leucas cephalotes (Roth) Spreng. Lammiaceae Herb Th Na 0.116

283. Leucas lanata Benth. Lammiaceae Herb Th Mi 0.216

284. Ligularia amplexicaulia DC. Asteraceae Herb H Me 0.286

285. Ligularia fischeri (Ledeb) Turcz. Asteraceae Herb H Ma 0.408

286. Lilium polyphyllum D.Don Liliaceae Herb G L 0.103

287. Lindelofia longiflora Baillon Boraginaceae Lhndi Herb Th Na 0.281

288. Lindelofia stylosa Brand Boraginaceae Lhndi Herb Th Na 0.043

289. Lindelofia macrostyla (Bunge) Popov Boraginaceae Herb H L 0.157

290. Lonicera angustifolia Wallich ex DC. Caprifoliaceae Phoot Shrub Np Na 3.853

291. Lonicera asperifolia Hook. F.Thoms. Caprifoliaceae Phoot Shrub Np Na 0.816

75

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 292. Lonicera hispida Pallas ex Willd Caprifoliaceae Bhdy Katri Shrub Np Na 1.634

293. Lonicera myrtillus Hook. f. & Thoms Caprifoliaceae Loonri Shrub Np Mi 0.154

294. Lonicera obovata Royle ex Hook. F.Thoms. Caprifoliaceae Bhdy Katri Shrub Np Na 1.605

295. Lonicera webbiana Wall.ex DC. Caprifoliaceae Bhdy Katri Shrub Np Na 2.006

296. Lonicera govaniana Wall.ex DC. Caprifoliaceae Shrub Np Mi 0.024

297. Lotus corniculatus L. Fabaceae Herb H Na 0.052

298. Lychnis coronaria (L.) Desr. Caryophylaceae Herb H Mi 0.059

299. Malaxis muscifera (Lindl.) Kuntze Orchidaceae Herb G Mi 0.059

300. Malva parviflora L. Malvaceae Dug Sonchal Herb Th Me 0.245

301. Malva neglecta Wallr. 0.137 Malvaceae Dag Sonchal Herb Th Me

302. Matricaria aurea (Loefl.) Sch.Bip. Asteraceae Herb Th Na 0.137

303. Meconopsis aculeata Royle Papaveraceae Herb Th Me 0.045

304. 0.166 Mentha longifolia Hudson Lammiaceae Herb H Mi

305. Mistegium nodosum (Kom.) Tzvelev Poaceae Baroo Herb Th Mi 0.212

76

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Specie Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 306. Minuartia kashmirica (Edgew.) Mattf. Caryophylaceae Herb Th L 0.21

307. Minuartia uniflora (Walter) Mattf. Caryophylaceae Herb Th L 0.199

308. Monira coulteriana Royle Dipsacaceae Herb Th Mi 0.143

309. Morina longifolia Wallich ex DC. Dipsacaceae Mali Kanda Herb H Ma 0.155

310. Myricaria elegans Royle Tamaricaceae Shrub Np L 1.745

311. Nepeta elliptica Royle ex Benth. Lammiaceae Herb Th Mi 0.119

312. Nepeta erecta (Royle ex Benth.) Benth. Lammiaceae Herb H Mi 0.128

313. Nepeta laevigata D.Don) Hand –Mazz Lammiaceae Herb Th Mi 0.486

314. Nepeta nervosa Royle ex Benth. Lammiaceae Herb H Mi 0.145

315. Nepeta podostachys Benth. Lammiaceae Herb Th Mi 0.083

316. Nephrolepis cordifolia (L.) C. Presl Nephrolepidaceae Fern G Ma 0.388

317. Oenothera rosea L'Hér. ex Aiton Onagraceae Herb Th Mi 0.227

318. Onopordum acanthium L. Asteraceae Chita Kanda H Me 0.066

319. 0.123 Onychium contiguum Wall. ex Hope, Pteridaceae Fern G Ma

77

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 320. Onychium japonicum (Thunb.) Kunze Pteridaceae Fern G Ma 0.028

321. Origanum vulgare L. Lammiaceae Bun Babri Herb H Mi 0.759

322. Orobanche alba Stephan ex Willd Orobanchaceae Herb H L 0.115

323. Osmunda claytoniana L. Osmundaceae Fern G Ma 0.543

324. Osmunda regalis L. Osmundaceae Fern G Ma 0.103

325. Oxalis corniculata L. Oxalidaceae Khatla Herb H Na 0.2

326. Oxyria digyna (L.) Hill Polygonaceae Khatkurla Herb Th Mi 0.494

327. Oxytropis lapponica (Wahi.) Gay Fabaceae Herb H Me 0.567

328. Parnassia nubicola Wallich ex Royle Parnassiaceae Herb H Mi 0.967

329. Parrotiopsis jacquemontiana (Decne.) 0.156 Rehder Hamamelidaceae Peshor Shrub Np Mi

330. Pedicularis bicornuta Klotzsch Scrophularaceae Herb H Mi 0.082

331. Pedicularis oederi Vahl Scrophularaceae Herb H Mi 0.27

332. Pedicularis pectinata Wallich ex Benth Scrophularaceae Herb H Mi 0.942

333. Pedicularis punctata Decne. Scrophularaceae Herb H Mi 0.326

78

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 334. Pedicularis pyramidata Royle Scrophularaceae Herb H Mi 0.677

335. Pedicularis scullyana Prain ex Maxim Scrophularaceae Herb H Mi 1.827

336. Pellaea nitidula Wall. ex Hope, Pteridaceae Fern G Mi 0.06

337. Pennisetum alopecuroides (L.) Spreng. Poaceae Herb G Na 0.38

338. Pennisetum flaccidum Griseb. Poaceae Herb G Na 0.407

339. Pennisetum lanatum Klotzsch Poaceae Ghaa Herb G L 2.257

340. Pennisetum annuum Mez Poaceae Herb G Na 0.238

341. Persicaria capitata Gross Polygonaceae Herb H Mi 0.255

342. Phleum alpinum L. Poaceae Herb G Na 0.227

343. 1.519 Phlomis bracteosa Royle ex Benth. Lammiaceae Herb H Me

344. Phlomis cashmeriana Royle ex Benth. 0.113 Lamiaceae Herb H Me

345. Phlomis spectabilis Falc.ex Benth. Lamiaceae Herb H Me 0.087

346. Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin.ex Steud. Poaceae Herb G Na 0.264

347. Picea smithiana (Wall.) Boiss. Pinaceae Kachal Tree Mp L 1.907

79

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 348. Pimpinella acuminata (Edgew.) C.B. 0.105 Clarke Apiaceae Herb H Mi

349. Pinus wallichiana A. B. Jackson Pinaceae Biar Tree Mp L 5.383

350. Piptatherum gracile Mez Poaceae Ghaa Herb H Na 0.462

351. Piptatherum laterale (Regel) Nevski Poaceae Ghaa Herb H L 0.181

352. Plantago lanceolata L. Plantaginaceae CHchi Patra Herb H Mi 0.992

353. Plantago major L. Plantaginaceae CHchi Patra Herb H Me 0.636

354. Plantago alpina L. Plantaginaceae Herb Th Me 0.193

355. Plantago depressa Willd. Plantaginaceae Herb Th Me 0.199

356. Pleurospermum brunonis Benth. ex 0.528 C.B.Clarke Apiaceae Herb H Ma

357. Pleurospermum candollei (DC.) 0.364 C.B.Clarke Apiaceae Plhar Herb H Ma

358. Pleurospermum govanianum (DC.) Benth. 0.143 ex C.B. Clarke Apiaceae Herb G Na

359. Poa annua L. Poaceae Ghaa Herb Th L 0.916

360. Poa attenuata Trin. Poaceae Herb G Na 0.086

80

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 361. Poa gracilis Trin. Poaceae Ghaa Herb Th L 0.033

362. Poa nemoralis L. Poaceae Ghaa Herb H Na 2.616

363. Poa alpina L. Poaceae Bozni Herb H L 0.355

364. Poa angustifolia L. Poaceae Herb G Na 2.355

365. Poa bactriana Roshev. Poaceae Herb G Na 0.361

366. Poa pratensis L. Poaceae Herb G Na 0.501

367. Polemonium caeruleum L. Polemoniaceae Herb Th Mi 0.055

368. Polygala sibirica L. Polygalaceae Herb Th Na 0.189

369. Polygonatum multiflorum All. Liliaceae Kwar Gandal Herb G Mi 0.029

370. Polygonatum verticilatum All. Liliaceae Kwar Gandal Herb G Mi 1.272

371. Polygonum cognatum Meisn. Polygonaceae Drobra Herb Th Na 0.372

372. Polygonum paronychioides C.Meyer ex 0.422 Hohen Polygonaceae Herb H Na

373. Polygonum plebeium R.Br. Polygonaceae Drobra Herb Th L 0.291

374. Polygonum alpinum All. Polygalaceae Herb G Me 2.156

375. Polygonum amplexicaule D.Don Polygalaceae Herb G Na 0.198

81

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 376. Polygonum aviculare L. Polygalaceae Herb G Na 0.214

377. Polystichum attenuatum Diels Dryopteridaceae Fern G Me 0.048

378. Polystichum bakerianum (Atk. ex C.B. 0.311 Clarke) Dryopteridaceae Fern G Me

379. Polystichum castaneum (C. B. Clarke) B. 0.259 K. Nayar & S. Kaur, Dryopteridaceae Fern G Me

380. Polystichum lachenense (Hook.) Bedd, Dryopteridaceae Fern G Ma 0.079

381. Polystichum lonchitis (L.) Roth Dryopteridaceae Fern G Ma 0.092

382. Polystichum prescottianum (Wall. ex Mett.) 0.12 T.Moore. Dryopteridaceae Fern G Ma

383. Polystichum yunnanense H. Christ, Notul. Dryopteridaceae Fern G Ma 0.044

384. Potentilla anserina L. Rosaceae Mali Di Cha Herb H Mi 0.043

385. Potentilla atrosanguinea Lodd. Rosaceae Mali Di Cha Herb H Mi 0.662

386. Potentilla cathaclinis Lehm. Rosaceae Mali Di Cha Herb H Mi 0.826

387. Potentilla curviseta Hook.f. Rosaceae Mali Ki Chaiy Herb H Me 0.156

388. Potentilla monanthes Wall.ex Lehm. Rosaceae Mali Di Cha Herb H Me 0.187

82

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 389. Potentilla nepalensis Hook. Rosaceae Mali Di Cha Herb H Mi 2.156

390. Potentilla ochreata Lindley Rosaceae Mali Di Cha Herb H Mi 1.374

391. Primula denticulata Smith Primulaceae Mameera Herb H Me 0.604

392. Primula edgeworthii (Hook.f) Pax Primulaceae Herb H Mi 0.729

393. Primula eliptica Royle Primulaceae Mameera Herb H M 0.261

394. Primula macrophyla D.Don Primulaceae Mameera Herb H Me 1.009

395. Primula reptans Hook. F.ex Duby Primulaceae Mameera Herb H Mi 0.874

396. Primula rosea Royle Primulaceae Mameera Herb H Mi 0.171

397. Primula stuartii Wall./ calderana Primulaceae Mameera Herb H Mi 1.04

398. Prunella vulgaris L. Lammiaceae Ser Thula Herb The Mi 0.593

399. Prunus cornuta (Wall. ex Royle) Steud. Rosaceae Bharath Tree Mp Me 0.791

400. Pseudomertensia echioides (Benth.) Riedl Boraginaceae Cheeroo Herb H Na 0.679

401. Pseudomertensia moltkioides Kazmi Boraginaceae Cheeroo Herb H Na 0.61

402. Pseudomertensia 0.4 moltkioides var. primuloides Kazmi Boraginaceae Lehndi Herb Th L

83

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 403. Pseudomertensia nemorosa (DC.) Stewart 0.139 & Kazmi Boraginaceae Lehndi Herb Th Na

404. Psychrogeton andryaloides (DC.) 0.334 Novopokr ex Krasch. Asteraceae Herb G Na

405. Pteridium aquilinum (L.) Kuhn., Dennstaedtiaceae Fern G Ma 0.333

406. Pteris cretica L., Mant. Pteridaceae Fern G Ma 0.043

407. Pteris stenophylla Wall.ex Hook.et Grev. Pteridaceae Fern G Ma 0.046

408. Ranunculus hirtellus Royle ex D.Don Ranunculaceae Herb Th Mi 0.103

409. Ranunculus laetus Wall. ex D. Don Ranunculaceae Herb Th Mi 0.106

410. Ranunculus stewartii H Riedl. Ranunculaceae Herb Th Mi 1.142

411. 0.093 Ranunculus trichophyllus Chaix ex Vill. Ranunculaceae Herb G Na

412. Ranunculus arvensis L. Ranunculaceae Herb H Mi 0.632

413. Rheum australe D.Don Royle Polygonaceae Gol Chontial Herb G Ma 0.978

414. Rheum webbianum Royle Polygonaceae Chontial Herb G Ma 0.882

415. Rheum tibeticum Maxim.ex Hook. f. Polygalaceae Herb G Ma 0.068

84

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 416. Rhodiola heterodonta (Hook. f & Thoms.) 0.968 Boriss. Crassulaceae Bug Masti Herb G Na

417. Rhodiola himalayansis D.Don Crassulaceae Saber Jar Herb G Mi 1.469

418. Rhodiola fastigiata (Hook. f. & Thomson) 0.213 S.H. Fu Crassulaceae Bug Masti Herb G Na

419. Ribes himalense Royle ex Decne. Grossulariaceae Shrub Np Mi 0.086

420. Rhododendron anthopogon D.Don Ericaceae Nichnee Shrub Np Mi 0.07

421. Rhododendron arborium Smith Ericaceae Nichnee Shrub Np Mi 0.178

422. Rhododendron campanulatum Hook.f. Ericaceae Nichnee Shrub Np Me 4.881

423. Rorippa montana (Wall. ex Hook. f. & 0.089 Thomson) Small Bracicaceae Herb H Me

424. Rosa alpina L. Rosaceae Mali Da Phol Shrub Np Na 2.13

425. Rosa webbiana Wall. ex Royle Rosaceae Guch Shrub Np Mi 3.646

426. Rosa macrophylla Lindl. Rosaceae Jangli Gulab Shrub Np Me 0.298

427. Roscoea alpina Royle Zingiberaceae Herb G Mi 0.071

428. Rosularia adenotricha (Wall. ex Edgew.) 0.046 C.-A. Jansson Crassulaceae Herb G L

85

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 429. Rubus elipticus Smith Rosaceae Kun Chari Shrub Np Me 0.169

430. Rubus fruticosus L. Rosaceae Guch Shrub Np Me 0.068

431. Rubus ulmifolius Schott Rosaceae Kun Chari Shrub Np Me 0.022

432. Rumex acetosa L. Polygonaceae Hola Herb G Me 0.024

433. Rumex nepalensis Sprengel Polygonaceae Hola Herb Th Me 2.002

434. Rumex patientia L. Polygonaceae Hola Herb G Ma 0.14

435. Sa1ix lindleyana Wall.ex Andr. Salicaceae 0.263

436. Salix flabllaris Andersson Salicaceae Bhanthri Shrub Np Mi 11.31

437. Salvia hians Royle ex Benth Lammiaceae Herb G Ma 0.086

438. Salvia moorcroftiana Wall.ex Benth. Lammiaceae Herb H Me 0.048

439. Salvia nubicola Wall. ex Sweet Lammiaceae Herb H Me 0.277

440. Sambucus wightiana Wallich ex Wight & 0.518 Arn. Sambucaceae Ganhoola Herb Th Ma

441. Saussurea albescens Sch.Bip Asteraceae Herb G Na 0.104

442. Saussurea alpina (L.) DC. Asteraceae Kori Jar Herb H Me 0.231

443. Saussurea costus (Falc.) Lipsch. Asteraceae Kuth Herb G Ma 0.095

86

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 444. Saussurea fastuosa Sch.Bip Asteraceae Kuth Herb H Mi 0.358

445. Saxifraga flagellaris Willd. Saxifragaceae Herb H Na 0.039

446. Saxifraga jacquemontiana Decne. Saxifragaceae Herb G Mi 0.049

447. Saxifraga parnassifolia D.Don Saxifragaceae Herb H L 0.055

448. Saxifraga stenophylla Royle Saxifragaceae Herb H L 0.084

449. Saxifraga strigosa Wall. ex Ser. Saxifragaceae Herb H Na 0.041

450. Sedum ewersii Ledeb. Crassulaceae Herb H Na 1.164

451. Sedum oreades (Dacne) Raym.Hamet Crassulaceae Herb H Na 0.067

452. Sedum trullipetalum Hook. f. & Thomson Crassulaceae Herb G Na 0.131

453. Selinum tenuifolium Salisb 0.119 Apiaceae Herb G Ma

454. 1.202 Senecio chrysanthemoides DC. Asteraceae Bagoo Herb H Me

455. Senecio graciliflorus DC. Asteraceae Bagoo Herb H Me 4.907

456. Senecio jacquemontianus (Decne.) 0.205 Benth.exHook. f. Asteraceae Herb H Ma

457. Sewertia cuneata D.Don Gentianaceae Rech Endeh Herb H Mi 3.603

87

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 458. Sibbaldia cuneata Hornem.ex Kuntze Rosaceae Herb H Na 0.285

459. Sibbaldia purpurea Royle Rosaceae Herb H Na 0.601

460. Sibbaldia tetrandra Bunge Rosaceae Herb H Na 0.101

461. Silene edgeworthii Bocquet Caryophylaceae Bat Karam Herb Th Na 0.501

462. Silene gonosperma (Rupr.)Bocquet Caryophylaceae Murkanr Herb Th Na 0.192

463. Silene viscosa (L.) Pers. Caryophylaceae Murkanr Herb Th Na 0.299

464. Silene vulgaris (Moench) Garcke Caryophylaceae Murkanr Herb Th Na 0.625

465. Sinopodophyllum hexandrum (Royle) 2.279 T.S.Ying Podophyllaceae Kakri Herb H Ma

466. Skimmea anquetilia N. P. Taylor & Airy 0.103 Shaw. Rutaceae Nyra Shrub Ch Mi

467. Skimmia laureola Franch. Rutaceae Nera Shrub Np Me 1.109

468. Solidago virga-aurea L. Asteraceae Muta Khesh Herb H Mi 0.015

469. Sonchus asper (L.) Hill Asteraceae Herb H Me 0.06

470. Sonchus oleraceus (L.) L. Asteraceae Kundiari Herb H Me 0.215

471. Sorbaria tomentosa (Lindl.) Rehder Rosaceae Karri Shrub Np Ma 0.112

88

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 472. Sorbus lanata (D.Don)Schauer Rosaceae Karri Herb Np Mi 0.896

473. Spiraea arcuata Hook.f. Rosaceae Shrub Np Mi 0.093

474. Spiraea bella Sims Rosaceae Shrub Np Mi 0.066

475. Stellaria decumbens Edgew. Caryophylaceae Herb Th Mi 0.114

476. Stellaria media (L.) Vill. Caryophylaceae Herb Th Mi 0.053

477. Stellaria nemorum L. Caryophylaceae Herb Th Mi 0.086

478. Swertia petiolata D.Don Gentianaceae Rech Endeh Herb H Mi 2.162

479. Swertia speciosa D.Don Gentianaceae Rech Endeh Herb H Mi 0.129

480. Tanacetum dolichophyllum Kitam Asteraceae Mali Ka Jahoo Herb H Me 0.774

481. Taraxacum tibetanum Hand.-Mazz. Asteraceae Mali Ki Hand Herb Th Mi 1.839

482. Taraxacum laevigatum (Willd.) DC. Asteraceae Hand Herb H Me 0.035

483. Taraxacum obovatum (Willd.) DC. Asteraceae Hand Herb H Me 0.157

484. Taraxecum officinale Webb Asteraceae Hand Herb H Mi 0.179

485. Taxus wallichiana Zucc. Taxaceae Thonri Tree Mp L 0.73

486. Thalictrum alpinum L. Ranunculaceae Herb H Mi 0.045

487. Thlaspi kotscbyanum Boiss. & Hohen. Bracicaceae Mali Ka Sag Herb H L 0.161

89

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 488. Thlaspi perfoliatum L. Bracicaceae Mali Ka Sag Herb Th L 1.803

489. Thymus linearis Benth ex Benth Lammiaceae Poodna Herb H L 1.906

490. Herb 1.365 Trifolium pratense L. Fabaceae Shatal Pink H Na

491. Herb 1 Trifolium repens L. Fabaceae Shatal White H Na

492. Trigonella emodi Benth Fabaceae Methi Herb Th Na 0.075

493. Trigonella falcata Balf. f. Fabaceae Methi Herb Th Na 0.357

494. Trillium govanianum Kunth Liliaceae Tre Patra Herb G Me 0.604

495. Trisetum spicatum (L.) K.Richt. Poaceae Ghaa Herb H L 0.239

496. Trolius acaulis Lindl. Ranunculaceae Herb H Mi 2.482

497. Tussilago farfara L. Asteraceae Herb H L 0.071

498. Urtica hyperborea Jacquem ex Wedd Urticaceae Keri Th Me 0.117

499. Urtica dioica L. Urticaceae Herb Th Meo 0.221

500. Valeriana jatamansi Jones Valerianaceae Mushki Bala Herb G Mi 0.989

501. Valeriana pyrolifolia Decne. Valerianaceae Manji Jari Herb G Me 0.284

90

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 502. Valeriana wallichii DC. Valerianaceae Herb G Mi 0.28

503. Verbascum thapsus L. Scrophularaceae Gady Kan Herb H Ma 0.452

504. Veronica himalensis D.Don Scrophularaceae Herb Th Na 0.303

505. Veronica polita Fr. Scrophularaceae Herb Th Na 0.32

506. Veronica alpina L. Scrophularaceae Herb Th Mi 0.167

507. Viburnum cotinifolium D.Don. Sambucaceae Rech Ikloo Shrub Np Me 0.661

508. Viburnum grandiflorum Wallich ex DC. Sambucaceae Ikloo Shrub Np Me 5.31

509. Viburnum nervosum D.Don. Sambucaceae Rech Ikloo Shrub Np Mi 0.359

510. Vicia narbonensis L. Fabaceae Matri Herb Th Me 0.241

511. Vincetoxicum arnottianum (Wight) Wight Apocynaceae Phaly Wala Poda Herb H Mi 0.479

512. 0.553 Viola biflora L. Violaceae Banafsha Herb Th Mi

513. 0.371 Viola canescens Wall.ex Roxb. Violaceae Banafsha Herb Th Mi

514. Viola kashmiriana W.Becker Violaceae Banafsha Herb Th Mi 0.111

515. Viola pyrolifolia Poir. Violaceae Herb Th Mi 0.557

91

Leaf Avg. Sr. Life Species Name Family Local Name Habit size IVI No. Form class 516. Woodsia alpine (Bolton) Gray, Nat. Woodsiaceae Fern G Me 0.11

517. Wulfenia amherstiana Benth Scrophularaceae Herb H Mi 0.261

Key

Th= Therophytes; Mp= Macrophanerophytes; Np= Nanophanerophytes; Ch= Chamaephytes; H= Hemicryptophytes; L= Lianas; G= Geophytes;

L= Leptophylls; Mi= Microphylls; Na= Nanophylls; Me= Mesophylls; Ma= Megaphylls

92

4.2. DOMINANT SPECIES BASED UPON IMPORTANCE VALUES

The importance value index of all the recorded plant species was calculated to analyze the contribution of the recorded species in the structure and formation of vegetation communities in the region. The most dominant species having the highest average IVI values were recorded as Salix flabellaris with an importance value of 12.03 followed by Juncus membraneous (10.02) Abies pindrow (9.21), Betula utilus (8.02),

Vibernum grandiflorum (06.64), Senecio graceliforois (6.18), Rhododendron campanulatum, (5.95) and Pinus wallichiana (5.38). The co-dominant species included

Bistorta amplexicaule (4.57), Rosa webbiana (4.18), Bistorta affinis (4.03), Juniperus communis (3.98), Lonicera anguastifolia (3.85), Sewerttia cuneata (3.60), Gallium boreale (3.13), Geranium pratense (2.68), Berberis jaskeana and Poa nemoralis (2.61)

(Table 4.1).

4.3. BIOLOGICAL SPECTRUM

The analyses of the Biological spectra included the determination of life form and

Leaf size class of the local flora. The biological spectrum reflects the adaptation of the recorded species in the characterisric ecological zones synchronized with the specific climatic conditions and habitat type.

4.3.1. Life form

The observed Life Forms from the western Himalayan High land indicated

Hemicryptophytes as the dominant life form in the investigated areas with 211 species constituting 40.81 % of the local flora. They were followed by Geophytes having 148 plant species with the percentage share of 28.33 %. Therophytes were represented by 93

Species with the percentage share of 17.98 % in the investigated area. Naphanarophytes

93 were represented by 51 species having a share of 9.86 % in 56 plant communities. Only nine plant species were of trees placed in group of Magaphanerophytes having a percentage of 1.74 %. Chaemeophytes included 4 species making 0.77 % of the local flora. Lianas constituted only 0.58 % with only 3 species recorded from the area (Fig.4.2).

Chaemeophyte Lianas s 1% Magaphanerophytes1% 2%

Nanophanerophytes 10%

Hemicryptophy Therophytes tes 18% 41%

Geophytes 28%

Figure 4.2. Life form distribution of the local highland flora

4.3.2. Leaf Size Classes

Leaf Size classes correspond to the variable climatic conditions in the high altitude Himalayan alpine in Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Results revealed that the

Microphyls were the dominant Leaf size group in the investigated sites with 185 Species having a percentage share of 35.78 %. They were followed by Mesoaphylls with 106

Species contributing 20.50 %. Nanophylls were represented by 102 species having a share of 19.72 % in the local flora. Leptophylls in the investigated contributed 13.92 % with 72

94 species. A total of 52 plant species were recorded having Megaphylls having 10.05 % of the local flora (Fig.4.3)

Megaphylls 10% Leptophylls 14% Microphylls 36%

Nanophylls 20% Mesophylls 20%

Figure 4.3 Leaf size class composition of local flora

4.4. PHYTOSOCIOLOGICAL ATTRIBUTES OF THE SUB ALINE AND ALPINE

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

A total of 56 high land plant communities were recorded from the whole region of

Azad Jammu and Kashmir in western Himalayas. Eighteen plant communities were recorded from an elevational range of 3500m to 4070m that was purely of Alpine in nature. Thirty Eight communities were recorded from an altitudinal range of 2700m-

3450m in sub-alpine zone. The primary species data including Density, frequency and cover was recorded for each species and processed to calculate Importance values at each community. The identified Plant Communities were named after the dominant species in each of the respective communities. The primary species data was further processed to

95 determine Phytosociological parameters including Diversity, richness, and Evenness and maturity index. The grazing and erosion intensity was also recorded for the studied sites.

4.5. DIVERSITY INDICES

From all fifty six plant communities both Simpson and Shannon Wiener index of diversity was calculated to investigate the variations among these observed sites.

Simpson’s index of diversity determines the dominance pattern of present species in the plant communities while Shannon Wiener index determines the over all diversity pattern of the particular site.

4.5.1. Simpson’s Diversity Index

An average value of Simpson’s Diversity Index as 0.92 was determined for the studied plant Communities. The highest value of Simpson’s diversity was recorded as

0.97 from sub Alpine zone at an altitude of 3200m in Shounther Valley, site 1

(Polygonum-Rheum-Astragalus Community). The lowest value of 0.72 was recorded from the Betula forest site 8 (Betula – Saussuria – Senecio Community) in Shoonthar valley at an altitude of 3450 m (Table 4.2).

4.5.2. Shannon-Wienner’s Diversity Index

An average value of Shannon Weiner Diversity Index as 3.16 was determined for the studied plant Communities. The highest value of Shannon’s diversity was recorded as

3.9 from sub Alpine zone at an altitude of 3200m in Shounther Valley, site 1

(Polygonum-Rheum-Astragalus Community). The lowest value of 2.37 was recorded from the Betula forest site 8 (Betula – Saussuria – Senecio Community) in Shoonthar valley at an altitude of 3450 m (Table 4.2).

96

4.5.3. Species Richness

Average value of Species richness as 2.26 was determined for the studied plant

Communities. The highest value of Species richness was recorded as 4.04 from sub alpine zone at an altitude of 3200m in Shounther Valley, site 1 (Polygonum-Rheum-Astragalus

Community). The lowest value of 1.27 was recorded from site 10 (Bistorta–Sibbaldia-

Geum Community) taken from Rati Gali at an altitude of 3836 m (Table 4.2).

4.5.4. Species Evenness

An average value of Species Evenness as 0.62 was determined for the studied plant Communities. The highest value of Species Evenness was recorded as 0.81 from sub alpine zone at an altitude of 3320 meter in Brithwar Gali, site 50 (Salix - Juniperus–

Epilobium community). The lowest value of 0.25 was recorded from the Betula forest site 8

(Betula – Saussuria – Senecio Community) in Shoonthar valley at an altitude of 3450 m

(Table 4.2).

4.5.5. Community Maturity

An average value of Species Maturity Index as 19.13 % was determined for the studied plant Communities. The highest value of Species Maturity Index was recorded as

40% from alpine zone at an altitude of 3730 meter in Rati Gali, site 13 (Juniperus–Rosa –

Lonicera community). The lowest value of 14.82 % was recorded from the forest site 52

(Salix- Viburnum - Pseudomerntensia Community) at Yadori Topin Leepa Valley at an altitude of 3292meters (Table 4.2).

97

Table.4.2 Quantitative Phytosociological attributes of the investigated communities.

No of Maturity GC EC Sites Communities Altitude Species Simpsons Shannon Evenness Richness index 1 C1-PRA 3200 70 0.97 3.9 0.7 4.04 20.42 2 1 2 C2-MCS 3118 34 0.91 2.96 0.56 1.96 25.88. 2 2 3 C3-SPS 3440 40 0.95 3.36 0.72 2.73 25 2 2 4 C4-RAP 3500 41 0.94 3.29 0.65 2.36 26.58 2 2 5 C5-JRA 3650 49 0.94 3.23 0.52 2.82 31.62 3 1 6 C6-BFI 3250 37 0.84 2.66 0.38 2.13 28.93 2 2 7 C7-CCT 3150 31 0.93 3.02 0.66 1.79 21.61 2 1 8 C8-BSS 3450 43 0.72 2.37 0.25 2.48 26 2 2 09 C9-BGA 3715 24 0.88 2.56 0.54 1.38 25.41 3 1 10 C10-BSJ 3836 22 0.9 2.65 0.64 1.27 27.72 3 3 11 C-11 BPS 3842 29 0.92 2.96 0.66 1.67 26.55 2 3 12 C-12 BTP 3900 40 0.95 3.42 0.76 2.31 19.75 3 1 13 C-13 JRL 3730 42 0.94 3.31 0.65 2.42 40 3 2 14 C-14 RSJ 3642 32 0.91 2.96 0.6 1.85 26.56 3 2 15 C-15 RAP 3069 39 0.92 3.07 0.55 2.25 32.82 2 1 16 C-16 PIV 2700 43 0.95 3.45 0.73 2.48 22.32 2 2 17 C-17 JAP 3550 35 0.91 3.06 0.61 2.86 28.85 2 1 18 C-18 BSJ 3323 27 0.89 2.65 0.52 1.58 22.22 3 2 19 C-19 BLJ 3400 36 0.93 3.16 0.65 2.07 25.55 3 2 20 C-20 AAB 3165 30 0.94 3.13 0.76 1.73 32.33 3 3 21 C-21 PBL 3070 59 0.94 3.42 0.52 3.4 21.86 2 2 22 C-22 ABV 3040 51 0.95 3.47 0.63 2.94 25.49 3 1 23 C-23 APJ 2984 47 0.93 3.23 0.54 2.71 22.97 3 2 24 C-24 ARV 3112 36 0.9 3.02 0.56 2.07 34.72 3 2 25 C-25 BRJ 3850 28 0.9 2.74 0.55 1.61 26.42 3 2 26 C-26 GSG 3500 55 0.94 3.41 0.55 3.17 21.63 3 1 27 C-27 JSA 3645 30 0.8 2.43 0.37 1.73 28 3 2 28 C-28 RPC 3971 31 0.87 2.82 0.54 1.79 26.45 1 1 29 C-29 RBP 3920 29 0.9 2.86 0.6 1.67 34.48 2 2 30 C-30 SBS 3230 41 0.88 3 0.49 2.36 25.85 3 2 31 C-31 APP 4017 24 0.92 2.87 0.74 1.38 27.91 2 2 32 C-32 ABR 4070 24 0.86 2.58 0.55 1.38 22.08 2 1 33 C-33 SGS 3300 31 0.94 3.11 0.72 1.79 24.83 3 3 34 C-34 SPL 3700 24 0.94 2.96 0.8 1.38 29.58 3 1 35 C-35 ASJ 2820 35 0.93 3.16 0.67 2.02 26.85 3 2 36 C-36 APF 2980 38 0.94 3.18 0.63 2.19 21.84 3 2 37 C-37 VPL 3080 46 0.94 3.34 0.61 2.65 22.39 2 2 38 C-38 LBJ 3150 33 0.92 2.96 0.58 1.9 19.69 3 2 39 C-39 APA 2915 33 0.94 3.18 0.73 1.9 28.78 2 1

98

No of Maturity GC EC Sites Communities Altitude(m) Species Simpsons Shannon Evenness Richness index 40 C-40 V CBS 3050 39 0.94 3.29 0.69 2.52 27.69 2 1 41 C-41 AVT 3070 34 0.94 3.21 0.73 1.96 27.05 2 3 42 C-42 VJL 3082 34 0.94 3.24 0.75 1.96 30.88 2 2 43 C-43 SLV 3115 33 0.93 3.14 0.7 1.9 30.75 3 1 44 C-44 PAV 3200 38 0.94 3 0.53 2.19 21.84 3 2 45 C-45 SJP 3300 34 0.94 3.18 0.7 1.96 29.41 3 2 46 C-46 JPP 3170 45 0.96 3.63 0.61 2.65 19.34 3 3 47 C-47 JRL 3100 40 0.96 3.47 0.8 2.3 20.55 2 2 48 C-48 SPP 3240 41 0.93 3.26 0.63 2.36 26.58 1 1 49 C-49POS 2971 47 0.95 3.66 0.67 2.71 24.46 3 3 50 C-50 SJE 3320 46 0.96 3.66 0.81 2.65 17.17 3 2 51 C-51 JBB 3580 46 0.96 3.5 0.72 2.65 17.39 3 1 52 C-52 SVP 3292 58 0.93 3.43 0.53 3.34 14.82 2 3 53 C-53 SVC 2846 47 0.95 3.51 0.71 2.71 19.57 3 2 54 C-54 VTJ 2940 55 0.96 3.74 0.76 3.17 17.45 3 2 55 C-55 PRS 3020 50 0.96 3.66 0.78 2.88 20 1 2 56 C-56 SSF 2939 46 0.93 3.66 0.65 2.65 19.13 3 2

Key For abbreviations C1- (PRA) –C56 (SSF)

Rhododendron- Potentilla - Cassiope Polygonum – Rheum-Astragalus (PRA) Bistorta– Geranium- Aconitum (BGASJP) (RPC) Myricaria-Carex -Sewerttia (MCS) Bistorta - Sibbaldia –Geum (BSG) Rhododendron- Bistorta - Poa (RBP) Salix- Polygonum – Senecio (SPS) Bistorta - Potentilla - Sibbaldia (BPS) Salix -Betula –Sibbaldia (SBS) Rosa – Artemisia – Pedicularis (RAP) Bistorta–Thymus- Corydalis (BTC) Anaphalis–Poa- Poa (APP) Juniperus -Rosa-Artemisia (JRA) Juniperus- Rosa- Lonicera (JRL) Allium- Bistorta- Rheum (ABR) Betula-Fragaria-Impatiens (BFI) Rhododendron-Swertia-Juniperus (RSJ) Sibbaldia - Gaultheria- Salix (SGS) Carex – Caltha- Trifolium (CCT) Rubus - Abies- Picea (RAP) Sibbaldia - Pedicularis - Lagotis (SPL) Betula – Saussuria-Senecio (BSS) Pinus- Indigofera-Vibernum(PIV) Juniperus -Potentilla –Primula (JPP) Abies - Skimmea-Juniperus (ASJ) Juniperus- Aconitum- Agrorstis (JAA) Juniperus - Rosa - Lonicera (JRL) Salix-Viburnum- Pseudomerntensia Abies- Potentilla - Fragaria (APF) Betula - Salix - Juniperus (BSJ) (SVP) Viburnum- Festuca – Lonicera (VSL) Betula -Lonicera- Juniperus (BLJ) Salix - Pinus- Prunus (SPP) Lonicera - Berberis -Juniperus (LBJ) Artemisia- Abies- Betula (AAB) Sibbaldia - Viburnum –Carex (SVC) Abies – Primula-Erigeron (APE) Pinus-Berberis -Lonicera (GBL) Viburnum- Thymus –Juniperus (VTJ) Viburnum- Berberis- Salix (VBS) Abies – Berberis – Viburnum (ABV) Juniperus - Bergenia – Berberis (JBB) Abies - Viburnum-Trillium (AVT) Abies - Picea –Juniperus (APJ) Potentilla- Rosa – Sibbaldia (PRS) Viburnum- Juniperus - Lonicera (VJL) Abies -Rosa - Viburnum (ARV) Salix - Juniperus – Epilobium (SJE) Bistorta - Rhododendron - Juniperus Salix - Lonicera -Viburnum (SLV) Poa- Osmunda – Salix (POS) (BRJ) Pinus-Abies-Viburnum (PAV) Gaultheria - Sibbaldia - Geum (GSG) Salix -Sibbalidia- Fragaria(SSF) Salix - Junperus - Pennisetum (SJP) Juniperus - Sibbaldia - Anaphalis (JSA) GC=Grazing intensity EC= Erosion intensity

99

4.6. Polygonum - Rheum-Astragalus Community (Community I)

4.6.1. Geographical Characteristics

Polygonum – Rheum – Astragalus Community was taken at the Shoonther Bahk towards Astore valley. The altitude of area was 3200 m located at 340 97.9041North

Latitude and 0740 52.8570 East longitude. Slope was between 00- 300with comparatively dry area having west facing aspect (Table 3.1).

4.6.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 70 species and was dominanted by Polygonum alpinum having an IVI value of 25.59 followed by Rheum austale and Astragalus subumbellatus having IVI values of 18.93 and 11.55 respectively. Co-dominant species were Galium boreale (11.51), Equesetum arvense (10.93) and Rumex nepalensis (10.63)

(Table 4.3).

4.6.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.97 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.901. The evenness was found to be 0.70 and richness value was 4.04. The maturity index value was calculated to be 20.42% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.6.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was not eroded and placed in Class 1 (not eroded).

Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2 (Table

4.2).

100

Table.4.3 Primary phytosociological data of Polygonum -Rheum-Astragalus Community

S. No Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 1 Galium verum 2.50 20.00 1.75 3.73 1.40 1.91 7.03 2 Equisetum arvense 2.90 40.00 3.50 4.32 2.80 3.81 10.93 3 Galium boreale 4.20 40.00 2.25 6.26 2.80 2.45 11.51 4 Taraxacum tibitianum 1.70 40.00 2.25 2.53 2.80 2.45 7.78 5 Chaerophyllum capnoides 1.30 20.00 1.75 1.94 1.40 1.91 5.24 6 Leucas lanata 0.90 30.00 0.75 1.34 2.10 0.82 4.26 7 Cynoglossum lanceolatum 1.30 40.00 2.25 1.94 2.80 2.45 7.19 8 Rumex nepalensis 4.00 20.00 3.00 5.96 1.40 3.27 10.63 9 Chenopodium album 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.15 0.70 0.27 1.12 10 Silene gonosperma 1.00 30.00 0.75 1.49 2.10 0.82 4.41 11 Pennisetum nemoralis 2.00 40.00 1.00 2.98 2.80 1.09 6.87 12 Polygonum alpinum 5.40 60.00 12.25 8.05 4.20 13.35 25.59 13 Phlomis bracteosa 0.90 30.00 2.00 1.34 2.10 2.18 5.62 14 Fragaria nubicola 1.30 20.00 0.50 1.94 1.40 0.54 3.88 15 Fagopyrum esculentum 0.50 20.00 0.50 0.75 1.40 0.54 2.69 16 Trifolium repens 1.00 40.00 1.00 1.49 2.80 1.09 5.38 17 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 2.10 30.00 4.50 3.13 2.10 4.90 10.13 18 Senecio chrysanthemoides 1.00 40.00 2.25 1.49 2.80 2.45 6.74 19 Astragalus subumbellatus 2.40 40.00 4.75 3.58 2.80 5.18 11.55 20 Erysimum melicentae 0.30 20.00 0.50 0.45 1.40 0.54 2.39 21 Aconitum heterophylum 1.00 40.00 1.00 1.49 2.80 1.09 5.38 22 Apluda dahuricus 1.30 20.00 0.50 1.94 1.40 0.54 3.88 23 Rheum austral 1.50 40.00 12.75 2.24 2.80 13.90 18.93 24 Lathyrus laevigatus 0.30 10.00 1.50 0.45 0.70 1.63 2.78 25 Impatiens thomsonii 1.10 30.00 0.75 1.64 2.10 0.82 4.55 26 Lathyrus pratensis 0.20 10.00 0.25 0.30 0.70 0.27 1.27 27 Angelica cyclocaepa 0.10 10.00 1.50 0.15 0.70 1.63 2.48 28 Carduus nutans 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.15 0.70 0.27 1.12 29 Leucas lanata 0.60 20.00 0.50 0.89 1.40 0.54 2.84 30 Galium aparine 0.50 10.00 0.25 0.75 0.70 0.27 1.72 31 Geranium pretense 0.30 10.00 0.25 0.45 0.70 0.27 1.42 32 Pedicularis bicornuta 0.60 20.00 0.50 0.89 1.40 0.54 2.84 33 Ranunculus stewartii 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.15 0.70 0.27 1.12 34 Calamintha umbrosa 0.30 10.00 0.25 0.45 0.70 0.27 1.42 35 Dipsacus inermis 0.60 20.00 0.50 0.89 1.40 0.54 2.84 36 Polystichum attenuatum 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.15 0.70 0.27 1.12 37 Swertia cuneata 0.20 10.00 0.25 0.30 0.70 0.27 1.27 38 Rumex nepalensis 0.30 10.00 0.25 0.45 0.70 0.27 1.42 39 Fritillaria roylei 0.40 10.00 1.50 0.60 0.70 1.63 2.93 40 Epilobium parviflorum 0.40 10.00 0.25 0.60 0.70 0.27 1.57 41 Mentha longifolia 1.00 10.00 0.25 1.49 0.70 0.27 2.46 42 Aquilegia fragrans 5.00 10.00 1.50 7.45 0.70 1.63 9.79

101

S. No Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 43 Primula macrophyla 0.20 10.00 0.25 0.30 0.70 0.27 1.27 44 Sedum ewersii 0.40 10.00 0.25 0.60 0.70 0.27 1.57 45 Polygonum cognatum 0.20 10.00 0.25 0.30 0.70 0.27 1.27 46 Leucas erecta 0.70 20.00 0.50 1.04 1.40 0.54 2.99 47 Aster falconeri 0.70 30.00 0.75 1.04 2.10 0.82 3.96 48 Saussureaalpina 1.70 10.00 1.50 2.53 0.70 1.63 4.87 49 Salix flablellaris 0.80 10.00 0.50 1.19 0.70 0.54 2.44 50 Rubus fruticosus 0.50 20.00 0.50 0.75 1.40 0.54 2.69 51 Pimpinella acuminate 0.50 20.00 0.50 0.75 1.40 0.54 2.69 52 Clinopodium piperitum 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.15 0.70 0.27 1.12 53 Verbascum thapsus 0.10 10.00 1.50 0.15 0.70 1.63 2.48 54 Bistorta affinis 1.30 20.00 3.00 1.94 1.40 3.27 6.61 55 Polygonum amplexicaulis 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.15 0.70 0.27 1.12 56 Artemisia annua 0.90 30.00 2.00 1.34 2.10 2.18 5.62 57 Phlomis spectabilis 1.30 30.00 0.75 1.94 2.10 0.82 4.85 58 Prunella vulgaris 0.70 20.00 0.50 1.04 1.40 0.54 2.99 59 Pseudomertensia echioides 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.15 0.70 0.27 1.12 60 Aster falconeri 0.20 10.00 0.25 0.30 0.70 0.27 1.27 61 Swertia petiolata 0.40 20.00 0.50 0.60 1.40 0.54 2.54 62 Plantago alpina 0.40 20.00 1.75 0.60 1.40 1.91 3.90 63 Trifoliumpretense 1.70 30.00 0.75 2.53 2.10 0.82 5.45 64 Potentilla nepalensis 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.15 0.70 0.27 1.12 65 Carex psychrophila 0.30 20.00 0.25 0.45 1.40 0.27 2.12 66 Iris lactea 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.15 0.70 0.27 1.12 67 Oxyria digyna 0.20 20.00 0.50 0.30 1.40 0.54 2.24 68 Aconitum chyasmenthium 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.15 0.70 0.27 1.12 69 Oxitropis lapponica 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.15 0.70 0.27 1.12 70 Thymus linearis 0.40 20.00 0.25 0.60 1.40 0.27 2.27 67.1 1430 91.75 100 100 100 300.

4.7. Myricaria - Carex - Sewerttia Community (Community 2)

4.7.1. Geographical Characteristics

Myricaria - Carex -Swertia Community was taken at the front of Spoon Lake in

Shounther Valley. The habitat of the stand was sandy and marshy. The altitude of area was 3181m located at 340 97.3994 North Latitude and 0740.52.4063 East longitude. Slope degree was between 00__300 lying at northern aspect (Table 3.1).

102

4.7.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 34 plant species and was dominated by Myricaria elegans having an IVI value of 65.20 followed by Carex atrosfusca and Swertia petiolata having IVI values of 29.63 and 25.67 respectively. Co-dominant species were Habenaria pectinata (14.35), Parnissia nubicola (14.27) and Trifolium repans (12.78) (Table 4.4).

4.7.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.91 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 2.96. The evenness was found to be 0.56 and richness value was 1.96. The maturity index value was calculated to be 25.88% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.2.2.4 Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2.

Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2 (Table

4.2).

Table.4.4 Primary phytosociological data of Myricaria - Carex - Sewerttia Community

S. No. Specie Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 1 Myricaria elegans 82.40 100 12.00 43.07 11.36 10.76 65.20 2 Salix flablellaris 18.60 60 4.00 9.72 6.82 3.59 20.13 3 Astragalus himalayenus 2.50 10 3.75 1.31 1.14 3.36 5.81 4 Dactylorhiza hatagirea 2.00 50 8.50 1.05 5.68 7.62 14.35 5 Swertia petiolata 4.30 70 17.25 2.25 7.95 15.47 25.67 6 Jaeschkea oligosperma 1.70 20 0.50 0.89 2.27 0.45 3.61 7 Parnassia nubicola 12.60 40 3.50 6.59 4.55 3.14 14.27 8 Equesetum arvense 7.00 40 4.75 3.66 4.55 4.26 12.46 9 Trifolium pretense 5.00 50 5.00 2.61 5.68 4.48 12.78 10 Trifolium repens 1.50 20 1.50 0.78 2.27 1.35 4.40 11 Carex atrofusca 22.00 60 12.50 11.50 6.82 11.21 29.53 12 Caltha alba 2.50 40 6.00 1.31 4.55 5.38 11.23 13 Pedicularis pectinata 2.10 20 3.00 1.10 2.27 2.69 6.06

103

S. No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 14 Blysmus compressus 6.70 30 4.50 3.50 3.41 4.04 10.95 15 Chaerophyllum capnoides 3.60 20 1.75 1.88 2.27 1.57 5.72 16 Plantago major 1.40 20 3.00 0.73 2.27 2.69 5.70 17 Taraxecum officinale 1.40 20 1.75 0.73 2.27 1.57 4.57 18 Rumex nepalensis 0.60 10 1.50 0.31 1.14 1.35 2.80 19 Hadysarum cacHirianum 2.50 10 3.75 1.31 1.14 3.36 5.81 20 Prunella vulgaris 1.40 30 0.75 0.73 3.41 0.67 4.81 21 Cynoglossum lanceolatum 0.30 10 0.25 0.16 1.14 0.22 1.52 22 Aconitum heterophyllum 0.10 10 0.25 0.05 1.14 0.22 1.41 23 Juncus thomsonii 0.80 10 0.25 0.42 1.14 0.22 1.78 24 Anaphalis triplinervis 0.70 10 0.25 0.37 1.14 0.22 1.73 25 Thymus linearis 0.60 10 0.25 0.31 1.14 0.22 1.67 26 Arnebia benthamii 1.30 20 0.25 0.68 2.27 0.22 3.18 27 Senecio chrysanthemoides 0.80 20 0.50 0.42 2.27 0.45 3.14 28 Oxyria digyna 0.50 10 1.50 0.26 1.14 1.35 2.74 29 Inula orientalis 0.10 10 1.50 0.05 1.14 1.35 2.53 30 Aconitum chyasmenthium 0.20 10 0.25 0.10 1.14 0.22 1.47 31 Juncus articulate 0.90 10 0.25 0.47 1.14 0.22 1.83 32 Polymonium caeruleum 1.10 10 1.50 0.58 1.14 1.35 3.06 33 Verbascum thapsus 0.30 10 1.50 0.16 1.14 1.35 2.64 34 Epilobium laxum 1.80 10 3.75 0.94 1.14 3.36 5.44 191.3 880 111.5 100 100 100 300

4.8. Salix- Polygonum – Senecio Community (Community 3)

4.8.1. Geographical Characteristics

Salix – Polygonum – Senecio Community with 40 plant species was taken in

Shoonther Valley. The altitude of the area was 3440 m located at 340 98.1739 North

Latitude and 0740.51.6405 East longitude. Slope was between 300 -600 with comparatively dry habitat lying on southern aspect (Table 3.1).

4.8.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 40 plant species and was dominated by Salix flablellaris having an IVI value of 29.66 followed by Polygonum alpinum and Senecio chrysanthemoides having IVI values of 23.49 and 20.74 respectively. Co-dominant

104

species were Rosa alpina (15.26), Pedicularis pectinata (14.17) and Polygonatum

verticilatum (13.84) (Table 4.5).

4.8.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.95 whereas the Shannon’s

diversity was calculated as 3.36. The evenness was found to be 0.72 and richness value

was 2.73. The maturity index value was calculated to be 25% for the investigated

community (Table 4.2).

4.8.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was eroded and placed in Class 2 (moderately

eroded). Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2

(Table 4.2).

Table.4.5 Primary phytosociological data of Salix - Polygonum - Senecio Community

S. No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 1 Salix flablellaris 18.00 60 6.50 17.77 6.00 5.90 29.66 2 Rosa alpina 8.00 60 1.50 7.90 6.00 1.36 15.26 3 Aconitum heterophyllum 4.30 60 2.75 4.24 6.00 2.49 12.74 4 Achillea millefolium 0.60 20 0.50 0.59 2.00 0.45 3.05 5 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 2.00 20 7.50 1.97 2.00 6.80 10.78 6 Lathyrus pratensis 0.10 10 0.25 0.10 1.00 0.23 1.33 7 Polygonum alpinum 10.10 40 10.50 9.97 4.00 9.52 23.49 8 Pedicularis pectinata 2.30 60 6.50 2.27 6.00 5.90 14.17 9 Rheum austale 0.40 30 5.50 0.39 3.00 4.99 8.38 10 Taraxacum tibitianum 0.40 10 1.50 0.39 1.00 1.36 2.76 11 Trifoliumpretense 1.30 10 1.50 1.28 1.00 1.36 3.64 12 Pennaisetum lanatum 2.60 40 1.00 2.57 4.00 0.91 7.47 13 Astragalus frigidus 3.70 30 4.50 3.65 3.00 4.08 10.73 14 Sonchus asper 0.20 10 0.25 0.20 1.00 0.23 1.42 15 Senecio chrysanthemoides 6.80 70 7.75 6.71 7.00 7.03 20.74 16 Equesetum arvense 4.10 40 4.75 4.05 4.00 4.31 12.36

17 Rumex nepalensis 1.50 20 1.75 1.48 2.00 1.59 5.07

105

S. No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 18 Impatiens edgeworthii 3.00 50 5.00 2.96 5.00 4.54 12.50 19 Polygonatum verticilatum 5.10 20 7.50 5.03 2.00 6.80 13.84 20 Dipsacus inermis 1.30 30 3.25 1.28 3.00 2.95 7.23 21 Cynoglossum lanceolatum 0.70 20 0.50 0.69 2.00 0.45 3.14 22 Trifolium repens 4.20 40 2.50 4.15 4.00 2.27 10.41 23 Poa gracilis 0.60 10 0.25 0.59 1.00 0.23 1.82 24 Leucas goxauianus 1.30 10 1.50 1.28 1.00 1.36 3.64 25 Leucas cephalotes 1.70 30 2.00 1.68 3.00 1.81 6.49 26 Artemisia annua 1.70 10 0.25 1.68 1.00 0.23 2.90 27 Dryopteris thalipteris 1.10 30 3.25 1.09 3.00 2.95 7.03 28 Anglica cyclocarpa 0.40 20 7.50 0.39 2.00 6.80 9.20 29 Phlomis bracteosa 0.40 10 1.50 0.39 1.00 1.36 2.76 30 Agrostis vernalis 0.80 10 0.50 0.79 1.00 0.45 2.24 31 Swertia speciosa 0.10 10 1.50 0.10 1.00 1.36 2.46 32 Arnebia benthamii 0.40 10 0.25 0.39 1.00 0.23 1.62 33 Sedum ewersii 0.80 10 0.25 0.79 1.00 0.23 2.02 34 Artemisia absinthium 0.40 10 0.25 0.39 1.00 0.23 1.62 35 Calamagrostis epigejos 2.30 20 0.50 2.27 2.00 0.45 4.72 36 Bupleurum candollei 0.90 20 0.50 0.89 2.00 0.45 3.34 37 Rumex nepalensis 0.30 10 1.50 0.30 1.00 1.36 2.66 38 Aegopodium alpestre 5.50 10 3.75 5.43 1.00 3.40 9.83 39 Mircostegium nodosum 0.40 10 0.25 0.39 1.00 0.23 1.62 40 Artemisia japonica 1.50 10 1.50 1.48 1.00 1.36 3.84 101.3 1000 110.25 100 100 100 300 Key : D=Density, F=Frequancy, C=Cover, RD=Relative Density, RF=Relative

Frequancy, RC=Relative Cover, IVI=Importance Value Index

4.9. Rosa – Artemisia – Pedicularis Community (Community 4)

4.9.1. Geographical Characteristics

Rosa-Artemisia-Pedicularis Community with 41 plant species was taken in

Shoonther Valley. The altitude of area was 3500 m located at 340.98.0305 North Latitude

and 0740.50.7352 East longitudes. Slope was between 300 -600 with comparatively dry

habitat lying at East facing aspect (Table 3.1).

106

4.9.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 41 plant species and was dominated by Rosa alpina

having an IVI value of 45.10 followed by Artemisia absinthium and Pedicularis punctata

having IVI values of 21.90 and 18.26 respectively. Co-dominant species were Astragalus

himalayenus (16.66), Senecio graciliflorus (16.06) and Polygonum alpinum (15.20)

(Table 4.6).

4.9.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.94 whereas the Shannon’s

diversity was calculated as 3.29. The evenness was found to be 0.65 and richness value

was 2.36. The maturity index value was calculated to be 26.58 % for the investigated

community (Table 4.2).

4.9.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was eroded and placed in Class 2 (Moderately

eroded). Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2

(Table 4.2).

Table.4.6 Primary phytosociological data of Rosa – Artemisia -Pedicularis Community

S. No. Specie Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 1 Rosa alpina 21.50 100.00 21.50 21.78 9.17 14.15 45.10 2 Pedicularis punctate 6.10 60.00 10.0 6.18 5.50 6.58 18.26 3 Astragalus himalayenus 6.00 40.00 10.5 6.08 3.67 6.91 16.66 4 Polygonatum verticilatum 3.00 40.00 3.50 3.04 3.67 2.30 9.01 5 Pennaisetum lanatum 4.90 30.00 3.25 4.96 2.75 2.14 9.86 6 Dioscorea deltoidea 2.80 50.00 5.75 2.84 4.59 3.78 11.21 7 Artemisia absinthium 7.70 30.00 17.3 7.80 2.75 11.35 21.90 8 Senecio graciliflorus 6.20 60.00 6.50 6.28 5.50 4.28 16.06 9 Iris lacteal 2.60 50.00 12 2.63 4.59 7.90 15.12 10 Polygonaum alpinum 4.70 60.00 7.50 4.76 5.50 4.93 15.20 11 Swertia petiolata 2.70 50.00 2.50 2.74 4.59 1.64 8.97

107

S. No. Specie Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 12 Rheum austral 0.20 10.00 3.75 0.20 0.92 2.47 3.59 13 Helictotrichon virescens 3.70 20.00 1.75 3.75 1.83 1.15 6.73 14 Dactylis glomerata 1.10 10.00 0.25 1.11 0.92 0.16 2.20 15 Fragaria nubicola 2.50 20.00 3.00 2.53 1.83 1.97 6.34 16 Galium boreale 0.30 10.00 0.25 0.30 0.92 0.16 1.39 17 Bupleurum falcatum 1.00 30.00 2.00 1.01 2.75 1.32 5.08 18 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 1.20 20.00 3.00 1.22 1.83 1.97 5.02 19 Dipsacus inermis 3.00 40.00 5.74 3.04 3.67 3.78 10.49 20 Trigonella falcate 0.40 20.00 3.00 0.41 1.83 1.97 4.21 21 Aster falconeri 2.10 30.00 2.00 2.13 2.75 1.32 6.20 22 Carduus nutans 0.40 20.00 0.50 0.41 1.83 0.33 2.57 23 Impatiens edgeworthii 1.40 10.00 1.50 1.42 0.92 0.99 3.32 24 Epilobium parviflorum 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.10 0.92 0.16 1.18 25 Pleurospermum brunonis 0.30 20.00 5.25 0.30 1.83 3.45 5.59 26 Verbascum thapsus 1.50 30.00 3.25 1.52 2.75 2.14 6.41 27 Dryopteris stewartii 0.50 10.00 0.25 0.51 0.92 0.16 1.59 28 Leucas lanata 0.50 20.00 1.75 0.51 1.83 1.15 3.49 29 Festuca lemanii 1.40 20.00 0.50 1.42 1.83 0.33 3.58 30 Elsholtzia fruticosa 0.90 10.00 0.25 0.91 0.92 0.16 1.99 31 Hypericum perforatum 1.20 30.00 2.00 1.22 2.75 1.32 5.28 32 Thymus linearis 1.50 10.00 3.75 1.52 0.92 2.47 4.90 33 Sedum ewersii 0.60 10.00 1.50 0.61 0.92 0.99 2.51 34 Sedum oreades 0.30 20.00 0.50 0.30 1.83 0.33 2.47 35 Allium humile 2.10 20.00 1.75 2.13 1.83 1.15 5.11 36 Artemisia annua 0.50 20.00 1.50 0.51 1.83 0.99 3.33 37 Taraxacum tibitianum 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.10 0.92 0.16 1.18 38 Equesetum arvense 1.20 10.00 1.50 1.22 0.92 0.99 3.12 39 Capsella bursa-pastoris 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.10 0.92 0.16 1.18 40 Erysimum melicentae 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.10 0.92 0.16 1.18 41 Arnebia benthamii 0.30 10.00 0.25 0.30 0.92 0.16 1.39 98.7 1090 151.9 100 100 100 300

4.10. Juniperus - Rosa – Artemisia Community (Community 5)

4.10.1. Geographical Characteristics

Juniperus – Rosa – Artemisia Community with 49 plant species was taken in

Shoonther Valley towards the Astor Route. The altitude of area was 3650 m located at 340

108

99.6451 North Latitude and 0740.53.7320 East longitude. Slope was between 600 -900

with comparatively moist habitat located at West facing Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.10.2. Phytosociological attributes

This community comprised 49 plant species and was dominanted by Juniperus

communis having an IVI value of 45.87 followed by Rosa alpina and Artemisia japonica

having IVI values of 25.41 and 18.10 respectively. Co-dominant species were

Pennaisetum nemoralis (15.90), Viola pyrolifolia (15.04) and Festuca lehmanii (14.40)

(Table 4.7).

4.10.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.94 whereas the Shannon’s

diversity was calculated as 3.23. The evenness was found to be 0.52 and richness value

was 2.82. The maturity index value was calculated to be 31.62 % for the investigated

community (Table 4.2).

4.10.4. Anthropogenic pressure

The soil of this Community was not eroded and placed in Class 1 (not eroded).

Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3 (Table 4.2).

Table.4.7 Primary phytosociological data of Juniperus -Rosa-Artemisia Community

S. No Specie Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 1 Juniperus communis 20.80 100 62.50 12.69 6.45 26.72 45.87 2 Rosa alpina 17.40 100 19.50 10.62 6.45 8.34 25.41 3 Berberis aristata 8.80 80 7.00 5.37 5.16 2.99 13.53 4 Robus fruticosus 1.40 20 0.50 0.85 1.29 0.21 2.36 5 Anglica cyclocarpa 0.33 20 2.33 0.20 1.29 1.00 2.49 6 Pedicularis pyramidata 3.66 66 8.33 2.23 4.26 3.56 10.05 7 Aster falconeri 5.20 60 9.00 3.17 3.87 3.85 10.89 8 Artemisia annua 10.00 86.60 15.00 6.10 5.59 6.41 18.10

109

S. No Specie Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 9 Bistorta affinis 0.46 6.60 1.00 0.28 0.43 0.43 1.13 10 Trifolium repens 1.20 26.60 3.16 0.73 1.72 1.35 3.80 11 Gnephalium affine 1.20 20. 1.33 0.73 1.29 0.57 2.59 12 Androsace primuloides 4.33 46.60 7.00 2.64 3.01 2.99 8.64 13 Pennaisetum annua 1.06 6.60 1.00 0.65 0.43 0.43 1.50 14 Astragalus frigidus 5.40 73.30 8.50 3.29 4.73 3.63 11.66 15 Iris hookariana 1.53 40.00 1.00 0.93 2.58 0.43 3.94 16 Thymus linearis 8.33 73.30 8.50 5.08 4.73 3.63 13.45 17 Leucas goxauianus 2.53 46.60 3.50 1.54 3.01 1.50 6.05 18 Viola pyrolifolia 9.53 80.00 9.50 5.81 5.16 4.06 15.04 19 Prunella vulgaris 1.00 20.00 0.50 0.61 1.29 0.21 2.11 20 Geranium himalayense 1.13 20.00 0.50 0.69 1.29 0.21 2.19 21 Hypericum perforatum 1.60 33.30 4.16 0.98 2.15 1.78 4.90 22 Bistorta vivipara 7.06 66.60 11.30 4.31 4.30 4.83 13.44 23 Aconogonum alpinum 0.80 20.00 2.16 0.49 1.29 0.92 2.70 24 Aconogonum molle 5.93 66.60 8.16 3.62 4.30 3.49 11.41 25 Bergenia cilliata 2.13 26.60 4.00 1.30 1.72 1.71 4.73 26 Pennaisetum nemoralis 12.60 66.60 9.16 7.69 4.30 3.92 15.90 27 Festuca lehmanii 10.13 66.60 9.16 6.18 4.30 3.92 14.40 28 Silene vulgaris 2.13 46.60 2.66 1.30 3.01 1.14 5.44 29 Polygonatum verticilatum 0.86 46.60 2.16 0.52 3.01 0.92 4.46 30 Galium verum 2.06 20.00 1.16 1.26 1.29 0.50 3.04 31 Verbascum thapsus 1.46 33.30 3.33 0.89 2.15 1.42 4.46 32 Onopordun acanthium 0.20 13.30 0.33 0.12 0.86 0.14 1.12 33 Allium tuberosum 1.46 13.30 3.33 0.89 0.86 1.42 3.17 34 Rumex nepalensis 0.46 13.30 0.50 0.28 0.86 0.21 1.35 35 Rheum webbianum 0.20 13.30 0.50 0.12 0.86 0.21 1.19 36 Dactylorhiza hatagiria 0.20 0.33 0.13 0.12 0.02 0.06 0.20 37 Swertia petiolata 0.53 0.50 0.20 0.32 0.03 0.09 0.44 38 Cardus nutans 0.33 0.33 0.13 0.20 0.02 0.06 0.28 39 Anagalus arvense 0.87 0.33 0.13 0.53 0.02 0.06 0.61 40 Polystichum lachenense 1.00 0.66 0.26 0.61 0.04 0.11 0.76 41 Sedum ewersii 0.80 0.66 0.26 0.49 0.04 0.11 0.64 42 Senecio chrysanthemoides 1.40 3.00 0.20 0.85 0.19 0.09 1.13 43 Anaphalis nepalensis 0.87 0.33 0.13 0.53 0.02 0.06 0.61 44 Gentiana algida 0.47 0.33 0.13 0.29 0.02 0.06 0.36 45 Sibbaldia cuneata 1.27 3.00 0.20 0.77 0.19 0.09 1.05 46 Polygonum paronychioides 0.73 0.33 0.13 0.45 0.02 0.06 0.52 47 Primuladenticulata 0.33 0.16 0.06 0.20 0.01 0.03 0.24 48 Oenothera rosea 0.20 1.00 0.06 0.12 0.06 0.03 0.21 49 Parnessia nubicola 0.53 0.33 0.13 0.32 0.02 0.06 0.40 163.9 1549.5 233.87 100 100 100 300

110

4.11. Betula - Fragaria – Impatiens Community (Community 6)

4.11.1. Geographical Characteristics

Betula - Fragaria –Impatiens Community with 37 plant species was taken in

Shoonther Valley towards the Hari Parbat peak. The altitude of area was 3250 m located at 340 96.6854 North Latitude and 0740.52.0697 East longitude. Slope was between 300 -

600 with comparatively moist habitat located at North facing Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.11.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 37 plant species and was dominated by Betula utilus having an IVI value of 110.74 followed by Fragaria nubicola and Impatiens edgeworthii having IVI values of 20.84 and 14.38 respectively. Co-dominant species were Galium boreale (14.14), Polygonatum verticilatum (13.64) and Senecio chrysanthemoides (13.01)

(Table 4.8).

4.11.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.84 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 2.66. The evenness was found to be 0.38 and richness value was 2.13. The maturity index value was calculated to be 28.93 % for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.11.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2

(Moderately eroded). Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2 (Table 4.2).

111

Table 4.8 Primary phytosociological data of Betula-Fragaria-Impatiens Community

S. No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 1 Betula utilus 9.40 100.00 776.32 12.42 9.34 88.99 110.74 2 Saussurea costus 2.73 53.00 18.66 3.61 4.95 2.14 10.70 3 Senecio chrysanthemoides 4.20 73.00 5.60 5.55 6.82 0.64 13.01 4 Silene vulgaris 4.80 66.00 2.33 6.34 6.17 0.27 12.77 5 Impatiens edgeworthii 4.30 86.60 5.33 5.68 8.09 0.61 14.38 6 Fragaria nubicola 10.90 60.00 7.33 14.4 5.60 0.84 20.84 7 Pennaisetum annua 2.60 33.30 1.66 3.43 3.11 0.19 6.74 8 Polygonatum verticilatum 5.20 66.60 4.83 6.87 6.22 0.55 13.64 9 Lindelofia longiflora 1.50 33.30 1.66 1.98 3.11 0.19 5.28 10 Anemone tetrasepla 2.30 40.00 8.33 3.04 3.74 0.95 7.73 11 Galium boreale 5.50 66.60 5.66 7.27 6.22 0.65 14.14 12 Pleurospermum brunonis 0.30 13.30 2.00 0.40 1.24 0.23 1.87 13 Rumex nepalensis 1.70 26.60 4.63 2.25 2.48 0.53 5.26 14 Dryopteris blanfordii 0.90 20.00 1.33 1.19 1.87 0.15 3.21 15 Viola kashmiriana 2.20 33.30 1.66 2.91 3.11 0.19 6.21 16 Trifolium repens 1.50 20.00 0.33 1.98 1.87 0.04 3.89 17 Geraniumnepalense 0.60 6.60 0.33 0.79 0.62 0.04 1.45 18 Lathyrus pratensis 0.70 33.30 1.66 0.92 3.11 0.19 4.23 19 Polygonum cognatum 1.40 20.00 1.33 1.85 1.87 0.15 3.87 20 Nephrolepis lonchitis 1.30 13.30 1.16 1.72 1.24 0.13 3.09 21 Valeriana pyrolifolia 2.40 46.60 1.83 3.17 4.35 0.21 7.73 22 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 1.30 33.30 6.33 1.72 3.11 0.73 5.55 23 Asplinum fontanum 2.10 20.00 1.33 2.77 1.87 0.15 4.79 24 Ranunculus laetus 0.20 6.60 0.16 0.26 0.62 0.02 0.90 25 Adiantum venustum 0.30 6.60 1.00 0.40 0.62 0.11 1.13 26 Robus fruticosus 0.60 6.60 0.16 0.79 0.62 0.02 1.43 27 Cardamine hirsute 0.20 6.60 0.16 0.26 0.62 0.02 0.90 28 Chrysopogon gryllus 0.30 6.60 0.16 0.40 0.62 0.02 1.03 29 Swertia speciosa 0.10 6.60 0.16 0.13 0.62 0.02 0.77 30 Pennaisetum lanatum 1.10 6.60 1.00 1.45 0.62 0.11 2.18 31 Leucas goxauianus 0.30 6.60 0.16 0.40 0.62 0.02 1.03 32 Rheumaustralee 0.30 6.60 2.50 0.40 0.62 0.29 1.30 33 Aquilegia fragrans 0.33 13.30 1.16 0.44 1.24 0.13 1.81 34 Pedicularis pyramidata 1.47 13.30 2.00 1.94 1.24 0.23 3.41 35 Plantago lanciolata 0.27 6.60 1.00 0.36 0.62 0.11 1.09 36 Piptatherum laterale 0.13 6.60 0.16 0.17 0.62 0.02 0.81 37 Prunella vulgaris 0.27 6.60 1.00 0.36 0.62 0.11 1.09 75.7 1070.5 872.41 100 100 100 300

112

4.12. Carex – Caltha- Trifolium Community (Community 7)

4.12.1. Geographical Characteristics

Carex–Caltha-Trifolium Community with 31 plant species was taken in

Shoonther Valley around the Spoon Lake. The altitude of area was 3150 m located at 340

97.3506 North Latitude and 0740.51.2926 East longitude. Slope was between 00 -300 with completely moist habitat with exposed surface (Table 3.1).

4.12.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 31 plant species and was dominated by Carex psychrophila having an IVI value of 50.82 followed by Caltha alba and Trifolium repens having IVI values of 35.35 and 18.77 respectively. Co-dominant species were Pedicularis pectinata (17.16), Ranunculus stewartii (17.01) and Agrostis vinealis (11.78) (Table 4.9).

4.12.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.93 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.02. The evenness was found to be 0.66 and richness value was 1.79. The maturity index value was calculated to be 21.61 % for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.7.7.4 Anthropogenic pressure

The soil of this Community was not eroded and placed in Class 1 (not eroded).

Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2 (Table

4.2).

113

Table.4.9 Primary phytosociological data of Carex – Caltha – Trifolium Community

S. No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 1 Ranunculus stewartii 5.60 30 6.75 5.63 4.48 6.91 17.01 2 Rumex nepalensis 1.10 10 3.75 1.11 1.49 3.84 6.43 3 Oxyria digyna 5.30 10 4.00 5.33 1.49 4.09 10.91 4 Carex psychrophila 22.40 80 16.00 22.51 11.94 16.37 50.82 5 Bistorta amplexicaulis 3.50 10 3.75 3.52 1.49 3.84 8.85 6 Trifolium repens 7.90 40 4.75 7.94 5.97 4.86 18.77 7 Aconitum heterophylum 1.10 40 1.00 1.11 5.97 1.02 8.10 8 Iris hookariana 1.50 10 1.50 1.51 1.49 1.53 4.53 9 Galium asperuloides 0.50 10 0.25 0.50 1.49 0.26 2.25 10 Taraxacum tibitianum 2.20 30 3.25 2.21 4.48 3.32 10.01 11 Pedicularis pectinata 6.30 40 4.75 6.33 5.97 4.86 17.16 12 Prunella vulgaris 4.40 20 3.00 4.42 2.99 3.07 10.48 13 Equesetum debile 2.50 20 1.75 2.51 2.99 1.79 7.29 14 Tussilago farfara 0.50 10 0.25 0.50 1.49 0.26 2.25 15 Astragalus himalayanus 0.10 10 1.50 0.10 1.49 1.53 3.13 16 Dactylorhiza hatagirea 0.10 10 0.25 0.10 1.49 0.26 1.85 17 Caltha alba 10.70 50 16.75 10.75 7.46 17.14 35.35 18 Agrostis vinealis 5.20 40 3.50 5.23 5.97 3.58 14.78 19 Primula macrophyla 1.20 30 2.00 1.21 4.48 2.05 7.73 20 Bupleurum candollei 0.30 20 0.50 0.30 2.99 0.51 3.80 21 Sibbaldia cuneata 1.50 10 1.50 1.51 1.49 1.53 4.53 22 Plantago major 2.90 30 4.50 2.91 4.48 4.60 12.00 23 Sedum ewersii 0.10 10 0.25 0.10 1.49 0.26 1.85 24 Achillea millefolium 0.40 10 1.50 0.40 1.49 1.53 3.43 25 Lathyrus pratensis 0.50 10 0.25 0.50 1.49 0.26 2.25 26 Parnasia nubicola 3.70 20 1.75 3.72 2.99 1.79 8.49 27 Vicia narbonensis 6.10 10 6.25 6.13 1.49 6.39 14.02 28 Swertia petiolata 0.80 10 1.50 0.80 1.49 1.53 3.83 29 Phlomis bracteosa 0.40 20 0.50 0.40 2.99 0.51 3.90 30 Agrostis vinealis 0.20 10 0.25 0.20 1.49 0.26 1.95 31 Aconitum chyasmenthium 0.50 10 0.25 0.50 1.49 0.26 2.25 99.5 670 97.75 100 100 100 300

4.13. Betula – Saussuria - Senecio Community (Community 8)

4.13.1. Geographical Characteristics

Betula – Saussuria- Senecio Community with 43 plant species was established in

Shounther Valley towards the Hari Parbat. The altitude of area was 3450 m located at 340

114

96.35478 North Latitude and 0740.51.5825 East longitude. Slope was between 300 -600

with comparatively moist habitat located at North facing Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.13.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 43 plant species and was dominated by Betula utilus

having IVI value of 135.50 followed by Saussuria costus and Senecio chrysanthemoides

having IVI values of 9.32 and 8.66 respectively. Co-dominant species were

Pleurospermum brunonis (8.29), Impatiens thomsonii (8.24) and Galium boreale (8.19)

(Table 4.10).

4.13.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.72 whereas the Shannon’s

diversity was calculated as 2.37. The evenness was found to be 0.25 and richness value

was 2.48. The maturity index value was calculated to be 26 % for the investigated

community (Table 4.2).

4.13.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2

(moderately eroded). Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was

classified as class 2 (Table 4.2).

Table.4.9 Primary phytosociological data of Betula - Saussuria - Senecio Community

S. No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 1 Betula utilus 56 100 1347.5 50.92 8.94 93.73 153.59 2 Saussurea costus 2.40 66.60 17.00 2.18 5.96 1.18 9.32 3 Pleurospermum brunonis 1.80 66.60 10.00 1.64 5.96 0.70 8.29 4 Solidago virga-aurea 0.26 6.60 0.40 0.24 0.59 0.03 0.85 5 Silene vulgaris 2.73 46.60 2.00 2.48 4.17 0.14 6.79 6 Impatiens thomsonii 4.93 40.00 2.60 4.48 3.58 0.18 8.24 7 Viola canescens 2.33 40.00 1.83 2.12 3.58 0.13 5.82

115

S. No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 8 Aquilegia nivalis 1.73 26.60 1.00 1.57 2.38 0.07 4.02 9 Polystichum castaneum 1.73 40.00 2.66 1.57 3.58 0.19 5.34 10 Senecio chrysanthemoides 3.93 53.30 4.66 3.57 4.77 0.32 8.66 11 Valeriana pyrolifolia 1.00 26.60 1.50 0.91 2.38 0.10 3.39 12 Nephrolepis lonchitis 0.40 13.30 0.66 0.36 1.19 0.05 1.60 13 Cynoglossum lanceolatum 0.93 26.60 1.50 0.85 2.38 0.10 3.33 14 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 1.73 26.60 8.66 1.57 2.38 0.60 4.55 15 Polygonum alpinum 3.33 40.00 4.66 3.03 3.58 0.32 6.93 16 Polygonatum verticilatum 2.40 26.60 0.66 2.18 2.38 0.05 4.61 17 Galium boreale 3.66 53.30 1.33 3.33 4.77 0.09 8.19 18 Pleurospermum candollei 0.40 13.30 0.50 0.36 1.19 0.03 1.59 19 Pedicularis bicornuta 0.46 13.30 2.00 0.42 1.19 0.14 1.75 20 Arnebia euchroma 1.20 40.00 5.14 1.09 3.58 0.36 5.03 21 Dryopteris barbigera 2.33 46.60 4.50 2.12 4.17 0.31 6.60 22 Caltha alba 0.66 20.00 1.33 0.60 1.79 0.09 2.48 23 Lathyrus laevigatus 0.73 26.60 0.66 0.66 2.38 0.05 3.09 24 Aconitum heterophyllum 0.86 33.30 0.83 0.78 2.98 0.06 3.82 25 Prunella vulgaris 0.20 13.30 0.33 0.18 1.19 0.02 1.39 26 Chaerophyllum villosum 0.26 13.30 0.33 0.24 1.19 0.02 1.45 27 Lindelofialongiflora 0.33 13.30 0.33 0.30 1.19 0.02 1.51 28 Pennaisetum annua 2.26 33.30 0.83 2.05 2.98 0.06 5.09 29 Geranium nepalense 3.26 33.30 1.66 2.96 2.98 0.12 6.06 30 Trillium govanianum 0.40 13.30 0.33 0.36 1.19 0.02 1.58 31 Rubus fruticosus 0.20 6.60 1.00 0.18 0.59 0.07 0.84 32 Plantago major 0.73 13.30 1.16 0.66 1.19 0.08 1.93 33 Trifolium pretense 0.26 6.60 0.16 0.24 0.59 0.01 0.84 34 Lilium polyphyllum 0.06 6.60 0.16 0.05 0.59 0.01 0.66 35 Rumex nepalensis 1.66 13.30 2.66 1.51 1.19 0.19 2.88 36 Juncus himalensis 0.53 6.60 1.00 0.48 0.59 0.07 1.14 37 Cardamine macrophyla 0.06 6.60 0.16 0.05 0.59 0.01 0.66 38 Poa bacteriana 0.06 6.60 1.00 0.05 0.59 0.07 0.71 39 Trifoliium prateranse 0.06 6.60 1.00 0.05 0.59 0.07 0.71 40 Leucas lanata 0.53 13.30 0.33 0.48 1.19 0.02 1.69 41 Fragaria nubicola 0.66 6.60 0.33 0.60 0.59 0.02 1.21 42 Hyoscyamus niger 0.20 6.60 0.33 0.18 0.59 0.02 0.80 43 Taraxacum tibetianum 0.33 6.60 1.00 0.30 0.59 0.07 0.96 109.98 1118.1 1437.7 100 100 100 300

116

4.14. Bistorta– Geranium- Aconitum Community (Community 9)

4.14.1. Geographical Characteristics

Bistorta– Geranium- Aconitum Community with 24 plant species was established at Ratti gali. The altitude of area was 3715 m located at 34082.5113 North Latitude and

0740.05.6981 East longitude. Slope was 00 _with comparatively moist habitat located at

Northern Aspect (Table.3.1).

4.14.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 24 plant species and was dominated by Bistorta affinis having an IVI value of 62.93 followed by Geranium himalayense and Aconitum chyasmenthium having IVI values of 57.79 and 29.68 respectively. Co-dominant species were Bergenia stracheyi (23.02), Potentilla nepalensis (21.41) and Tanacetum dolichophyllum (15.70) (Table 4.11).

4.14.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.887 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 2.567. The evenness was found to be 0.54 and richness value was 1.386. The maturity index value was calculated to be 25.41 % for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.14.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was not eroded and placed in Class 1 (slightly eroded). Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3

(Table 4.2).

117

Table.4.10. Primary phytosociological data of Bistorta– Geranium- Aconitum Community

S. No. Species Name D RD F RF C C RC IVI 1 Bergenia strachyei 3.6 7.09 20 3.28 12.5 12.66 23.02 2 Geranium himalayense 12.6 24.80 90 14.75 18 18.23 57.79 3 Bistorta affinis 11.1 21.85 90 14.75 26 26.33 62.93 4 Prunella vulgaris 0.1 0.20 10 1.64 0.25 0.25 2.09 5 Pedicularis pyramidata 0.4 0.79 10 1.64 0.25 0.25 2.68 6 Cortia depressa 0.2 0.39 20 3.28 0.5 0.51 4.18 7 Viola canescens 0.7 1.38 20 3.28 1.75 1.77 6.43 8 Tanacetum dolichophyllum 2.2 4.33 40 6.56 4.75 4.81 15.70 9 Pennaisetum lanatum 2.5 4.92 30 4.92 3.25 3.29 13.13 10 Gentiana algida 1.2 2.36 20 3.28 1.75 1.77 7.41 11 Potentilla nepalensis 3.3 6.50 40 6.56 8.25 8.35 21.41 12 Sibbaldia purpurea 1.5 2.95 30 4.92 4.5 4.56 12.43 13 Bupleurum candollei 0.2 0.39 10 1.64 0.25 0.25 2.29 14 Iris decora 0.4 0.79 10 1.64 1.5 1.52 3.95 15 Aconitum chyasmenthium 7.5 14.76 40 6.56 8.25 8.35 29.68 16 Fragaria nubicola 0.1 0.20 10 1.64 0.25 0.25 2.09 17 Phlomis bracteosa 1.7 3.35 40 6.56 2.25 2.28 12.18 18 Rosa webbiana 0.1 0.20 10 1.64 0.25 0.25 2.09 19 Cryptogramma brunoniana 0.1 0.20 10 1.64 1.5 1.52 3.36 20 Rhodiola heterodonta 0.3 0.59 10 1.64 1.5 1.52 3.75 21 Artemisia japonica 0.4 0.79 10 1.64 0.25 0.25 2.68 22 Polystichum younnanense 0.3 0.59 10 1.64 0.25 0.25 2.48 23 Thymus linearis 0.2 0.39 20 3.28 0.5 0.51 4.18 24 Stellaria decumbens 0.1 0.20 10 1.64 0.25 0.25 2.09 50.8 100 610 100 98.8 100 300

4.15. Bistorta - Sibbaldia –GeumCommunity (Community 10)

4.15.1. Geographical Characteristics

Bistorta - Sibbaldia –Geum Community with 22 plant species was established at

Ratti gali. The altitude of area was 3836 m located at 34083.8051 North Latitude and

074005.9911 East longitudes. Slope was 00-300 with comparatively dry habitat lying at

Northern Aspect (Table.3.1).

118

4.15.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 22 plant species and was dominated by Bistorta affinis

having an IVI value of 55.30 followed by Sibbaldia cuneata and Geum elatum having IVI

values of 42.06 and 33.34 respectively. Co-dominant species were Rhodiola heterodonta

(25.57), Ainsliaea aptera (23.02) and Anaphalis triplinervis (19.85) (Table.4.12).

4.15.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.90 whereas the Shannon’s

diversity was calculated as 2.65. The evenness was found to be 0.64 and richness value

was 1.27. The maturity index value was calculated to be 27.72% for the investigated

community (Table 4.2).

4.15.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was highly eroded and placed in Class 3 (Heavily

eroded). Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3

(Table.4.2).

Table.4.12. Primary phytosociological data of Bistorta - Sibbaldia - Jurania Community

S. No. Species Name D RD F RF CC RC IVI 1 Bistorta affinis 13.3 17.55 80 13.11 25.75 24.64 55.30 2 Ainsliaea aptera 7.4 9.76 40 6.56 7 6.70 23.02 3 Geum elatum 7.3 9.63 60 9.84 14.5 13.88 33.34 4 Tanacetum dolichophyllum 0.7 0.92 30 4.92 0.75 0.72 6.56 5 Rhodiola heterodonta 7.7 10.16 40 6.56 9.25 8.85 25.57 6 Anaphalis triplinervis 4 5.28 20 3.28 4 3.83 12.38 7 Taraxacum tibitianum 0.7 0.92 30 4.92 2 1.91 7.76 8 Festuca hartmannii 0.6 0.79 10 1.64 0.25 0.24 2.67 9 Sibbaldia cuneata 12.3 16.23 70 11.48 15 14.35 42.06 10 Chaerophyllum villosum 2.9 3.83 30 4.92 5.5 5.26 14.01 11 Lindelofia longiflora 1.2 1.58 30 4.92 0.75 0.72 7.22 12 Silene edgeworthii 1.3 1.72 10 1.64 0.25 0.24 3.59 13 Anaphalis triplinervis 5.7 7.52 30 4.92 7.75 7.42 19.85

119

S. No. Species Name D RD F RF CC RC IVI 14 Senecio chrysanthemoides 0.3 0.40 10 1.64 0.25 0.24 2.27 15 Rheum webbiana 0.2 0.26 20 3.28 0.5 0.48 4.02 16 Gentiana phylocalyx 0.3 0.40 10 1.64 0.25 0.24 2.27 17 Lentopodium alpinum 2.8 3.69 20 3.28 4 3.83 10.80 18 Potentilla atrosanguinea 2.5 3.30 30 4.92 3.25 3.11 11.33 19 Poa alpina 3.6 4.75 10 1.64 1.5 1.44 7.82 20 Aster falconeri 0.1 0.13 10 1.64 0.25 0.24 2.01 21 Juncus thomsonii 0.6 0.79 10 1.64 0.25 0.24 2.67 22 Lagotis cashmiriana 0.3 0.40 10 1.64 1.5 1.44 3.47 75.8 100 610 100 104.5 100 300

4.16. Bistorta - Potentilla - Sibbaldia Community (Community 11)

4.16.1. Geographical Characteristics

Bistorta - Potentilla –Sibbaldia Community with 29 plant species was established

at Ratti gali. The altitude of area was 3842 m located at 340.83.715 North Latitude and

0740.07.6548 East longitude. Slope was 600-900 with comparatively moist habitat located

at Northern Aspect (Table.3.1).

4.16.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 29 plant species and was dominated by Bistorta affinis

having an IVI value of 53.1 followed by Potentilla nepalensis and Sibbaldia cuneata

having IVI values of 33.0 and 26.8 respectively. Co-dominant species were Rhodiola

heterodonta (24.8), Lagotis cashmiriana (18.0) and Festuca hartmannii (12.3)

(Table.4.13).

120

4.16.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.92 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 2.96. The evenness was found to be 0.66 and richness value was 1.67. The maturity index value was calculated to be 26.55% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.16.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was highly eroded and placed in Class 3 (Heavily eroded). Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2

(Table.4.2).

Table.4.13. Primary phytosociological data of Bistorta - Potentilla - Sibbaldia Community

S.No. Species Name D RD F RF C C RC IVI 1 Potentilla nepalensis 4.4 8.85 60 7.79 14.75 16.43 33.08 2 Ranunculus stewartii 1.6 3.22 40 5.19 0.5 0.56 8.97 3 Bistorta affinis 13 26.16 60 7.79 17.25 19.22 53.17 4 Rhodiola heterodonta 5.9 11.87 40 5.19 7 7.80 24.87 5 Tanacetum dolichophyllum 0.2 0.40 10 1.30 0.25 0.28 1.98 6 Lindelofia stylosa 0.4 0.80 10 1.30 0.25 0.28 2.38 7 Sibbaldia cuneata 4.5 9.05 60 7.79 9 10.03 26.87 8 Pseudomertensia echioides 0.5 1.01 20 2.60 0.5 0.56 4.16 9 Anaphalis triplinervis 0.8 1.61 20 2.60 1.75 1.95 6.16 10 Swertia petiolata 0.2 0.40 20 2.60 1.75 1.95 4.95 11 Parnassia nubicola 0.9 1.81 20 2.60 0.5 0.56 4.97 12 Minuartia uniflora 1.8 3.62 30 3.90 3.25 3.62 11.14 13 Geum elatum 0.5 1.01 30 3.90 3.25 3.62 8.52 14 Bergenia stracheyi 0.9 1.81 20 2.60 3 3.34 7.75 15 Festuca hartmannii. 3.1 6.24 30 3.90 2 2.23 12.36 16 Cheilenthus persica 0.3 0.60 20 2.60 3 3.34 6.54 17 Anaphalis triplinervis 1.5 3.02 30 3.90 0.75 0.84 7.75 18 Tanacetum dolichophyllum 0.5 1.01 30 3.90 0.75 0.84 5.74 19 Lagotis cashmiriana 2.5 5.03 40 5.19 7 7.80 18.02 20 Eurphobia wallichii 0.2 0.40 10 1.30 0.25 0.28 1.98 21 Potentilla nepalensis 1.1 2.21 30 3.90 3.25 3.62 9.73 22 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 0.8 1.61 20 2.60 1.75 1.95 6.16 23 Rheum webbianum 0.1 0.20 10 1.30 0.25 0.28 1.78

121

S.No. Species Name D RD F RF C C RC IVI 24 Bupleurum candollei 0.4 0.80 20 2.60 0.5 0.56 3.96 25 Sedum ewersii 1.2 2.41 20 2.60 3 3.34 8.35 26 Aster falconeri 0.9 1.81 20 2.60 1.75 1.95 6.36 27 Polygonum asplinum 0.2 0.40 10 1.30 0.25 0.28 1.98 28 Plantago major 0.3 0.60 20 2.60 0.5 0.56 3.76 29 Iris lacteal 1 2.01 20 2.60 1.75 1.95 6.56 49.7 100 770 100 89.75 100 300

4.17. Bistorta–Thymus- Corydalis Community (Community 12)

4.17.1. Geographical Characteristics

Bistorta–Thymus- Corydalis Community with 40 plant species was established at

Ratti gali. The altitude of area was 3900 m located at 340.83.9340 North Latitude and

0740.06.4742 East longitude. Slope was 00-300 with comparatively dry habitat located at

Southern Aspect (Table. 3.1).

4.17.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 40 plant species and was dominated by Bistorta affinis having an IVI value of 27.76 followed by Thymus linearis and Corydalis stewartii having

IVI values of 24.16 and 23.12 respectively. Co-dominant species were Geranium himalayense (17.85), Polystichum bakerianum (17.40), and Pennaisetum lanatum (10.61)

(Table.4.14).

4.17.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.95 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.42. The evenness was found to be 0.76 and richness value was 2.31. The maturity index value was calculated to be 19.75% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

122

4.17.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was not eroded and placed in Class 1 (slightly eroded). High grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3

(Table.4.2).

Table.4.14. Primary phytosociological data of Bistorta–Thymus- Corydalis Community

S. No. Species Name D RD F RF CC RC IVI 1 Thymus linearis 3.6 7.392 20 2.53 10 14.23 24.16 2 Astragalus subumbellatus 0.4 0.821 20 2.53 1.75 2.49 5.84 3 Bistorta affinis 6.2 12.731 40 5.06 7 9.96 27.76 4 Geranium himalayens 3.8 7.803 40 5.06 3.5 4.98 17.85 5 Fragaria nubicola 0.1 0.205 10 1.27 1.5 2.14 3.61 6 Potentilla nepalensis 1.4 2.875 20 2.53 1.75 2.49 7.90 7 Swertia petiolata 0.4 0.821 20 2.53 1.75 2.49 5.84 8 Aster falconeri 1.9 3.901 20 2.53 2 2.85 9.28 9 Sedum ewersii 0.4 0.821 20 2.53 0.5 0.71 4.06 10 Leucas lanata 0.4 0.821 20 2.53 0.5 0.71 4.06 11 Polystichum bakerianum 3.6 7.392 20 2.53 5.25 7.47 17.40 12 Phlomis bracteosa 0.3 0.616 10 1.27 1.5 2.14 4.02 13 Taraxacum tibitianum 0.1 0.205 10 1.27 0.25 0.36 1.83 14 Pennaisetum lanatum 2.8 5.749 30 3.80 0.75 1.07 10.61 15 Piptatherum laterale 2.1 4.312 20 2.53 1.75 2.49 9.33 16 Asplenium adiantum nigrum 0.1 0.205 10 1.27 0.25 0.36 1.83 17 Clinopodium vulgare 0.4 0.821 20 2.53 0.5 0.71 4.06 18 Ranunculus stewartii 0.3 0.616 10 1.27 0.25 0.36 2.24 19 Irus hookriana 0.6 1.232 20 2.53 3 4.27 8.03 20 Viola canescens 0.1 0.205 10 1.27 0.25 0.36 1.83 21 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 0.9 1.848 30 3.80 2 2.85 8.49 22 Epilobium parviflorum 1 2.053 30 3.80 0.75 1.07 6.92 23 Mistegium nodosum 0.6 1.232 10 1.27 1.5 2.14 4.63 24 Valeriana jatamansi 0.1 0.205 10 1.27 0.25 0.36 1.83 25 Festuca kashmiriana 1.5 3.080 30 3.80 0.75 1.07 7.95 26 Pleurospermum candollei 0.3 0.616 20 2.53 1.75 2.49 5.64 27 Anaphalis triplinervis 1.7 3.491 20 2.53 3 4.27 10.29 28 Arnebia benthamii 0.7 1.437 20 2.53 1.75 2.49 6.46 29 Aquilegia pubiflora 0.4 0.821 20 2.53 0.5 0.71 4.06 30 Tanacetum dolichophyllum 0.4 0.821 20 2.53 0.5 0.71 4.06 31 Swertia petiolata 0.3 0.616 10 1.27 1.5 2.14 4.02 32 Primula rosea 0.6 1.232 10 1.27 1.5 2.14 4.63 33 Corydalis stewartii 5.5 11.294 40 5.06 4.75 6.76 23.12 34 Polygonatum verticilatum 0.4 0.821 20 2.53 0.5 0.71 4.06

123

S. No. Species Name D RD F RF CC RC IVI 35 Delphinium roylei 0.5 1.027 10 1.27 0 0.00 2.29 36 Aconitum heterophyllum 1.1 2.259 30 3.80 1.5 2.14 8.19 37 Fragaria nubicola 1.3 2.669 10 1.27 0.75 1.07 5.00 38 Rumex nepalensis 0.1 0.205 10 1.27 1.75 2.49 3.96 39 Pleurospermum brunonis 0.4 0.821 20 2.53 0.5 0.71 4.06 40 Allium humile 1.9 3.901 30 3.80 0.75 1.07 8.77 48.7 100 790 100 70.25 100 300

4.18. Juniperus- Rosa- Lonicera Community (Community 13)

4.18.1. Geographical Characteristics

Juniperus- Rosa- Lonicera Community with 42 plant species was established at

Ratti gali. The altitude of area was 3730m located at 340.83.0406 North Latitude and

740.05.6981 East longitude. Slope was 300-600 with comparatively dry habitat located at

Southern Aspect (Table.3.1).

4.18.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 42 plant species and was dominated by Juniperus communis having an IVI value of 35.80 followed by Rosa alpina and Lonicera asperifolia having IVI values of 28.65 and 24.01 respectively. Co-dominant species were Astragalus candolleanus (22.03), Geranium pretense (13.37), and Berberis aitchisonii (12.89)

(Table.4.15).

4.18.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.94 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.31. The evenness was found to be 0.65 and richness value was 2.42. The maturity index value was calculated to be 40.0% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

124

4.18.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2

(Moderately eroded). Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3 (Table.4.2).

Table.4.15. Primary phytosociological data of Juniperus- Rosa- Lonicera Community

S. No. Species Name D RD F RF CC RC IVI 1 Juniperus communis 14.4 8.99 100 5.95 47.5 20.86 35.80 2 Lonicera asperifolia 15.2 9.49 100 5.95 19.5 8.56 24.01 3 Berberis aitchisonii 8.6 5.37 60 3.57 9 3.95 12.89 4 Rosa alpina 25.8 16.11 100 5.95 15 6.59 28.65 5 Ephedra gerardiana 1.2 0.75 40 2.38 6 2.63 5.76 6 Ribes himalense 1.4 0.87 40 2.38 3.5 1.54 4.79 7 Lindelofia longiflora 4.4 2.75 60 3.57 6.5 2.85 9.17 8 Draba cachemirica 0.3 0.19 10 0.60 0.25 0.11 0.89 9 Tanacetum dolichophyllum 4.6 2.87 50 2.98 5 2.20 8.04 10 Potentilla nepalensis 0.9 0.56 20 1.19 3 1.32 3.07 11 Potentilla atrosanguinea 0.6 0.37 10 0.60 1.5 0.66 1.63 12 Leucas lanata goxauianus 1.7 1.06 50 2.98 2.5 1.10 5.14 13 Prunella vulgaris 3.8 2.37 60 3.57 5.25 2.31 8.25 14 Elymus dahuricus 7.4 4.62 50 2.98 5 2.20 9.79 15 Poa nemoralis 8.1 5.06 50 2.98 9.75 4.28 12.32 16 Allium carolinianum 1.1 0.69 30 1.79 2 0.88 3.35 17 Bistorta affinis 3.5 2.19 30 1.79 4.5 1.98 5.95 18 Verbascum thapsus 0.3 0.19 10 0.60 1.5 0.66 1.44 19 Pedicularis pectinata 3.3 2.06 60 3.57 6.5 2.85 8.49 20 Astragalus candolleanus 15.2 9.49 100 5.95 15 6.59 22.03 21 Rumex nepalensis 0.6 0.37 20 1.19 1.75 0.77 2.33 22 Geranium pretense 7.1 4.43 80 4.76 9.5 4.17 13.37 23 Phlomis bracteosa 1.5 0.94 70 4.17 1.75 0.77 5.87 24 Fragaria nubicola 2.5 1.56 20 1.19 3 1.32 4.07 25 Ephedra gerardiana 1.2 0.75 20 1.19 3 1.32 3.26 26 Codonopsis clematidea 0.5 0.31 10 0.60 0.25 0.11 1.02 27 Senecio chrysanthemoides 1.4 0.87 40 2.38 2.25 0.99 4.24 28 Aster falconeri 0.6 0.37 30 1.79 0.75 0.33 2.49 29 Cardus nutans 0.2 0.12 10 0.60 1.5 0.66 1.38 30 Habenaria pectinata 1 0.62 10 0.60 1.75 0.77 1.99 31 Bergenia stracheyi 0.9 0.56 10 0.60 1.5 0.66 1.82 32 Aegopodium alpestre 0.1 0.06 10 0.60 1.5 0.66 1.32 33 Monira longiflora 0.4 0.25 20 1.19 3 1.32 2.76 34 Sedum ewersii 1.6 1.00 30 1.79 2 0.88 3.66

125

S. No. Species Name D RD F RF CC RC IVI 35 Swertia petiolata 4.4 2.75 50 2.98 7.5 3.29 9.02 36 Epilobium parviflorum 1.2 0.75 40 2.38 1 0.44 3.57 37 Iris decora 0.8 0.50 30 1.79 2 0.88 3.16 38 Thymus linearis 5.5 3.44 50 2.98 6.25 2.74 9.16 39 Ranunculus laetus 0.9 0.56 30 1.79 3.25 1.43 3.77 40 Adiantum venustum 0.4 0.25 10 0.60 0.25 0.11 0.95 41 Woodsia alpine 0.9 0.56 20 1.19 0.5 0.22 1.97 42 Sibbaldia cuneata 4.6 2.87 40 2.38 4.75 2.09 7.34 160.1 100 1680 100 227.8 100 300

4.19. Rhododendron - Swertia –Juniperus Community (Community 14)

4.19.1. Geographical Characteristics

Rhododendron-Swertia–Juniperus Community with 32 plant species was established at Ratti Gali. The altitude of area was 3642m located at 34083.4566 North

Latitude and 740 05.2435 East longitude. Slope was 00-300 with comparatively moist habitat lying at Southern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.19.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 32 plant species and was dominated by Rhododendron campanulatum having an IVI value of 66.20 followed by Swertia petiolata and Juniperus exelsa having IVI values of 28.95 and 20.68 respectively. Co-dominant species were

Primula stuartii (19.23), Juncus thomsonii (15.34), and Pedicularis pyramidata (12.30)

(Table. 4.116).

4.19.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.91 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 2.96. The evenness was found to be 0.60 and richness value

126 was 1.85. The maturity index value was calculated to be 26.56% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.19.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2

(Moderatly eroded). Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3 (Table 4.2).

Table.4.16. Primary phytosociological data of Rhododendron - Swertia – Juniperus Community

S. No. Species Name D RD F RF C RC IVI 1 Rhododendron campanulatum 26.4 31.24 60 7.06 46.5 27.89 66.20 2 Salix flablellaris 0.6 0.71 20 2.35 3 1.80 4.86 3 Juniperus excelsa 5.6 6.63 20 2.35 19.5 11.70 20.68 4 Swertia petiolata 11.2 13.25 20 2.35 22.25 13.35 28.95 5 Geum elatum 0.7 0.83 10 1.18 1.5 0.90 2.90 6 Parnassia nubicola 2.4 2.84 50 5.88 3.7515 2.25 10.97 7 Primula denticulate 2 2.37 50 5.88 2.5 1.50 9.75 8 Sibbaldia tetrandra 0.2 0.24 10 1.18 0.25 0.15 1.56 9 Primula stuartii 5.2 6.15 50 5.88 12 7.20 19.23 10 Carex atrosfusca 1.2 1.42 40 4.71 2.25 1.35 7.48 11 Pedicularis pyramidata 2.4 2.84 60 7.06 4 2.40 12.30 12 Caltha alba 0.9 1.07 20 2.35 3 1.80 5.22 13 Rheum webbianum 0.7 0.83 20 2.35 3 1.80 4.98 14 Juncus thomsonii 5.6 6.63 60 7.06 2.75 1.65 15.34 15 Pedicularis pectinata 0.1 0.12 10 1.18 0.25 0.15 1.44 16 Asparagus adscendens 3.1 3.67 40 4.71 3.5 2.10 10.47 17 Carex cardiolepis 0.8 0.95 10 1.18 0.25 0.15 2.27 18 Rhodiola Halayensis 0.3 0.36 10 1.18 1.5 0.90 2.43 19 Aconogonum molle 0.6 0.71 10 1.18 0.25 0.15 2.04 20 Juncus himalensis 0.6 0.71 20 2.35 1.75 1.05 4.11 21 Juncus articulates 2.5 2.96 20 2.35 0.5 0.30 5.61 22 Oxaria dygyna 0.8 0.95 10 1.18 1.5 0.90 3.02 23 Festuca kashmiriana 1.8 2.13 10 1.18 1.5 0.90 4.21 24 Bistorta affinis 1 1.18 50 5.88 5 3.00 10.07 25 Geranium himalayense 1.3 1.54 30 3.53 4.5 2.70 7.77 26 Primula eliptica 1.8 2.13 30 3.53 4.5 2.70 8.36 27 Codonopsis clematidea 1.9 2.25 30 3.53 6 3.60 9.38 28 Sibbaldia cuneata 0.5 0.59 20 2.35 3 1.80 4.74 29 Sa1ix lindleyana 1.4 1.66 30 3.53 2 1.20 6.39

127

S. No. Species Name D RD F RF C RC IVI 30 Iris lactea 0.3 0.36 10 1.18 1.5 0.90 2.43 31 Dryopteris barbigera 0.4 0.47 10 1.18 0.25 0.15 1.80 32 Botrychium matricariifolium 0.2 0.24 10 1.18 0.25 0.15 1.56 84.5 100 850 100 164.3 98.5 298.53

4.20. Rubus - Abies- Picea Community (Community 15)

4.20.1. Geographical Characteristics

Rubus-Abies- Picea Community with 39 plant species was established at Khawaja

Bahak. The altitude of area was 3069 m located at 340.46.972 North Latitude and

0740.06.257 East longitude. Slope was between 00- 300 with comparatively moist habitat lying at Northern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.20.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 39 plant species and was dominated by Rubus fruticosus having an IVI value of 48.30 followed by Abies pindrow and Picea smithiana having IVI values of 41.54 and 29.82 respectively. Co-dominant species were Rosa webbiana (20.38), Fragaria nubicola (14.95) and Poa nemoralis (12.24) (Table. 4.17).

4.20.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.92 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.07. The evenness was found to be 0.55 and richness value was 2.25. The maturity index value was calculated to be 32.82% for the investigated community (Table. 4.2).

4.20.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was not eroded and placed in Class 1 (Not eroded).

Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2 (Table

4.2).

128

Table.4.17. Primary phytosociological data of Rubus - Abies- Picea Community S. No. Species Name D R.D F R.F C.C R.C IVI 1. Abies pindrow 3.6 2.20 100 7.81 61.26 31.53 41.54 2. Picea smithiana 2.4 1.47 80 6.25 42.95 22.10 29.82 3. Betula utilus 1 0.61 60 4.69 3.85 1.98 7.28 4. Rubus fruticosus 67.6 41.32 30 2.34 9 4.63 48.30 5. Rosa webbiana 20.2 12.35 60 4.69 6.5 3.34 20.38 6. Viburnum cotinifolium 4.2 2.57 10 0.78 3 1.54 4.89 7. Berberis jaeschkeana 9.6 5.87 10 0.78 3 1.54 8.19 8. Salix flabellaris 8.6 5.26 10 0.78 7.5 3.86 9.90 9. Skimmea anquetilia 4.6 2.81 20 1.56 1 0.51 4.89 10. Impatiens grandulifera 1.3 0.79 40 3.13 1 0.51 4.43 11. Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 2.2 1.34 50 3.91 2.5 1.29 6.54 12. Anaphalis boisseri 0.4 0.24 10 0.78 0.25 0.13 1.15 13. Aquilegia pubiflora 0.8 0.49 10 0.78 1.5 0.77 2.04 14. Fragaria nubicola 5.8 3.55 90 7.03 8.5 4.37 14.95 15. Valeriana wallichii 0.3 0.18 20 1.56 0.5 0.26 2.00 16. Poa nemoralis 5.4 3.30 70 5.47 6.75 3.47 12.24 17. Agrorstis vernalis 3.5 2.14 60 4.69 4 2.06 8.89 18. Polygonatum verticilatum 1.6 0.98 50 3.91 2.5 1.29 6.17 19. Trillium govanianum 2.3 1.41 30 2.34 2 1.03 4.78 20. Viola canescens 0.3 0.18 20 1.56 0.5 0.26 2.00 21. Solidago virga aurea 1.3 0.79 30 2.34 2 1.03 4.17 22. Bupleurum longicaule 0.1 0.06 10 0.78 0.25 0.13 0.97 23. Artemisia absinthium 1.8 1.10 10 0.78 1.5 0.77 2.65 24. Aster falconeri 0.3 0.18 10 0.78 0.25 0.13 1.09 25. Galium verum 3.1 1.89 60 4.69 5.25 2.70 9.28 26. Habenaria pectinata 0.3 0.18 20 1.56 0.5 0.26 2.00 27. Sambucus wightiana 0.4 0.24 20 1.56 0.5 0.26 2.06 28. Nephrolepis cordifolia 0.7 0.43 10 0.78 1.5 0.77 1.98 29. Polygonatum multiflorum 0.5 0.31 20 1.56 0.5 0.26 2.13 30. Geranium himalayense 3.5 2.14 60 4.69 4 2.06 8.89 31. Sibbaldia cuneata 0.1 0.06 10 0.78 0.25 0.13 0.97 32. Calamintha umbrosa 1.6 0.98 30 2.34 3.25 1.67 4.99 33. Epilobium angustifolium 1.5 0.92 40 3.13 2.25 1.16 5.20 34. Cardamine loxostemonides 0.3 0.18 20 1.56 0.5 0.26 2.00 35. Taraxacum tibetanum 0.3 0.18 20 1.56 0.5 0.26 2.00 36. Cuscuta reflexa 0.3 0.18 20 1.56 0.5 0.26 2.00 37. Lentopodium himalayanum 0.6 0.37 30 2.34 0.75 0.39 3.10 38. Primula denticulate 0.4 0.24 20 1.56 0.5 0.26 2.06 39. Polystichum bakerianum 0.8 0.49 10 0.78 1.5 0.77 2.04 163.6 100 1280 100 194.32 100 300

129

4.21. Pinus- Indigofera -Vibernum Community (Community 16)

4.21.1. Geographical Characteristics

Pinus - Indigofera-Vibernum Community with 43 plant species was established at Khawajaseri forest. The altitude of area was 2700 m located at 340.91.972 North

Latitude and 0740 .06.870 East longitude. Slope was between 00-300 with comparatively dry habitat located at Southern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.21.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 43 plant species and was dominated by Pinus wallichiana having an IVI value of 35.51 followed by Indigofera heterantha and

Viburnum grandiflorum having IVI values of 26.02 and 20.29 respectively. Co-dominant species were Lonicera webbiana (15.32), Asplenium adiantum-nigrum (14.52) and

Sambucus wightiana (10.14) (Table. 4.18).

4.21.3. Diversity and Component

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.95 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.45. The evenness was found to be 0.73 and richness value was 2.48.

The maturity index value was calculated to be 22.32% for the investigated community

(Table 4.2).

4.21.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2

(Moderately eroded). Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2 (Table 4.2).

130

Table.4.18.Primary phytosociological data of Pinus-Indigofera-Viburnum Community

S. No. Species Name D RD F RF CC RC IVI 1. Pinus wallichiana 3.2 4.62 100 10.42 21.57 20.47 35.51 2. Acer caesium 0.6 0.87 40 4.17 1.384 1.31 6.35 3. Sorbaria tomentosa 0.6 0.87 20 2.08 3.5 3.32 6.27 4. Indigofera heterantha 11.2 16.16 40 4.17 6 5.69 26.02 5. Viburnum grandiflorum 9.2 13.28 40 4.17 3 2.85 20.29 6. Lonicera webbiana 7.2 10.39 20 2.08 3 2.85 15.32 7. Nephrolepis cordifolia 1.6 2.31 20 2.08 1.5 1.42 5.82 8. Adiantum pedatum 0.6 0.87 40 4.17 1.3 1.23 6.27 9. Adiantum trichomanes 1.6 2.31 40 4.17 1.1 1.04 7.52 10. Asplenium adiantum nigrum 5.2 7.50 40 4.17 3 2.85 14.52 11. Dryoptaris stewartii 1.4 2.02 30 3.13 3.25 3.08 8.23 12. Asplenium septentrionale 1.1 1.59 10 1.04 0.25 0.24 2.87 13. Artemisia maritima 1.9 2.74 10 1.04 3.75 3.56 7.34 14. Sambucus wightiana 1.9 2.74 30 3.13 4.5 4.27 10.14 15. Onopordun acanthium 0.3 0.43 20 2.08 3 2.85 5.36 16. Cardus edelbergii 0.1 0.14 10 1.04 0.25 0.24 1.42 17. Silene vulgaris 0.9 1.30 30 3.13 2 1.90 6.32 18. Silene gonosperma 1.4 2.02 20 2.08 1.75 1.66 5.76 19. Malvaneglecta 0.6 0.87 10 1.04 1.5 1.42 3.33 20. Atropa acuminate 0.9 1.30 20 2.08 3 2.85 6.23 21. Poa nemoralis 1.6 2.31 40 4.17 1 0.95 7.42 22. Agrorstis vernalis 1.3 1.88 10 1.04 0.25 0.24 3.15 23. Agrorstis stolonifera 1 1.44 10 1.04 1.5 1.42 3.91 24. Gentiana carinata 0.5 0.72 10 1.04 1.5 1.42 3.19 25. Anaphalus nepalensis 1.9 2.74 30 3.13 4.5 4.27 10.14 26. Bupleurum falcatum 0.3 0.43 10 1.04 0.25 0.24 1.71 27. Polygonum amplexicaule 0.1 0.14 10 1.04 0.25 0.24 1.42 28. Thymus linearis 1.4 2.02 20 2.08 3 2.85 6.95 29. Eurphobia wallichii 0.5 0.72 10 1.04 1.5 1.42 3.19 30. Psedomertensia moltkioides 0.4 0.58 20 2.08 0.5 0.47 3.14 31. Phlomis bracteosa 1.3 1.88 10 1.04 1.5 1.42 4.34 32. Verbascum thapsus 0.3 0.43 20 2.08 3 2.85 5.36 33. Plantago lenceolata 0.6 0.87 20 2.08 1.75 1.66 4.61

131

S. No. Species Name D RD F RF CC RC IVI 34. Inula spiraeifolia 0.2 0.29 10 1.04 1.5 1.42 2.75 35. Polygonum aviculare 0.5 0.72 10 1.04 1.5 1.42 3.19 36. Vincetoxicum arnottianum 0.4 0.58 20 2.08 1.75 1.66 4.32 37. Trigonella emodi 0.3 0.43 10 1.04 1.5 1.42 2.90 38. Oxalis corniculata 0.3 0.43 20 2.08 0.5 0.47 2.99 39. Rumex nepalensis 0.9 1.30 20 2.08 3 2.85 6.23 40. Galium boreale 0.6 0.87 10 1.04 0.25 0.24 2.14 41. Barleria cristata 0.3 0.43 10 1.04 1.5 1.42 2.90 42. Dioscoria deltoidea 0.1 0.14 10 1.04 2.75 2.61 3.80 43. Bromus japonicas 3 4.33 30 3.13 2 1.90 9.35 69.3 100 960 100 105.36 100 300

4.22. Juniperus- Aconitum- Agrorstis Community (Community 17)

4.22.1. Geographical Characteristics

Juniperus- Aconitum- Agrorstis Community with 35 plant species was established at Khawaja Top. The altitude of area was 3550 m located at 340.66.989 North Latitude and 0740.08.745 East longitude. Slope was between 300 -600 with comparatively moist habitat located at Northern Aspect (Table.3.1).

4.22.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 35 plant species and was dominated by Juniperus communis having IVI value of 74.65 followed by Aconitum chyasmenthium and Agrorstis vernalis having IVI values of 19.43 and 17.68 respectively. Co-dominant species were

Pedicularis pyramidata (14.24), Bistorta affinis (13.97) and Euphrasia himalayica (11.14)

(Table 4.19).

132

4.22.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.91 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.06. The evenness was found to be 0.61 and richness value was 2.86. The maturity index value was calculated to be 28.85% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.22.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was slightly eroded and placed in Class 1 (slightly eroded). Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2

(Table 4.2).

Table.4.19.Primary phytosociological data of Juniperus- Aconitum- Agrorstis Community

S. No. Species Name D R.D F R.F C R.C.C IVI 1. Juniperus communis 38.4 47.76 100 9.90 15 16.99 74.65 2. Aconitum chyasmenthium 3.9 4.85 50 4.95 8.5 9.63 19.43 3. Aconitum heterophyllum 2.3 2.86 50 4.95 2.5 2.83 10.64 4. Sedum ewersii 0.9 1.12 20 1.98 3 3.40 6.50 5. Delphinium roylei 0.8 1.00 30 2.97 2 2.27 6.23 6. Geranium himalayense 2 2.49 40 3.96 1 1.13 7.58 7. Agrorstis vernalis 5 6.22 70 6.93 4 4.53 17.68 8. Caltha alba 0.7 0.87 20 1.98 3 3.40 6.25 9. Arabis amplexicaulis 0.3 0.37 20 1.98 1.75 1.98 4.34 10. Bistorta affinis 2.7 3.36 30 2.97 6.75 7.64 13.97 11. Trifolium repens 0.7 0.87 30 2.97 0.75 0.85 4.69 12. Pseudomerntensia nemerosa 0.7 0.87 20 1.98 3 3.40 6.25 13. Rohodiola fastigiata 0.4 0.50 20 1.98 1.75 1.98 4.46 14. Nephrolepis cordifolia 0.8 1.00 10 0.99 1.5 1.70 3.68 15. Euphrasia himalayica 2.7 3.36 50 4.95 2.5 2.83 11.14 16. Gentiana algida deprassa 0.9 1.12 30 2.97 2 2.27 6.35 17. Allium humile 0.5 0.62 10 0.99 0.25 0.28 1.90 18. Cardamine macrophylla 3.2 3.98 30 2.97 3.25 3.68 10.63 19. Delphinium roylei 0.2 0.25 20 1.98 0.5 0.57 2.80 20. Anaphalis boisseri 0.8 1.00 20 1.98 3 3.40 6.37 21. Gnephalium affine 1.8 2.24 60 5.94 1.5 1.70 9.88 22. Lentopodium lentopodium 0.6 0.75 20 1.98 0.5 0.57 3.29 23. Clinopodium vulgare 0.3 0.37 10 0.99 0.3 0.34 1.70

133

S. No. Species Name D R.D F R.F C R.C.C IVI 24. Taraxacum tibitianum 0.5 0.62 30 2.97 0.75 0.85 4.44 25. Lagotis cashmeriana 0.5 0.62 20 1.98 1.75 1.98 4.58 26. Primula denticulate 0.6 0.75 20 1.98 3 3.40 6.12 27. Psedomertensia moltkioides 2.2 2.74 30 2.97 2 2.27 7.97 28. Inula royleana 0.1 0.12 10 0.99 0.25 0.28 1.40 29. Phlomis bracteosa 0.4 0.50 20 1.98 0.5 0.57 3.04 30. Astragalus grahamianus 0.4 0.50 20 1.98 1.75 1.98 4.46 31. Pedicularis pyramidata 2.8 3.48 40 3.96 6 6.80 14.24 32. Swertia speciosa 0.4 0.50 20 1.98 0.5 0.57 3.04 33. Blysmus compressus 0.4 0.50 10 0.99 0.25 0.28 1.77 34. Iris hookariana 0.6 0.75 10 0.99 1.5 1.70 3.44 35. Aconogonum alpiunm 0.9 1.12 20 1.98 1.75 1.98 5.08 80.4 100.0 1010 100.0 88.3 100.0 300.0

4.23. Betula - Salix - Juniperus Community (Community 18)

4.23.1. Geographical Characteristics

Betula - Salix –Juniperus Community with 27 plant species was established at

Burjali Bahak. The altitude of area was 3323 m located at 340.46.889 North Latitude and

0740.05.945 East longitude. Slope was between 00 -300 with comparatively moist habitat located at Western Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.23.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 27 plant species and was dominated by Betula utilus having an IVI value of 70.80 followed by Salix flablellaris and Juniperus communis having IVI values of 39.18 and 37.39 respectively. Co-dominant species were Artemisia absinthium (30.23), Lonicera webbiana (19.32) and Anaphalis boisseri (13.53) (Table

4.20).

134

4.24.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.89 whereas the Shannon’s

diversity was calculated as 2.65. The evenness was found to be 0.52 and richness value

was 1.58. The maturity index value was calculated to be 22.22% for the investigated

community (Table 4.2).

4.24.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class two

(Moderately eroded). Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified

as class 3 (Table 4.2).

Table.4.20.Primary phytosociological data of Betula - Salix - Juniperus Community

S.No. Species Name D RD F R.F C RCC IVI 1. Betula utilus 4.4 3.918 100 16.67 71.88 50.22 70.80 2. Salix flablellaris 31.8 28.317 40 6.67 6 4.19 39.18 3. Juniperus communis 29.8 26.536 40 6.67 6 4.19 37.39 4. Lonicera webbiana 15.6 13.891 20 3.33 3 2.10 19.32 5. Rosa webbiana 3.9 3.473 10 1.67 0.5 0.35 5.49 6. Eurphobia wallichii 0.6 0.534 20 3.33 4.0 2.79 6.66 7. Poa alpina 3.4 3.028 30 5.00 3.3 2.27 10.30 8. Urtica hyperborean 0.6 0.534 10 1.67 1.5 1.05 3.25 9. Anaphalis boisseri 3.2 2.850 40 6.67 5.8 4.02 13.53 10. Chenopodium album 0.4 0.356 20 3.33 1.8 1.22 4.91 11. Polygonum cognatum 0.5 0.445 10 1.67 0.3 0.17 2.29 12. Polygonumparonychioides 0.7 0.623 20 3.33 1.8 1.22 5.18 13. Artemisia absinthium 8.6 7.658 60 10.00 18.0 12.58 30.23 14. Poa annua 0.8 0.712 10 1.67 1.5 1.05 3.43 15. Sibbaldia cuneata 0.3 0.267 10 1.67 1.5 1.05 2.98 16. Athyrium filix-femina 0.5 0.445 10 1.67 1.5 1.05 3.16 17. Cystopteris dickieana 0.9 0.801 10 1.67 1.5 1.05 3.52 18. Polystichum castaneum 1.1 0.980 10 1.67 1.5 1.05 3.69 19. Pronella vulgaris 0.6 0.534 30 5.00 0.8 0.52 6.06 20. Veronica polita 0.9 0.801 10 1.67 1.5 1.05 3.52 21. Thlaspi perfoliatum 0.4 0.356 10 1.67 1.5 1.05 3.07 22. Taraxacum obovatum 0.7 0.623 20 3.33 3.0 2.10 6.05 23. Bistorta amplexicaule 0.9 0.801 20 3.33 3.0 2.10 6.23

135

S.No. Species Name D RD F R.F C RCC IVI 24. Impatiens grandulifera 0.3 0.267 10 1.67 0.3 0.17 2.11 25. Cardamine hirsute 0.6 0.534 10 1.67 1.5 1.05 3.25 26. Erysimum melicentae 0.3 0.267 10 1.67 0.3 0.17 2.11 27. Delphinium vestitum 0.5 0.445 10 1.67 0.3 0.17 2.29 112.3 100.000 600 100.00 143.13 100.00 300.00

4.25. Betula -Lonicera- Juniperus Community (Community 19)

4.25.1. Geographical Characteristics

Betula–Lonicera–Juniperus Community with 36 plant species was established in

Kilwan Bahak of Khawajaseri. The altitude of area was 3400 m located at 340 80.889

North Latitude and 0740.08.784 East longitude. Slope was between 300- 600 with

comparatively dry habitat lying at Northern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.25.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 36 plant species and was dominated by Betula utilus

shaving an IVI value of 39.35 followed by Lonicera webbiana and Juniperus communis

having IVI values of 37.12 and 30.39 respectively. Co-dominant species were Anaphalis

boisseri of (20.81), Thymus linearis (12.82) and Euphrasia himalayica (10.93) (Table

4.21).

4.25.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.93 whereas the Shannon’s

diversity was calculated as 3.16. The evenness was found to be 0.65 and richness value

was 2.07. The maturity index value was calculated to be 25.55% for the investigated

community (Table 4.2).

136

4.25.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2. Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3 (Table 4.2).

Table.4.21. Primary phytosociological data of Betula - Lonicera - Juniperus Community

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF CC R.C IVI 1. Betula utilus 3 2.85 100 10.87 35.21 25.62 39.35 2. Pinus wallichiana 0.6 0.57 40 4.35 0.704 0.51 5.43 3. Juniperus communis 22.8 21.67 40 4.35 6 4.37 30.39 4. Lonicera webbiana 31.8 30.23 40 4.35 3.5 2.55 37.12 5. Rosa webbiana 7.2 6.84 20 2.17 0.5 0.36 9.38 6. Viburnum cotinifolium 3.8 3.61 20 2.17 3 2.18 7.97 7. Anaphalis boisseri 6.8 6.46 50 5.43 12.25 8.91 20.81 8. Euphrasia himalayica 2.9 2.76 30 3.26 6.75 4.91 10.93 9. Epilobium angustifolium 0.6 0.57 20 2.17 0.5 0.36 3.11 10. Gentiana algida 1.7 1.62 30 3.26 4.75 3.46 8.33 11. Pleurospermum brunonis 0.3 0.29 10 1.09 3.75 2.73 4.10 12. Rheum australe 0.3 0.29 10 1.09 6.25 4.55 5.92 13. Chaerophyllum capnoides 0.3 0.29 10 1.09 1.5 1.09 2.46 14. Inula grandiflora 0.3 0.29 10 1.09 0.5 0.36 1.74 15. Polygonum amplexicaule 1 0.95 40 4.35 4.75 3.46 8.76 16. Fragaria nubicola 1 0.95 40 4.35 3.25 2.37 7.66 17. Potentilla monanthes 1 0.95 40 4.35 7.25 5.28 10.57 18. Dryopteris thalipteris 0.8 0.76 10 1.09 1.5 1.09 2.94 19. Prunella vulgaris 0.8 0.76 10 1.09 0.75 0.55 2.39 20. Thymus linearis 2.6 2.47 40 4.35 8.25 6.00 12.82 21. Oxitropis lapponica 0.7 0.67 30 3.26 3.25 2.37 6.29 22. Nephrolepis cordifolia 0.6 0.57 10 1.09 1.5 1.09 2.75 23. Asplenium septentrionale 1.8 1.71 20 2.17 1.75 1.27 5.16 24. Bistorta affinis 1.9 1.81 20 2.17 3 2.18 6.16 25. Phlomis bracteosa 0.9 0.86 30 3.26 0.75 0.55 4.66 26. Solidago virga aurea 0.4 0.38 20 2.17 0.5 0.36 2.92 27. Primula denticulate 0.3 0.29 20 2.17 1.75 1.27 3.73 28. Artemisia absinthium 0.7 0.67 20 2.17 3 2.18 5.02 29. Eurphobia wallichii 0.4 0.38 10 1.09 0.25 0.18 1.65 30. Aquilegia pubiflora 0.3 0.29 10 1.09 0.25 0.18 1.55 31. Caltha alba 1.2 1.14 30 3.26 3.25 2.37 6.77 32. Sedum ewersii 0.8 0.76 20 2.17 1.75 1.27 4.21 33. Rosularia adenotricha 0.1 0.10 10 1.09 0.25 0.18 1.36 34. Pedicularis oederi 0.4 0.38 10 1.09 1.5 1.09 2.56 35. Festuca kashmiriana 3.2 3.04 40 4.35 2.25 1.64 9.03 36. Piptatherum gracile 1.9 1.81 10 1.09 1.5 1.09 3.98 105.2 100.00 920 100.00 137.415 100.00 300

137

4.26. Artemisia- Abies- Betula Community (Community 20)

4.26.1. Geographical Characteristics

Artemisia- Abies- Betula Community with 30 plant species was established at

Khawaja Seri Hill in South of Muzaffarabad. The altitude of area was 3165 m located at

340.46.936 North Latitude and 0740.06.113 East longitude. Slope was between 300- 600 with comparatively dry habitat located at Northern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.3.3.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 30 plant species and was dominated by Artemisia absinthium having an IVI value of 28.91 followed by Abies pindrow and Betula utilus having IVI values of 27.24 and 20.23 respectively. Co-dominant species were Salix flablellaris of (19.45), Berberis jaeschkeana (18.30) and Rosa webbiana (17.45) (Table

4.22).

4.26.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.94 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.13. The evenness was found to be 0.76 and richness value was 1.73. The maturity index value was calculated to be 32.33% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.26.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was heavily eroded and placed in Class 3 (highly eroded). Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3

(Table 4.2).

138

Table.4.22. Primary phytosociological data of Artemissia- Abies- Betula Community

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C RC IVI 1. Betula utilus 2 1.64 80 8.25 14.42 10.35 20.23 2. Abies pindrow 1.6 1.31 60 6.19 27.52 19.75 27.24 3. Pinus wallichiana 1.8 1.47 60 6.19 9.08 6.52 14.18 4. Picea smithiana 0.2 0.16 20 2.06 0.34 0.25 2.47 5. Viburnum nervosum 9 7.37 40 4.12 3.50 2.51 14.01 6. Rosa webbiana 15.4 12.61 40 4.12 1.00 0.72 17.45 7. Lonicera webbiana 11.6 9.50 40 4.12 3.50 2.51 16.14 8. Rubus fruticosus 6 4.91 60 6.19 6.50 4.66 15.76 9. Berberis jaeschkeana 17.2 14.09 20 2.06 3.00 2.15 18.30 10. Juniperus communis 9.2 7.53 20 2.06 3.00 2.15 11.75 11. Salix flablellaris 18.6 15.23 20 2.06 3.00 2.15 19.45 12. Artemisia absinthium 9.9 8.11 80 8.25 17.50 12.56 28.91 13. Dryopteris blanfordii 2.6 2.13 40 4.12 3.50 2.51 8.76 14. Pseudomertensia echioides 1.3 1.06 10 1.03 3.00 2.15 4.25 15. Rumex nepalensis 0.7 0.57 30 3.09 3.25 2.33 6.00 16. Polygonum cognatum 1.6 1.31 20 2.06 3.00 2.15 5.52 17. Sibbaldia cuneata 1.7 1.39 30 3.09 3.25 2.33 6.82 18. Urtica hyperborea 0.3 0.25 10 1.03 1.50 1.08 2.35 19. Thalictrum alpinum 0.3 0.25 20 2.06 1.75 1.26 3.56 20. Dryopteris stewartii 1.2 0.98 20 2.06 3.00 2.15 5.20 21. Eurphrobia wallichii 0.5 0.41 10 1.03 1.50 1.08 2.52 22. Pseudomertensia echioides 0.4 0.33 20 2.06 0.50 0.36 2.75 23. Prunella vulgaris 1 0.82 30 3.09 0.75 0.54 4.45 24. Nepeta podostachys 0.4 0.33 20 2.06 1.75 1.26 3.65 25. Nephrolepis cordifolia 1.1 0.90 10 1.03 3.75 2.69 4.62 26. Fragaria nubicola 1.7 1.39 60 6.19 6.50 4.66 12.24 27. Aconogonum molle 2.8 2.29 30 3.09 4.50 3.23 8.62 28. Solidago virga aurea 0.6 0.49 20 2.06 0.50 0.36 2.91 29. Rumex acetosa 0.2 0.16 10 1.03 0.25 0.18 1.37 30. Agrimonia eupatoria 1.2 0.98 40 4.12 4.75 3.41 8.51 122.1 100 970 100 139.36 100 300

4.27. Pinus - Berberis -Lonicera Community (Community 21)

4.27.1. Geographical Characteristics

Pinus - Berberis – Lonicera Community with 59 plant species was established at

Bahak Kilwan of Khawajaseri.The altitude of area was 3070m located at 340.46.936

139

North Latitude and 0740.06.113 East longitude. Slope was between 300-600 with comparatively dry habitat and lying atSouthern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.27.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 59 plant species and was dominated by Pinus wallichiana having an IVI value of 39.29 followed by Berberis jaeschkeana and Lonicera webbiana having IVI values of 30.38 and 27.12 respectively. Co-dominant species were

Indigofera himalayensis (25.09), Viburnum nervosum (15.15), and Juniperus communis

(14.13) (Table 4.23).

4.27.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.94 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.42. The evenness was found to be 0.52 and richness value was 3.40. The maturity index value was calculated to be 21.86% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.27.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2 (Moderately eroded). Low grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2 (Table 4.2).

Table.4.23. Primary phytosociological data of Pinus-Berberis -Lonicera Community

S.No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 1 Pinus wallichiana 2.4 100 107.23 2.27 7.75 29.27 39.29 2 Juniperus communis 8.4 20 17.00 7.94 1.55 4.64 14.13 3 Berberis jaeschkeana 17.6 40 39.00 16.64 3.10 10.65 30.38 4 Lonicera webbiana 16.2 40 31.90 15.31 3.10 8.71 27.12 5 Rosa webbiana 4.4 40 10.50 4.16 3.10 2.87 10.13 6 Indegofera himalayensis 12 40 39.00 11.34 3.10 10.65 25.09 7 Viburnum nervosum 3.8 40 31.00 3.59 3.10 8.46 15.15 8 Rumex nepalensis 0.9 30 4.50 0.85 2.33 1.23 4.40

140

S.No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 9 Plantago major 0.7 30 3.25 0.66 2.33 0.89 3.87 10 Plantago lanciolata 0.8 30 3.25 0.76 2.33 0.89 3.97 11 Urtia dioica 0.6 10 1.50 0.57 0.78 0.41 1.75 12 Lychnis coronaria 0.2 10 1.50 0.19 0.78 0.41 1.37 13 Asplenum adiantum nigrum 0.8 10 1.50 0.76 0.78 0.41 1.94 14 Adiantum capillus veneris 0.4 10 1.50 0.38 0.78 0.41 1.56 15 Polygonum cognatum 3.1 40 6.00 2.93 3.10 1.64 7.67 16 Polygonatum verticilatum 3.4 50 2.50 3.21 3.88 0.68 7.77 17 Capsilla bursa pestoris 1.9 40 4.70 1.80 3.10 1.28 6.18 18 Asplenium fontanum 0.1 10 0.25 0.09 0.78 0.07 0.94 19 Oxyria digyna 0.4 10 1.50 0.38 0.78 0.41 1.56 20 Malva parviflora 1 20 3.00 0.95 1.55 0.82 3.31 21 Nephrolepis cordifolia 0.8 10 1.50 0.76 0.78 0.41 1.94 22 Sambucus wightiana 0.2 10 1.50 0.19 0.78 0.41 1.37 23 Parnasia nubicola 0.3 10 0.25 0.28 0.78 0.07 1.13 24 Iris decora 1.1 20 3.00 1.04 1.55 0.82 3.41 25 Dryopteris flix-mass 1.3 10 1.50 1.23 0.78 0.41 2.41 26 Impatiens grandulifera 1.2 30 4.50 1.13 2.33 1.23 4.69 27 Anaphalis boisseri 1.00 20 3.00 0.95 1.55 0.82 3.31 28 Cynoglossum lanceolatum 0.70 20 1.00 0.66 1.55 0.27 2.48 29 Lentopodium alpinum 1.10 30 4.50 1.04 2.33 1.23 4.59 30 Taraxacum tibitianum 0.10 10 0.25 0.09 0.78 0.07 0.94 31 Ainsliaea latifolia 1.10 10 0.25 1.04 0.78 0.07 1.88 32 Thlaspi kotscbyanum 0.50 20 1.75 0.47 1.55 0.48 2.50 33 Festuca kashmiriana 1.30 20 0.50 1.23 1.55 0.14 2.92 34 Piptatherum gracile 3.70 40 3.50 3.50 3.10 0.96 7.55 35 Viola canescens 0.10 10 0.25 0.09 0.78 0.07 0.94 36 Valeriana jatamansi 0.50 20 3.00 0.47 1.55 0.82 2.84 37 Artemisia absinthium 0.30 10 1.50 0.28 0.78 0.41 1.47 38 Sibbaldia purpurea 0.90 30 4.50 0.85 2.33 1.23 4.40 39 Pseudomertensia echioides 0.10 10 0.25 0.09 0.78 0.07 0.94 40 Clinopodium vulgare 0.60 30 0.75 0.57 2.33 0.20 3.10 41 Campanula aristata 0.70 20 0.50 0.66 1.55 0.14 2.35 42 Thymus linearis 0.40 10 1.50 0.38 0.78 0.41 1.56 43 Crepis sancta 0.30 20 1.75 0.28 1.55 0.48 2.31 44 Onopordum acanthium 0.10 10 1.5 0.09 0.78 0.41 1.28 45 Ajugaparviflora 0.10 10 0.25 0.09 0.78 0.07 0.94 46 Prunella vulgaris 0.60 30 0.75 0.57 2.33 0.20 3.10 47 Eurphobia wallichii 0.30 10 0.25 0.28 0.78 0.07 1.13 48 Poa alpina 2.70 30 2.00 2.55 2.33 0.55 5.42 49 Minuartia uniflora 0.40 10 1.50 0.38 0.78 0.41 1.56 50 Colutea multiflora 0.60 20 3.00 0.57 1.55 0.82 2.94 51 Sedum ewersii 0.30 10 0.25 0.28 0.78 0.07 1.13

141

S.No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 52 Phlomis bracteosa 0.80 20 0.50 0.76 1.55 0.14 2.44 53 Juncus membranaceus 0.40 10 0.25 0.38 0.78 0.07 1.22 54 Juncus articulates 0.50 10 0.25 0.47 0.78 0.07 1.32 55 Bergenia ciliata 0.20 10 1.50 0.19 0.78 0.41 1.37 56 Hypericum perforatum 0.10 10 0.25 0.09 0.78 0.07 0.94 57 Trifolium pretense 0.90 30 1.75 0.85 2.33 0.48 3.65 58 Trifolium repens 0.30 20 0.50 0.28 1.55 0.14 1.97 59 Verbascum thapsus 0.10 10 0.25 0.09 0.78 0.07 0.94 105.8 1290 366.33 100 100 100 300

4.28. Abies – Berberis – Viburnum Community (Community 22)

4.28.1. Geographical Characteristics

Abies–Berberis–Viburnum Community with 51 plant species was established at

Burjali Forest of Khawajaseri in west of Sharda. The altitude of area was 3040 m located at 340.44.789 North Latitude and 074006.965 East longitudes. Slope was between 00 -300 with comparatively moist habitat located at Eestern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.28.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 51 plant species and was dominated by Abies pindrow having an IVI value of 38.36 followed by Berberis jaeschkeana and Viburnum nervosa having IVI values of 27.99 and 19.17 respectively. Co-dominant species were having IVI values Rosa webbiana (18.06), Cotoneaster affinis (12.60) and Salix flablellaris (12.43)

(Table 4.24).

4.28.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.95 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.47. The evenness was found to be 0.63 and richness value

142 was 2.94. The maturity index value was calculated to be 25.49% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.28.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was not eroded and placed in Class one (not eroded).

Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3 (Table 4.2).

Table.4.24.Primary phytosociological data of Abies – Berberis–Viburnum Community

S.No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 1 Pinus wallichiana 0.60 40 3.63 0.50 3.08 0.76 4.34 2 Picea smithiana 1.20 60 19.22 1.00 4.62 4.03 9.64 3 Abies pindrow 1.60 80 147.60 1.33 6.15 30.98 38.46 4 Acer caesium 0.60 10 1.21 0.50 0.77 0.25 1.52 5 Prunus cornuta 0.40 10 0.33 0.33 0.77 0.07 1.17 6 Indegofera himalayensis 6.60 20 19.50 5.47 1.54 4.09 11.10 7 Berberis jaeschkeana 20.80 40 36.50 17.25 3.08 7.66 27.99 8 Rosa webbiana 10.60 40 29.50 8.79 3.08 6.19 18.06 9 Viburnum nervosum 10.80 40 34.00 8.96 3.08 7.14 19.17 10 Cotoneaster affinis 8.40 20 19.50 6.97 1.54 4.09 12.60 11 Lonicera myrtillus 3.60 20 19.50 2.99 1.54 4.09 8.62 12 Juniperous communis 6.20 20 19.50 5.14 1.54 4.09 10.77 13 Salix flabellaris 8.20 20 19.50 6.80 1.54 4.09 12.43 14 Ephedra girardiana 2.80 20 17.00 2.32 1.54 3.57 7.43 15 Drypteris redactopinnata 1.70 30 2.00 1.41 2.31 0.42 4.14 16 Diplazium maximum 1.30 20 3.00 1.08 1.54 0.63 3.25 17 Astragalus oplites 0.90 20 5.25 0.75 1.54 1.10 3.39 18 Astragalus rhizanthus 0.70 20 3.00 0.58 1.54 0.63 2.75 19 Thymus linearis 1.30 30 5.50 1.08 2.31 1.15 4.54 20 Sambucus wightiana 2.90 10 1.50 2.40 0.77 0.31 3.49 21 Dryopteris stewertii 0.30 30 11.25 0.25 2.31 2.36 4.92 22 Taraxacum tibeticum 0.30 10 1.50 0.25 0.77 0.31 1.33 23 Arabis amplexicaulis 0.30 10 1.50 0.25 0.77 0.31 1.33 24 Arnebia euchroma 1.10 20 5.25 0.91 1.54 1.10 3.55 25 Festuca kashmiriana 4.70 60 2.75 3.90 4.62 0.58 9.09 26 Poa bacteriana 2.90 30 0.75 2.40 2.31 0.16 4.87 27 Poa nemoralis 1.90 20 1.70 1.58 1.54 0.36 3.47 28 Habenaria pectinata 0.30 20 0.50 0.25 1.54 0.10 1.89 29 Swertia cuneata 1.30 20 1.75 1.08 1.54 0.37 2.98 30 Adiantum trichomanes 0.70 20 3.00 0.58 1.54 0.63 2.75 31 Polygonum amplexicaulis 1.40 30 4.50 1.16 2.31 0.94 4.41

143

S.No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 32 Anaphalis boisseri 1.70 30 3.25 1.41 2.31 0.68 4.40 33 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 0.40 20 1.75 0.33 1.54 0.37 2.24 34 Aquilegia nivalis 0.50 20 0.50 0.41 1.54 0.10 2.06 35 Artemisia absinthium 0.90 10 1.50 0.75 0.77 0.31 1.83 36 Aster falconeri 0.70 20 1.75 0.58 1.54 0.37 2.49 37 Senecio chrysanthemoides 1.30 30 2.00 1.08 2.31 0.42 3.81 38 Sibbaldia purpurea 0.80 30 3.25 0.66 2.31 0.68 3.65 39 Pseudomertensia echioides 0.50 20 0.50 0.41 1.54 0.10 2.06 40 Cynoglossum lanceolatum 0.40 20 0.50 0.33 1.54 0.10 1.98 41 Fragaria nubicola 1.30 60 6.50 1.08 4.62 1.36 7.06 42 Cardamine hirsute 0.20 10 0.25 0.17 0.77 0.05 0.99 43 Inula hookeri 1.90 30 3.25 1.58 2.31 0.68 4.57 44 Inula grandiflora 0.90 40 3.50 0.75 3.08 0.73 4.56 45 Oxalis corniculata 0.10 10 0.25 0.08 0.77 0.05 0.90 46 Arisaema nepanthoides 0.50 20 0.50 0.41 1.54 0.10 2.06 47 Bergenia ciliata 0.20 10 1.50 0.17 0.77 0.31 1.25 48 Hypericum perforatum 0.70 30 0.75 0.58 2.31 0.16 3.05 49 Dipsacus inermis 0.50 20 1.75 0.41 1.54 0.37 2.32 50 Polygonum alpinum 0.60 20 1.75 0.50 1.54 0.37 2.40 51 Verbascum thapsus 0.10 10 0.25 0.08 0.77 0.05 0.90 120.6 1300 476.4 100 100 100 300

4.29. Abies - Picea –Juniperus Community (Community 23)

4.29.1. Geographical Characteristics

Abies - Picea – Juniperus Community with 47 plant species was established in

Baboon Valley at the base of Chiria Bahk 27 km away from Tehsil .The altitude of area was 2984 m located at 340.42.160 North Latitude and 0730.50.690 East longitude. Slope was between 00 -300 with comparatively dry and wet mix habitat lying at

Northern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.29.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 47 plant species and was dominated by Abies pindrow having an IVI value of 62.09 followed by Picea smithiana and Juniperus communis

144 having IVI values of 22.35 and 17.92 respectively. Co-dominant species were Dryopteris filix-mass of (15.94), Indigofera himalayensis (15.75) and Salix flablellaris (12.21) (Table

4.25).

4.29.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.93 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.23. The evenness was found to be 0.54 and richness value was 2.71. The maturity index value was calculated to be 22.97% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.29.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2

(Moderatly eroded). Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3 (Table 4.2).

Table.4.25. Primary phytosociological data of Abies – Picea- Juniperus Community

Sr.No. Species Name D F C RD RF RCC IVI 1. Abies pindrow 2 80 149.36 2.11 7.41 52.57 62.09 2. Pinus wallichiana 1.2 40 11.82 1.27 3.70 4.16 9.13 3. Picea smithiana 1.4 40 48.78 1.48 3.70 17.17 22.35 4. Acer caesium 0.2 20 2.03 0.21 1.85 0.71 2.78 5. Betula utilus 0.8 20 2.96 0.85 1.85 1.04 3.74 6. Taxus wallichiana 0.6 20 0.9 0.63 1.85 0.32 2.80 7. Indigofera himalayense 9.4 40 6 9.94 3.70 2.11 15.75 8. Juniperous communis 14.2 20 3 15.01 1.85 1.06 17.92 9. Rosa webbiana 9 20 0.5 9.51 1.85 0.18 11.54 10. Berberis jaeschkeana 7.4 40 1 7.82 3.70 0.35 11.88 11. Rhododendron anthopogon 1.8 20 0.5 1.90 1.85 0.18 3.93 12. Spiraea bella 3 20 0.5 3.17 1.85 0.18 5.20 13. Salix flablellaris 8.8 20 3 9.30 1.85 1.06 12.21 14. Dryopteris filix-mas 8.2 50 7.5 8.67 4.63 2.64 15.94 15. Viola canescens 0.7 40 1 0.74 3.70 0.35 4.80 16. Eurphobia wallichii 1.5 40 1 1.59 3.70 0.35 5.64 17. Pseudomertensia echioides 0.2 10 0.25 0.21 0.93 0.09 1.23

145

Sr.No. Species Name D F C RD RF RCC IVI 18. Sambucus wightiana 0.8 20 3 0.85 1.85 1.06 3.75 19. Impatiens bicolor 0.8 20 0.5 0.85 1.85 0.18 2.87 20. Thymus linearis 2.8 30 4.05 2.96 2.78 1.43 7.16 21. Calamagrostis epigejos 3.9 60 2.75 4.12 5.56 0.97 10.65 22. Polygonum amplexicaule\ 0.8 20 3 0.85 1.85 1.06 3.75 23. Botrychium lunaria 0.3 10 0.25 0.32 0.93 0.09 1.33 24. Viola canescens 0.3 10 1.5 0.32 0.93 0.53 1.77 25. Poa annua 2.4 60 1.5 2.54 5.56 0.53 8.62 26. Fragaria nubicola 1.7 40 4.75 1.80 3.70 1.67 7.17 27. Rumex nepalensis 0.1 10 1.5 0.11 0.93 0.53 1.56 28. Plantago alpina 0.2 10 0.25 0.21 0.93 0.09 1.23 29. Plantago major 0.3 20 1.75 0.32 1.85 0.62 2.78 30. Trifolium repens 0.3 20 0.5 0.32 1.85 0.18 2.34 31. Achillea millefolium 0.1 10 0.25 0.11 0.93 0.09 1.12 32. Oxyria digyna 0.3 10 1.5 0.32 0.93 0.53 1.77 33. Polygonum cognatum 0.4 20 1.75 0.42 1.85 0.62 2.89 34. Anaphalis nepalensis 2.9 20 4 3.07 1.85 1.41 6.33 35. Erysimum melicentae 0.1 10 1.5 0.11 0.93 0.53 1.56 36. Ligularia amplexicaulia 0.5 20 0.5 0.53 1.85 0.18 2.56 37. Dryopteris wallichianum 0.1 10 0.25 0.11 0.93 0.09 1.12 38. Phleum alpinum 0.5 10 0.25 0.53 0.93 0.09 1.54 39. Prunella vulgaris 0.3 10 0.25 0.32 0.93 0.09 1.33 40. Valeriana jatamansi 0.3 10 1.5 0.32 0.93 0.53 1.77 41. Rheum tibeticum 0.2 10 1.5 0.21 0.93 0.53 1.67 42. Bergenia purpurrascens 0.3 10 1.5 0.32 0.93 0.53 1.77 43. Artemisia absinthium 1.8 20 1.75 1.90 1.85 0.62 4.37 44. Bupleurum falcatum 0.3 10 0.25 0.32 0.93 0.09 1.33 45. Solidago verga aurea 0.2 10 0.2 0.21 0.93 0.07 1.21 46. Origanum vulgare 1.1 10 1.5 1.16 0.93 0.53 2.62 47. Corduus nutans 0.1 10 0.25 0.11 0.93 0.09 1.12 94.6 1080 284.10 100 100 100 300

4.30. Abies -Rosa - Viburnum Community (Community 24)

4.30.1. Geographical Characteristics

Abies – Rosa – Viburnum Community with 36 plant species was established in

Baboon Valley at Chiria Bahk 28 km away from Tehsil Athmuqam. The altitude of area was 3112 m located at 340.41.906 North Latitude and 0730.50.534 East longitude. Slope

146 was between 00 -300 with comparatively and wet habitat located ata mixture of

Northern/Southern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.30.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 36 plant species and was dominated by Abies pindrow having an IVI value of 77.77 followed by Rosa webbiana and Viburnum nervosum having

IVI values of 17.94 and 17.47 respectively. Co-dominant species were Picea smithiana of

(15.79), Pteridium equilinum (12.95) and Cotoneaster bacillaris (12.30) (Table 4.26).

4.30.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.90 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.02. The evenness was found to be 0.56 and richness value was 2.07. The maturity index value was calculated to be 34.72% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.30.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2. Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3 (Table 4.2).

Table.4.26. Primary phytosociological data of Abies - Rosa - Viburnum Community

Sr.No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 1 Abies pindrow 3.4 100 414.80 6.56 8.00 63.21 77.77 2 Prunus padus 1.2 60 12.92 2.32 4.80 1.97 9.09 3 Batula utilis 1 40 5.42 1.93 3.20 0.83 5.96 4 Pinus wallichiana 0.2 20 0.35 0.39 1.60 0.05 2.04 5 Acer caesium 1 60 11.52 1.93 4.80 1.76 8.49 6 Picea smithiana 1.6 60 51.82 3.09 4.80 7.90 15.79 7 Viburnum nervosum 2.9 60 46.4 5.60 4.80 7.07 17.47 8 Rosa webbiana 5.7 40 24.5 11.00 3.20 3.73 17.94 9 Cotoneaster bacillaris 4.2 20 17 8.11 1.60 2.59 12.30 10 Pteridium equilinum 3 70 10.25 5.79 5.60 1.56 12.95 11 Sambucus wightiana 1.5 50 8.5 2.90 4.00 1.30 8.19

147

S. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI No. 12 Ligularia amplexicaulia 1 40 1 1.93 3.20 0.15 5.28 13 Rumex nepalensis 0.5 30 3.25 0.97 2.40 0.50 3.86 14 Anaphalis boisseri 1.3 30 3.25 2.51 2.40 0.50 5.40 15 Pseudomertensia echioides 0.8 30 3.25 1.54 2.40 0.50 4.44 16 Cynoglossum lanceolatum 1.1 20 3 2.12 1.60 0.46 4.18 17 Fragaria nubicola 1.2 40 4.75 2.32 3.20 0.72 6.24 18 Festuca kashmiriana 3.3 60 2.75 6.37 4.80 0.42 11.59 19 Piptatherum gracile 3.3 40 3.5 6.37 3.20 0.53 10.10 20 Poa nemoralis 0.1 10 1.5 0.19 0.80 0.23 1.22 21 Origanum vulgare 3.1 40 3.5 5.98 3.20 0.53 9.72 22 Polygonum cognatum 1.6 20 0.5 3.09 1.60 0.08 4.76 23 Lindelofia Lindelofia 1.4 20 5.25 2.70 1.60 0.80 5.10 24 Sibbaldia purpurea 1.1 40 4.75 2.12 3.20 0.72 6.05 25 Taraxacum tibitianum 0.3 20 0.5 0.58 1.60 0.08 2.26 26 Potentilla monanthes 0.6 30 3.25 1.16 2.40 0.50 4.05 27 Trifolium repens 0.4 20 0.5 0.77 1.60 0.08 2.45 28 Geranium wallichianum 0.9 30 0.75 1.74 2.40 0.11 4.25 29 Prunella vulgaris 0.3 10 0.25 0.58 0.80 0.04 1.42 30 Viola canescens 0.1 10 0.25 0.19 0.80 0.04 1.03 31 Valeriana jatamansi 0.5 20 0.5 0.97 1.60 0.08 2.64 32 Achillea millefolium 0.3 10 1.5 0.58 0.80 0.23 1.61 33 Iris decora 0.1 10 1.5 0.19 0.80 0.23 1.22 34 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 1.2 40 2.25 2.32 3.20 0.34 5.86 35 Plantago major 0.1 10 0.25 0.19 0.80 0.04 1.03 36 Galium boreale 1.5 40 1 2.90 3.20 0.15 6.25 51.8 1250 656.23 100 100 100 300

4.31. Bistorta - Rhododendron - Juniperus Community (Community 25)

4.31.1. Geographical Characteristics

Bistorta–Rhododendron–Juniperus Community with 28 plant species was established at Baboon valley Hill in North of Neelum. The altitude of area was 3850 m located at 340.41.659 North Latitude and 0730.48.611 East longitude. Slope was between

00- 300 with comparatively dry habitat lying at Southern Aspect (Table 3.1).

148

4.31.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 28 plant species and was dominated by Bistorta affinis

having an IVI value of 60.34 followed by Rhododendron campanulatumand Juniperus

communis having IVI values of 48.96 and 35.15 respectively. Co-dominant species were

Sibbaldia cuneata having IVI valuesof (20.64), Rohodiola himalayensis (16.49) and Poa

nemoralis (15.58) (Table 4.27).

4.31.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.90 whereas the Shannon’s

diversity was calculated as 2.74. The evenness was found to be 0.55 and richness value

was 1.61. The maturity index value was calculated to be 26.42% for the investigated

community (Table 4.2).

4.31.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2

(Moderately eroded). Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified

as class 3 (Table 4.2).

Table.4.27. Primary phytosociological data of Bistorta - Rhododendron - Juniperus Community

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C RCC IVI 1. Rhododendron campanulatum 26.4 32.20 100 13.51 2.5 3.25 48.96 2. Juniperus communis 18 21.95 40 5.41 6 7.79 35.15 3. Bistorta affinis 13.5 16.46 70 9.46 26.5 34.42 60.34 4. Sibbaldia cuneata 3.4 4.15 50 6.76 7.5 9.74 20.64 5. Geum elatum 0.6 0.73 30 4.05 3.25 4.22 9.01 6. Lagotis cashmeriana 2 2.44 30 4.05 4.5 5.84 12.34 7. Taraxacum tibitianum 0.1 0.12 10 1.35 0.25 0.32 1.80 8. Swertia speciosa 0.2 0.24 10 1.35 0.25 0.32 1.92 9. Solidago virga aurea 0.5 0.61 20 2.70 0.5 0.65 3.96 10. Aconogonum molle 1.6 1.95 30 4.05 0.75 0.97 6.98 11. Poa nemoralis 3.2 3.90 60 8.11 2.75 3.57 15.58 12. Agrorstis vernalis 0.4 0.49 20 2.70 3 3.90 7.09 13. Juncus himalensis 0.5 0.61 20 2.70 0.5 0.65 3.96

149

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C RCC IVI 14. Potentilla atrosanguinea 0.3 0.37 10 1.35 1.5 1.95 3.67 15. Erysimum melicentae 1.2 1.46 20 2.70 0.5 0.65 4.82 16. Ranunculus stewartii arvensis 1.3 1.59 20 2.70 1.75 2.27 6.56 17. Phlomis cashmeriana 1.1 1.34 20 2.70 1.75 2.27 6.32 18. Bergenia purpurrascens 0.1 0.12 10 1.35 0.25 0.32 1.80 19. Campanula aristata 0.3 0.37 10 1.35 0.25 0.32 2.04 20. Gnephalium affine 0.8 0.98 20 2.70 0.5 0.65 4.33 21. Aconitum chyasmenthium 0.4 0.49 20 2.70 1.75 2.27 5.46 22. Rohodiola himalayensis 2.7 3.29 40 5.41 6 7.79 16.49 23. Allium humile 1.3 1.59 20 2.70 0.5 0.65 4.94 24. Festuca lehmanii 0.3 0.37 10 1.35 0.25 0.32 2.04 25. Circaea alpina 0.1 0.12 10 1.35 0.25 0.32 1.80 26. Cassiope fastigiata 0.9 1.10 10 1.35 1.5 1.95 4.40 27. Polygonum alpinum 0.3 0.37 10 1.35 1.5 1.95 3.67 28. Trifolium repens 0.5 0.61 20 2.70 0.5 0.65 3.96 82 100 740 100 77 100 300

4.32. Gaultheria - Sibbaldia - Geum Community (Community 26)

4.32.1. Geographical Characteristics

Gaultheria - Sibbaldia – Geum Community with 55 plant species was established

at Baboon valley Hill. The altitude of area was 3500 m located at 340.42.229 North

Latitude and 0730.49.931 East longitude. Slope was between 00- 300 with comparatively

dry habitat and located Flate platue (Table 3.1).

4.32.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 55 plant species and was dominated by Gaultheria

trichophylla having an IVI value of 35.44 followed by Sibbaldia purpurea and Geum

elatum having IVI values of 31.15 and 26.86 respectively. Co-dominant species were

Rosa webbiana having (18.72), Lonicera webbiana (16.68) and Poa nemoralis (14.02)

(Table 4.28).

150

4.32.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.94 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.41. The evenness was found to be 0.55 and richness value was 3.17. The maturity index value was calculated to be 21.63% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.32.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this community was not eroded and placed in Class 1 (Not eroded). Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3(Table 4.2).

Table.4.28. Primary phytosociological data of Gaultheria - Sibbaldia - Geum Community

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C RCC IVI 1. Juniperus communis 6.8 4.95 40 3.36 6 5.22 13.53 2. Rosa webbiana 17 12.37 60 5.04 1.5 1.31 18.72 3. Salix flabllaris 8.2 5.97 20 1.68 3 2.61 10.26 4. Gaultheria trichophylla 42.8 31.15 20 1.68 3 2.61 35.44 5. Berberis jaeschkeana 3.8 2.77 20 1.68 0.5 0.44 4.88 6. Lonicera webbiana 14.2 10.33 60 5.04 1.5 1.31 16.68 7. Sibbaldiapurpurea 8.7 6.33 70 5.88 21.75 18.94 31.15 8. Geum elatum 5.5 4.00 70 5.88 19.5 16.98 26.86 9. Sedum ewersii 0.5 0.36 20 1.68 1.75 1.52 3.57 10. Aconitum chyasmenthium 1.2 0.87 30 2.52 4.5 3.92 7.31 11. Plantago major 0.1 0.07 10 0.84 0 0.00 0.91 12. Taraxacum tibitianum 1.7 1.24 30 2.52 4.5 3.92 7.68 13. Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 0.9 0.66 30 2.52 0.75 0.65 3.83 14. Poa nemoralis 6.1 4.44 70 5.88 4.25 3.70 14.02 15. Agrorstis vernalis 0.3 0.22 10 0.84 1.5 1.31 2.36 16. Ranunculus stewartiilaetus 0.3 0.22 10 0.84 0.25 0.22 1.28 17. Geranium himalayense 0.3 0.22 10 0.84 0.25 0.22 1.28 18. Phlomis bracteosa 0.5 0.36 20 1.68 0.5 0.44 2.48 19. Viola canescens 0.1 0.07 10 0.84 0.25 0.22 1.13 20. Primula rosea 0.5 0.36 20 1.68 3 2.61 4.66 21. Tanacetum dolicophyllum 0.1 0.07 10 0.84 0.25 0.22 1.13 22. Trifolium repans 0.1 0.07 10 0.84 0.25 0.22 1.13 23. Sedum oreades 0.3 0.22 10 0.84 0.25 0.22 1.28 24. Bupleurum falcatum 0.7 0.51 30 2.52 0.75 0.65 3.68 25. Thymus linearis 0.5 0.36 10 0.84 1.5 1.31 2.51 26. Anaphalis triplinervis 1.2 0.87 20 1.68 1.75 1.52 4.08 27. Gnephalium affine 2.3 1.67 60 5.04 1.5 1.31 8.02 28. Ajuga parviflora 0.1 0.07 10 0.84 0.25 0.22 1.13

151

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C RCC IVI 29. Bistorta affinis 1.3 0.95 20 1.68 3 2.61 5.24 30. Veronica alpina 0.3 0.22 10 0.84 0.25 0.22 1.28 31. Cystopteris Montana 0.1 0.07 10 0.84 1.5 1.31 2.22 32. Potentilla monanthes 0.2 0.15 10 0.84 1.5 1.31 2.29 33. Colutea multiflora 1.1 0.80 50 4.20 5 4.35 9.36 34. Veronica himalensis 0.8 0.58 10 0.84 1.5 1.31 2.73 35. Rumex nepalensis 0.3 0.22 10 0.84 1.5 1.31 2.36 36. Aconogonum molle 0.5 0.36 10 0.84 0.25 0.22 1.42 37. Rohodiola himalayensis 0.5 0.36 20 1.68 2 1.74 3.79 38. Polystichum younnanense 0.4 0.29 20 1.68 0.5 0.44 2.41 39. Cryptogramma stelleri 0.1 0.07 10 0.84 0.25 0.22 1.13 40. Minuartia uniflora 1.2 0.87 30 2.52 0.75 0.65 4.05 41. Iris hookariana 0.5 0.36 10 0.84 1.5 1.31 2.51 42. Caltha alba 0.1 0.07 10 0.84 0.25 0.22 1.13 43. Phleum alpinum 0.3 0.22 10 0.84 2.6 2.26 3.32 44. Bergenia stracheyi 0.3 0.22 10 0.84 1.5 1.31 2.36 45. Athyrium fimbriatum 0.5 0.36 10 0.84 1.5 1.31 2.51 46. Adiantum trichomanes 0.4 0.29 10 0.84 0.25 0.22 1.35 47. Impatiens grandulifera 0.9 0.66 20 1.68 0.5 0.44 2.77 48. Aster falconeri 0.1 0.07 10 0.84 0.25 0.22 1.13 49. Agrimonia eupatoria 1.1 0.80 20 1.68 1.75 1.52 4.00 50. Selinum tenuifolium 0.2 0.15 10 0.84 0.25 0.22 1.20 51. Eurphobia wallichii 0.3 0.22 10 0.84 0.25 0.22 1.28 52. Swertia speciosa 0.1 0.07 10 0.84 0.25 0.22 1.13 53. Chaerophyllum villosum 0.4 0.29 20 1.68 0.5 0.44 2.41 54. Dracocephalum nutans 0.1 0.07 10 0.84 0.25 0.22 1.13 55. Oenothera rosea 0.5 0.36 20 1.68 0.5 0.44 2.48 Total 137.4 100 1190 100 114.85 100 300

4.33. Juniperus - Sibbaldia - Anaphalis Community (Community 27)

4.33.1. Geographical Characteristics

Juniperus - Sibbaldia –Anaphalis Community with 30 plant species was established at

Sar of Baboon Valley. The altitude of area was 3645 m located at 340.41.837 North

Latitude and 0730.49.612 East longitude. Slope was between 00- 300 with comparatively wet-dry mix habitat located at Southern Aspect (Table 3.1).

152

4.33.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 30 plant species and was dominated by Juniperus communis having an IVI value of 121.54 followed by Sibbaldia purpurea and Anaphalis boisseri having IVI values of 35.96 and 14.24 respectively. Co-dominant species were

Geum elatum (13.70), Poa nemoralis (13.21) and Rohodiola himalayensis (12.04) (Table

4.29).

4.33.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.80 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 2.43. The evenness was found to be 0.37 and richness value was 1.73. The maturity index value was calculated to be 28.0% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.33.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2. Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3(Table 3.1).

Table.4.29. Primary phytosociological data of Juniperus - Sibbaldia - Anaphalis Community

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C RCC IVI 1. Juniperus communis 46 56.58 100 11.90 83 53.05 121.54 2. Sibbaldia purpurea 8.9 10.95 100 11.90 20.5 13.10 35.96 3. Taraxacum tibitianum 1.2 1.48 40 4.76 3.45 2.21 8.44 4. Anaphalis boisseri 3.3 4.06 60 7.14 4.75 3.04 14.24 5. Gnephalium affine 0.8 0.98 20 2.38 0.5 0.32 3.68 6. Lentopodium lentopodium 1.3 1.60 20 2.38 3 1.92 5.90 7. Geum elatum 2.4 2.95 50 5.95 7.5 4.79 13.70 8. Allium humile 0.8 0.98 20 2.38 0.5 0.32 3.68 9. Swertia speciosa 1 1.23 30 3.57 0.75 0.48 5.28 10. Poa nemoralis 3.5 4.31 60 7.14 2.75 1.76 13.21 11. Festuca hartmanii 0.2 0.25 10 1.19 0.25 0.16 1.60 12. Agrorstis vernalisi 1.2 1.48 30 3.57 4.5 2.88 7.92 13. Aconitum chyashmenthium 0.8 0.98 30 3.57 2 1.28 5.83 14. Solidago virga aurea 0.1 0.12 10 1.19 0.25 0.16 1.47 15. Campanula cashmeriana 0.3 0.37 10 1.19 1.5 0.96 2.52 16. Bistorta affinis 1 1.23 10 1.19 1.5 0.96 3.38

153

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C RCC IVI 17. Chaerophyllum villosum 1.6 1.97 40 4.76 4.75 3.04 9.77 18. Rumex nepalensis 0.1 0.12 10 1.19 0.25 0.16 1.47 19. Ranunculus stewartii arvensis 1.1 1.35 20 2.38 0.5 0.32 4.05 20. Trifolium repens 0.5 0.62 10 1.19 1.5 0.96 2.76 21. Plantago major 0.3 0.37 20 2.38 0.5 0.32 3.07 22. Rohodiola himalayensis 1.9 2.34 60 7.14 4 2.56 12.04 23. Primula reptans 0.2 0.25 10 1.19 0.25 0.16 1.60 24. Polystichum lachenense 0.3 0.37 10 1.19 1.5 0.96 2.52 25. Pedicularis pyramidata 0.3 0.37 10 1.19 0.25 0.16 1.72 26. Meconopsis acuelata 0.3 0.37 10 1.19 1.5 0.96 2.52 27. Phlomis bracteosa 0.3 0.37 10 1.19 1.5 0.96 2.52 28. Oxyria digyna 0.3 0.37 10 1.19 0.25 0.16 1.72 29. Cryptogramma brunoniana 0.5 0.62 10 1.19 1.5 0.96 2.76 30. Gymnocarpium dryopteris 0.8 0.98 10 1.19 1.5 0.96 3.13 81.3 100 840 100 156.45 100 300

4.34. Rhododendron- Potentilla - Cassiope Community (Community 28)

4.34.1. Geographical Characteristics

Rhododendron –Potentilla –Cassiope Community with 31 plant species was established at Baboon Hill in South of Neelum. The altitude of area was 3971 m located at 340.41.465

North Latitude and 0730.48.766 East longitude. Slope was between 600- 900 with comparatively moist habitat lying Northern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.34.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 31 plant species and was dominated by Rhododendron campanulatum having an IVI value of 96.40 followed by Potentilla monanthes and

Cassiope fastigiata having IVI values of 17.44 and 15.51 respectively. Co-dominant species were Poa alpina (12.19), Helictotrichon virescens (11.55) and Bergenia stracheyi

(11.44) (Table 4.30).

4.34.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.87 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 2.82. The evenness was found to be 0.54 and richness value

154

was 1.79. The maturity index value was calculated to be 26.45% for the investigated

community (Table 4.2).

4.34.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this community was slightly eroded and placed in Class 1 (slightly

eroded). No grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 1 (Table

4.2).

Table.4.30.Primary phytosociological data of Rhododendron- Potentilla - Cassiope Community Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C RCC IVI 1. Rhododendron campanulatum 55.4 61.22 100 12.20 15 22.99 96.40 2. Salix flabellaris 1 1.10 40 4.88 1 1.53 7.52 3. Swertia speciosa 0.5 0.55 10 1.22 1.5 2.30 4.07 4. Cassiope fastigiata 3.1 3.43 30 3.66 5.5 8.43 15.51 5. Tanacetum dolicophyllum 1.4 1.55 30 3.66 0.75 1.15 6.35 6. Anaphalis boisseri 1.9 2.10 40 4.88 1 1.53 8.51 7. Gnephalium affine 1.6 1.77 50 6.10 1.25 1.92 9.78 8. Aster falconeri 0.5 0.55 10 1.22 0.25 0.38 2.16 9. Pedicularis pyramidata 0.8 0.88 20 2.44 1.75 2.68 6.00 10. Primula denticulate 0.4 0.44 30 3.66 2 3.07 7.17 11. Anemone rivularis 0.4 0.44 10 1.22 0.25 0.38 2.04 12. Potentilla monanthes 1.6 1.77 50 6.10 6.25 9.58 17.44 13. Saxifraga stenophylla 1.1 1.22 10 1.22 1.5 2.30 4.73 14. Helictotrichon virescens 3.2 3.54 50 6.10 1.25 1.92 11.55 15. Sonchus oleraceus 0.3 0.33 10 1.22 0.25 0.38 1.93 16. Lagotis cashmeriana 0.7 0.77 20 2.44 3 4.60 7.81 17. Erysimum melicentae 1.8 1.99 40 4.88 1 1.53 8.40 18. Bergenia stracheyi 0.8 0.88 30 3.66 4.5 6.90 11.44 19. Rohodiola himalayensis 0.4 0.44 20 2.44 1.75 2.68 5.56 20. Poa alpina 3.5 3.87 40 4.88 2.25 3.45 12.19 21. Bistorta affinis 2.1 2.32 20 2.44 3 4.60 9.36 22. Aconogonum molle 2.2 2.43 30 3.66 2 3.07 9.15 23. Rohodiola fastigiata 0.6 0.66 20 2.44 1.75 2.68 5.78 24. Geranium himalayense 1.5 1.66 30 3.66 0.75 1.15 6.47 25. Juncus himalensis 0.3 0.33 10 1.22 0.25 0.38 1.93 26. Campanula aristata 0.8 0.88 20 2.44 0.5 0.77 4.09 27. Orobanche alba 0.3 0.33 10 1.22 0.25 0.38 1.93 28. Selinum tenuifolium 0.5 0.55 10 1.22 0.25 0.38 2.16 29. Bistorta vivipara 0.6 0.66 10 1.22 1.5 2.30 4.18 30. Polemonium caeruleum 0.8 0.88 10 1.22 1.5 2.30 4.40 31. Monira coulteriana 0.4 0.44 10 1.22 1.5 2.30 3.96 90.5 100 820 100 65.25 100 300

155

4.34. Rhododendron- Bistorta - Poa Community (Community 29)

4.35.1. Geographical Characteristics

Rhododendron- Bistorta – Poa Community with 29 plant species was established at the top of Chora in Baboon Valley. The altitude of area was 3920 m located at 340.41.176

North Latitude and 0730.48.841 East longitude. Slope was between 300- 600 with comparatively moist habitat lying Northern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.35.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 29 plant species and was dominated by Rhododendron campanulatum having an IVI value of 79.02 followed by Bistorta affinis and Poa nemoralis having IVI values of 22.58 and 19.73 respectively. Co-dominant species were Sibbaldia purpurea (18.31), Jurania macrocephala (16.29) and Aconitum chyasmenthium (13.61)

(Table 4.31).

4.35.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.90 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 2.86. The evenness was found to be 0.60 and richness value was 1.67. The maturity index value was calculated to be 34.48% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.35.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2

(Moderatly eroded). Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2(Table 4.2).

Table.4.31.Primary phytosociological data of Rhododendron- Bistorta - Poa Community

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C RC IVI 1. Rhododendron campanulatum 51.8 56.37 100 10 10 12.66 79.02 2. Salix lindleyana 2.8 3.05 40 4 1 1.27 8.31 3. Potentilla atrosanguinea 0.6 0.65 30 3 0.75 0.95 4.60 4. Aster falconeri 0.6 0.65 30 3 0.75 0.95 4.60 5. Geranium himalayense 2.3 2.50 40 4 1 1.27 7.77

156

Sr.No. Plant species D RD F C IVI RF RC 6. Geum elatum 1.2 1.31 50 5 3.75 4.75 11.05 7. Rohodiola himalayensis 0.9 0.98 30 3 3.25 4.11 8.09 8. Tanacetum dolicophyllum 0.3 0.33 10 1 1.5 1.90 3.23 9. Swertia speciosa 0.3 0.33 10 1 1.5 1.90 3.23 10. Swertia petiolata 1.3 1.41 30 3 4.5 5.70 10.11 11. Pedicularis pyramidata 0.9 0.98 30 3 1 1.27 5.25 12. Bistorta affinis 6.9 7.51 40 4 8.75 11.08 22.58 13. Aconitum chyasmanthium 2.1 2.29 50 5 5 6.33 13.61 14. Sibbaldia cuneata 2.3 2.50 60 6 7.75 9.81 18.31 15. Jurania macrocephala 1.7 1.85 40 4 8.25 10.44 16.29 16. Pseudomerntensia hispidum 0.6 0.65 30 3 3.25 4.11 7.77 17. Rheum webbianum 0.7 0.76 40 4 4.75 6.01 10.77 18. Anaphalis boisseri 0.3 0.33 10 1 0.25 0.32 1.64 19. Solidago virga aurea 1.1 1.20 50 5 1.25 1.58 7.78 20. Poa nemoralis 7 7.62 80 8 3.25 4.11 19.73 21. Agrorstis vernalis 1.5 1.63 30 3 0.75 0.95 5.58 22. Taraxacum laevigatum 0.7 0.76 20 2 0.5 0.63 3.39 23. Pedicularis bicornuta 0.5 0.54 10 1 1.5 1.90 3.44 24. Saxifraga parnassifolia 0.4 0.44 20 2 0.5 0.63 3.07 25. Saussurea alpina 0.4 0.44 20 2 1.75 2.22 4.65 26. Phlomis bracteosa 0.4 0.44 20 2 0.5 0.63 3.07 27. Bergenia stracheyi 0.1 0.11 10 1 0.25 0.32 1.43 28. Ranunculus stewartii 1.7 1.85 50 5 1.25 1.58 8.43 29. Campanula aristata 0.5 0.54 20 2 0.5 0.63 3.18 91.9 100 1000 100 79 100 300

4.36. Salix -Betula – Sibbaldia Community (Community 30)

4.36.1. Geographical Characteristics

Salix - Betula –Sibbaldia Community with 41 plant species was established at Baboon

Bahak. The altitude of area was 3230 m located at 340.70.3124 North Latitude and730.83.7229 East longitude. Slope was between 00- 300 with comparatively moist habitat located at Northern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.36.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 41 plant species and was dominated by Salix flablellaris having an IVI value of 91.43 followed by Betulla utilis and Sibbaldia cuneata

157

having IVI values of 16.69 and 16.51 respectively. Co-dominant species were Rosa

webbiana (12.71), Lonicera webbiana (12.52) and Abies pindrow (10.61) (Table 4.32).

4.36.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.88 whereas the Shannon’s

diversity was calculated as 3.00. The evenness was found to be 0.49 and richness value

was 2.36. The maturity index value was calculated to be 25.85% for the investigated

community (Table 4.2).

4.36.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2

(Moderatly eroded). Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified

as class 3 (Table 4.2).

Table.4.32. Primary phytosociological data of Salix - Betula - Sibbaldia Community

Sr.No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 1. Abies pindrow 1 40 11.01 1.51 3.77 5.32 10.61 2. Betula utilus 2.8 60 14.09 4.22 5.66 6.81 16.69 3. Salix flablellaris 27.6 100 83.5 41.63 9.43 40.37 91.43 4. Rosa webbiana 4 40 6 6.03 3.77 2.90 12.71 5. Berberis aristata 2.6 20 7.5 3.92 1.89 3.63 9.43 6. Lonicera webbiana 0.8 20 19.5 1.21 1.89 9.43 12.52 7. Solidago virga aurea 0.5 20 0.5 0.75 1.89 0.24 2.88 8. Plantago major 0.4 20 1.75 0.60 1.89 0.85 3.34 9. Sibbaldia cuneata 3.2 70 10.5 4.83 6.60 5.08 16.51 10. Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 1.2 50 1.25 1.81 4.72 0.60 7.13 11. Anemone tetrasepla 0.3 20 1.75 0.45 1.89 0.85 3.19 12. Aster falconeri 1.5 30 3 2.26 2.83 1.45 6.54 13. Lonicera webbiana 1.3 20 3 1.96 1.89 1.45 5.30 14. Caltha alba 1.6 20 3 2.41 1.89 1.45 5.75 15. Trillium govanianum 2.1 50 1.25 3.17 4.72 0.60 8.49 16. Sassoria costus 0.6 30 3.25 0.90 2.83 1.57 5.31 17. Bergenia purpurrascens 0.9 20 5.25 1.36 1.89 2.54 5.78 18. Primula rosea 0.4 10 1.5 0.60 0.94 0.73 2.27 19. Primula macrophylaphylla 0.9 30 3.25 1.36 2.83 1.57 5.76

20. Lindelofia macrostyla 0.5 20 1.75 0.75 1.89 0.85 3.49

158

Sr.No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 21. Cystopteris fragilis 0.4 20 1.75 0.60 1.89 0.85 3.34 22. Pseudomertensia echioidesta 0.4 20 0.5 0.60 1.89 0.24 2.73 23. Ptaris stenophylla 0.5 10 1.5 0.75 0.94 0.73 2.42 24. Polygonum amplexicaule 0.5 10 1.5 0.75 0.94 0.73 2.42 25. Trifolium pratense 0.3 10 0.25 0.45 0.94 0.12 1.52 26. Eurphobia wallichii 0.5 20 0.5 0.75 1.89 0.24 2.88 27. Campanula aristata 0.4 10 0.25 0.60 0.94 0.12 1.67 28. Taraxacum tibitianum 2.1 30 4.5 3.17 2.83 2.18 8.17 29. Fragaria nubicola 0.9 30 3.25 1.36 2.83 1.57 5.76 30. Equisetum debile 0.6 10 0.25 0.90 0.94 0.12 1.97 31. Actia spicata 0.2 10 0.25 0.30 0.94 0.12 1.37 32. Anaphalis nepalensis 1.7 40 3.5 2.56 3.77 1.69 8.03 33. Lentopodium lentopodium 0.3 10 0.25 0.45 0.94 0.12 1.52 34. Galium verum 0.3 10 0.25 0.45 0.94 0.12 1.52 35. Angelica glauca 0.5 20 1.75 0.75 1.89 0.85 3.49 36. Ainsliaea aptera 0.1 10 0.25 0.15 0.94 0.12 1.22 37. Oxalis corniculata 0.3 20 0.5 0.45 1.89 0.24 2.58 38. Polygonatum verticilatum 0.9 30 0.75 1.36 2.83 0.36 4.55 39. Astragalus frigidus. 0.4 20 1.75 0.60 1.89 0.85 3.34 40. Aconitum chyasmenthium 0.3 20 0.5 0.45 1.89 0.24 2.58 41. Parnesia nubicola 0.5 10 0.25 0.75 0.94 0.12 1.82 66.3 1060 206.85 100 100 100 300

4.37. Anaphalis–Poa- Poa Community (Community 31)

4.37.1. Geographical Characteristics

Anaphalis–Poa- Poa Community with 24 plant species was established at Baboon valley

Hill. The altitude of area was 4017 m located at 340.41.397 North Latitude and

0730.48.741 East longitude. Slope was between 00- 300 with comparatively dry habitat

and sunny slope (Table 3.1).

4.37.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 24 plant species and was dominated by Anaphalis

boisseri having an IVI value of 41.61 followed by Poa alpina and Poa nemoralis having

IVI values of 34.78 and 29.77 respectively. Co-dominant species were Sibbaldia

159 purpurea (23.43), Potentilla monanthes (17.18) and Rohodiola himalayensis (16.86)

(Table 4.33).

4.37.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.92 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 2.87. The evenness was found to be 0.74 and richness value was 1.38. The maturity index value was calculated to be 27.91% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.37.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2. Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2 (Table 4.2).

Table.4.33. Primary phytosociological data of Anaphalis - Poa - Poa Community Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C RC IVI 1. Rohodiola himalayensis 1.3 4.13 40 5.97 4.75 6.76 16.86 2. Poa alpina 4.1 13.02 60 8.96 9 12.81 34.78 3. Anaphalis boisseri 4.1 13.02 70 10.45 12.75 18.15 41.61 4. Pedicularis pyramidata 1.5 4.76 30 4.48 4.5 6.41 15.65 5. Bistorta affinis 1.9 6.03 20 2.99 5.25 7.47 16.49 6. Juncus himalensis 0.4 1.27 20 2.99 0.5 0.71 4.97 7. Saxifraga flagellaris 0.1 0.32 10 1.49 0.25 0.36 2.17 8. Circaea alpina 0.8 2.54 30 4.48 0.75 1.07 8.08 9. Exacum tetragonum 0.7 2.22 20 2.99 0.5 0.71 5.92 10. Salix flablellaris 0.5 1.59 10 1.49 1.75 2.49 5.57 11. Sibbaldia cuneata 1.8 5.71 40 5.97 8.25 11.74 23.43 12. Lagotis cashmiriana 1.4 4.44 30 4.48 0 0.00 8.92 13. Poa nemoralis 3.6 11.43 80 11.94 4.5 6.41 29.77 14. Agrorstis vernalis 0.9 2.86 30 4.48 0.75 1.07 8.40 15. Alopecurus himalaicus 0.8 2.54 20 2.99 0.25 0.36 5.88 16. Potentilla atrosanguinea 0.1 0.32 10 1.49 1.5 2.14 3.95 17. Aster falconeri 0.1 0.32 10 1.49 0.25 0.36 2.17 18. Potentilla anserine 1.4 4.44 40 5.97 4.75 6.76 17.18 19. Swertia petiolata 0.3 0.95 10 1.49 1.5 2.14 4.58 20. Tanacetum dolicophyllum 1.1 3.49 20 2.99 3 4.27 10.75 21. Geum elatum 1.2 3.81 30 4.48 3 4.27 12.56 22. Thlaspi perfoliatum 0.7 2.22 20 2.99 0.5 0.71 5.92 23. Cassiope fastigiata 2.6 8.25 10 1.49 1.75 2.49 12.24 24. Rheum webbianum 0.1 0.32 10 1.49 0.25 0.36 2.17 31.5 100 670 100 70.25 100 300

160

4.38. Allium- Bistorta- Rheum Community (Community 32)

4.38.1. Geographical Characteristics

Allium- Bistorta – Rheum Community with 24 plant species was established at Jabri of

Baboon Valley. The altitude of area was 4070 m located at 340.41.074 North Latitude and

0730.48.573 East longitude. Slope was between 300- 600 with comparatively dry habitat taken fom Southern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.38.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 24 plant species and was dominated by Allium humile having an IVI value of 83.05 followed by Bistorta affinis and Rheum webbianum with IVI values of 59.14 and 15.03 respectively. Co-dominant species were Bergenia stracheyi

(11.68), Pedicularis pyramidata (15.03) and Geum elatum (11.11) (Table 4.34).

4.38.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.86 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 2.58. The evenness was found to be 0.55 and richness value was 1.38. The maturity index value was calculated to be 22.08% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.38.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this community was not eroded and placed in Class 1 (not eroded).

Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2(Table

4.2).

Table.4.34. Primary phytosociological data of Allium- Bistorta- Rheum Community Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C RC IVI 1. Bistorta affinis 8.2 23.16 60 11.32 9 24.66 59.14 2. Aconitum chashmanthum 1.1 3.11 10 1.89 0.25 0.68 5.68 3. Rheum webbianum 3.5 9.89 20 3.77 0.5 1.37 15.03 4. Phlomis bracteosa 0.1 0.28 10 1.89 0.25 0.68 2.85 5. Bergenia stracheyi 1.1 3.11 20 3.77 1.75 4.79 11.68 6. Allium humile 12.3 34.75 60 11.32 13.5 36.99 83.05 7. Saussurea alpina 0.3 0.85 10 1.89 0.25 0.68 3.42

161

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C RC IVI 8. Jurania macrocephala 0.3 0.85 20 3.77 0.5 1.37 5.99 9. Geum elatum 1.2 3.39 30 5.66 0.75 2.05 11.11 10. Tanacetum dolicophyllum 0.3 0.85 10 1.89 0.25 0.68 3.42 11. Matricaria aurea 0.6 1.69 10 1.89 1.5 4.11 7.69 12. Pedicularis bicornuta 1.1 3.11 20 3.77 1.75 4.79 11.68 13. Pedicularis pyramidata 0.9 2.54 30 5.66 0.75 2.05 10.26 14. Swertia speciosa 0.3 0.85 10 1.89 0.25 0.68 3.42 15. Sibbaldia cuneata 0.4 1.13 20 3.77 0.5 1.37 6.27 16. Potentilla monanthes 0.5 1.41 30 5.66 0.75 2.05 9.13 17. Aster alpinus 0.1 0.28 10 1.89 0.25 0.68 2.85 18. Lagotis cashmeriana 0.6 1.69 30 5.66 0.75 2.05 9.41 19. Gentiana phyllocalyx 0.5 1.41 30 5.66 0.75 2.05 9.13 20. Geranium himalayense 0.1 0.28 10 1.89 0.25 0.68 2.85 21. Potentilla atrosanguinea 0.5 1.41 20 3.77 0.5 1.37 6.56 22. Campanula aristata 0.4 1.13 20 3.77 0.5 1.37 6.27 23. Primula denticulate 0.4 1.13 20 3.77 0.5 1.37 6.27 24. Dracocephalum nutans 0.6 1.69 20 3.77 0.5 1.37 6.84 35.4 100 530 100 36.5 100 300

4.39. Sibbaldia – Gaultheria - Salix Community (Community 33)

4.39.1. Geographical Characteristics

Sibbaldia – Gaultheria - Salix Community with 31 plant species was established at

Shaheed Medan in Baboon Valley. The altitude of area was 3300 m located at

340.69.9896 North Latitude and 730.83.1748 East longitude. Slope was between 300 _

600with comparatively dry and sandy habitat located at East Southern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.39.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 31 plant species and was dominated by Sibbaldia cuneata having an IVI value of 28.90 followed by Gaultheria trichophylla and Salix flablellaris IVI values of 27.96 and 24.72 respectively. Co-dominant species were Rosa webbiana (24.41), Juniperus communis (23.08) and Rhododendron campanulatum

(16.65) (Table 4.35).

162

4.39.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.94 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.11. The evenness was found to be 0.72 and richness value was 1.79. The maturity index value was calculated to be 24.83% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.39.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this community was highly eroded and placed in Class 3 (Highly eroded).Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3

(Table 4.2).

Table.4.35.Primary phytosociological data of Sibbaldia -Gaultheria- Salix Community

Sr.No Species Name D RD F RF C RC IVI 1. Salix flablellaris 13 11.86 40 5.19 6 7.67 24.72 2. Viburnum grandiflorum 4.8 4.38 20 2.60 0.5 0.64 7.62 3. Berberis jaeschkeana 7 6.39 40 5.19 1 1.28 12.86 4. Lonicera webbiana 6.2 5.66 20 2.60 0.5 0.64 8.89 5. Juniperus communis 11.2 10.22 40 5.19 6 7.67 23.08 6. Gaultheria trichophylla 23.6 21.53 20 2.60 3 3.83 27.96 7. Rohododenderon arborium 3.8 3.47 40 5.19 1 1.28 9.94 8. Rhododendron campanulatum 11.2 10.22 20 2.60 3 3.83 16.65 9. Rosa webbiana 6.4 5.84 20 2.60 12.5 15.97 24.41 10. Thymus linearis 2.2 2.01 20 2.60 7.75 9.90 14.51 11. Potentilla atrosanguinea 1 0.91 30 3.90 3.25 4.15 8.96 12. Poa bacteriana 1.4 1.28 30 3.90 0.75 0.96 6.13 13. Geranium himalayense 0.1 0.09 10 1.30 0.25 0.32 1.71 14. Allium humile 2 1.82 30 3.90 0.75 0.96 6.68 15. Sibbaldia cuneata 5.6 5.11 70 9.09 11.5 14.70 28.90 16. Polygonatum verticilatum 0.3 0.27 10 1.30 0.25 0.32 1.89 17. Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 1.3 1.19 40 5.19 2.25 2.88 9.26 18. Valeriana jatamansi 0.3 0.27 10 1.30 1.5 1.92 3.49 19. Solidago virga aurea 0.1 0.09 10 1.30 0.25 0.32 1.71 20. Aconitum heterphyllum 1.9 1.73 50 6.49 1.25 1.60 9.82 21. Habenaria pectinata 0.2 0.18 10 1.30 0.25 0.32 1.80 22. Swertia speciosa 0.8 0.73 30 3.90 3.25 4.15 8.78 23. Aconitum ferox 1.5 1.37 30 3.90 2 2.56 7.82 24. Bergenia stracheyi 0.1 0.09 10 1.30 1.5 1.92 3.31 25. Codonopsis ovate 0.3 0.27 10 1.30 0.25 0.32 1.89

163

Sr.No Species Name D RD F RF C RC IVI 26. Cheilenthus persica 0.7 0.64 20 2.60 1.75 2.24 5.47 27. Sedum ewersii 0.6 0.55 30 3.90 2 2.56 7.00 28. Iris hookariana 1.2 1.09 20 2.60 3 3.83 7.53 29. Plantago major 0.1 0.09 10 1.30 0.25 0.32 1.71 30. Parnesia nubicola 0.3 0.27 10 1.30 0.25 0.32 1.89 31. Gentiana kurroo 0.4 0.36 20 2.60 0.5 0.64 3.60 109.6 100 770 100 78.25 100 300

4.40.1 Sibbaldia - Pedicularis - Lagotis Community (Community 34)

4.40.1. Geographical Characteristics

Sibbaldia –Pedicularis – Lagotis Community with 24 plant species was established at

Chora Medan in Baboon Valley. The altitude of area was 3700 m located at 340.69.7071

North Latitude and 730.82.6483 East longitude. Slope was between 00-300 with comparatively dry habitat located on exposed area (Table 3.1).

4.40.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 31 plant species and was dominated by Sibbaldia cuneata having an IVI value of 33.85 followed by Pedicularis pyramidata and Lagotis cashmeriana with IVI values of 27.17 and 20.52 respectively. Co-dominant species were

Poa alpina (18.92), Ranunculus arvensis (18.53) and Carex atrofusca (18.36) (Table

4.36).

4.40.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.94 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 2.96. The evenness was found to be 0.80 and richness value was 1.38. The maturity index value was calculated to be 29.58% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.40.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this community was not eroded and placed in Class 1 (Not eroded).

Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3 (Table 4.2).

164

Table.4.36. Primary phytosociological data of Sibbaldia - Pedicularis - Lagotis Community

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C RC IVI 1. Sibbaldia cuneata 2.8 10.26 50 7.04 7.5 16.56 33.85 2. Caltha alba 0.6 2.20 30 4.23 2 4.42 10.84 3. Anemon obtusiloba 0.5 1.83 30 4.23 2 4.42 10.47 4. Alopecurus himalaicus 0.4 1.47 20 2.82 0.5 1.10 5.39 5. Bistorta affinis 3 10.99 20 2.82 1.8 3.97 17.78 6. Anaphalis boisseri 0.8 2.93 20 2.82 3 6.62 12.37 7. Gnephaliumalpinum 0.4 1.47 10 1.41 1.5 3.31 6.18 8. Rohodiola himalayensis 1 3.66 40 5.63 3.5 7.73 17.02 9. Lagotis cashmeriana 1.2 4.40 40 5.63 4.75 10.49 20.52 10. Meconopsis aculeate 0.1 0.37 10 1.41 0.25 0.55 2.33 11. Taraxacum tibitianum 0.2 0.73 10 1.41 0.25 0.55 2.69 12. Poa nemoralis 1.4 5.13 20 2.82 0.5 1.10 9.05 13. Agrorstis vernalis 2.3 8.42 40 5.63 1 2.21 16.27 14. Carex atrofusca 1.8 6.59 60 8.45 1.5 3.31 18.36 15. Juncus thomsonii 0.7 2.56 50 7.04 1.25 2.76 12.37 16. Campanula aristata 0.5 1.83 10 1.41 0.25 0.55 3.79 17. Pedicularis pyramidata 2.7 9.89 60 8.45 4 8.83 27.17 18. Primula rosea 0.3 1.10 10 1.41 0.25 0.55 3.06 19. Carex cardiolepis 1.6 5.86 60 8.45 1.5 3.31 17.62 20. Juncus articulates 0.2 0.73 20 2.82 0.5 1.10 4.65 21. Gentianodes alii 0.7 2.56 30 4.23 0.75 1.66 8.45 22. Poa alpina 1.3 4.76 30 4.23 4.5 9.93 18.92 23. Campanula cashmeriana 0.1 0.37 10 1.41 0.25 0.55 2.33 24. Ranunculus arvensis 2.7 9.89 30 4.23 2 4.42 18.53 27.3 100 710 100 45.3 100 300

4.41. Abies - Skimmea-Juniperus Community (Community 35)

4.41.1. Geographical Characteristics

Abies-Skimmea-Juniperus Community with 35 plant species was established at

Perchinasi Top in South of Muzaffarabad. The altitude of area was 2820 m located at 340.

23.196 North Latitude and 0730.36.572 East longitude. Slope was between 00 -300 with comparatively dry habitat lying at East facing Aspect (Table 3.1).

165

4.41.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 35 plant species and was dominated by Abies pindrow having an IVI value of 54.56 followed by Skimmea lauriola and Juniperus communis having IVI values of 19.27 and 16.98 respectively. Co-dominant species were Rosa webbiana (16.73), Indigofera himalayensis (16.21) and Festuca hartmannii (15.07)

(Table 4.37).

4.41.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.93 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.16. The evenness was found to be 0.67 and richness value was 2.02. The maturity index value was calculated to be 26.85 % for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.41.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2. High grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3 (Table 4.2).

Table.4.37. Primary phytosociological data of Abies – Skimmea-Juniperus Community

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C C RC IVI 1 Abies pindrow 3 3.87 80 8.511 50.95 41.88 54.26 2 Picea smithiana 1 1.29 40 4.255 10.64 8.75 14.29 3 Pinus wallichiana 0.6 0.77 20 2.128 1.56 1.28 4.18 4 Lonicera asperifolia 5.2 6.71 20 2.128 0.5 0.41 9.25 5 Juniperus communis 9.6 12.39 20 2.128 3 2.47 16.98 6 Indegofera himalayensis 9 11.61 20 2.128 3 2.47 16.21 7 Rosa webbiana 11 14.19 20 2.128 0.5 0.41 16.73 8 Skimmea lauriola 11 14.19 40 4.255 1 0.82 19.27 9 Lonicera webbiana 0.5 0.65 20 2.128 1.75 1.44 4.21 10 Aster himalicus 0.8 1.03 30 3.191 0.75 0.62 4.84 11 Sibbaldia purpurea 0.8 1.03 30 3.191 3 2.47 6.69 12 Rumex nepalensis 0.6 0.77 20 2.128 4.5 3.70 6.60 13 Oxalis corniculata 0.4 0.52 20 2.128 0.5 0.41 3.05

166

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C C RC IVI 14 veronica himalensis 3.9 5.03 20 2.128 4 3.29 10.45 15 Trisetum spicatum 3.4 4.39 60 6.383 1.5 1.23 12.00 16 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 0.9 1.16 40 4.255 2.25 1.85 7.27 17 Salvia moorcraftiana 0.3 0.39 10 1.064 1.5 1.23 2.68 18 Potentilla nepalensis 0.5 0.65 20 2.128 1.75 1.44 4.21 19 Carduus nutans 0.2 0.26 10 1.064 1.5 1.23 2.55 20 Vincetoxicum arnottianum 0.4 0.52 20 2.128 1.75 1.44 4.08 21 Malva parviflora 0.4 0.52 10 1.064 1.5 1.23 2.81 22 Viola canescens 0.6 0.77 40 4.255 2.25 1.85 6.88 23 Ainsliaea aptera 0.5 0.65 10 1.064 1.5 1.23 2.94 24 Eurphobia wallichii 1.1 1.42 20 2.128 1.75 1.44 4.99 25 Ainsliaea perantese. 2.3 2.97 40 4.255 2.25 1.85 9.07 26 Impatiens brachycentra 0.3 0.39 10 1.064 0.25 0.21 1.66 27 Sonchus oleracrus 0.1 0.13 10 1.064 0.25 0.21 1.40 28 Festuca hartmannii. 4 5.16 70 7.447 3 2.47 15.07 29 Aquilegia pubiflora 0.4 0.52 10 1.064 1.5 1.23 2.81 30 Pteris cretica 0.1 0.13 10 1.064 1.5 1.23 2.43 31 Primula denticulate 0.3 0.39 20 2.128 0.5 0.41 2.93 32 Primula rosea 0.8 1.03 10 1.064 1.5 1.23 3.33 33 Caltha alba 0.6 0.77 10 1.064 1.5 1.23 3.07 34 Arisaema tortosum 1 1.29 40 4.255 1 0.82 6.37 35 Fragaria nubicola 1.9 2.45 70 7.447 5.5 4.52 14.42 77.5 100 940 100 121.65 100 300

4.42. Abies- Potentilla - Fragaria Community (Community 36)

4.42.1. Geographical Characteristics

Abies - Potentilla – Fragaria Community with 38 plant species was established at

Perchinasi Camp site. The altitude of area was 2980 m located at 340.23.123 North

Latitude and 0730.36.632 East longitude. Slope was between 300 -600 with comparatively dry habitat located at South facing Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.42.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 38 plant species and was dominated by Abies pindrow having an IVI value of 46.33 followed by Potentilla ochreata and Fragaria nubicola

167 having IVI values of 26.82 and 21.39 respectively. Co-dominant species were Juniperus communis (19.63), Lonicera hispida (18.45) and Viburnum grandiflorum (17.21) (Table

4.38).

4.42.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.94 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.18. The evenness was found to be 0.63 and richness value was 2.19. The maturity index value was calculated to be 21.84 % for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.42.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2. High grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3 (Table 4.2).

Table.4.38. Primary phytosociological data of Abies- Potentilla - Fragaria Community

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F R.F CC RC IVI 1 Abies pindrow 2.4 2.51 100 12.05 27.52 31.77 46.33 2 Pinus wallichiana 1 1.05 60 7.23 5.11 5.90 14.18 3 Juniperus communis 14 14.64 40 4.82 0.14 0.16 19.63 4 Vibernum grandiflorum 11.8 12.34 40 4.82 0.04 0.05 17.21 5 Lonicera hispida 15.2 15.90 20 2.41 0.12 0.14 18.45 6 Potentilla ochreata 23.2 24.27 20 2.41 0.12 0.14 26.82 7 Silene edgeworthii 0.3 0.31 10 1.20 0.25 0.29 1.81 8 Fragaria nubicola 3.8 3.97 30 3.61 11.95 13.80 21.39 9 Pennaisetum lanatum 4.2 4.39 40 4.82 2.25 2.60 11.81 10 Polygonum amplexicaule 0.4 0.42 20 2.41 2.1 2.42 5.25 11 Pleurospermum candollei 0.1 0.10 10 1.20 1.5 1.73 3.04 12 Chaerophyllum capnoides 0.6 0.63 20 2.41 1.75 2.02 5.06 13 Arisaema flavum 1.6 1.67 50 6.02 1.25 1.44 9.14 14 Anaphalis triplinervis 0.9 0.94 20 2.41 1.75 2.02 5.37 15 Galium boreale 0.8 0.84 10 1.20 0.25 0.29 2.33 16 Impatiens edgeworthii 0.4 0.42 10 1.20 0.25 0.29 1.91 17 Parnassia nubicola 1.9 1.99 10 1.20 3.75 4.33 7.52 18 Astragalus subumbellatus 1.2 1.26 40 4.82 4.75 5.48 11.56 19 Ceterach offichnarum 0.5 0.52 10 1.20 1.5 1.73 3.46

168

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F R.F CC RC IVI 20 Viola canescens 0.3 0.31 20 2.41 0.5 0.58 3.30 21 Ainsliaea aptera 0.3 0.31 10 1.20 1.5 1.73 3.25 22 Pedicularis pyramidata 0.9 0.94 20 2.41 1.75 2.02 5.37 23 Asplenium trichomanes 2.1 2.20 10 1.20 3.75 4.33 7.73 24 Iris decora 0.6 0.63 10 1.20 1.5 1.73 3.56 25 Bupleurum candollei 0.8 0.84 30 3.61 0.75 0.87 5.32 26 Primula macrophyla 0.1 0.10 10 1.20 0.25 0.29 1.60 27 Clinopodium umbrosum 0.1 0.10 10 1.20 0.25 0.29 1.60 28 Thymus linearis 1.4 1.46 20 2.41 3 3.46 7.34 29 Achillea millefolium 0.3 0.31 10 1.20 1.5 1.73 3.25 30 Origanum vulgare 0.6 0.63 10 1.20 0.25 0.29 2.12 31 Geranium pretense 0.4 0.42 10 1.20 0.25 0.29 1.91 32 Artemisia herba alba 1.4 1.46 10 1.20 1.5 1.73 4.40 33 Adiantum capilus venaris 0.3 0.31 10 1.20 0.25 0.29 1.81 34 Sibbaldia cuneata 0.7 0.73 30 3.61 2 2.31 6.66 35 Malva parviflora 0.1 0.10 10 1.20 0.25 0.29 1.60 36 Nepeta laevigata 0.5 0.52 20 2.41 0.5 0.58 3.51 37 Polygala sibirica 0.3 0.31 10 1.20 0.25 0.29 1.81 38 Ajuga parviflora 0.1 0.10 10 1.20 0.25 0.29 1.60 95.6 100 830 100 86.6 100 300

4.43. Viburnum- Festuca - Lonicera Community (Community 37)

4.43.1. Geographical Characteristics

Viburnum - Festuca –Lonicera Community with 46 plant species was established at Nagan Wali Bahak in east of Perchinasi. The altitude of area was 3080 m located at

340.41.525 North Latitude and 0730.54.892 East longitude. Slope was between 300 -600 with comparatively dry habitat lying at Northern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.43.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 46 plant species and was dominated by Viburnum cotinifolium having an IVI value of 36.82 followed by Festuca hartmannii and Lonicera hispida having IVI values of 34.09 and 24.86 respectively. Co-dominant species were

169

Oxytropis lapponica (24.36), Salix flablellaris (21.97) and Aconitum hetrophylum (9.55)

(Table 4.39).

4.43.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.94 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.34. The evenness was found to be 0.61 and richness value was 2.65. The maturity index value was calculated to be 22.39 % for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.43.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2.

Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2 (Table

4.2).

Table.4.39. Primary phytosociological data of Viburnum- Festuca- Lonicera Community

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C RC IVI 1 Lonicera hispida 4.40 6.62 40.00 3.88 20.00 14.36 24.86 2 Viburnum cotinifolium 10.20 15.34 40.00 3.88 24.50 17.59 36.82 3 Salix flablellaris 5.20 7.82 20.00 1.94 17.00 12.21 21.97 4 Oxytropis lapponica 8.60 12.93 40.00 3.88 10.50 7.54 24.36 5 Astragalus grahamianus 0.30 0.45 20.00 1.94 0.50 0.36 2.75 6 Habenaria pectinata 0.40 0.60 20.00 1.94 0.50 0.36 2.90 7 Silne viscosa 0.70 1.05 20.00 1.94 0.50 0.36 3.35 8 Plantago major 0.10 0.15 10.00 0.97 0.25 0.18 1.30 9 Orobanche alba 0.30 0.45 20.00 1.94 0.50 0.36 2.75 10 Festuca hartmannii 12.80 19.25 90.00 8.74 8.50 6.10 34.09 11 Eremopoa altaica 0.80 1.20 20.00 1.94 0.50 0.36 3.50 12 Ranunculus stewartii 0.50 0.75 10.00 0.97 1.50 1.08 2.80 13 Urtica hyperborean 0.20 0.30 10.00 0.97 0.25 0.18 1.45 14 Aconitum heterophyllum 2.10 3.16 40.00 3.88 3.50 2.51 9.55 15 Aconitum chyasmenthium 1.30 1.95 20.00 1.94 1.75 1.26 5.15 16 Senecio graciliflorus 0.90 1.35 40.00 3.88 1.00 0.72 5.96 17 Lindelofia longiflora 0.40 0.60 20.00 1.94 1.75 1.26 3.80 18 Rubus elipticus 0.10 0.15 10.00 0.97 1.50 1.08 2.20 19 Allardia tomentosa 0.60 0.90 20.00 1.94 1.75 1.26 4.10

170

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C RC IVI 20 Pedicularis pyramidata 0.60 0.90 20.00 1.94 1.75 1.26 4.10 21 Cynoglossum zeylanicum 0.10 0.15 10.00 0.97 0.25 0.18 1.30 22 Monira longicaule 0.20 0.30 10.00 0.97 1.50 1.08 2.35 23 Delphinium denudatnum 0.50 0.75 20.00 1.94 0.50 0.36 3.05 24 Aquilegia nivalis 0.10 0.15 10.00 0.97 0.25 0.18 1.30 25 Rheum austral 0.60 0.90 30.00 2.91 4.50 3.23 7.05 26 Bergenia ciliata 0.90 1.35 20.00 1.94 3.00 2.15 5.45 27 Galium boreale 1.50 2.26 40.00 3.88 1.00 0.72 6.86 28 Onychium contiguum 0.70 1.05 20.00 1.94 0.50 0.36 3.35 29 Polygonatum verticilatum 0.90 1.35 20.00 1.94 0.50 0.36 3.65 30 Cynoglossum lanceolatum 0.40 0.60 10.00 0.97 1.50 1.08 2.65 31 Dipsacus inermis 0.40 0.60 10.00 0.97 1.50 1.08 2.65 32 Asplenium trichomanes 0.60 0.90 10.00 0.97 1.50 1.08 2.95 33 Adiantum pedatum 0.30 0.45 10.00 0.97 0.25 0.18 1.60 34 Crepis sancta 0.30 0.45 10.00 0.97 1.50 1.08 2.50 35 Pleurospermum candollei 0.40 0.60 20.00 1.94 3.00 2.15 4.70 36 Roscoea alpina 0.50 0.75 20.00 1.94 1.75 1.26 3.95 37 Thymus linearis 0.90 1.35 30.00 2.91 3.25 2.33 6.60 38 Bupleurum marginatum 0.90 1.35 30.00 2.91 0.75 0.54 4.80 39 Artemisia herba alba 0.30 0.45 10.00 0.97 1.50 1.08 2.50 40 Pedicularis scullyana 0.90 1.35 30.00 2.91 4.50 3.23 7.50 41 Astragalis subumbellatus 0.50 0.75 30.00 2.91 2.00 1.44 5.10 42 Sibbaldia purpurea 0.60 0.90 20.00 1.94 1.75 1.26 4.10 43 Sedum ewersii 0.60 0.90 20.00 1.94 1.75 1.26 4.10 44 Aster himalicus 0.90 1.35 20.00 1.94 0.50 0.36 3.65 45 Origanum vulgare 1.50 2.26 30.00 2.91 0.75 0.54 5.71 46 Filipendula ulmaria 0.50 0.75 10.00 0.97 1.50 1.08 2.80 66.5 100 1030 100 139.25 100 300

4.44. Lonicera - Berberis -Juniperus Community (Community 38)

4.44.1. Geographical Characteristics

Lonicera -Berberis -Juniperus Community with 33 plant species was established at Peerhaseemar Ziarat. The altitude of area was 3150 m located at 340.41.653 North

Latitude and 0730.54.964 East longitude. Slope was between 00 -300 with comparatively dry habitat located at South facing Aspesct (Table 4.2).

171

4.44.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 33 plant species and was dominated by Lonicera webbiana having an IVI value of 52.48 followed by Berberis aitchisonii and Juniperis communis having IVI values of 29.50 and 29.33 respectively. Co-dominant species were

Festuca hartmannii (23.90), Lonicera angustifolia (22.61) and Viburnum grandiflorum

(21.42) (Table 4.40).

4.44.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.92 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 2.96. The evenness was found to be 0.58 and richness value was 1.90. The maturity index value was calculated to be 19.69 % for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.44.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2

(Moderatly eroded). Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3 (Table 4.2).

Table.4.40. Primary phytosociological data of Lonicera – Berberis-Juniperus Community

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C RC IVI 1 Lonicera webbiana 7.4 12.74 60 9.23 49.00 30.51 52.48 2 Lonicera angustifolia 5.2 8.95 20 3.08 17.00 10.59 22.61 3 Berberis aitchisonii 9.2 15.83 20 3.08 17.00 10.59 29.50 4 Vibernum grandiflorum 3.6 6.20 20 3.08 19.50 12.14 21.42 5 Juniperus communis 8.2 14.11 20 3.08 19.50 12.14 29.33 6 Sibbaldia cuneata 2.6 4.48 40 6.15 7.00 4.36 14.99 7 Pennaisetum lanatum 6 10.33 70 10.77 4.50 2.80 23.90 8 Taraxacum tibitianum 0.3 0.52 20 3.08 1.05 0.65 4.25 9 Anaphalis triplinervis 0.4 0.69 10 1.54 0.50 0.31 2.54 10 Arisaema flavum 0.5 0.86 20 3.08 0.80 0.50 4.44 11 Artemisia japonica 1.9 3.27 10 1.54 3.75 2.33 7.14

172

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C RC IVI 12 Bupleurum candollei 0.4 0.69 20 3.08 0.50 0.31 4.08 13 Aster himalicus 0.7 1.20 30 4.62 2.00 1.25 7.07 14 Trigonella falcate 0.1 0.17 10 1.54 0.25 0.16 1.87 15 Geranium pretense 1.1 1.89 20 3.08 0.50 0.31 5.28 16 Wulfenia amherstiana 0.2 0.34 10 1.54 0.25 0.16 2.04 17 Polygonum plebeium 0.5 0.86 10 1.54 1.50 0.93 3.33 18 Phlomis bracteosa 0.3 0.52 10 1.54 1.50 0.93 2.99 19 Thymus linearis 1.9 3.27 40 6.15 4.75 2.96 12.38 20 Gentiana phylocalyx 0.5 0.86 20 3.08 0.50 0.31 4.25 21 Chaerophyllum capnoides 0.3 0.52 10 1.54 0.25 0.16 2.21 22 Bistorta amplexicaulis 0.2 0.34 10 1.54 0.25 0.16 2.04 23 Carex psychrophila 0.3 0.52 10 1.54 0.25 0.16 2.21 24 Psedomertensia moltkioides 0.9 1.55 20 3.08 0.50 0.31 4.94 25 Senecio graciliflorus 0.7 1.20 20 3.08 0.50 0.31 4.59 26 Pleurospermum candollei 0.4 0.69 10 1.54 0.25 0.16 2.38 27 Hypericum perforatum 0.6 1.03 20 3.08 0.50 0.31 4.42 28 Dipsacus inermis 0.3 0.52 10 1.54 0.25 0.16 2.21 29 Eurphobia wallichii 0.2 0.34 10 1.54 0.25 0.16 2.04 30 Bergenia stracheyi 0.3 0.52 10 1.54 1.50 0.93 2.99 31 Rubus fruticosus 0.1 0.17 10 1.54 1.50 0.93 2.64 32 Polygonatum verticilatum 2 3.44 20 3.08 1.75 1.09 7.61 33 Asplenium adiantum nigrum 0.8 1.38 10 1.54 1.50 0.93 3.85 58.1 100 650 100 160.6 100 300

4.45. Abies – Primula - Erigeron Community (Community 39)

4.45.1. Geographical Characteristics

Abies – Primula-Erigeron Community with 33 plant species was established at forest site in Machiara National Park. The altitude of area was 2915 m located at

340.56.9268 North Latitude and 0730.57.2376 East longitude. Slope was between 00 -300 with comparatively moist habitat lying at north facing Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.45.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 33 plant species and was dominated by Abies pindrow having an IVI value of 47.91 followed by Primula macrophyla and Erigeron bellidioides

173 having IVI values of 18.93 and 16.53 respectively. Co-dominant species were Viburnum grandiflorum (15.21), Ainsliaea aptera (14.42) and Geranium himalayense (13.85) (Table

4.41).

4.45.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.94 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.18. The evenness was found to be 0.73 and richness value was 1.90. The maturity index value was calculated to be 28.78 % for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.45.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was not eroded and placed in Class 1 (not eroded).

Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2 (Table

4.2).

Table.4.41. Primary phytosociological data of Abies – Primula-Erigeron Community

S.No. Species Name D RD F RF CC RC IVI 1 Abies pindrow 2.8 4.66 60 6.32 45.90 36.93 47.91 2 Taxus wallichiana 0.8 1.33 40 4.21 9.34 7.52 13.06 3 Aesculus indica 0.2 0.33 10 1.05 0.01 0.01 1.39 4 Vibernum grandiflorum 5 8.32 60 6.32 0.72 0.58 15.21 5 Parrotiopsis jacquemontiana 1 1.66 20 2.11 0.12 0.10 3.87 6 Lonicera asperifolia 1 1.66 20 2.11 0.3 0.24 4.01 7 Viburnum nervosum 0.6 1.00 20 2.11 0.12 0.10 3.20 8 Prunus padus 0.8 1.33 20 2.11 0.02 0.02 3.45 9 Adiantum pedatum 1.6 2.66 30 3.16 3.25 2.62 8.44 10 Dryopteris ramose 1.2 2.00 30 3.16 3.25 2.62 7.77 11 Salix flablellaris 1.3 2.16 10 1.05 0.25 0.20 3.42 12 Galium boreale 3.9 6.49 50 5.26 2.5 2.01 13.76 13 Agrostis gigantean 1.6 2.66 40 4.21 1 0.80 7.68 14 Primula macrophyla 4.1 6.82 50 5.26 8.5 6.84 18.93 15 Valeriana jatamansi 3.5 5.82 40 4.21 2.25 1.81 11.84 16 Urtica hyperborea 0.5 0.83 10 1.05 1.5 1.21 3.09 17 Rumex nepalensis 0.2 0.33 10 1.05 1.5 1.21 2.59

174

S.No. Species Name D RD F RF CC RC IVI 18 Pennaisetum lanatum 4.4 7.32 40 4.21 2.25 1.81 13.34 19 Geranium himalayense 4.1 6.82 40 4.21 3.5 2.82 13.85 20 Impatiens brachycentra 1.1 1.83 20 2.11 0.5 0.40 4.34 21 Alcea rosea 0.9 1.50 20 2.11 4 3.22 6.82 22 Trillium govanianum. 1.8 3.00 40 4.21 2.25 1.81 9.02 23 Lindelofia longiflora 2 3.33 30 3.16 1.75 1.41 7.89 24 Cardamine hirsute 0.6 1.00 30 3.16 2 1.61 5.77 25 Polygonum plebgium 1.2 2.00 30 3.16 3.25 2.62 7.77 26 Dipsacus inermis 1.9 3.16 20 2.11 1.75 1.41 6.67 27 Erigeron bellidioides 4.5 7.49 40 4.21 6 4.83 16.53 28 Asplenium fontanum 0.3 0.50 20 2.11 1.75 1.41 4.01 29 Alopecurus himalaicus 3.6 5.99 30 3.16 4.5 3.62 12.77 30 Ainsliaea aptera 2.9 4.83 30 3.16 8 6.44 14.42 31 Polystichum prescottianum 0.4 0.67 20 2.11 1.75 1.41 4.18 32 Silene edgeworthii 0.2 0.33 10 1.05 0.25 0.20 1.59 33 Plantago major 0.1 0.17 10 1.05 0.25 0.20 1.42 60.1 100 950 100 124.27 100 300

4.46. Viburnum- Berberis- Salix Community (Community 40)

4.46.1. Geographical Characteristics

Viburnum- Berberis- Salix Community with 39 plant species was established at forest in Machiara National Park. The altitude of area was 3050 m located at 340.58.1268

North Latitude and 0730.56.5542 East longitude. Slope was between 300 -600 with comparatively moist habitat located at South facing Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.46.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 39 plant species and was dominated by Viburnum grandiflorum having an IVI value of 39.06 followed by Berberis aitchisonii and Salix flablellaris having IVI values of 38.16 and 16.32 respectively. Co-dominant species were

Festuca hartmannii (14.84), Galium boreale (13.32) and Pinus wallichiana (12.04)

(Table 4.42).

175

4.46.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.94 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.29. The evenness was found to be 0.69 and richness value was 2.52. The maturity index value was calculated to be 27.69 % for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.46.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was not eroded and placed in Class 1 (not eroded).

Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2 (Table

4.2).

Table.4.42. Primary phytosociological data of Viburnum - Berberis - Salix Community

Sr. Species Name D RD F RF CC RC IVI No. 1 Pinus wallichiana 1.8 1.98 60 5.56 7.60 4.50 12.04 2 Abies pindrow 0.6 0.66 40 3.70 0.94 0.56 4.92 3 Taxus wallichiana 0.6 0.66 40 3.70 1.53 0.90 5.27 4 Vibernum grandiflorum 13.8 15.21 40 3.70 34 20.14 39.06 5 Berberis aitchisonii 14.8 16.32 60 5.56 27.5 16.29 38.16 6 Viburnum nervosum 3.2 3.53 20 1.85 7.5 4.44 9.82 7 Sorbus lanata 1 1.10 20 1.85 3 1.78 4.73 8 Lonicera webbiana 1 1.10 20 1.85 3 1.78 4.73 9 Salix flablellaris 5.8 6.39 40 3.70 10.5 6.22 16.32 10 Aconogonum alpiunm 1.9 2.09 30 2.78 4.5 2.67 7.54 11 Rumex nepalensis 0.8 0.88 20 1.85 3 1.78 4.51 12 Primula macrophyla 1.1 1.21 30 2.78 3.25 1.93 5.92 13 Origanum vulgare. 0.6 0.66 10 0.93 0.25 0.15 1.74 14 Eurphorbia wallichii 1.4 1.54 30 2.78 2 1.18 5.51 15 Clinopodium vulgare 2.4 2.65 40 3.70 2.25 1.33 7.68 16 Valeriana jatamansi 1.6 1.76 30 2.78 0.75 0.44 4.99 17 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 0.6 0.66 30 2.78 0.75 0.44 3.88 18 Adiantum caudatum 1 1.10 30 2.78 3.25 1.93 5.81 19 Polystichum attenuatum 0.3 0.33 10 0.93 0.5 0.30 1.55 20 Dryopteris marginata 1.4 1.54 30 2.78 6.75 4.00 8.32 21 Dryopteris barbigera 2.1 2.32 20 1.85 5.25 3.11 7.28 22 Geranium pretense 2 2.21 30 2.78 2 1.18 6.17 23 Festuca hartmannii 5.9 6.50 50 4.63 6.25 3.70 14.84

176

Sr. Species Name D RD F RF CC RC IVI No. 24 Silene edgeworthii 1.4 1.54 30 2.78 0.75 0.44 4.77 25 Galium boreale 5.5 6.06 40 3.70 6 3.55 13.32 26 Fragaria nubicola 1.2 1.32 20 1.85 2 1.18 4.36 27 Valeriana jatamansi 0.8 0.88 30 2.78 2 1.18 4.84 28 Wulfenia amherstiana 1.2 1.32 20 1.85 5.25 3.11 6.28 29 Alopecurus himalaicus 1.9 2.09 30 2.78 0.75 0.44 5.32 30 Chrysopogon gryllus 4.5 4.96 40 3.70 3.5 2.07 10.74 31 Ajuga bracteosa 0.4 0.44 20 1.85 1.75 1.04 3.33 32 Calanthe tricarinata 3.4 3.75 20 1.85 3 1.78 7.38 33 Taraxacum tibitianum 0.3 0.33 20 1.85 1.75 1.04 3.22 34 Alopecurus himalaicus 2.9 3.20 30 2.78 4.5 2.67 8.64 35 Plantago major 0.1 0.11 10 0.93 0.25 0.15 1.18 36 Lindelofia longiflora 0.1 0.11 10 0.93 0.25 0.15 1.18 37 Cynoglossum lanceolatum 0.1 0.11 10 0.93 0.25 0.15 1.18 38 Iris decora 0.1 0.11 10 0.93 0.25 0.15 1.18 39 Asplenium septentrionale 1.1 1.21 10 0.93 0.25 0.15 2.29 90.7 100 1080 100 168.82 100 300

4.47. Abies - Viburnum-Trillium Community (Community 41)

4.47.1. Geographical Characteristics

Abies - Viburnum-Trillium Community with 34 plant species was established at

Dher Bahak in Machiara National Park. The altitude of area was 3070 m located at

340.56.9568 North Latitude and 0730.54.0511 East longitude. Slope was between 600 -900 with comparatively moist habitat lying on North East Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.47.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 34 plant species and was dominated by Abies pindrow having an IVI value of 50.72 followed byViburnum grandiflorum and Trillium govanianum having IVI values of 18.70 and 15.71 respectively. Co-dominant species were Galium boreale (15.02), Skimmea lauriola (13.84) and Prunus padus (12.95) (Table

4.43).

177

4.47.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.94 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.21. The evenness was found to be 0.73 and richness value was 1.96. The maturity index value was calculated to be 27.05 % for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.47.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was severely eroded and placed in Class 3 (highly eroded). Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2

(Table 4.2).

Table.4.43. Primary phytosociological data of Abies-Viburnum-Trillium Community

Sr. Species Name D RD F RF CC R.C IVI No 1 Taxus wallichiana 0.8 1.41 40 4.35 5.09 3.65 9.41 2 Abies pindrow 1.4 2.47 40 4.35 61.14 43.90 50.72 3 Pinus wallichiana 0.8 1.41 40 4.35 8.13 5.84 11.60 4 Prunus cornuta 1 1.77 60 6.52 6.49 4.66 12.95 5 Rubus fruticosus 1 1.77 40 4.35 0.24 0.17 6.29 6 Viburnum grandiflorum 6.6 11.66 60 6.52 0.72 0.52 18.70 7 Lonicera asperifolia 3.4 6.01 20 2.17 0.30 0.22 8.40 8 Skimmea lauriola 5.2 9.19 40 4.35 0.42 0.30 13.84 9 Dryopteris marginata 2.1 3.71 30 3.26 6.75 4.85 11.82 10 Pseudomertensia moltkioides 0.6 1.06 30 3.26 0.75 0.54 4.86 11 Valeriana jatamansi 1.9 3.36 40 4.35 1.00 0.72 8.42 12 Impatiens grandulifera 2.6 4.59 40 4.35 2.25 1.62 10.56 13 Viola canescens pyrolifolia 1.6 2.83 40 4.35 1.00 0.72 7.89 14 Trillium govanianum 4.5 7.95 40 4.35 4.75 3.41 15.71 15 Adiantum trichomanes 1.3 2.30 20 2.17 3.00 2.15 6.62 16 Primula reptans 0.6 1.06 30 3.26 3.25 2.33 6.65 17 Galium boreale 3.9 6.89 50 5.43 3.75 2.69 15.02 18 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 1 1.77 30 3.26 1.75 1.26 6.28 19 Rumex nepalensis 0.2 0.35 10 1.09 1.50 1.08 2.52 20 Epilobium wallichianum 2.6 4.59 20 2.17 1.75 1.26 8.02 21 Corydalis stewartii 1.5 2.65 30 3.26 2.00 1.44 7.35 22 Geranium pretense 0.3 0.53 20 2.17 0.50 0.36 3.06 23 Agrostis vernalis 0.1 0.18 10 1.09 0.25 0.18 1.44

178

Sr. Species Name D RD F RF CC R.C IVI No 24 Fragaria nubicola 2.9 5.12 30 3.26 4.50 3.23 11.62 25 Apluda mutica 0.4 0.71 10 1.09 1.50 1.08 2.87 26 Eurphobia wallichii 1 1.77 20 2.17 1.50 1.08 5.02 27 Silene edgeworthii 0.3 0.53 10 1.09 0.25 0.18 1.80 28 Ajuga parviflora 0.1 0.18 10 1.09 0.25 0.18 1.44 29 Eurphobia herita 0.3 0.53 10 1.09 0.25 0.18 1.80 30 Ainsliaea aptera 1.7 3.00 10 1.09 3.75 2.69 6.78 31 Allardia tomentosa 0.6 1.06 10 1.09 1.50 1.08 3.22 32 Artemisia annua 1.8 3.18 10 1.09 3.75 2.69 6.96 33 Dipsacus inermis 0.8 1.41 10 1.09 1.50 1.08 3.58 34 Polygonatum verticilatum 1.7 3.00 10 1.09 3.75 2.69 6.78 56.6 100 920 100 139.27 100 300

4.48. Viburnum- Juniperus - Lonicera Community (Community 42)

4.48.1. Geographical Characteristics

Viburnum-Juniperus–Lonicera Community with 34 plant species was established at Dhar Bahak in Machiara National Park. The altitude of area was 3082 m located at 340.96.914 North Latitude and 0730.90.510 East longitude. Slope was between

300 -600 with comparatively moist habitat lying at East Southern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.8.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 34 plant species and was dominated by Viburnum grandiflorum having IVI value of 34.37 followed by Juniperus excelsa and Lonicera webbiana having IVI values of 32.05 and 18.34 respectively. Co-dominant species were

Pinus wallichiana (17.07), Festuca hartmannii (16.98) and Galium boreale (13.20)

(Table 4.44).

179

4.48.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.94 whereas the Shannon’s

diversity was calculated as 3.24. The evenness was found to be 0.75 and richness value

was 1.96. The maturity index value was calculated to be 30.88 % for the investigated

community (Table 4.2).

4.48.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class 2

(Moderately eroded). Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was

classified as class 2 (Table 4.2).

Table.4.44. Primary phytosociological data of Viburnum - Juniperus - Lonicera Community

Sr. Species Name D RD F RF CC RC IVI No 1 Abies pindrow 0.8 0.97 40 3.81 12.15 6.288 11.07 2 Pinus wallichiana 1.4 1.69 60 5.71 18.67 9.661 17.07 3 Prunus cornuta 0.2 0.24 20 1.90 0.10 0.051 2.20 4 Vibernum grandiflorum 10 12.09 60 5.71 32 16.561 34.37 5 Lonicera webbiana 5.6 6.77 40 3.81 15 7.763 18.34 6 Rubus elipticus 1.2 1.45 20 1.90 7.5 3.882 7.24 7 Juniperus excela 8.8 10.64 40 3.81 34 17.597 32.05 8 Iris decora 1.8 2.18 40 3.81 11.6 6.004 11.99 9 Primula macrophyla 1.7 2.06 40 3.81 4.75 2.458 8.32 10 Salvia nubicola 1.8 2.18 30 2.86 2 1.035 6.07 11 Artemisia japonica 0.4 0.48 20 1.90 0.5 0.259 2.65 12 Fragaria nubicola 5.3 6.41 40 3.81 1 0.518 10.74 13 Impatiens brachycentra 1.1 1.33 30 2.86 0.75 0.388 4.58 14 Saussurea albescens 2.5 3.02 20 1.90 1.75 0.906 5.83 15 Trifolium repens 2.3 2.78 20 1.90 1.75 0.906 5.59 16 Arisaema nepanthoides 0.4 0.48 20 1.90 0.5 0.259 2.65 17 Eurphobia wallichii 0.9 1.09 10 0.95 0.25 0.129 2.17 18 Geranium pretense 4.2 5.08 50 4.76 2.5 1.294 11.13 19 Dipsacus inermis 0.9 1.09 20 1.90 1.75 0.906 3.90 20 Epilobium parviflorum 2.1 2.54 30 2.86 2 1.035 6.43 21 Athyrium wallichianum 1.2 1.45 30 2.86 3.25 1.682 5.99 22 Dryopteris blanfordii 1.8 2.18 30 2.86 6.75 3.493 8.53 23 Rumex nepalensis 0.4 0.48 20 1.90 1.75 0.906 3.29

180

Sr. Species Name D RD F RF CC RC IVI No 24 Ligularia amplexicaulia 1.7 2.06 40 3.81 1.1 0.569 6.43 25 Festuca hartmannii. 6 7.26 60 5.71 7.75 4.011 16.98 26 Filago hurdwenica 2.3 2.78 30 2.86 4.5 2.329 7.97 27 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 1.4 1.69 30 2.86 3.25 1.682 6.23 28 Galium boreale 5.5 6.65 40 3.81 5.3 2.743 13.20 29 Habenaria pectinata 2.1 2.54 30 2.86 0.75 0.388 5.78 30 Silene edgeworthii 2.1 2.54 30 2.86 2.05 1.061 6.46 31 Polygonum alpinum 2.2 2.66 20 1.90 4 2.070 6.64 32 Asplenium septentrionale 1.8 2.18 20 1.90 0.5 0.259 4.34 33 Taraxacum tibitianum 0.5 0.60 10 0.95 1.5 0.776 2.33 34 Polygonatum verticilatum 0.3 0.36 10 0.95 0.25 0.129 1.44 82.7 100 1050 100 193.22 99.99 300

4.49. Salix - Lonicera -Viburnum Community (Community 43)

4.49.1. Geographical Characteristics

Salix - Lonicera –Viburnum Community with 33 plant species was established at

Dana Bahak in Machiara National Park. The altitude of area was 3115 m located at

340.55.8268 North Latitude and 0730.40.3920 East longitude. Slope was between 300 -600

with comparatively moist habitat with North East facing Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.49.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 33 plant species and was dominated by Salix

flablellaris having an IVI value of 62.58 followed by Lonicera webbiana and Viburnum

grandiflorum having IVI values of 20.03 and 16.56 respectively. Co-dominant species

were Pinus wallichiana (14.95), Festuca hartmannii (12.33) and Galium boreale (10.74)

(Table 4.45).

181

4.49.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.93 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.14. The evenness was found to be 0.70 and richness value was 1.90. The maturity index value was calculated to be 30.75 % for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.49.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was slightly eroded and placed in Class 1 (slightly eroded). High grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3

(Table 4.2).

Table.4.45. Primary phytosociological data of Salix - Lonicera -Viburnum Community

Sr. Species Name D RD F RF CC RC IVI No. 1 Abies pindrow 1 1.6 40 3.39 0.06 0.10 5.07 2 Pinus wallichiana 0.6 0.9 40 3.39 6.65 10.61 14.95 3 Prunus cornuta 0.6 0.9 40 3.39 1.63 2.60 6.94 4 Acer cappadocicum 0.8 1.3 40 3.39 0.52 0.83 5.49 5 Betula utilus 1.2 1.9 40 3.39 0.01 0.01 5.30 6 Taxus wallichiana 0.6 0.9 40 3.39 3.29 5.25 9.58 7 Picea smithiana 0.6 0.9 40 3.39 2.55 4.07 8.41 8 Salix flablellaris 6.6 10.4 60 5.08 29.50 47.07 62.58 9 Juniperus communis 0.6 0.9 40 3.39 1.00 1.60 5.93 10 Rubus fruticosus elipticus 1.2 1.9 40 3.39 3.00 4.79 10.07 11 Lonicera webbiana 1 1.6 20 1.69 10.50 16.75 20.03 12 Vibernum grandifolium 4.8 7.6 40 3.39 3.50 5.58 16.56 13 Dipsacus inermis 2.4 3.8 40 3.39 0.14 0.22 7.40 14 Primula macrophyla 0.9 1.4 30 2.54 0.02 0.03 3.99 15 Epilobium royleanum 1.2 1.9 20 1.69 0.02 0.02 3.61 16 Fragaria nubicola 3.4 5.4 50 4.24 0.02 0.03 9.64 17 Adiantum pedatum 0.9 1.4 20 1.69 0.02 0.02 3.14 18 Dryopteris ramosa 0.6 0.9 20 1.69 0.02 0.02 2.67 19 Rumex nepalensis 1.9 3.0 50 4.24 0.04 0.06 7.30 20 Valeriana jatamansi 2.3 3.6 20 1.69 0.01 0.01 5.34 21 Lindelofia lindelofia 2.1 3.3 50 4.24 0.01 0.01 7.56 22 Senecio chrysanthemoides 2.5 3.9 40 3.39 0.02 0.04 7.38 23 Salvia nubicola 3.8 6.0 40 3.39 0.02 0.04 9.43

182

Sr. Species Name D RD F RF CC RC IVI No. 24 Ainsliaea aptera 2.6 4.1 30 2.54 0.02 0.03 6.68 25 Silne viscosa 1.5 2.4 30 2.54 0.00 0.01 4.92 26 Festuca hartmannii. 5.1 8.1 50 4.24 0.03 0.04 12.33 27 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 1.2 1.9 30 2.54 0.02 0.03 4.46 28 Polygonum cognatum 2.6 4.1 40 3.39 0.02 0.04 7.54 29 Galium boreale 4.1 6.5 50 4.24 0.02 0.03 10.74 30 Trillium govanianum 2.6 4.1 40 3.39 0.01 0.02 7.52 31 Habenaria pectinata 0.8 1.3 10 0.85 0.01 0.01 2.12 32 Caltha alba 0.9 1.4 30 2.54 0.01 0.02 3.98 33 Cardamine hirsuta 0.3 0.5 10 0.85 0.01 0.01 1.33 63.3 100 1180 100 62.67 100 300

4.50. Pinus – Abies - Viburnum Community (Community 44)

4.50.1. Geographical Characteristics

Pinus-Abies-Viburnum Community with 38 plant species was established at

Chak in Machiara National Park in North of Muzaffarabad. The altitude of area was 3200 m located at 340.55.7318 North Latitude and 0730.51.3934 East longitude. Slope was between 300- 600 with high moister located at Northern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.50.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 38 plant species and was dominated by Pinus wallichiana having IVI value of 76.18 followed by Abies pidrow and Viburnum grandifolum having IVI values of 31.25 and 24.63 respectively. Co-dominant species were Lonicera hispida (12.65), Juniperus communis (10.59) and Lonicera webbiana

(9.78) (Table 4.46).

183

4.50.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.94 whereas the Shannon’s

diversity was calculated as 3.00. The evenness was found to be 0.53 and richness value

was 2.19. The maturity index value was calculated to be 21.84 % for the investigated

community (Table 4.2).

4.50.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was eroded and placed in Class 2. High grazing

intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3 (Table 4.2).

Table.4.46. Primary phytosociological data of Pinus-Abies-Viburnum Community

Sr.No. Species Name D RD F RF C RC IVI 1 Pinus wallichiana 1.4 2.01 40 4.82 5683.98 69.354 76.18 2 Abies pindrow 0.6 0.86 40 4.82 2095.92 25.574 31.25 3 Acer caesium 0.4 0.57 40 4.82 121.80 1.486 6.88 4 Betula utilus 0.4 0.57 40 4.82 136.69 1.668 7.06 5 Vibernum grandiflorum 13.6 19.48 40 4.82 27 0.329 24.63 6 Vibernum nurvosum 3.2 4.58 20 2.41 7.5 0.092 7.09 7 Lonicera webbiana 5 7.16 20 2.41 17 0.207 9.78 8 Lonicera hispida 7 10.03 20 2.41 17 0.207 12.65 9 Juniperus communis 5.6 8.02 20 2.41 12.5 0.153 10.59 10 Rubus fruticosus elipticus 0.6 0.86 20 2.41 3 0.037 3.31 11 Salix flablellaris 3.6 5.16 20 2.41 7.5 0.092 7.66 12 Rheum australe 0.2 0.29 10 1.20 3.75 0.046 1.54 13 Inula orientalis 0.8 1.15 40 4.82 2.25 0.027 5.99 14 Valeriana jatamansi 0.1 0.14 10 1.20 0.25 0.003 1.35 15 Artemisia japonica 0.8 1.15 10 1.20 1.5 0.018 2.37 16 Artemisia herba alba 4.2 6.02 20 2.41 5.25 0.064 8.49 17 Iris decora 0.1 0.14 10 1.20 1.5 0.018 1.37 18 Impatiens edgeworthii 2.2 3.15 20 2.41 3 0.037 5.60 19 Pleurospermum candollei 0.4 0.57 20 2.41 5.25 0.064 3.05 20 Habenaria pectinata 0.5 0.72 20 2.41 0.5 0.006 3.13 21 Silene vulgaris 0.2 0.29 10 1.20 0.25 0.003 1.49 22 Bergenia stracheyi 2.2 3.15 20 2.41 10 0.122 5.68 23 Sedum ewersii 0.5 0.72 30 3.61 0.75 0.009 4.34

184

Sr.No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 24 Festuca hartmannii 3.3 4.73 40 4.82 2.25 0.027 9.57 25 Viola canescens 0.4 0.57 20 2.41 0.5 0.006 2.99 26 Astragalus subumbellatus 2.4 3.44 30 3.61 6.75 0.082 7.14 27 Iris hookariana 0.1 0.14 10 1.20 1.5 0.018 1.37 28 Eurphobia wallichii 0.1 0.14 10 1.20 0.25 0.003 1.35 29 Sonchus oleracrus 0.5 0.72 30 3.61 2 0.024 4.36 30 Fragaria nubicola 2.1 3.01 20 2.41 1.75 0.021 5.44 31 Primula macrophyla 0.6 0.86 10 1.20 1.5 0.018 2.08 32 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 0.8 1.15 10 1.20 3.75 0.046 2.40 33 Geranium himalayense 1.3 1.86 20 2.41 0.5 0.006 4.28 34 Cardamine macrophyla 0.4 0.57 20 2.41 1.75 0.021 3.00 35 Origanum vulgare 1.5 2.15 20 2.41 4 0.049 4.61 36 Geranium pratense 1.1 1.58 10 1.20 1.5 0.018 2.80 37 Monira longifolia 0.8 1.15 20 2.41 1.75 0.021 3.58 38 Silne viscosa 0.8 1.15 20 2.41 1.75 0.021 3.58 69.8 100 830 100 8195.6 100 300

4.51. Salix - Junperus - Pennaisetum Community (Community 45)

4.51.1. Geographical Characteristics

Salix -Juniperus-Pennaisetum Community with 34 plant species was established

at Chak Bahak in Machiara National Park. The altitude of area was 3300 m located at

340.56.3813 North Latitude and 0730.50.1632 East longitudes. Slope was between 00 -300

with comparatively moist habitat lying on Eastern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.51.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 34 plant species and was dominated by Salix

flablellaris having an IVI value of 43.92 followed by Juniperus communis and

Pennaisetum lanatum having IVI values of 31.22 and 21.30 respectively. Co-dominant

species were Berberis aristata (20.40), Lonicera hispida (13.43) and Geum elatum

(12.97) (Table 4.47).

185

4.51.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.94 whereas the Shannon’s

diversity was calculated as 3.18. The evenness was found to be 0.70 and richness value

was 1.96. The maturity index value was calculated to be 29.41 % for the investigated

community (Table 4.2).

4.51.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was eroded and placed in Class 2 (moderately

eroded). High grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3

(Table 4.2).

Table.4.47. Primary phytosociological data of Salix - Junperus - Pennaisetum Community

Sr. Species Name D RD F RF CC RC IVI No 1 Salix flablellaris 12.6 14.08 80 8 44.50 21.84 43.92 2 Juniperus communis 11.4 12.74 40 4 29.50 14.48 31.22 3 Lonicera hispida 5.8 6.48 40 4 6.00 2.94 13.43 4 Berberis artistata 9 10.06 20 2 17.00 8.34 20.40 5 Iris decora 0.3 0.34 20 2 1.75 0.86 3.19 6 Cucusta europia 2.8 3.13 40 4 3.50 1.72 8.85 7 Origanum vulgare 2.1 2.35 20 2 4.00 1.96 6.31 8 Lamium album 1.6 1.79 30 3 2.00 0.98 5.77 9 Fragaria nubicola 2.2 2.46 50 5 2.50 1.23 8.69 10 Ainsliaea perantese. 1.1 1.23 30 3 0.75 0.37 4.60 11 Pennaisetum lanatum 8.3 9.27 70 7 10.25 5.03 21.30 12 Rheum austral 0.5 0.56 20 2 5.25 2.58 5.14 13 Berginea stracheyi 0.8 0.89 40 4 7.00 3.44 8.33 14 Silene vulgaris 2.5 2.79 40 4 3.50 1.72 8.51 15 Polygonum alpinum 0.7 0.78 30 3 2.00 0.98 4.76 16 Rumex nepalensis 0.3 0.34 30 3 1.75 0.86 4.19 17 Plantago major 0.2 0.22 10 1 0.25 0.12 1.35 18 Plantago alpina 0.2 0.22 10 1 0.25 0.12 1.35 19 Eurphobia wallichii 1.6 1.79 20 2 4.00 1.96 5.75 20 Pteridium equilinum 1 1.12 20 2 5.25 2.58 5.69 21 Artemisia herba alba 3.3 3.69 20 2 7.50 3.68 9.37 22 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 0.7 0.78 20 2 1.75 0.86 3.64 23 Arisaema flavum 0.8 0.89 20 2 0.50 0.25 3.14

186

Sr. Species Name D RD F RF CC RC IVI No 24 Geum elatum 2.5 2.79 60 6 8.50 4.17 12.97 25 Potentilla cathaclinis 2.5 2.79 40 4 6.00 2.94 9.74 26 Geranium nepalense 0.9 1.01 30 3 0.75 0.37 4.37 27 Polygonum cognatum 1.9 2.12 20 2 1.75 0.86 4.98 28 Bistorta amplexicaule 0.8 0.89 10 1 3.75 1.84 3.73 29 Plantago depressa 0.3 0.34 20 2 0.50 0.25 2.58 30 Sibbaldia purpurea 3.1 3.46 40 4 6.00 2.94 10.41 31 Impatiens edgeworthii 1.6 1.79 10 1 1.50 0.74 3.52 32 Urtica dioica 0.5 0.56 10 1 1.50 0.74 2.29 33 Bistorta affinis 3.7 4.13 20 2 7.50 3.68 9.82 34 Primula denticulate 1.9 2.12 20 2 5.25 2.58 6.70 89.5 100 1000 100 203.8 100 300

4.52. Juniperus - Rosa - Lonicera Community (Community 46)

4.52.1. Geographical Characteristics

Juniperus - Rosa –Lonicera Community with 40 plant species was established at

Sheshamali in district Hattian Bala. The altitude of area was 3100 m located

at340.26.5266 North Latitude and 0730.79.1804 East longitude. Slope was 00_300 with

comparatively moist habitat located at southern aspect (Table.3.1).

4.52.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 40 plant species and was dominated by Juniperus

communis having an IVI value of 30.39 followed by Lonicera webbiana and Rosa

macrophylla having IVI values of 20.69 and 16.66 respectively. Co-dominant species

were Sibbaldia purpurea (13.73), Spiraea arcuata (12.23) and Pseudomertensia

moltkioides (11.29) (Table.4.48).

4.52.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.96 whereas the Shannon’s

diversity was calculated as 3.47. The evenness was found to be 0.80 and richness value

187 was 2.30. The maturity index value was calculated to be 20.55% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.52.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was eroded and placed in Class 3 (Heavely eroded).

Heavy grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 3 (Table.4.2).

Table.4.48. Primary phytosociological data of Juniperus - Rosa - Lonicera Community

S.No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 1. Juniperus communis 7.6 40 24.6 11.73 4.87 13.79 30.39 2. Juniperus squamata 1 10 7.5 1.54 1.22 4.20 6.96 3. Rosa macrophyla 3.8 10 17.1 5.86 1.22 9.58 16.66 4. Lonicera webbiana 4.8 40 15 7.41 4.87 8.41 20.69 5. Cotoneaster affinis 4.2 10 12.5 6.48 1.22 7.00 14.7 6. Spiraea arcuata 2.6 10 12.5 4.01 1.22 7.00 12.23 7. Artemisia absinthium 1.4 30 1.75 2.16 3.65 0.98 6.79 8. Thymus linearis 1.1 30 3 1.70 3.65 1.68 7.03 9. Eurphobiawallichii 1.4 10 3.75 2.16 1.22 2.10 5.48 10. Sibbaldia cuneata 3.2 40 7 4.94 4.87 3.92 13.73 11. Potentilla curviseta 1.3 30 5.5 2.01 3.65 3.08 8.74 12. Poa alpina 3.6 40 1 5.56 4.87 0.56 10.99 13. Gypsophila cerastioides 3 20 3 4.63 2.43 1.68 8.74 14. Arisaema jacquemontii 0.9 30 4.5 1.39 3.65 2.52 7.56 15. Stellaria decumbens 0.3 10 0.25 0.46 1.22 0.14 1.82 16. Phlomis bracteosa 0.3 2 1.75 0.46 0.24 0.98 1.68 17. Fragaria nubicola 1.4 30 3.25 2.16 3.65 1.82 7.63 18. Bistorta affinis 1.2 20 5.25 1.85 2.43 2.94 7.22 19. Adiantum venustum 1.8 10 0.25 2.78 1.22 0.14 4.14 20. Pedicularis pyramidata 0.7 30 3.25 1.08 3.65 1.82 6.55 21. Aconitum violaceum 0.4 20 0.5 0.62 2.43 0.28 3.33 22. Achillea millefolium 0.5 20 1.75 0.77 2.43 0.98 4.18 23. Bupleurum falcatum 0.2 20 0.5 0.31 2.43 0.28 3.02 24. Primuladenticulata 1.2 30 5.5 1.85 3.65 3.08 8.58 25. Actaea spicata 1.2 20 1.75 1.85 2.43 0.98 5.26 26. Pseudomertensia moltkioides 2.5 30 6.75 3.86 3.65 3.78 11.29 27. Anemone obtusiloba 0.4 10 1.5 0.62 1.22 0.84 2.68 28. Primula macrophyla 0.3 10 1.5 0.46 1.22 0.84 2.52 29. Gnaphalium hypoleucum 0.8 10 1.5 1.23 1.22 0.84 3.29 30. Gentiana algida 1.5 30 0.75 2.31 3.65 0.42 6.38 31. Rheum webbianum 0.2 10 3.75 0.31 1.22 2.10 3.63 32. Rannunculus arvensis 1.4 20 3 2.16 2.43 1.68 6.27 33. Trifolium repens 0.7 20 3 1.08 2.43 1.68 5.19 34. Geum urbanum 1 30 4.25 1.54 3.65 2.38 7.57

188

S.No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 35. Asplenium septentrionale 1.3 10 0.25 2.01 1.22 0.14 3.37 36. Chaerophyllum villosum 1.3 20 3 2.01 2.43 1.68 6.12 37. Sibbaldia cuneata 1.2 10 1.5 1.85 1.22 0.84 3.91 38. Potentilla atrosanguianea 0.5 20 3 0.77 2.43 1.68 4.88 39. Rumex nepalensis 0.1 10 1.5 0.15 1.22 0.84 2.21 40. Carex buxbaumii 2.5 20 0.5 3.86 2.40 0.28 6.57 64.8 822 178.4 99.9 100 99.96 299.95

4.53. Juniperus -Potentilla -Primula Community (Community 47)

4.53.1. Geographical Characteristics

Juniperus -Potentilla –Primula Community with 45 plant species was established at

Sheshamali site in North of Gari Dopatta Village . The altitude of area was 3170 m located at 340.26.3501 North Latitude and 0730.78.3916East longitude. Slope was 300-600 with comparatively dry habitat lying at northern aspect (Table.3.1).

4.53.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 46 plant species and was dominated by Juniperus communis having an IVI value of 27.93 followed by Potentilla achreata and Primula macrophyla having IVI values of 14.21 and 13.88 respectively. Co-dominant species were Poa praterance (13.21), Cynoglossum lanceolatum (11.24) and Sibbaldia cuniata

(10.55) (Table.4.49).

4.53.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.96 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.63. The evenness was found to be 0.61 and richness value was 2.65. The maturity index value was calculated to be 19.34 % for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

189

4.53.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was not eroded and placed in Class one (slightly eroded). Moderate grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class

02 (Table. 4.2).

Table.4.49. Primary phytosociological data of Juniperus -Potentilla -Primula Community

Sr.No. Species Name D F C R.D R.F R.C IVI 1. Juniperus communis 8.6 40 36.6 11.80 4.49 11.64 27.93 2. Lunicera govaniana 1.4 20 19.5 1.92 2.25 6.20 10.37 3. Potentilla ochreata 4.2 20 19.5 5.76 2.25 6.20 14.21 4. Rosa webbiana 2.4 20 3 3.29 2.25 0.95 6.49 5. Viburnum nervosum 3.8 20 17.1 5.21 2.25 5.44 12.9 6. Cynoglossum lanceolatum 2.6 30 13.5 3.57 3.37 4.30 11.24 7. Chaerophyllum capnoides 1.9 40 12 2.61 4.49 3.82 10.92 8. Fragaria nubicola 1.9 20 10.5 2.61 2.25 3.34 8.2 9. Poa alpina 2.5 30 4 3.43 3.37 1.27 8.07 10. Trifolium repens 1.6 40 9.5 2.19 4.49 3.02 9.7 11. Corydalis stewartii 0.3 20 1 0.41 2.25 0.32 2.98 12. Polygonatum verticilatum 0.4 20 1 0.55 2.25 0.32 3.12 13. Aconitum hetrophyllum 0.3 20 1 0.41 2.25 0.32 2.98 14. Sibbaldia cuneata 2.1 30 13.5 2.88 3.37 4.30 10.55 15. Juncus membranaceus 3.2 20 3.5 4.39 2.25 1.11 7.75 16. Phlomis bracteosa 1 30 9 1.37 3.37 2.86 7.6 17. Poa praterance 6.6 20 6 9.05 2.25 1.91 13.21 18. Rheum webbiananum 0.4 10 7.5 0.55 1.12 2.39 4.06 19. Irus hookariana 1.6 20 6 2.19 2.25 1.91 6.35 20. Allium carolinianum 0.9 10 0.1 1.23 1.12 0.03 2.38 21. Angelica glauca 0.1 10 7.5 0.14 1.12 2.39 3.65 22. Taraxacum tibitianum 0.5 30 4 0.69 3.37 1.27 5.33 23. Plantago major 0.8 20 6 1.10 2.25 1.91 5.26 24. Gypsophila cerastioides 1 10 3 1.37 1.12 0.95 3.44 25. Pimpinella acuminate 0.8 10 3 1.10 1.12 0.95 3.17 26. Primula macrophyla 1.5 50 19.5 2.06 5.62 6.20 13.88 27. Geranium himalayense 1.1 30 4 1.51 3.37 1.27 6.15 28. Astragalus frigidus 0.2 10 3 0.27 1.12 0.95 2.34 29. Delphinium nordhagenii 0.5 20 6 0.69 2.25 1.91 4.85 30. Taraxacum obovatum 0.5 10 3 0.69 1.12 0.95 2.76 31. Sedum ewersii 1.3 20 3.5 1.78 2.25 1.11 5.14 32. Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 0.9 20 1 1.23 2.25 0.32 3.8 33. Siline edgeworthii 1.1 20 1 1.51 2.25 0.32 4.08 34. Dropteris wallichianum 1.4 20 3.5 1.92 2.25 1.11 5.28 35. Bistorta affinis 0.7 10 3 0.96 1.12 0.95 3.03 36. Fragaria nubicola 0.5 10 3 0.69 1.12 0.95 2.76

190

Sr.No. Species Name D F C R.D R.F R.C IVI 37. Viola biflora 1.3 10 6 1.78 1.12 1.91 4.81 38. Androsace primuloides 0.3 10 0.5 0.41 1.12 0.16 1.69 39. Sedum trullifolium 2.8 10 7.5 3.84 1.12 2.39 7.35 40. Anaphalis boisseri 1.9 10 7.5 2.61 1.12 2.39 6.12 41. Malaxis muscifera 0.6 10 3 0.82 1.12 0.95 2.89 42. Carex buxbaumii 0.3 10 0.5 0.41 1.12 0.16 1.69 43. Ranunculus stewartii 2.3 20 3.5 3.16 2.25 1.11 6.52 44. Geum elatum 1.4 10 3 1.92 1.12 0.95 3.99 45. Thymus linearis 0.7 10 7.5 0.96 1.12 2.39 4.47 46. Filago hurdwenica 0.7 10 7.5 0.96 1.12 2.39 4.47 72.9 890 314.3 100 99.97 99.96 299.93

4.54. Salix - Pinus- Prunus Community (Community 48)

4.54.1. Geographical Characteristics

Salix- Pinus – Prunus Community with 41 plant species was established at

Sheesha Mali in west of Leepa Valley. The altitude of area was 3240 m located at

340.27.0745 North Latitude and 0730.76.9639 East longitude. Slope was between 600- 900 and located at Southern Aspect (Table.3.1).

4.54.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 41 plant species and was dominated by Salix flablellaris having an IVI value of 50.44 followed by Pinus wallichiana and Prunus padus having IVI values of 41.33 and 14.09 respectively. Co-dominant species were

Spiraea arcuata (12.70), Fragaria nubicola (11.37), and Geranium himalayense (10.61)

(Table.4.50).

4.54.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.93 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.26. The evenness was found to be 0.63 and richness value was 2.36. The maturity index value was calculated to be 26.58% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

191

4.54.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was not eroded and placed in Class 1 (slightly

eroded). Low grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class one

(Table.4.2).

Table.4.50. Primary phytosociological data of Salix - Pinus- Prunus Community

Sr.No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 1 Betula utilus 1.4 60 5.30 1.79 5.50 1.37 8.66 2 Pinus wallichiana 2 40 136.11 2.55 3.67 35.11 41.33 3 Abies pindrow 0.6 20 15.11 0.77 1.83 3.90 6.5 4 Prunus padus 0.8 20 43.56 1.02 1.83 11.24 14.09 5 Taxus wallichiana 0.2 20 2.22 0.26 1.83 0.57 2.66 6 Picea smithiana 0.4 20 6.43 0.51 1.83 1.66 4 7 Salix flablellaris 20.4 80 66.2 26.02 7.34 17.08 50.44 8 Spiraea arcuata 6 20 12.5 7.65 1.83 3.22 12.7 9 Viburnum cotinifolium 2.8 20 7.5 3.57 1.83 1.93 7.33 10 Alopecurus himalaicus 0.7 20 0.5 0.89 1.83 0.13 2.85 11 Ranunculus trichophyllus 1.6 20 5.25 2.04 1.83 1.35 5.22 12 Potentilla nepalensis 0.8 20 5.25 1.02 1.83 1.35 4.2 13 Primula macrophyla 1 50 8.5 1.28 4.59 2.19 8.06 14 Primula denticulate 0.4 20 1.75 0.51 1.83 0.45 2.79 15 Galium boreale 3.5 40 2.25 4.46 3.67 0.58 8.71 16 Sibbaldia cuneata 0.7 10 1.5 0.89 0.92 0.39 2.2 17 Viola biflora 1.2 40 4.75 1.53 3.67 1.23 6.43 18 Valeriana jatamansii 1.3 40 4.75 1.66 3.67 1.23 6.56 19 Dryopteris juxtaposita 1.3 20 1.75 1.66 1.83 0.45 3.94 20 Bergenia purpurrascens 0.4 10 3.75 0.51 0.92 0.97 2.4 21 Bistorta affinis 1.2 20 3 1.53 1.83 0.77 4.13 22 Dactylorhiza hatagirea 0.6 20 1.75 0.77 1.83 0.45 3.05 23 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 0.8 30 0.75 1.02 2.75 0.19 3.96 24 Polygonatum verticilatum 1.9 40 1 2.42 3.67 0.26 6.35 25 Salvia hians 0.2 10 1.5 0.26 0.92 0.39 1.57 26 Carex cardiolepis 3.3 20 1.75 4.21 1.83 0.45 6.49 27 Festuca kashmiriana 3.6 30 2 4.59 2.75 0.52 7.86 28 Piptatherum gracile 1.8 20 0.5 2.30 1.83 0.13 4.26 29 Poa nemoralis 2.3 20 3 2.93 1.83 0.77 5.53 30 Geum elatum 0.7 30 3 0.89 2.75 0.77 4.41 31 Juncus membranaceus 2.4 20 1.75 3.06 1.83 0.45 5.34 32 Geranium himalayense 2.9 30 9 3.70 2.75 2.32 8.77 33 Viola canescens 1.2 30 3.25 1.53 2.75 0.84 5.12 34 Cortusa brotheri 1.3 40 3.5 1.66 3.67 0.90 6.23 35 Fragaria nubicola 3.6 50 8.5 4.59 4.59 2.19 11.37 36 Ainsliaea aptera 1.1 30 3.25 1.40 2.75 0.84 4.99

192

Sr.No. Species Name D F C RD RF RC IVI 37 Fritillaria roylei 0.1 10 0.25 0.13 0.92 0.06 1.11 38 Draba oreades 0.3 10 0.25 0.38 0.92 0.06 1.36 39 Aquilegia nivalis 1.1 20 3 1.40 1.83 0.77 4 40 Astragalus grahamianus 0.2 10 0.25 0.26 0.92 0.06 1.24 41 Filipendula ulmaria 0.3 10 1.5 0.37 0.92 0.39 1.68 78.4 1090 387.68 99.99 99.92 99.98 299.89

4.55. Poa- Osmunda – Salix Community (Community 49)

4.55.1. Geographical Characteristics

Poa-Osmunda–Salix Community with 47 plant species was established at

Brithwar Gali North East of Leepa Valley. The altitude of area was 2971 m located at

340.25.3305 North Latitude and 0730.85.0961 East longitude. Slope was between 00-300

with comparatively moist habitat lying at northern aspect (Table 3.1).

4.55.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 47 plant species and was dominated by Poa

angustifolia havingan IVI value of 38.40 followed by Osmunda claytoniana and Salix

flablellaris having IVI values of 27.15 and 26.76 respectively. Co-dominant species were

Spiraea arcuata (12.91), Primula macrophyla (9.51), and Juniperus communis (9.18)

(Table 4.51).

4.55.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.95 whereas the Shannon’s

diversity was calculated as 3.66. The evenness was found to be 0.67 and richness value

was 2.71. The maturity index value was calculated to be 24.46% for the investigated

community (Table 4.2).

4.55.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was highly eroded and placed in Class three. High

grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class three (Table 4.2).

193

Table.4.51. Primary phytosociological data of Poa- Osmunda - Salix Community

Sr.No. Species Name D F C R.D RF RC IVI 1 Juniperus communis 1.90 10.00 6.50 3.07 0.87 5.24 9.18 2 Lonicera webbiana 2.80 20.00 3.00 4.52 1.74 2.42 8.68 3 Salix flabellaris 8.00 20.00 15.00 12.92 1.74 12.10 26.76 4 Rosa webbiana pink 1.80 10.00 3.75 2.91 0.87 3.02 6.80 5 Spiraea arcuata 1.80 20.00 10.25 2.91 1.74 8.27 12.91 6 Skimmea lauriola 2.90 10.00 0.25 4.68 0.87 0.20 5.76 7 Bergenia stracheyi 0.30 10.00 6.50 0.48 0.87 5.24 6.60 8 Potentilla monanthes 0.80 20.00 1.75 1.29 1.74 1.41 4.44 9 Sewertia cuneata 0.60 20.00 3.00 0.97 1.74 2.42 5.13 10 Dryopteris stewartii 1.50 20.00 3.00 2.42 1.74 2.42 6.58 11 Adiantum capilus veneris 2.50 20.00 0.50 4.04 1.74 0.40 6.18 12 Asplenium trichomanes 1.10 40.00 4.75 1.78 3.48 3.83 9.09 13 Cortusa brotherii 0.50 10.00 1.50 0.81 0.87 1.21 2.89 14 Wulfenia amherstiana 0.50 10.00 1.50 0.81 0.87 1.21 2.89 15 Meconopsis aculeate 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.16 0.87 0.20 1.23 16 Geranium himalayense 0.80 20.00 0.50 1.29 1.74 0.40 3.43 17 Galium aparine 1.80 20.00 0.75 2.91 1.74 0.60 5.25 18 Caltha alba 0.50 20.00 1.75 0.81 1.74 1.41 3.96 19 Plantago major 0.50 20.00 3.00 0.81 1.74 2.42 4.97 20 Viola canescens 0.20 10.00 0.25 0.32 0.87 0.20 1.39 21 Eurphobia wallichii 0.80 10.00 1.50 1.29 0.87 1.21 3.37 22 Filipendula ulmaria 0.80 10.00 1.50 1.29 0.87 1.21 3.37 23 Dryopteris blanfordii 0.50 10.00 1.50 0.81 0.87 1.21 2.89 24 Osmunda regalis 0.50 10.00 1.50 0.81 0.87 1.21 2.89 25 Arisaema intermedium 0.30 20.00 1.50 0.48 1.74 1.21 3.43 26 Fragaria nubicola 1.60 30.00 3.00 2.58 2.61 2.42 7.61 27 Carex cardiolepis 0.80 10.00 0.25 1.29 0.87 0.20 2.36 28 Poa angustifolia 2.40 390.00 0.75 3.88 33.91 0.60 38.40 29 Hypoxis aurea 1.20 20.00 0.50 1.94 1.74 0.40 4.08 30 Sibbaldia cuneata 1.60 40.00 3.25 2.58 3.48 2.62 8.68 31 Rosularia adenotricha 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.16 0.87 0.20 1.23 32 Geranium wallichianum 1.10 10.00 1.50 1.78 0.87 1.21 3.86 33 Rubus ulmifolius 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.16 0.87 0.20 1.23 34 Taraxacum tibitianum 0.20 10.00 0.50 0.32 0.87 0.40 1.60 35 Juncus membranaceus 1.60 20.00 1.50 2.58 1.74 1.21 5.53 36 Primula roesa 0.30 10.00 1.75 0.48 0.87 1.41 2.77 37 Primula dendiculata 0.60 20.00 1.75 0.97 1.74 1.41 4.12 38 Pallaea nitidula 1.30 10.00 1.50 2.10 0.87 1.21 4.18 39 Primula macrophyla 0.90 30.00 6.75 1.45 2.61 5.44 9.51 40 Trollius acaulis 0.20 10.00 0.25 0.32 0.87 0.20 1.39 41 Arabis amplexicaulis 0.40 10.00 0.25 0.65 0.87 0.20 1.72 42 Gentiana depressa 0.60 10.00 0.25 0.97 0.87 0.20 2.04

194

Sr.No. Species Name D F C R.D RF RC IVI 43 Aconitum leave 1.40 20.00 3.00 2.26 1.74 2.42 6.42 44 Pedicularis oederi 0.50 10.00 1.50 0.81 0.87 1.21 2.89 45 Alchemilla trollii 1.40 20.00 3.00 2.26 1.74 2.42 6.42 46 Hackelia uncinata 1.60 20.00 3.00 2.58 1.74 2.42 6.74 47 Osmunda claytoniana 8.20 30.00 14.00 13.25 2.61 11.29 27.15 61.9 1150 124 100 100 100 300

4.56. Salix - Juniperus – Epilobium Community (Community 50)

4.56.1. Geographical Characteristics

Salix - Juniperus –Epilobium Community with 46 plant species was established at

Brithwar Gali North East of Leepa Valley. The altitude of area was 3320m located at

340.24.4370 North Latitude and 0730.85.7380 East longitude. Slope was between 00- 300

with comparatively dry habitat located at Northern Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.56.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 46 plant species and was dominated by Salix

flablellaris having an IVI value of 26.62 followed by Juniperus communis and Epilobium

parviflorum IVI values of 21.67 and 17.97 respectively. Co-dominant species were

Rhododendron campanulatum (12.66), Sibbaldia purpurea (11.13) and Geum elatum

(9.98) (Table 4.52).

4.56.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.96 whereas the Shannon’s

diversity was calculated as 3.66. The evenness was found to be 0.81 and richness value

was 2.65. The maturity index value was calculated to be 17.17 % for the investigated

community (Table 4.2).

4.56.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class two. High

grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class three (Table 4.2).

195

Table.4.52. Primary phytosociological data of Salix - Juniperus- Epilobium Community

Sr.No. Species Name D F C R.D RF RC IVI 1 Salix flablellaris 5.10 20.00 15.00 10.32 2.53 13.77 26.62 2 Juniperus communis 3.90 20.00 12.25 7.89 2.53 11.24 21.67 3 Rosa webbiana 1.00 10.00 1.50 2.02 1.27 1.38 4.67 4 Viburnum nervosum 2.00 10.00 2.50 4.05 1.27 2.29 7.61 5 Rhododendron campanulatum 5.40 10.00 0.50 10.93 1.27 0.46 12.66 6 Caltha alba 0.50 10.00 0.25 1.01 1.27 0.23 2.51 7 Aconitum laeve 0.10 10.00 0.50 0.20 1.27 0.46 1.93 8 Arabis amplexicaulis 0.80 20.00 0.25 1.62 2.53 0.23 4.38 9 Oxaria dygnya 1.10 10.00 0.20 2.23 1.27 0.18 3.68 10 Epilobium parviflorum 3.60 30.00 7.50 7.29 3.80 6.88 17.97 11 Sibbaldia purpurea 0.90 50.00 3.25 1.82 6.33 2.98 11.13 12 Plantago major 0.30 30.00 1.50 0.61 3.80 1.38 5.78 13 Potentilla atrosanguinea 0.50 10.00 1.75 1.01 1.27 1.61 3.88 14 Potentilla anserine 0.70 20.00 3.25 1.42 2.53 2.98 6.93 15 Geum elatum 0.90 30.00 4.75 1.82 3.80 4.36 9.98 16 Ranunculus stewartii 0.90 40.00 2.25 1.82 5.06 2.07 8.95 17 Phleum alpinum 0.30 40.00 0.25 0.61 5.06 0.23 5.90 18 Anemone obtusiloba 0.90 10.00 5.25 1.82 1.27 4.82 7.91 19 Cortusa brother 0.50 10.00 1.50 1.01 1.27 1.38 3.65 20 Trillium govanianum 0.80 10.00 0.25 1.62 1.27 0.23 3.11 21 Galium asperuloides 2.10 10.00 0.25 4.25 1.27 0.23 5.75 22 Lindelofia macrostyla 1.00 10.00 1.50 2.02 1.27 1.38 4.67 23 Primula roesa 0.30 20.00 3.00 0.61 2.53 2.75 5.89 24 Sewertia cuneata 0.30 20.00 1.75 0.61 2.53 1.61 4.75 25 Polemonium caeruleum 0.40 10.00 1.50 0.81 1.27 1.38 3.45 26 Poa pretences 1.30 10.00 1.50 2.63 1.27 1.38 5.27 27 Salvia hians 0.30 10.00 1.50 0.61 1.27 1.38 3.25 28 Pedicularis pyramidata 0.40 10.00 1.50 0.81 1.27 1.38 3.45 29 Taraaxacum laevigatum 0.30 10.00 1.50 0.61 1.27 1.38 3.25 30 Campanula latifolia 0.20 10.00 0.25 0.40 1.27 0.23 1.90 31 Gypsophila cerastioides 0.50 10.00 1.50 1.01 1.27 1.38 3.65 32 Gentian algida 0.90 20.00 0.50 1.82 2.53 0.46 4.81 33 Pleurospermum govanianum 0.60 30.00 3.25 1.21 3.80 2.98 8.00 34 Cortia depressa 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.20 1.27 0.23 1.70 35 Geranium himalayense 1.30 20.00 0.50 2.63 2.53 0.46 5.62 36 Bergenia stracheyi 0.80 10.00 6.50 1.62 1.27 5.97 8.85 37 Meconopsis aculeate 0.30 10.00 1.50 0.61 1.27 1.38 3.25 38 Polystichum bakerianum 0.90 20.00 3.00 1.82 2.53 2.75 7.11 39 Athyrium filix femina 1.10 20.00 1.75 2.23 2.53 1.61 6.36 40 Pellaea nitidula 0.80 10.00 0.50 1.62 1.27 0.46 3.34 41 Viola biflora 0.90 20.00 0.50 1.82 2.53 0.46 4.81 42 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 0.80 20.00 1.50 1.62 2.53 1.38 5.53

196

Sr.No. Species Name D F C R.D RF RC IVI 43 Iris kashmiriana 1.00 10.00 5.25 2.02 1.27 4.82 8.11 44 Arisaema intermedium 1.10 20.00 3.00 2.23 2.53 2.75 7.51 45 Trifolium repens 1.00 20.00 0.50 2.02 2.53 0.46 5.01 46 Polygonatum verticilatum 0.50 20.00 0.25 1.01 2.53 0.23 3.77 49.4 790 108.95 100 100 100 300

4.57. Juniperus - Bergenia - Berberis Community (Community 51)

4.57.1. Geographical Characteristics

Juniperus - Bergenia–Berberis Community with 46 plant species was established

at Brithwar Top in North of Leepa Valley and west of Indian Held Kashmir. The altitude

of area was 3580 m located at 340.24.3246 North Latitude and 0730.86.1072 East

longitude. Slope was 00- 300 with comparatively moist habitat located on top Plateu

(Table 3.1).

4.57.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 46 plant species and was dominated by Juniperus

communis having an IVI value of 25.85 followed by Bergenia stracheyi and Berberis

jaeschkeana having IVI values of 21.18 and 20.01 respectively. Co-dominant species

were Sibbaldia purpurea (19.03), Corydalis stewartii (14.62) and Juncus membranaceus

(13.86) (Table 4.53).

4.57.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.96 whereas the Shannon’s

diversity was calculated as 3.5. The evenness was found to be 0.72 and richness value

was 2.65. The maturity index value was calculated to be 17.39 % for the investigated

community (Table 4.2).

4.57.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was not eroded and placed in Class one. Extensive

grazing was observed at the site and was classified as class three (Table 4.2).

197

Table.4.53. Primary phytosociological data of Juniperus - Bergenia - Berberis Community

Sr.No. Species Name D F C R.D RF RC IVI 1 Juniperus communis 7.40 20.00 18.25 10.29 2.50 13.06 25.85 2 Loniera govaniana 1.80 10.00 3.75 2.50 1.25 2.68 6.44 3 Rhododendron campanulatum 4.40 10.00 8.50 6.12 1.25 6.08 13.45 4 Berberis jaeschkeana 6.80 20.00 11.25 9.46 2.50 8.05 20.01 5 Rosa alpina 1.30 10.00 2.50 1.81 1.25 1.79 4.85 6 Poa alpina 5.50 30.00 4.50 7.65 3.75 3.22 14.62 7 Pseudomerntensia nemerosa 1.40 10.00 3.75 1.95 1.25 2.68 5.88 8 Plantago major 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.14 1.25 0.18 1.57 9 Trifolium pretense 0.70 20.00 3.00 0.97 2.50 2.15 5.62 10 Anemone obtusiloba 1.40 30.00 4.50 1.95 3.75 3.22 8.92 11 Sibbaldia purpurea 2.50 50.00 13.00 3.48 6.25 9.30 19.03 12 Geum urbanum 1.20 40.00 4.00 1.67 5.00 2.86 9.53 13 Aconitum leave 0.60 30.00 0.75 0.83 3.75 0.54 5.12 14 Viola biflora 0.30 10.00 1.50 0.42 1.25 1.07 2.74 15 Galium asperuloides 2.20 10.00 1.50 3.06 1.25 1.07 5.38 16 Tanacetum dolicophyllum 1.40 10.00 3.75 1.95 1.25 2.68 5.88 17 Anaphalis boisseri 0.60 20.00 0.50 0.83 2.50 0.36 3.69 18 Cortia depressia 0.30 20.00 1.75 0.42 2.50 1.25 4.17 19 Iris kashmiriana 2.10 10.00 3.75 2.92 1.25 2.68 6.85 20 Primula roesa 0.70 20.00 3.00 0.97 2.50 2.15 5.62 21 Bergenia stracheyi 2.50 30.00 19.50 3.48 3.75 13.95 21.18 22 Gentian algida 1.20 20.00 3.00 1.67 2.50 2.15 6.32 23 Carex cardiolepis 4.40 40.00 3.00 6.12 5.00 2.15 13.27 24 Juncus membranaceus 4.70 40.00 3.25 6.54 5.00 2.33 13.86 25 Allium humile 3.60 10.00 3.25 5.01 1.25 2.33 8.58 26 Hypoxis aurea 1.90 20.00 0.50 2.64 2.50 0.36 5.50 27 Potentilla curviseta 0.20 10.00 0.25 0.28 1.25 0.18 1.71 28 Saxifraga jacquemontiana 0.30 10.00 1.50 0.42 1.25 1.07 2.74 29 Adiantum venustum 1.90 10.00 0.25 2.64 1.25 0.18 4.07 30 Thymus linearis 0.80 10.00 0.25 1.11 1.25 0.18 2.54 31 Phlomis bracteosa 0.20 20.00 0.50 0.28 2.50 0.36 3.14 32 Veronica polita 0.50 10.00 1.50 0.70 1.25 1.07 3.02 33 Malaxis muscifera 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.14 1.25 0.18 1.57 34 Stellaria decumbens 0.30 10.00 0.25 0.42 1.25 0.18 1.85 35 Rumex nepalensis 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.14 1.25 0.18 1.57 36 Taraxacum tibitianum 0.30 10.00 1.50 0.42 1.25 1.07 2.74 37 Poa pretense 0.80 10.00 0.25 1.11 1.25 0.18 2.54 38 Rohodiola fastigiata 0.20 10.00 0.25 0.28 1.25 0.18 1.71 39 Artemisia absinthium 0.20 10.00 0.25 0.28 1.25 0.18 1.71 40 Senecio chrysanthemoides 0.30 10.00 0.25 0.42 1.25 0.18 1.85 41 Anemone obtusiloba 0.30 20.00 0.50 0.42 2.50 0.36 3.28 42 Polygonum alpinum 0.30 10.00 0.25 0.42 1.25 0.18 1.85

198

Sr.No. Species Name D F C R.D RF RC IVI 43 Silene gonospermum 0.60 10.00 0.25 0.83 1.25 0.18 2.26 44 Fragaria nubicola 1.80 30.00 2.00 2.50 3.75 1.43 7.68 45 Impatiens edgeworthii 0.90 20.00 1.50 1.25 2.50 1.07 4.83 46 Gypsophila cerastioides 0.80 10.00 1.50 1.11 1.25 1.07 3.44 71.9 800 139.75 100 100 100 300

4.58. Salix- Viburnum - Pseudomerntensia Community (Community 52)

4.58.1. Ggraphic Aharacters

Salix - Viburnum –Pseudomerntensia Community with 58 plant species was established

at Yadori Top Few meters below Bara Hazari. The altitude of area was 3395 m located at

340.26.6424 North Latitude and 0730.95.7157 East longitude. Slope was 300-600 with

comparatively moist habitat located at Northern Aspect (Table.3.1).

4.58.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 58 plant species and was dominated by Salix

flablellaris having an IVI value of 58.56 followed by Viburnum nervosumand

Pseudomerntensia nemerosa having IVI values of 30.76 and 20.59 respectively. Co-

dominant species were Juniperus communis (16.19), Berberis jaeschkeana (10.54) and

Veronica himalensis (6.64) (Table.4.54).

4.58.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.93 whereas the Shannon’s

diversity was calculated as 3.43. The evenness was found to be 0.53 and richness value

was 3.34. The maturity index value was calculated to be 14.82% for the investigated

community (Table 4.2).

4.58.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was highly eroded and placed in Class three (Heavily

eroded). Moderategrazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class 2

(Table.4.2).

199

Table.4.54. Primary phytosociological data of Salix-Viburnum-Pseudomerntensia Community

Sr.No. Species Name D F C R.D R.F R.C IVI 1. Salix flablellaris 17.4 60 44.1 27.06 6.98 24.52 58.56 2. Juniperus communis 2.8 20 17.1 4.35 2.33 9.51 16.19 3. Viburnum nervosum 9.6 40 20.1 14.93 4.65 11.18 30.76 4. Berberis jaeschkeana 2.6 20 7.5 4.04 2.33 4.17 10.54 5. Rosa webbiana 2.2 20 3 3.42 2.33 1.67 7.42 6. Senecio jacquemontianus 0.5 10 8.55 0.78 1.16 4.75 6.69 7. Pseudomerntensia nemerosa 5.6 40 13 8.71 4.65 7.23 20.59 8. Arisaema intermedium 0.2 10 0.25 0.31 1.16 0.14 1.61 9. Primula edgeworthii 0.6 30 3.25 0.93 3.49 1.81 6.23 10. Artemisia absinthium 0.1 10 0.25 0.16 1.16 0.14 1.46 11. Sibbaldia cuneata 0.4 10 1.5 0.62 1.16 0.83 2.61 12. Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 0.2 10 0.25 0.31 1.16 0.14 1.61 13. Androsace longifolia 0.4 20 0.5 0.62 2.33 0.28 3.23 14. Veronica himalensis 1.7 20 3 2.64 2.33 1.67 6.64 15. Polemonium caeruleum 0.1 10 0.25 0.16 1.16 0.14 1.46 16. Phlomis bracteosa 0.1 10 0.25 0.16 1.16 0.14 1.46 17. Pseudomertensia echioides 0.3 20 0.5 0.47 2.33 0.28 3.08 18. Sedum ewersii 0.1 10 0.25 0.16 1.16 0.14 1.46 19. Caltha alba 0.2 10 1.5 0.31 1.16 0.83 2.3 20. Fragaria nubicola 1.6 10 4.5 2.49 1.16 2.50 6.15 21. Astragalus frigidus 0.1 30 0.25 0.16 3.49 0.14 3.79 22. Bistorta affinis 0.2 10 1.5 0.31 1.16 0.83 2.3 23. Chinopodium vulgare 0.2 10 0.25 0.31 1.16 0.14 1.61 24. Rorippa montana 0.3 10 0.5 0.47 1.16 0.28 1.91 25. Eurphobia wallichii 1.9 20 5.25 2.95 2.33 2.92 8.2 26. Dryopteris stewartii 0.5 20 0.25 0.78 2.33 0.14 3.25 27. Nephrolepis cordifolia 0.6 10 1.5 0.93 1.16 0.83 2.92 28. Asplenium septentrionale 0.4 10 0.25 0.62 1.16 0.14 1.92 29. Geranium himalayense 0.4 10 1.5 0.62 1.16 0.83 2.61 30. Viola canescens 0.8 20 1.75 1.24 2.33 0.97 4.54 31. Valeriana pyrolifolia 0.5 20 3 0.78 2.33 1.67 4.78 32. Gnephalium affine 0.3 10 0.25 0.47 1.16 0.14 1.77 33. Pedicularis pyramidata 0.4 10 1.5 0.62 1.16 0.83 2.61 34. Campanula latifolia 0.4 10 1.5 0.62 1.16 0.83 2.61 35. Impatiens brachycentra 0.9 10 1.5 1.40 1.16 0.83 3.39 36. Minuartia kashmirica 0.1 10 0.25 0.16 1.16 0.14 1.46 37. Potentilla monanthes 0.1 10 1.5 0.16 1.16 0.83 2.15 38. Codonopsis viridis 0.9 10 1.5 1.40 1.16 0.83 3.39 39. Rumex nepalensis 0.4 10 3.75 0.62 1.16 2.09 3.87 40. Iris decora 0.5 10 1.5 0.78 1.16 0.83 2.77 41. Pleurospermum brunonis 0.2 10 1.5 0.31 1.16 0.83 2.3 42. Lavatera kashmiriana 0.1 10 0.25 0.16 1.16 0.14 1.46

200

Sr.No. Species Name D F C R.D R.F R.C IVI 43. Tanacetum dolicophyllum 0.3 10 0.25 0.47 1.16 0.14 1.77 44. Chenopodium phylloglossum 0.1 10 0.25 0.16 1.16 0.14 1.46 45. Trifolium repens 0.3 10 1.5 0.47 1.16 0.83 2.46 46. Draba oreades 0.3 20 0.5 0.47 2.33 0.28 3.08 47. Poa paratense 0.8 10 0.25 1.24 1.16 0.14 2.54 48. Aquilegia fragrans 0.2 10 0.25 0.31 1.16 0.14 1.61 49. Polygonatum verticilatum 0.8 10 0.25 1.24 1.16 0.14 2.54 50. Verbascum thapsus 0.1 10 1.5 0.16 1.16 0.83 2.15 51. Carex buxbaumii 0.7 10 1.5 1.09 1.16 0.83 3.08 52. Senecio chrysanthemoides 0.8 30 1.97 1.24 3.49 1.10 5.83 53. Nepeta podostachys 0.6 10 1.5 0.93 1.16 0.83 2.92 54. Angelica glauca 0.2 10 3.75 0.31 1.16 2.09 3.56 55. Stellaria nemorum 0.7 10 0.25 1.09 1.16 0.14 2.39 56. Jaeschkea oligosperma 0.2 10 0.25 0.31 1.16 0.14 1.61 57. Rheum tibeticum 0.1 10 1.5 0.16 1.16 0.83 2.15 58. Eurphobia wallichii 1.2 10 3.75 1.84 1.16 2.09 5.09 64.3 860 179.82 99.99 99.94 99.97 299.90

4.59. Sibbaldia - Viburnum –Carex Community (Community 53)

4.59.1. Geographical Characteristics

Sibbaldia- Viburnum –Carex Community with 47 plant species was established

at Ganga Chotti in North West of Bagh. The altitude of area was 2846m located at

340.07.7019 North Latitude and 0730.77.8443 East longitude. Slope was 00-300 with

comparatively dry habitat lying at Southern Aspect (Table.3.1).

4.59.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 47 plant species and was dominated by Sibbaldia

cuneata having an IVI value of 32.15 followed by Viburnum nervosum and Carex

cardiolepis having IVI values of 22.18 and 21.05 respectively. Co-dominant species were

Poa alpina (16.59), Cotoneaster nummularia (11.54), and Anemone tetrasepala (11.52)

(Table.4.55).

201

4.59.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.95 whereas the Shannon’s

diversity was calculated as 3.51. The evenness was found to be 0.71 and richness value

was 2.71. The maturity index value was calculated to be 19.57% for the investigated

community (Table 4.2).

4.59.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was slightly eroded and placed in Class one (Slightly

eroded). Over grazing was observed at the site and was classified as class three

(Table.4.2)

Table.4.55. Primary phytosociological data of Sibbaldia - Viburnum - Carex Community

Sr.No. Species Name D F Cover RD RF RC IVI 1 Viburnum nervosum 6.50 30.00 14.00 8.25 3.26 10.67 22.18 2 Cotoneaster nummularia 3.10 10.00 8.55 3.93 1.09 6.51 11.54 3 Lonicera webbiana 1.80 10.00 3.75 2.28 1.09 2.86 6.23 4 Sibbaldia cuneata 12.50 50.00 14.25 15.86 5.43 10.86 32.15 5 Lentopodium lentopodium 3.20 40.00 3.50 4.06 4.35 2.67 11.08 6 Trifolium repens 2.70 40.00 6.95 3.43 4.35 5.30 13.07 7 Carex cardiolepis 8.30 60.00 5.25 10.53 6.52 4.00 21.05 8 Plantago major 0.90 20.00 1.75 1.14 2.17 1.33 4.65 9 Gentiana algida 1.70 30.00 0.75 2.16 3.26 0.57 5.99 10 Taraxacum tibitianum 0.20 20.00 0.50 0.25 2.17 0.38 2.81 11 Rumex nepalensis 0.30 10.00 1.50 0.38 1.09 1.14 2.61 12 Arisaema flavum 1.90 20.00 1.75 2.41 2.17 1.33 5.92 13 Ranunculus arvensis 0.40 20.00 1.75 0.51 2.17 1.33 4.01 14 Fragaria nubicola 1.40 40.00 3.50 1.78 4.35 2.67 8.79 15 Arabis amplexicaulis 0.70 20.00 0.50 0.89 2.17 0.38 3.44 16 Asplenium trichomanes 0.30 10.00 0.25 0.38 1.09 0.19 1.66 17 Corydalis govaniana 0.40 20.00 1.75 0.51 2.17 1.33 4.01 18 Phlomis bracteosa 1.10 20.00 1.75 1.40 2.17 1.33 4.90 19 Plantago major 0.60 20.00 1.75 0.76 2.17 1.33 4.27 20 Thymus linearis 2.10 30.00 3.25 2.66 3.26 2.48 8.40 21 Onopordum acanthium 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.13 1.09 0.19 1.40 22 Anemone tetrasepala 2.80 40.00 4.75 3.55 4.35 3.62 11.52 23 Ajugaparviflora 1.20 20.00 3.00 1.52 2.17 2.29 5.98 24 Anaphalus nepalensis 0.30 10.00 0.25 0.38 1.09 0.19 1.66 25 Dryopteris barbigera 1.40 10.00 1.50 1.78 1.09 1.14 4.01 26 Viola canescens 0.60 20.00 1.75 0.76 2.17 1.33 4.27 27 Helictotrichon virescens 4.40 20.00 3.00 5.58 2.17 2.29 10.04

202

Sr.No. Species Name D F Cover RD RF RC IVI 28 Poa alpina 2.10 30.00 14.00 2.66 3.26 10.67 16.59 29 Nepeta eliptica 2.20 20.00 4.00 2.79 2.17 3.05 8.01 30 Impatiens edgeworthii 0.50 10.00 1.50 0.63 1.09 1.14 2.86 31 Minuartia kashmirica 0.70 20.00 3.00 0.89 2.17 2.29 5.35 32 Lotus corniculatus 0.40 10.00 1.50 0.51 1.09 1.14 2.74 33 Osmunda regalis 0.50 10.00 1.50 0.63 1.09 1.14 2.86 34 Galium asperuloides 1.50 10.00 0.25 1.90 1.09 0.19 3.18 35 Geranium wallichianum 1.30 10.00 1.50 1.65 1.09 1.14 3.88 36 Geum urbanum 1.80 20.00 3.00 2.28 2.17 2.29 6.74 37 Potentilla nepalensis 0.30 10.00 1.50 0.38 1.09 1.14 2.61 38 Poa pretense 1.80 10.00 1.50 2.28 1.09 1.14 4.51 39 Epilobium royleanum 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.13 1.09 0.19 1.40 40 Galium boreale 1.80 20.00 0.50 2.28 2.17 0.38 4.84 41 Gypsophila cerastioides 0.80 10.00 1.50 1.02 1.09 1.14 3.25 42 Oxalis corniculata 0.30 10.00 0.25 0.38 1.09 0.19 1.66 43 Urtica hyperborea 0.50 10.00 1.50 0.63 1.09 1.14 2.86 44 Astragalus candolleanus 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.13 1.09 0.19 1.40 45 Chaerophyllum villosum 0.30 10.00 1.50 0.38 1.09 1.14 2.61 46 Stellarianemorum 0.50 10.00 0.25 0.63 1.09 0.19 1.91 47 Rorippa montana 0.40 20.00 0.50 0.51 2.17 0.38 3.06 78.8 920 131.25 100 100 100 300

4.60. Viburnum- Thymus –Juniperus Community (Community 54)

4.60.1. Geographical Characteristics

Viburnum -Thymus–Juniperus Community with 55 plant species was established

at Hajipeer in District Hawali. The altitude of area was 2940m located at 330.96.4379

North Latitude and 0740.06.1764 East longitude. Slope was between300-600 with

comparatively dry and rocky habitat and lying at Southern Aspect (Table.3.1).

4.60.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 55 plant species and was dominated by Viburnum

nervosum having an IVI value of 23.30 followed by Thymus linearis and Juniperus

communis having IVI values of 17.68 and 15.33 respectively. Co-dominant species were

Berberis jaeschkeana (13.61), Isodon rugosus (12.75), and Arisaema jacquemontii

(12.35) (Table.4.56).

203

4.60.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.96 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.74. The evenness was found to be 0.76 and richness value was 3.17. The maturity index value was calculated to be 17.45% for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.60.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was less eroded and placed in Class two (Moderately eroded). High grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class three

(Table.4.2)

Table.4.56. Primary phytosociological data of Viburnum- Thymus - Juniperus Community

Sr.No Species Name D F C R.D R.F R.C IVI 1 Viburnum nervosum 7.50 30.00 17.75 8.07 3.13 12.10 23.30 2 Berberis jaeschkeana 5.50 10.00 9.75 5.92 1.04 6.65 13.61 3 Isodon rugosus 5.50 10.00 8.50 5.92 1.04 5.80 12.75 4 Juniperus communis 7.10 10.00 9.75 7.64 1.04 6.65 15.33 5 Indegofera himalayensis 1.80 10.00 3.75 1.94 1.04 2.56 5.54 6 Rosa webbiana 2.50 20.00 3.00 2.69 2.08 2.05 6.82 7 Cotoneaster procumbens 1.00 10.00 3.75 1.08 1.04 2.56 4.67 8 Arabis amplexicaulis 0.50 20.00 0.50 0.54 2.08 0.34 2.96 9 Onopordum acanthium 0.30 20.00 3.00 0.32 2.08 2.05 4.45 10 Monira coulteriana 0.10 10.00 1.50 0.11 1.04 1.02 2.17 11 Achillea millefolium 0.60 20.00 3.00 0.65 2.08 2.05 4.77 12 Arisaema tortosum 3.80 40.00 6.00 4.09 4.17 4.09 12.35 13 Thymus linearis 6.40 30.00 11.25 6.89 3.13 7.67 17.68 14 Plantago major 0.70 30.00 2.00 0.75 3.13 1.36 5.24 15 Plantago alpina 0.90 20.00 1.90 0.97 2.08 1.30 4.35 16 Asplenium adiantum nigrum 1.30 30.00 4.50 1.40 3.13 3.07 7.59 17 Onychium contiguum 0.50 10.00 1.50 0.54 1.04 1.02 2.60 18 Verbascum thapsus 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.11 1.04 0.17 1.32 19 Vincetoxicum arnottianum 1.75 20.00 1.75 1.88 2.08 1.19 5.16 20 Fragaria nubicola 1.75 20.00 1.75 1.88 2.08 1.19 5.16 21 Galium asperuloides 1.60 20.00 1.75 1.72 2.08 1.19 5.00 22 Primula macrophyla 5.50 20.00 1.75 5.92 2.08 1.19 9.19 23 Arisaema flavum 5.50 20.00 1.75 5.92 2.08 1.19 9.19 24 Corydalis govaniana 5.30 20.00 0.50 5.70 2.08 0.34 8.13 25 Trifolium pretense 2.25 40.00 4.75 2.42 4.17 3.24 9.83 26 Cardamine loxostemonides 1.80 20.00 1.75 1.94 2.08 1.19 5.21

204

Sr.No Species Name D F C R.D R.F R.C IVI 27 Pteris stenophylla 0.50 10.00 1.50 0.54 1.04 1.02 2.60 28 Impatiens edgeworthii 1.20 20.00 1.75 1.29 2.08 1.19 4.57 29 Urtica hyperborea 0.40 10.00 0.25 0.43 1.04 0.17 1.64 30 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 0.30 10.00 0.25 0.32 1.04 0.17 1.53 31 Hadysarum cacHirianum 0.60 20.00 0.50 0.65 2.08 0.34 3.07 32 Ajuga parviflora 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.11 1.04 0.17 1.32 33 Anemone tetrasepala 0.30 10.00 1.50 0.32 1.04 1.02 2.39 34 Gypsophila oreades 1.10 10.00 1.50 1.18 1.04 1.02 3.25 35 Iris decora 1.60 20.00 1.50 1.72 2.08 1.02 4.83 36 Primula roesa 0.20 10.00 1.50 0.22 1.04 1.02 2.28 37 Lentopodium lentopodium 0.40 20.00 0.50 0.43 2.08 0.34 2.85 38 Gentian algida 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.11 1.04 0.17 1.32 39 Taraxacum tibitianum 0.40 20.00 1.75 0.43 2.08 1.19 3.71 40 Sibbaldia cuneata 3.60 30.00 4.50 3.87 3.13 3.07 10.07 41 Androsace rotundifolia 0.20 10.00 0.25 0.22 1.04 0.17 1.43 42 Anemone obtusiloba 0.40 10.00 1.50 0.43 1.04 1.02 2.49 43 Gnephalium affine 0.80 10.00 1.50 0.86 1.04 1.02 2.93 44 Potentilla monanthes 1.40 20.00 3.00 1.51 2.08 2.05 5.64 45 Festuca kashmiriana 0.80 20.00 0.50 0.86 2.08 0.34 3.28 46 Poa bacteriana 1.30 20.00 0.50 1.40 2.08 0.34 3.82 47 Artemisia absinthium 0.90 20.00 3.00 0.97 2.08 2.05 5.10 48 Artemisia annua 0.50 20.00 0.50 0.54 2.08 0.34 2.96 49 Aster falconeri 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.11 1.04 0.17 1.32 50 Chaerophyllum villosum 0.50 20.00 3.00 0.54 2.08 2.05 4.67 51 Rumex nepalensis 0.30 20.00 1.75 0.32 2.08 1.19 3.60 52 Polemonium caeruleum 0.50 10.00 0.25 0.54 1.04 0.17 1.75 53 Eurphobia wallichii 1.40 10.00 3.75 1.51 1.04 2.56 5.10 54 Fritillaria roylei 1.10 20.00 1.75 1.18 2.08 1.19 4.46 55 Polygala sibirica 0.40 10 0.25 0.43 1.04 0.17 1.64 92.95 960 146.65 100 100 100 300

4.61. Potentilla- Rosa - Sibbaldia Community (Community 55)

4.61.1. Geographical Characteristics

Potentilla - Rosa –Sibbaldia Community with 50 plant species was established at

Shero Dhara in Bagh. The altitude of area was 3020 m located at 330.95.330 North

Latitude and 0740.00.6344 East longitude. Slope was between 600- 900 with comparatively rocky and dry habitat located at Southern Aspect (Table 3.1).

205

4.61.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 50 plant species and was dominated by Potentilla monanthes having an IVI value of 17.61 followed by Rosa webbiana and Sibbaldia purpurea having IVI values of 16.94 and 16.94 respectively. Co-dominant species were values Juniperus communis (15.88), Viburnum nervosum (14.67) and Poa alpina (12.87)

(Table 4.57).

4.61.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.96 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.66. The evenness was found to be 0.78 and richness value was 2.88. The maturity index value was calculated to be 20.0 % for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.61.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was less eroded and placed in Class two

(Moderately eroded). Low grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class one (Table.4.2).

Table.4.57. Primary phytosociological data of Potentilla- Rosa - Sibbaldia Community

Sr.No Species Name D F C R.D RF RC IVI 1 Viburnum nervosum 4.50 20.00 13.50 5.32 2.00 7.35 14.67 2 Berberis jaeschkeana 4.30 30.00 4.20 5.08 3.00 2.29 10.37 3 Salix flabellaris 1.60 10.00 3.75 1.89 1.00 2.04 4.93 4 Rosa webbiana 5.10 40.00 12.70 6.03 4.00 6.91 16.94 5 Juniperus excelsa 1.50 20.00 5.25 1.77 2.00 2.86 6.63 6 Juniperus communis 4.20 40.00 12.70 4.96 4.00 6.91 15.88 7 Spiraea aucreata 1.10 20.00 5.25 1.30 2.00 2.86 6.16 8 Berberis aristata 1.00 10.00 1.50 1.18 1.00 0.82 3.00 9 Potentilla monanthes 5.70 20.00 16.30 6.74 2.00 8.87 17.61 10 Lonicera webbiana 1.20 10.00 3.75 1.42 1.00 2.04 4.46 11 Cotoneaster falconeri 2.10 20.00 8.10 2.48 2.00 4.41 8.89 12 Fragaria nubicolaa 1.10 40.00 4.50 1.30 4.00 2.45 7.75 13 Wulfenia amherstiana 0.40 20.00 1.75 0.47 2.00 0.95 3.43 14 Galium asperuloides 2.80 30.00 1.75 3.31 3.00 0.95 7.26 15 Poa angustifolia 2.40 50.00 9.25 2.84 5.00 5.03 12.87

206

Sr.No Species Name D F C R.D RF RC IVI 16 Potentilla nepalensis 5.60 20.00 3.00 6.62 2.00 1.63 10.25 17 Sibbaldia purpurea 6.80 40.00 9.00 8.04 4.00 4.90 16.94 18 Geranium wallichianum 5.20 30.00 4.50 6.15 3.00 2.45 11.60 19 Bistorta affinis 2.30 20.00 5.25 2.72 2.00 2.86 7.58 20 Colutea multiflora 0.70 20.00 1.75 0.83 2.00 0.95 3.78 21 Gentian algida 0.70 20.00 1.75 0.83 2.00 0.95 3.78 22 Dryopteris marginata 1.20 20.00 1.75 1.42 2.00 0.95 4.37 23 Carex cardiolepis 4.50 30.00 2.00 5.32 3.00 1.09 9.41 24 Anemone obtusiloba 1.50 30.00 3.25 1.77 3.00 1.77 6.54 25 Monira coulteriana 2.20 10.00 3.75 2.60 1.00 2.04 5.64 26 Iris kashmiriana 0.50 10.00 1.50 0.59 1.00 0.82 2.41 27 Primula roesa 0.80 30.00 3.25 0.95 3.00 1.77 5.71 28 Thymus linearis 3.00 40.00 6.00 3.55 4.00 3.27 10.81 29 Gypsophila cerastioides 0.80 20.00 1.75 0.95 2.00 0.95 3.90 30 Gnaphalium hypoleucum 0.90 20.00 1.75 1.06 2.00 0.95 4.02 31 Sedum ewersii 0.70 20.00 0.50 0.83 2.00 0.27 3.10 32 Origanum vulgare 1.20 10.00 3.00 1.42 1.00 1.63 4.05 33 Chaerophyllum villosum 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.12 1.00 0.14 1.25 34 Lathyrus pratensis 0.50 10.00 1.50 0.59 1.00 0.82 2.41 35 Onychium japonicum 0.60 20.00 1.50 0.71 2.00 0.82 3.53 36 Phlomis bracteosa 0.50 20.00 1.75 0.59 2.00 0.95 3.54 37 Artemisia absinthium 0.70 10.00 1.75 0.83 1.00 0.95 2.78 38 Aquilegia nivalis 0.30 10.00 3.00 0.35 1.00 1.63 2.99 39 Saxifraga strigosa 1.00 10.00 0.25 1.18 1.00 0.14 2.32 40 Pedicularis pyramidata 0.10 10.00 1.50 0.12 1.00 0.82 1.93 41 Viola biflora 0.20 10.00 0.25 0.24 1.00 0.14 1.37 42 Artemisia maritime 0.20 10.00 1.50 0.24 1.00 0.82 2.05 43 Androsace sempervivoides 0.30 10.00 1.50 0.35 1.00 0.82 2.17 44 Valeriana jatamansi 0.20 10.00 1.50 0.24 1.00 0.82 2.05 45 Phleum alpinum 0.10 10.00 1.50 0.12 1.00 0.82 1.93 46 Taraxacum tibitianum 0.20 20.00 0.25 0.24 2.00 0.14 2.37 47 Bergenia stracheyi 0.70 10.00 3.00 0.83 1.00 1.63 3.46 48 Pleurospermum brunonis 0.10 10.00 1.50 0.12 1.00 0.82 1.93 49 Rheum austral 0.10 20.00 1.50 0.12 2.00 0.82 2.93 50 Leontopodium leontopodium 1.10 20.00 1.75 1.30 2.00 0.95 4.25 84.6 1000 183.75 100 100 100 300

207

4.62. Salix -Sibbalidia- Fragaria Community (Community 56)

4.62.1. Geographical Characteristics

Salix -Sibbalidia–Fragaria Community with 46 plant species was established at

Shankh in South west of Bedori. The altitude of area was 2939 m located at 330.95.4397

North Latitude and 0730.99.7961 East longitude. Slope was between 00-300 with comparatively moist habitat located at South facing Aspect (Table 3.1).

4.62.2. Phytosociological Attributes

This community comprised 46 plant species and was dominated by Salix flablellaris having an IVI value of 60.72 followed by Sibbaldia purpurea and Fragaria nubicola having IVI values of 19.73 and 11.34 respectively. Co-dominant species were

Plantago major (10.30), Juniperus communis (9.31) and Bergenia stracheyi (9.05) (Table

4.58).

4.62.3. Diversity and Components

Community showed a Simpson’s diversity value of 0.93 whereas the Shannon’s diversity was calculated as 3.66. The evenness was found to be 0.65 and richness value was 2.65. The maturity index value was calculated to be 19.13 % for the investigated community (Table 4.2).

4.62.4. Anthropogenic Pressure

The soil of this Community was moderately eroded and placed in Class two. High grazing intensity was observed at the site and was classified as class three (Table 4.2)

Table.4.58. Primary phytosociological data of Salix – Sibbalidia- Fragaria Community

Sr.No Species Name D F C R.D RF RC IVI 1 Salix flablellaris 20.80 50.00 36.40 30.95 5.68 24.08 60.72 2 Potentilla achreata 0.50 10.00 1.50 0.74 1.14 0.99 2.87 3 Spiraea aucuata 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.15 1.14 0.17 1.45 4 Viburnum nervosum 1.70 10.00 6.50 2.53 1.14 4.30 7.97 5 Juniperus communis 2.60 10.00 6.50 3.87 1.14 4.30 9.31 6 Caltha alba 1.60 30.00 4.50 2.38 3.41 2.98 8.77

208

Sr.No Species Name D F C R.D RF RC IVI 7 Rumex nepalensis 0.30 20.00 0.50 0.45 2.27 0.33 3.05 8 Sibbaldia purpurea 5.30 30.00 12.75 7.89 3.41 8.44 19.73 9 Plantago major 1.20 40.00 6.00 1.79 4.55 3.97 10.30 10 Persicaria barbata 0.70 40.00 3.50 1.04 4.55 2.32 7.90 11 Valeriana jatamansii 0.70 30.00 4.50 1.04 3.41 2.98 7.43 12 Sewertia cuneata 0.50 30.00 3.25 0.74 3.41 2.15 6.30 13 Achillea millefolium 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.15 1.14 0.17 1.45 14 Bistorta affinis 0.60 20.00 3.00 0.89 2.27 1.98 5.15 15 Gentian algida 1.50 30.00 3.25 2.23 3.41 2.15 7.79 16 Primula roesa 0.80 30.00 3.25 1.19 3.41 2.15 6.75 17 Galium asperuloides 1.90 20.00 0.50 2.83 2.27 0.33 5.43 18 Asplenium adiantum nigrum 0.40 10.00 1.50 0.60 1.14 0.99 2.72 19 Asplenium trichomanes 0.60 10.00 1.50 0.89 1.14 0.99 3.02 20 Adiantum caudatum 1.60 10.00 1.50 2.38 1.14 0.99 4.51 21 Cortusabrotherii 0.50 20.00 3.00 0.74 2.27 1.98 5.00 22 Plantago depressa 0.40 10.00 1.50 0.60 1.14 0.99 2.72 23 Taraxacum tibitianum 0.30 10.00 1.50 0.45 1.14 0.99 2.58 24 Aconogonum molle 0.60 10.00 0.25 0.89 1.14 0.17 2.19 25 Ranunculus hirtellus 0.90 20.00 3.25 1.34 2.27 2.15 5.76 26 Bergenia stracheyi 1.00 20.00 8.00 1.49 2.27 5.29 9.05 27 Geranium himalayense 1.50 20.00 1.75 2.23 2.27 1.16 5.66 28 Fragaria nubicola 1.90 40.00 6.00 2.83 4.55 3.97 11.34 29 Poa gracilis 1.40 20.00 0.50 2.08 2.27 0.33 4.69 30 Poa nemoralis 1.10 10.00 0.25 1.64 1.14 0.17 2.94 31 Viola canescens 1.00 20.00 3.00 1.49 2.27 1.98 5.75 32 Poa bacteriana 1.50 20.00 0.50 2.23 2.27 0.33 4.84 33 Juncus membranaceus 2.80 20.00 1.25 4.17 2.27 0.83 7.27 34 Trillium govanianum 0.30 10.00 0.25 0.45 1.14 0.17 1.75 35 Carex cardiolepis 1.70 30.00 2.00 2.53 3.41 1.32 7.26 36 Epilobium parviflorum 0.40 10.00 1.50 0.60 1.14 0.99 2.72 37 Stellariadecombens 1.80 10.00 1.50 2.68 1.14 0.99 4.81 38 Leontopodium leontopodium 0.90 30.00 2.00 1.34 3.41 1.32 6.07 39 Sinoodophyllum hexandrum 0.20 10.00 0.25 0.30 1.14 0.17 1.60 40 Agromonia pilosa 0.40 10.00 1.50 0.60 1.14 0.99 2.72 41 Viola biflora 0.30 10.00 1.50 0.45 1.14 0.99 2.58 42 Impatiens edgeworthii 0.40 10.00 0.25 0.60 1.14 0.17 1.90 43 Anemone tetrasepla 1.00 20.00 3.00 1.49 2.27 1.98 5.75 44 Trifolium repens 1.00 10.00 3.75 1.49 1.14 2.48 5.11 45 Pleurospermum brunonis 0.10 10.00 0.25 0.15 1.14 0.17 1.45 46 Ranunculus stewartii 0.30 20.00 1.75 0.45 2.27 1.16 3.88 67.2 880 151.15 100 100 100 300

209

4.63. ECOSYETEM SERVICES OF HIGHLAND FLORA IN AJK

Ecosystem services provided by the natural vegetation have a fundamental role in the sustainability of mankind over the centuries. The local populations depend on the natural ecosystem services in terms of food, timber wood, fuel wood, medicinal herbs, vegetables, mushroom collection, forbs and fodder, fruits, shelter, as well as cultural and spiritual benefits. These vital ecosystem services and products have a major role in sustainability of mountain people by providing them opportunities to build their economy and support their livelihood. Current research project also aimed to estimate the contribution of these services provided by alpine and sub-alpine vegetation types in sustainability and livelihood promotion of rural people in the western Himalayan region of Azad Jammu and Kashmir through a questionnaire based survey. The findings of the survey are elaborated as following.

4.63.1. Socioeconomic Attributes of the local population

A total of 20 villages in surrounding populations of sub-alpine and alpine region in AJK were surveyed to quantify the role of wild plant species in the livelihood support and contribution to the socio-economic status of the local populations. The analyzed data was obtained from 320 households belonging to diverse social ranks. The average family size/Household in the investigated region was calculated as 8.95 persons. Maximum family size was reported from the village Dao Khun as 13.15 persons at an altitudinal rang of 2100m-2600m whereas lowest family size as 5.16 was reported from Dosut &

Khwajaseri at an elevational range of 1800m-2100m.

Analyzed data about herd size revealed that an average herd size of 17.96 grazing units/household. Largest flock size of 36.95 grazing units/household was reported from village Halmat-Taobut at an altitude of 2275m. The smallest flock size as 3 grazing

210 units/household was reported from Barikot village of district Bagh at an altitudinal range of 1800m-2400m. The average land holding was recorded as 2.134 hectare/family.

Maximum land holding was recorded as 2.162 hectare in the village Dao Khun whereas minimum land holding was recorded as 0.286 hectare in village Dosut and Khwajaseri.

Average subsistence agricultural land was reported to be 0.490 hectare/family.

Average available grazing area per grazing unit was calculated to be 0.683 hectare whereas average grazing area available for stall feeding was recorded as 0.092 hectare in area. Maximum grazing area per grazing unit was calculated to be 0.872 hectare/ grazing unit from village Dawarian whereas minimum grazing area per grazing unit was calculated to be 0.041 hectare/ grazing unit from Dosut and Khwajaseri. Local populations in the rural areas sustain their livelihood by animal rearing but do not have sufficient land holding to compensate the needs of their livestock.

4.63.2. Medicinal Plants Used by Local People

Indigenous Medicinal plants are among the most important ecosystem service having a vital role in the primary health care system of the Himalayan highland populations. Our results revealed that a total of 67 medicinal plants belonging to 37 families were being used for different medicinal purposes. The predominant families of medicinal plants included Polygonaceae with 9 species of medicinal plants followed by

Asteraceae and Apiaceae (6 spp each) and Lamiaceae (4 spp). Out of these 67 plants, 24 plant species (35.82%) i.e. Rumex nepalensis, Rheum webbianum, Saussurea costus,

Skimmia laureola, Primula denticulata, Trillium gavaniainum, Thymus linearis, Mentha longifolia, Inula royleana, Atropa acuminata and Arisaema jacquemontii were used for treatment of different livestock diseases such as cough, constipation, red urination, foot and mouth diseases, weakness, wounds and inflammation. Beside these uses, 14 plant

211 species (20.89%) were used as a tea purposes among local people in cold, coughing, influenza, headache, stomach disorders, joint pain, dysentery and constipation etc.

Important plants used for tea purposes were Bistorta amplexicaulis, Bergenia stracheyi,

Abies pindrow, Geranium nepalense, Saussurea costus, Taxus wallichiana and Thymus linearis etc. Investigation revealed the different plant parts were used due to their high efficiency to cure diseases. Roots and rhizome were the major plant part used for medicinal purposes making 56.71% of the ethno botanical uses followed by, leaves

(20.89 %), aerial parts (14.92 %), whole plant (13.43 %), flower (8.95 %), fruit (7.46 %), bark and stem (5.97 %), seeds (2.98 %) and bulb (1.49 %) (Figure 4.4). Major diseases including asthma, stomachache, toothache, hepatitis, piles, dysentery, diabetes, joint pain, cough, backache, constipation, fever, feminine diseases, cold, and fracture etc were treated by using Medicinal herbs (Table 4.59).

It was observed that the People of old age group (40-70 years) mostly preferred the treatment of diseases by the use of local medicinal herbs as compared to the pharmaceutical products. The survey about the use of medicinal plants in local populations revealed that 100% population of Dosut, Khwajaseri, Machiara, Dawarian and Bagh Barikot were found using medicinal plants to cure different diseases. The were followed by Halmat, Sardari, Tawbat (83.33%), Peer Hasimar (75%), Dao Khun (62.5%),

Nagder (57.5%), Leepa valley (42.85%), Kel, Domail bala and Shounther (32%) (Figure

4.5).

212

Fruit used Bulb used Whole plants used Seed used 6% 1% 10% 2% Arial parts used 11% Flowers used 7%

Roots / Rhizome used 43% Stem and Leaves used Bark used 16% 4%

Figure 4.4 Percentage of different Medicinal plant’s parts used as medicines

Bagh (Barikot), Dosut and 100 Khwaja seri, Nagder, 100 57

Dawarian, 100 Machiara, 100 Peera Seemar, 75

Guraz Valley , Leepa valley, 42 83 Dao Khun, 62 Shonther Valley , 32

Figure 4.5: Percentage dependency of the surveyed villages on medicinal plants

213

Table 4.59. Medicinal Plants, local names, parts used, and their remarks in Azad Jammu and Kashmir

Sr. Local Parts Plant Species Family Medicinal Remarks No Name Used 1 Abies pindrow Royle Pinaceae Rever B Bark tree is used in fever, cough, and stomach pain. Stomachache, urinary complaints, toothache, 2. Achillea milliefolium L. Asteraceae Dand jari L,Rh antiseptic. Rhizome paste is applied on chest to treat pneumonia, 3. Aconitum hetrophyllum Wall Ranunaculaceae Patrees Rh cold, fever, headache, diarrhea, dyspepsia, and diabetes. Flower mixed with honey given in asthma, roots Aconitun chyasmenthium Stapf 4. Ranunculaceae Mohri Fl, Rh paste used for foot and mouth diseases (Mukhar) of ex Holmes animals

5. Aconogonum alpiunm Schur Polygonaceae Pan cholla Ar, R Arial parts as vegetable and root leucorrhoea.

Decoction of roots and fruit used as anti-lice for 6. Actaea spicata L. Ranunculaceae Muniri R, F, humans and animals

Aesculus indica (Colebr. ex Hippocastanacea Fruit is given to overcome the weakness and as a 7. Bun Khor F Cambess.) Hook. e vermifuge for animals

Decoction is used to cure skin diseases, diabetes, and Jan-e- 8. Ajuga bracteosa Lammiaceae Wp worm killing, and blood purification, stops burning of adam stomach. Mali Ka 9. Allium humile wall Amaryllidaceae WP Condiment, stomachche Piaz Burning of feet, stomach and liver, red urination in 10. Althea rosea Malvaceae Gul kher R animals

214

Sr. Local Parts Plant Species Family Medicinal Remarks No Name Used Vegetable, seed with other medicinal plants are given 11. Amaranthus viridius Chenopodiaceae Ganhiar Ar,Se for backache, joint pain and burning of stomachache. 12. Angelica candicans Apiaceae Palhar R Wound healing in sheep and goats Cough, cold, influenza, constipation and cure of 13. Angelica cyclocarpa Edgew Apiaceae Murchar Rh asthma in animals. Used in acute abdominal pain and kept in houses as 14. Angelica glauca Edgew Apiaceae Chora R,L emergency medicine for stomachche, rheumatism, hepatitis also used as condiment

15. Arisaema jacquemontii Blume. Araceae Sur ganda R Cough, intestinal ailments and weakness of animals

Gow Joint pain, stomachche, fever, and ulcer. Scurvy, 16. Arnebia benthamii L. Boraginaceae Rh zuban fever

17. Atropa acuminata Royle Solanaceae Lubar L, R Cough, fever and pyrexia of animals

Cure eye diseases, joint pains, skin diseases, 18. Berberis aristata DC. Berberidaceae Sunbal R,B,F jaundice, piles, stomach ulcer, backache, malaria, and fractures. Fruit is laxative. Kala Root bark is used cancer, leg pain, pain in vertebral 19. Berberis aristata Roxb.ex DC Berberidaceae B Sumbal Colum, and bleeding. Root paste used on burns, in kidney stone, piles, diabetes, ulcer dysentery, and heart diseases. Crushed Bat 20. Bergenia stracheyi Hook.f Saxifragaceae Rh roots are mixed with milk and given in backache. Phaiwa Root powder with water or milk is used to reduce obesity.

215

Sr. Local Parts Plant Species Family Medicinal Remarks No Name Used

Roots are used for the general weakness of animal, Mali Ki and for the treatment of diarrhea, dysentery and 21. Bistorta amplexicaulis D.Don Polygonaceae Rh,F Masloonr Hoptysis. Flower tea is used to treat stomach problem. Bupleurum longicaule Wall. ex Mithi Jar/ Roots put in the yogurt to increase the amount of 22. Apiaceae R DC kali jari butter. Leaves paste with Mentha leves given in case of 23. Canabus sativa L. Cannabaceae Bhung Ar constipation and reducing the extra water from liver. Capsella bursa-pastoris (L.) Pan 24. Bracicaceae Ar Vegetable for stomach Medikus Pencha Rhizome have antifungal and anti-bacterial activity, Hasbay ki 25. Chaerophyllum reflexum Lindl Apiaceae Rh paste of the rhizome is given to cure typhoid fever Jar and skin diseases

26. Chenopodium album L. Chenopodiaceae Bathwa L, S Vegetable for cough and constipation

Dioscorea deltoidea Wall.ex 27. Dioscoraceae Kareens Rh Locally used as an alternate of soap Griseb. Vegetable, rhizome is used for the treatment of 28. Dryopteris filix-mas D.Don Dryopteridaceae Langroo WP cholera and dysentery. Arial parts soaked in water and used in hepatitis and 29. Equesetum arvense L. Equesetaceae Band kiia Ar jaundice

30. Fagopyrum esculentum Moench Polygonaceae Trumba L Vegetable for weakness and constipation

216

Sr. Local Parts Plant Species Family Medicinal Remarks No Name Used

Fragaria nubicola (Hook. f.) Khan Fruit eaten as a strawberry, decoction of roots used in 31. Rosaceae F, R Lindl. ex Lacaita merchant jaundice and typhoid.

Jagli Bulb is put in the yogurt to increase the amount of 32. Fritillaria roylei Liliaceae Bu thoom butter Root extract is used to inhabit the pathogenic activity 33. Gentiaoides alii Omer &Qaiser Gentianaceae Bhangri R of yeast. Also used to cure Laconia. Tonsillitis and toothache. Oil is astringent and applied as massage around throat. Decoction is used 34. Geranium nepalense D.Don Geraniaceae Ratan Jot WP for joint pain, gyne problems, constipation, and digestion. Rhizome is put in the yogurt to increase the amount 35. Habenaria pectinata D. Don Orchidaceae Nar Mada Rh of butter. Mali Ka Decoction of root is given in cough. Root powder is 36. Indigofera himalayensis Wall Fabiaceae R Kenthi applied externally for pain in chest. 37. Inula royleana DC. Asteraceae Poshgr R Abdominal pain and worm killing of animals Used in digestion, backache, diarrhea, and joint Gugal 38. Jurinea macrociphala L. Asteraceae Rh pains. Root paste is eaten after cooking in rice or Dhoop flour.

39. Lagotis cashmeriana Rupr. Scrophularaceae Kali hand Ar Vegetable for diabetes mellitus

40. Lindelofia longiflora Baillon Boraginaceae Lhndi Fl, R Used to cure female diseases

217

Sr. Local Parts Plant Species Family Medicinal Remarks No Name Used Dag Vegetable, seeds are used as demulcent in cough and 41. Malva parviflora Zinn Malvaceae WP Sounchil ulcers in the bladder Vegetable in digestion and diarrhea. Decoction of 42. Mentha longifolia L.Hudson Lammiaceae Podeena WP leaves is used to stop vomiting. Cure skin diseases, fever, cough and rheumatism. 43. Origanum vulgare L. Lammiaceae Ban Babri WP Volatile oil is used to kill harmful intestinal worms. 44. Oxyria digyna (L.) Hill Polygonaceae Khatkurla Ar Vegetable for stomach problems and constipation Used as vegetables for the remedy of glandular infections i.e swellings and inflammation in wounds 45. Phytolacca acinosa Phytolaccaceae Lubber Ar, R etc. Root oil is used for joint pains chronic rheumatism and reduction in weight. Cure of asthma and dysentery of animals. Root is useful in kappa, biliousness, bilious fever, urinary discharges, asthma, cough, blood troubles, 46. Picrorrhiza kurrooa L. Royle. Scrophulariaceae Kor Katki Rh burning sensation, lucoderma, diabetes, jaundice and purifies the nurse’s milk. CHchi Vegetable, flower as alternate of ispaghol in 47. Plantago lanceolata L. Plantaginaceae Fl ,L Patra dysentery. Root paste with shaker is given in Abdominal pain, 48. Pleurospermum sp Apiaceae Chorial Rh cold, influenza and cough of animals Arial parts are used as vegetable. Seeds are used for Ar,R,Se relieving the gripping pain of colic. Roots are used as 49. Polygonum alpinum All. Polygonaceae Chikroon ,S astringent. Stalk is used for washing of ulcers, constipation.

218

Sr. Local Parts Plant Species Family Medicinal Remarks No Name Used

Ethanol extract of rhizome have antibacterial activity Polygonum amplexicaule 50. Polygonaceae Masloon Rh against pseudomonas aeruginosa. Rhizome tea is D.Don effective in different diseases too. Mali di 51. Potentilla atrosanguinea Lodd. Rosaceae R Root tea is taken for stomach problems cha Leaves for eye diseases, whole plant for red urination 52. Primula denticulata Smith Primulaceae Mameera L ,wp of animals Vegetable, stem is edible, root paste is applied Goal externally in muscular injury, cuts, wounds, mumps, 53. Rheum australee D.Don Polygonaceae L.Rh,S Chontial headache, stomachache constipation, dysentery, swelling of throat, earche and blood purification. Stem is edible, root paste is applied externally in Chipti muscular injury, cuts, wounds, mumps, headache, 54. Rheum webbianum Royle Polygonaceae L,Rh,S Chontial stomachache constipation, dysentery, swelling of throats, earache and blood purification. Cure stomach diseases and headache. Root paste is 55. Rhodiola fastigiata Hook. Crassulaceae Bag Masti Rh used. 56. Rosa indica Rosaceae Gulab Fl Decoction of flower for massage in pain Vegetable. Root paste is anti-lice. Constipation of 57. Rumex nepalensis Hook. Polygonaceae Hola L,Rh animals Constipation, worm killing, joint pain, antiseptic, 58. Sassuria costus Asteraceae Kutth Rh toothache, and backche, weakness, sugar etc. Mutakhes Gass trouble in humans and for the release of after 59. Senecio jacquemontianus Asteraceae R h birth in animals

219

Sr. Local Parts Plant Species Family Medicinal Remarks No Name Used Decoction of leaves used to reduce the obesity. Insect 60. Skimmia laureola Hook Rutaceae Nere L repellent dysentery for animals. To cure coughing its paste is given with honey. Tea is used strengthening Vegetable. Also used in cold, cough and diabetes and 61. Taraxacum officinale L. Asteraceae Hand L,R kidney pain Bhuti 62. Taraxacum tibetianum Asteraceae WP Vegetable for diabetes. Hand Leaves are sedative, antiseptic. Bark tea is used to 63. Taxus wallichiana Zucc. Taxaceae Thoonri L,B cure asthma, bronchitis, epilepsy, and cough. Ban 64. Thymus linearis Benth. Lammiaceae L,Fl Suppression of urine, constipation and shivering. Ajwaen Ethanol extract of the rhizome and aril parts have antifungal activity and also used in rheumatism, birth 65. Trillium gavaniainum Wall Trilliliaceae Tin Patra Rh,Ar control and in the preparation of sex like hormones. Eye pain, joint pain and rheumatism, heart diseases and blood cancer Hypotonic and insecticide. Mental disorders, pain in Musk-e- 66. Valeriana wallichii DC. Valirianaceae Rh joints, eye, ear and hair. Also used in pneumonia and Bala fever. 67. Viola canescens Wall.ex Roxb. Violaceae Banafsha Fl Earache, hepatitis, jaundice

Key:

WP=Whole plant B = Bark R=Root St=Stalk L= Leaf Fl= flower Rh= Rhizome

Ra= Reisn Se= Seed Ar= Arial parts S=Stem Bu=bulb F=Fruit 220

4.63.3. Wild Vegetables Used

Survey was conducted to estimate the utilization of wild vegetables and their role in the livelihood support of the local inhabitants. Most people were found to collect the wild vegetables from their native forests and alpine grass lands in large quantities. A total of 34 plant species were found to be used as wild vegetables among locals. Important vegetables which were used mostly by the local villagers are Dryopteris ramosa

(langroo), Asplenium fontanum (Kungi) Taraxacum obovatum (hund) Polygonum alpinum (chikroon), Epilobium parviflorum (nariia), Mentha longifolia (podina), Rumex acetosa (holla), Rheum australe (chontial), Malva neglecta (sonchal), Allium humile

(piaz), Osmunda regalis (kandhera), Plantago major (chemche ptra), polymonium caroleanum (Chach), Mentha spicata, Urtica dioica (Kiary), Polygonum plebeium

(Drobra), Silene vulgaris ( Murkanr), Trillium govanianum (Tre patra), Dipsacus inermis

(Opalha), Chenopodium album (Bathwa) and Aconogonum alpinum (Pan chola). Locals collect these wild vegetables in spring and summer season and use in fresh condition but for winter season locals dry these after boiling whereas some vegetables were directly dried under the heat of sun without boiling.

The of results from different studied sites revealed 100% population of Machiara,

Dawarian, Dosut, Khwaja Seri and Bagh Barikot sites were found using wild vegetables.

They were followed by 87.5 % in Halmat, Sardari, Tawbat Salkhalla, Nagder (82.5 %),

Leepa valley (42.85 %), Kel, Domail Bala and Shounther (32 %), Dao Khun and Peer

Haseemar each with 25 % (Figure 4.6).

221

Bagh (Barikot), Nagder, 82.5 Dosut- 100 Khwajaseri, 100 Dawarian, 100

Peer Hasimar, 25 Machiara, 100

Leepa valley, Shonther Valley, 42.85 Guraze Valley, Dao Khun, 25 32 87.5 Figure 4.6.Percentage of people’s using wild vegetables as a food 4.63.4. Mushroom Collection

Mushroom collection is another important ecosystem service practiced by the local communities for their food as well as commercial sale to the market. Different types of morel mushrooms especially Morchella esculenta (L.) Pers and Morchella conica (L.)

Pers were found having great importance value among local people. Some areas were recorded to collect wild edible mushroom species as a vegetable including Polyporous sequamosa, sparassis crispa (Sherrii), Sparassis spetheulata (Sherrii), Gyromitra esculenta (Kan gucha), Hericium sp (Shtori), and Verpa bohimeca (Shtaba). The species of Morchella (Guchii), Helvella crispa (Kan Guchii), Helvella elastica, Helvella leuconosa were used as high cost vegetables to reduce the fats and blood sugar. Local populations were also found to collect these mushrooms for market sale purposes. Local market price for the year 2017 was found to be Rs.10000-14000 / kg. The average mushroom quantity collected and sold/family ranged between 2-10 kg/year.

222

The analysis of individual sites revealed that 50% population the Dosut and

Khwaja Seri village were found to extract mushroom from their forests followed by 36.36

% in Machiara, 31.25% in Dawarian, 30 % in Nagder and 12.5 % in Guraz Valley

(Halmat, Sardari, Taobut). On the other the sites including Kel, Domail Bala, Shounther,

Dao Khun, Leepa valley, Peer Haseemar and Bagh Barikot were recorded with no mushroom collection at all (Figure 4.7).

Peer Hasimar, 0 Bagh (Barikot), 0 Leepa valley, 0 Dao Khun, 0 Dawarian, 31.25 Nagder, 30 Shonther Valley, 0

Guraze Valley, 12.5

Dosut- Khwajaseri, 50 Machiara, 36.36

Figure 4.7. Percentage of local population involved in mushroom collection 4.63.5. Fuel Wood Consumption Pattern

The average annual fuel wood consumption in the study area was found to be

269.069 tons /household. The highest quantity of fuel wood consumed was recorded as

601.92 tons /household from Taobut village at an altitude of 2275m. The lowest quantity of fuel wood consumed annually was recorded from Maldai village as 58.05 tons. It was revealed that the consumption of fuel wood was recorded to be 3-4 fold higher making about 70% of the total consumption in the winter season ranging from September to

March due to severe climatic conditions, heavy snow fall and freezing temperatures. The result showed that 13 species of trees were used as fuel wood in the different areas. The

223 prefered fuel wood species in the area included Pinus wallichiana, Cedrus deodara, Abies pindrow, Asculus indica, Picea smithiana, Taxus bacatta, Querqus dilatata, Salix flabellaris, Juniperis communis, Betula utilus, Rohododendran companulatum, and Acer caesium.

4.64. VILLAGE WISE ANALYSIS OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES

4.64.1.1. Site: 1 Dosut- Khwajaseri

4.64.1.1.1. Geographical Characters

Dosut-Khwajaseri lies at an altitudinal range of 1700-2500m at 340 75.7188

North Latitude and 0740 13.8039 East longitudes. The village is located 12 Km away from district headquarter Athmuqam. Distance of forest from the settlement was about 1 km. The summer season extended from 1st April to 15 October (198 days) whereas the winter season is of 165 days (from 15 October to March) in the investigated site

4.64.1.1.2. Fuel Wood Consumption

Average annual fuel wood consumption was recorded as 15.18 tons/ household.

During summer average consumption was recorded to be 4.45 tons whereas the values increased up to 10.72 ton in winter period. The average per capita per day fuel wood consumption is about 8.05 kg. During summer season per capita per day consumption was recorded as 4.36 kg whereas during winter this amount increased to 12.59 kg (Table

4). Two to three folds increase in fuel wood consumption was recorded during winter due to severe climatic conditions and non-availability of alternate fuel resources.

224

4.64.1.1.3. Socioeconomic Variables

The average household size in the investigated area was calculated as 5.16 persons whereas average herd size was 7 grazing units per household. The average land holding was recorded as 0.28 hectare /family, of which 0.24 hectare were agricultural while remaining area was used as grazing pastures. Average grazing area available for a grazing unit was 0.005 hectare (Table 4.61).

4.64.1.1.4. Ecosystem services

A total of 8 plants species were reported to be used as wild vegetables and 9 plant species were found to be used as fodder. Wild fruits of three plant species were being used by the local inhabitants. Twenty one medicinal plants species were used to treat different human diseases whereas 14 plants species were reported as remedy against veterinary diseases. Five species of plants were reported to be used for tea. The local populations were also recorded to collect and utilize 2 species of Morchella having considerable livelihood contribution (Approximately Rs 15000 / year).

4.64.2. Site: 2: Machiara

4.64.2.1. Geographical Characters

Machiara lies at an altitudinal range of 1800 m-2180 m at 340 54.7437 North latitude and 0730 57.7589 East longitude. The village is located 13 km away from Tehsil

Headquarter Patika. Distance of forest from the settlement was about 2 km. The summer season extended from 1st April to 15 October (198 days) whereas the winter season is of

165 days (from 15 October to March) in the investigated site.

225

4.64. 2.2. Fuel Wood Consumption:

Average annual fuel wood consumption was recorded as 15.18 tons. During summer average consumption was recorded to be 4.45 tons whereas the values increased up to 10.72 ton in winter period. During summer season per capita per day consumption recorded about 2.03 whereas during winter this amount increased to 6.21 kg (Table 4.61).

Two to three fold increases in fuel wood consumption was recorded during winter due to severe climatic conditions.

4.64.2.3. Socioeconomic Variables

The average household size in the investigated area was calculated as 7.90 persons whereas average herd size was 26.72 cattle units per household. The average land holding was recorded as 1.765 h /family out of which 0.753h was agricultural. Average grazing area available for a grazing unit was 0.037h (Table 4.61).

4.64.2.4. Ecosystem services

A total of 6 plant species were reported to be used as wild vegetables. A total of

2 plant species were reported to use as fodder. Wild fruits of three plant species were used by the local inhabitants. Ten medicinal plants species were used to treat different human diseases whereas 2 plants species were reported as remedy against veterinary diseases.

Two species of plants were reported to be used for tea. The local populations were also recorded to collect and utilize 2 species of Morchella having considerable livelihood contribution (Approx. 10000/year).

226

4.64.3. Site: 3 Halmat –Shunddas

4.64.3.1. Geographical Characters

Halmat lies at 340 75.2768 North Latitude and 0740 66.1344 East longitude.

Sardari lies at 340 76.3132 North Latitude and 0740 62.8866 East longitude, Taobut lies at

340 72.7597 North Latitude and 0740 71.0531 East longitude and Shunddas lies at 340

75.8860 North Latitude and 0740 64.6380 East longitude and at an altitudinal range of

1900m-2200m. The villages are located 45 km away from Town area Kel. Distance of forest from the settlement was about 1-5 km. The summer season extended from 15 April to September (168 days) whereas the winter season is of 197 days (from October to15

April) in the investigated sites.

4.64.3.2. Fuel Wood Consumption

Average annual fuel wood consumption was recorded as 25.08 tons /year.

During summer average consumption was recorded to be 7.35 tons whereas the values increased up to 17.73 ton in winter period. During summer season per capita per day consumption was recorded about 4.23 whereas during winter this amount increased to

8.71 kg (Table 4.60). Two to three fold increases in fuel wood consumption was recorded during winter due to severe climatic conditions.

4.64.3.3. Socioeconomic Variables

The average household size in the investigated area was calculated as 10.33 persons whereas average herd size was 36.95 cattle units per household. The average land holding was recorded as 1.148 ha /family, of which 0.396 ha kunals were agricultural.

Average grazing area available for a grazing unit was 0.020 ha (Table 4.61).

227

4.64.3.4. Ecosystem services

A total of 8 plant species were reported to be used as wild vegetables. A total of

13 plant species were reported to be used as fodder. Wild fruits of seven plant species were used by the local inhabitants. Sixteen medicinal plants species were used to treat different human diseases whereas 11 plant species were reported as a remedy against veterinary diseases. Four species of plants were reported to be used for tea. The local populations were also recorded to collect and utilize 5 species of wild edible mushrooms and Morchella sp having considerable livelihood contribution (Approx. 25000-

750000/year). Local people (08.33 %) were involved in illegal trade of Aconitum hetrophylum to improve their livelihood (Approx. 30000-60000/year).

4.64.4. Site: 04 Domail Bala- Shounther Valley

Domail Bala and Shounther Valley lies at an altitudinal range of 2200m- 2900m at 340 96.0834 North latitude and 740 47.4920 East longitude and 340 97.9041 North latitude and 740 52.8570 East longitude respectively. The villages are located 25 km away from Town area Kel. Distance of forest from the settlement was about 20 km. The summer season extended from 15 April to September (168 days) whereas the winter season is of 197 days (from October to15 April) in the investigated sites.

4.64.4.1. Fuel Wood Consumption

Average annual fuel wood consumption was recorded as 20.58 tons /year.

During summer average consumption was recorded to be 4.03 tons whereas the values increased up to 16.54 ton in winter period. During summer season per capita per day consumption was recorded about 2.53 kg whereas during winter this amount increased to

8.80 kg (Table 4). Three to four fold increases in fuel wood consumption was recorded

228 during winter due to high altitude, large family size, prolong winter, severe climatic conditions of temperature, non-availability of alternate fuel resources and change in aspect.

4.64.4.2. Socioeconomic Variables

The average household size in the investigated area was calculated as 09.48 persons whereas average herd size was 09.32 cattle units per household. The average land holding was recorded as 1.179 ha /family, of which 0.343 ha was agricultural. Average grazing area available for a grazing unit was 0.089 ha (Table 4.61).

4.64.4.3. Ecosystem services

A total of 12 plant species were reported to be used as wild vegetables. A total of 18 plant species were reported to use as fodder. Wild fruits of two plant species

(Fragaria nubicola and Rubus sp) were used by the local inhabitants. Sixteen medicinal plants species were used to treat different human diseases whereas 4 plants species were reported as remedy against veterinary diseases. Five species of plants were reported to be used for tea. The local populations were also recorded to collect and utilize 4 species of wild edible mushrooms as a delicious vegetable. Eight percent people were involved in illegal trade of Fritilaria roleyi and Aconitum hetrophylum to improve their livelihood

(Approx. 15000-40000/year).

4.64.5. Site: 05 Dao Khun

4.64.5. 1. Geographical Characters

Dao Khun lies at an altitudinal range of 2100m-2600m at 340 26.0815North latitude and 0730 .80.9806 East longitude. The village is located 40 km away from district

Headquarter Hattian Balla. Distance of forest from the settlement was about 0.5 km. The

229 summer season extended from 1st April to September (183 days) whereas the winter season is of 182 days (1st October to March) in the investigated site

4.64.5.2. Fuel Wood Consumption

Average annual fuel wood consumption was recorded as 22.89 tons /year.

During summer average consumption was recorded to be 6.17 tons whereas the values increased up to 16.72 ton in winter period. During summer season per capita per day consumption was recorded about 2.54 kg whereas during winter this amount increased to

6.93 kg (Table 4.60). Two to three fold increases in fuel wood consumption was recorded during cold winter due to large family size, severe climatic conditions and availability of forest wood at low cast

4.64.5. 3. Socioeconomic Variables

The average house hold size in the investigated area was calculated as 13.25 persons whereas average herd size was 5.62 cattle units per household. The average land holding was recorded as 2.162 ha) /family, of which 0.549ha were agricultural. Average grazing area available for a grazing unit was 0.286 ha (Table 4.61).

4.64.5. 4. Ecosystem services

A total of 5 plant species were reported to be used as wild vegetables. A total of 7 plant species were reported to use as fodder. Nine medicinal plants species were used to treat different human diseases whereas 3 plants species were reported as remedy against veterinary diseases. Roots of Bistorta amplexicaulis were reported to be used for tea.

230

4.64.6. Site: 6 Leepa Valley

4.64.6.1. Geographical Characters

Leepa Valley lies at an altitudinal range of 2000 m-2800 m at 340 30.4645 North latitude and 0730 90.5407 East longitude. Distance of forest from the settlement was about 01-03 km. The summer season extended from 1st April to 15 October (198 days) whereas the winter season is of 165 days (16 October to March) in the investigated site.

4.64.6.2. Fuel Wood Consumption

Average annual fuel wood consumption was recorded as 17.96 tons /year.

During summer average consumption was recorded to be 5.94 tons whereas the values increased up to 12.02 ton in winter period. During summer season per capita per day consumption was recorded about 3.33 kg whereas during winter this amount increased to

8.09 kg (Table 4.60).

4.64.6.3. Socioeconomic Variables

The average household size in the investigated area was calculated as 9 persons whereas average herd size was 4.28 cattle units per household. The average land holding was recorded as 0.577 ha /family, of which 0.238 ha was agricultural. Average grazing area available for a grazing unit was 0.078 ha (Table 4.61).

4.64.6.4. Ecosystem services

A total of 3 plant species were reported to be used as wild vegetables whereas

10 plant species were reported to use as fodder. Seven medicinal plants species were used to treat different human diseases.

231

4.64.7. Site: 7 Peer Haseemar

4.64.7.1. Geographical Characters

Peer Haseemar lies at an altitudinal range of 2800 m- 3200 m at 340 .41.526

North latitude and 0730 54.892 East longitude. The village is located 28 km away from

Muzaffarabad City. The summer season extended from 1st March to October (245 days) whereas the winter season is of 120 days (1st November to February) in the investigated site.

4.64.7.2. Fuel Wood Consumption

Average annual fuel wood consumption was recorded as 14.51 tons /year.

During summer average consumption was recorded to be 5.51 tons whereas the values increased up to 9.00 tons in winter period. During summer season per capita per day consumption was recorded about 2.72 kg whereas during winter this amount increased to

9.09 kg (Table 4.60). Due to short winter and prolonged hot summer season, average fuel wood consumption was recorded as low as compared to other sites.

4.64.7.3. Socioeconomic Variables

The average household size in the investigated area was calculated as 8.25 persons whereas average herd size was 68.5 grazing units per household. The average land holding was recorded as150 ha /family, of which 0.581 ha was agricultural. Average grazing area available for a grazing unit was 0.008 ha (Table 4.61).

4.64.7.4. Ecosystem services

A total of 5 plant species were reported to be used as wild vegetables while 2 plant species were used to make tea in cold days of the year. Leaves of Aesculus indica

232 were used as a fodder in winter season for sheep and goats. Seven medicinal plants species were used to treat different human diseases.

4.64.8. Site: 8 Nagder

4.64.8.1. Geographical Characters

Nagder lies at an altitudinal range of 2300 m- 3000 m at 340 68.2589 North latitude and 0740 92.5593 East longitude. The village is located 13 km away from district

Headquarter Athmuqam. Distance of forest from the settlement was about 3 km. The summer season extended from 1st April to October (214 days) whereas the winter season is of 151 days (1st November to March) in the investigated site.

4.64.8.2. Fuel Wood Consumption

Average annual fuel wood consumption was recorded as 13.49 tons /year.

During summer average consumption was recorded to be 2.66 tons whereas the values increased up to 10.83 ton in winter period. During summer season per capita per day consumption was recorded about 1.38 kg whereas during winter this amount increased to

7.96 kg (Table 4.60).

4.64.8.3. Socioeconomic Variables

The average household size in the investigated area was calculated as 9 persons whereas average herd size was 8.67 cattle units per household. The average land holding was recorded as 1.116 ha /family, of which 0.581 ha was agricultural. Average grazing area available for a grazing unit was 0.061 ha (Table 4.61).

233

4.64.8.4. Ecosystem services

A total of 22 plant species were reported to be used as wild vegetables. A total of 18 plant species were reported to use as fodder. Wild fruits of 9 plant species were used by the local inhabitants. Thirty eight medicinal plants species were used to treat different human diseases whereas 16 plants species were reported as remedy against veterinary diseases. Eight species of plants were reported to be used for tea. The local populations were also recorded to collect and utilize 4 species of wild edible mushrooms as a delicious vegetable during spring and moonsoon in summer and in dried form in winter season with meat. Thirty percent of people were involved in trade of Morchella esculenta and Morchella conica to improve their livelihood (Approx. 10000-15000/year).

4.64.9. Site: 9 Dawarian

4.64.9.1. Geographical Characters:

Dawarian Village lies at an altitudinal range of 1700m-2000m at 340 72.8892

North latitude and0740 03.0346 East longitude. The village is located 28 km away from district Headquarter Athmuqam. Distance of forest from the settlement was about 1-2 km.

The summer season extended from 1st April to October (214 days) whereas the winter season is of 151 days (1st November to March) in the investigated site.

4.64.9.2. Fuel Wood Consumption

Average annual fuel wood consumption was recorded as 13.82 tons /year.

During summer average consumption was recorded to be 05.61 tons whereas the values increased up to 08.21 ton in winter period. During summer season per capita per day consumption was recorded about 3.25 kg whereas during winter this amount increased to

6.74 kg (Table 4.60).

234

4.64.9.3. Socioeconomic Variables

The average household size in the investigated area was calculated as 8.06 persons whereas average herd size was 9.62 grazing units per household. The average land holding was recorded as 1.251 ha /family, of which 0.379 ha was agricultural.

Average grazing area available for a grazing unit was 0.090 ha (Table 4.61).

4.64.10. Site: 10: Bagh Barikot

4.64.10.1. Geographical Characters:

Bagh Barikot lies at an altitudinal range of 1800 m- 2400 m at 330 95.7107

North latitude and 0730 90.8330 East longitude. The village is located 20 km away from district Headquarter Bagh. Distance of forest from the settlement was about 1-2 km. The summer season extended from 15 April to September (168 days) whereas the winter season is of 197 days (1st October to 15 April) in the investigated site.

4.64.10.2. Fuel Wood Consumption

Average annual fuel wood consumption was recorded as 11.66 tons /year.

During summer average consumption was recorded to be 2.8 tons whereas the values increased up to 8.86 ton in winter period. During summer season per capita per day consumption was recorded about 1.80 kg whereas during winter this amount increased to

4.86 kg (Table 4.60).

4.64.10.3. Socioeconomic Variables

The average household size in the investigated area was calculated as 9.25 persons whereas average herd size was 3 cattle units per household. The average land

235 holding was recorded as 1.104 ha /family, of which 0.345 ha was agricultural. Average grazing area available for grazing unit was 0.252 ha (Table 4.61).

4.64.10.4. Ecosystem services

Single plant i.e Dryopteris filix-mas were reported to be used as wild vegetables.

A total of 8 plant species were reported to be used as fodder. Wild fruits of 3 plant species were used by the local inhabitants. Bergenia cilliata was used to treat different problems and wound healing.

236

Table 4.60. Socioeconomic parameters and fuel wood consumption pattern in local poplation of the study area

Av. fuel wood Av. fuel wood Av. fuel wood Distance Total house Altitude Family consumption consumption consumption from the Site name hold (m) size summer winter annual forest surveyed kg/day/capita kg/day/capita kg/day/capita used(km) Dosut & Khwaja 1800-2180 5.16 4.36 12.59 8.05 3-4 45 Seri

Machiara 1600-2050 7.90 2.03 6.21 3.91 2 29

Halmat, Sardari,Tawbut, 1900-2200 10.33 4.23 8.71 6.65 1-5 48 Marnat

Kel, Domal bala and 1900-3200 9.48 2.53 8.80 5.94 20 29 Shounther

Dao Khun 2100-2600 13.25 2.54 6.93 4.73 0.5 25

Leepa Valley 2000-2800 9 3.33 8.09 5.46 1-3 22

Peera Semar 2800-3200 8.25 2.72 9.09 4.81 00 20

Nagder 1700-3200 9 1.38 7.96 4.10 3 49 24 Dawarian 1700-2000 8.06 3.25 6.74 4.70 1-2 1-2 27 Bagh (Barikot) 1800-2400 9.25 1.80 4.86 3.45

Average 8.96 2.81 7.99 5.18

237

Table 4.61.Family size, Average land holding, herd size, available grazing area /grazing unit in the surveyed villages

Av. Av. Land Av. Av. grazing Av. grazing Distance from Total house Altitude Family Cultivated Site name holding herd area area/ cattle the forest used hold (m) size land (Hectare) size (Hectare ) (Hectare l) (km) surveyed (Hectare) Dosut & Khwaja 1800-2180 5.16 0.286 7 0.041 0.244 0.005 3-4 45 Seri

Machiara 1600-2050 7.90 1.765 26.72 1.011 0.753 0.037 2 29

Halmat, Sardari,Tawbut, 1900-2200 10.33 1.148 36.95 0.752 0.396 0.020 1-5 48 Marnat Kel, Domal bala 1900-3200 9.48 1.179 9.32 0.343 0.835 0.089 20 29 and Shounther

Dao Khun 2100-2600 13.25 2.162 5.62 1.612 0.549 0.286 0.5 25

Leepa Valley 2000-2800 9 0.577 4.28 0.339 0.238 0.078 1-3 22

Peera Semar 2800-3200 8.25 1.150 68.5 0.569 0.581 0.008 00 20

0.581 Nagder 1700-3200 9 1.116 8.67 0.534 0.061 3 49

1-2 24 Dawarian 1700-2000 8.06 1.251 9.62 0.872 0.379 0.090

1-2 27 Bagh (Barikot) 1800-2400 9.25 1.104 3 0.758 0.345 0.252

Average 8.96 1.17 17.96 0.68 0.49 0.092 oo oo

238

4.63.6. Fodder and for age collected from forest and Grass lands

A total of 320 houses from ten remote sites of Azad Jammu and Kashmir were surveyed to estimate the dependency pattern of local communities on the forest and grass lands for fodder requirements. Out of the investigated sites 24.04 % villagers were found to extract the fodder in the form of grasses and leaves of palatable shrubs and trees from the nearest resources while 17.40% people were found to purchase the wheat straw and fodder from markets and local venders. Plant species used as a substitute of fodder in all villages included Betula utilus (Buraj), Aesculus indica (Bankhor), Salix alba (Beens),

Salix tetrasperma (Jangli beens), Taxus wallichiana (Thonri), Acer caesium (Trekana),

Acer pictum (Trekana), Juglans regia (Akhrot), Corylus colurna (Oorni), Parotiopsis jacquemontianus (Pashare), Prunus padus (Bharath), Quercus spp (Choor, Reen),

Indegofera sp (Kenthee), Ailenthus altisema (Drewa), and Salix flabellaris (Bhentheri) etc. Due to small land holding and poor income, the local communities regarding their fodder requirements, depends on forest. In some areas where economic conditions of the locals were stable, people were found to purchase the wheat straw (in the form of

Bundles) and fodder (in the form of one head loads etc.) from markets.

Hundred percent of People from Dosut and Khwaja Seri area were found using pastures and forests for extraction of forbs and fodder, followed by 81.25 % in Dawarian,

50 % in Halmat, Sardari, and Taobut, 57.14 % in Leepa valley, 25 % in Dao Khun, 18.18

% of Machiara, 15% of Nagder, and 8 % in Kel, Domail Bala and Shounther (Figure 4.8).

4.63.6.1. Site: 1 Nagder

The average land holding/household in the village Nagder was recorded as 1.11 hectare. The survey revealed that local populations consumed an average of 18.75 head loads of fodder in the form of forbs and lopped leaves taken from the Alpine grass land

239 and forest of Nagder and Baboon Valley for their livestock in summer. In the winter, each household was recorded to purchase an average of 25.25 bundles of straw from market

(Figure 4.8).

4.63.6.2. Site: 02 Dosut and Khwaja Seri

The average land holding/ household in the village Dosut and Khwaja Seri was recorded as 0.28 hectare. The survey revealed that local populations consumed an average of 55.91 head loads of fodder in the form of forbs and lopped leaves taken from the

Alpine grass land and forest of Khwaja Seri for their livestock in summer (Figure 4.8).

4.63.6.3. Site: 03 Machiara

The average land holding/household in the village Machiara was recorded as 1.76 hectare. The survey revealed that local populations consumed an average of 6.81 head loads of fodder in the form of forbs and lopped leaves taken from Machiara National Park for their livestock in summer. In the winter, each household was recorded to purchase an average of 21.36 bundles of straw from market (Figure 4.8).

4.63.6.4. Site: 04 Guraz Valley

The average land holding/household in the Guraz Valley (Halmat, Sardari,

Taobut, Marnat, Dana, Nekroo and Shunddas) was recorded as 1.14 hectare. The survey revealed that local populations consumed an average of 13.70 head loads of fodder in the form of forbs and lopped leaves taken from alpine pastures and forest for their livestock in summer and winter. In the winter, each house hold was recorded to purchase an average of 21.36 bundles of straw from market (Figure 4.8).

240

4.63.6.5. Site: 05 Shounther Valley

The average land holding/household in the Shounther Valley (Kel, Domail Bala) was recorded as 1.17 hectare. The survey revealed that local populations consumed an average of 1.2 head loads of fodder in the form of forbs and lopped leaves taken from alpine pastures and forest for their livestock in summer and winter. In the winter, each household was recorded to purchase an average of 31.40 bundles of straw from market

(Figure 4.8).

4.63.6.6. Site: 06 Dao Khun

The average land holding/household in the Village Dao Khun was recorded as

2.16 hectare. The survey revealed that local populations consumed an average of 26.25 head loads of fodder in the form of forbs and lopped leaves taken from pastures and forest of Sheshamali for their livestock in summer. In the winter, each house hold was recorded to purchase an average of 31.40 bundles of straw from market (Figure 4.8).

4.63.6.7. Site: 07 Leepa Valley

The average land holding/household in the Leepa Valley was recorded as 0.57 hectare. The survey revealed that local populations consumed an average of 39.28 head loads of fodder in the form of forbs and lopped leaves taken from alpine pastures and forest of Leepa Valley for their livestock in summer (Figure 4.8).

4.63.6.8. Site: 08 Maldai

The average land holding/household in the village Maldai was recorded as 1.15 hectare. The survey revealed that local populations consumed an average of 30 head loads of fodder in the form of forbs and lopped leaves taken from pastures and forest of

Peerchinasi and Peer Haseemar for their livestock in summer. In the winter, each house

241 hold was recorded to purchase an average of 70 bundles of straw from market (Figure

4.8).

4.63.6.9. Site: 09 Dawarian

The average land holding/household in the village Dawarian was recorded as 1.25 hectare. The survey revealed that local populations consumed an average of 74.68 head loads of fodder in the form of forbs and lopped leaves taken from alpine pastures of Rati

Gali for their livestock in summer. In the winter, each house hold was recorded to purchase an average of 15.5bundles of straw from market (Figure 4.8).

4.63.6.10. Site: 10 Bagh Barikot

The average land holding/household in the village Bagh Barikot was recorded as

1.10 hectare. The survey revealed that local populations consumed an average of 29.58 head loads of fodder in the form of forbs and lopped leaves taken from alpine pastures of

Sankh and Sheroo Dhara for their livestock in summer. In the winter, each household was recorded to purchase an average of 35.5 bundles of straw from market (Figure 4.8).

242

Surveyed house hold people involved in fodder collection. 100 Ave. head loads extraction 74.68 Ave. Straw Bundles purchased 81.25 83.33 70 50 55.91 57.14 35.5 49 45 48 26.25 39.28 25.25 29 21.36 31.4 30 18.75 29 2525 2729.58 22 20 24 15 18.18 13.7 15.5 6.81 8 0 0 1.2 0 0 0

Figure 4.8: Fodder and forage utilization pattern in the villages of the study area

4.65. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

A multivariate ordination analysis is a mathematical approach used to calculate species composition and sample site similarity or dissimilarity due to environmental variables. This method explains the variation and relationship among species and environmental variables. Two statistical techniques including Principal component analysis (PCA) and Cluster analysis (CA) were applied to the primary species dataset to explain the correlations, trends, and similarity and species assemblage patterns of highland flora. PCA is basically an eigenanalysis. The sum of the eigenvalues equals the sum of the variance of all variables in the data set whereas cluster analysis shows the association among communities due to similar species composition and environmental factors.

243

4.65.1. PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS (PCA)

Principal Component Analysis was used to explain the variance in dataset on the basis of Eigenvalues assigned to the components. PCA diagrammatic expression,

Eigenvalues and variance (%) was based on quantitative parameters including dominance and IVI values as well as environmental variables like Slope, aspect, altitudinal range and moisture content. Maximum variance (13.57%) with an eigenvalue 780.955 was explained in PC 1 at an altitudinal range of 3200 meters where the number of species was maximum with higher diversity. PC 2 and 3 explained 10.94% and 8.44% variance with respective Eigenvalues of 629.66 and 485. These sites were identical in Environment,

Geography and plant species composition. PCs 54 and 55 showed minimum variance

(0.14% and 0.13%) with Eigenvalues 8.43 and 7.55.

Abies pindrow was identified as a keystone species in species dataset appearing separately in PCA diagram. The species inhabited most of the moist slopes degrees slopes in harsh climatic conditions in higher temperate regions and found as first dominant in community 35, 15, 9 and 13. Rhododendron campanulatum also appeared to have a distant appearance on PCA biplot because of isolated habitat and climatic experience found at an altitudinal range >3500 meters. Its dominance was concentrated in south and south eastern alpine and sub-alpine slopes in community 12 and 16 preferring dry rocky sands. Juncus membranaceus, an indicator of alpine wetland flora, was separated from the central cluster appearing along X-Axis discretely in the PCA figure. It was found at an altitudinal range of 3300 to 4000 meters. The habitat of this species was comprised of moist Microclimates, wetlands and sandy soils dominating the marshes and bogs of

Shounther, Baboon and Ratti Galli sites. Salix flablellaris was another keystone species presented independently in PCA as it was found at moist northern and southern slopes on sandy soils is dominant in community 14, 17, 48 and 55 and 56. Bistorta affinis was also

244 articulated as an iconic species in PCA along Y-axis. Bistorta affinis occurred consistently in most of the alpine communities with an altitudinal range of 3500-4200m meters with intensive dominance in communities 6, 8, 20, 36 and 40 communities.

Unpalatability of the species enhanced its aptitude to sustain vigorously.

Community 2, 12, 16, 13, 10, 9, 15 and 35 are arranged on X-axis in close proximity as they all are related with each other lying on north east and southern slope with similar species diversity status. The alpine communities 4, 7, 6, 8, 20, 25, 39, 40, 43 and 36 were placed in closed proximity in the PCA Biplot attributed to their similar

Geography as well as species composition. These sites were located on North facing slopes characterized with high moisture content. The floristic inventory revealed the dominance of Aconitum, Geranium, Aster, Rheum, Bistorta, and Artemisia absanthium in these communities.

Similarly the sub-alpine communities 32, 55, 56, 48, 31, 14, 17, 33, 34, 26 and 35 showed affiliation in terms of distance measures attributed to the similar Geographical occurrence and resembling phyto diversity. These lower altitudinal sites were characterized by dominance of trees and shrub species including Abies pindrow, Pinus wallichiana, Betula utilus, Juniperus communis, Viburnum cotinifolium, Indigofera himalayensis, Sibalddia purpurea, Lonicera webbiana, and Lonicera asperifolia (Figure

4.9)

245

Figure 4.09: Principal Component Analysis Biplot of the species and sites data matrics.

246

4.65.2. CLUSTER ANALYSIS (CA)

The Cluster analysis based upon Euclidean distance was performed on the community attributes to reveal the associations among 56 recorded plant communities having altitudinal range between 2700m to 4170m in sub-alpine to alpine high lands of

Azad Jammu and Kashmir. The cluster analysis identified a total of seven clusters along with a single out leered community as an outlier. The detailed description of the clusters is given as following.

4.65. 1. Cluster 01

The cluster one comprised two communities which were taken in Shounther valley an altitudinal range of 3300m - 3459m. A total of 76 species were present in both communities. Both sites were dominated by Betula utilus having importance value index of 110.74 and 135.50 respectively. The co dominant species among the both site were mostly similar. The soil of the strand was purely most and were taken on north facing aspects which contributed to association of these two pure strand of Betula forest (Figure

4.10).

4.65. 2. Cluster 02

A total of four communities were closely associated among cluster two. The dominant species among all sites were Rhododendron campanulatum, Bistorta affinis and Juniparis excelsa. These four communities were taken at two different localities like Rati Galli and

Baboon Valley. A total 120 species were present among all associated communities. The altitudinal ranges were recorded as 3642m to 3071m. All these communities were taken at south facing aspect having same degree classes with most habitats (Figure 4.10).

247

4.65. 3. Cluster 03

A total of 9 communities were present among this cluster with two sub clusters 3a and 3b comprising mostly of the sub alpine sites dominated by trees and shrubs. In cluster

3a three communities (26, 31, and 33) were associated with each other recorded at

Khawaja Seri hill. A total of 120 species were present in these communities with the dominant species including Abies pindrow, Picea smithiana, Artimisea, absanthium,

Rubus fruticoses, Betula utilus and Vibernum cotilifolium. The altitudinal range of these sites was between 3040m to 3165m located at north eastern aspect. In cluster 3b six communities (09, 34, 35, 10, 15 and 13) were associated with each other taken from

Machiara National Park, Baboon valley and Peer Haseemar respectively. A total of 223 species were present in all sites among which Abies pindrow dominated as first in 06 communities. The co dominance species among these sites were Juniperis communis,

Vibernum nervosum, Rosa webbiana, Picea smithiana, Trillium govanianum and Primula macrophyla. Small variation in altitude, moist habitat, similar Ggraphic aspect and topographic features were the contributing factors that have made this association (Figure

4.10).

4.65. 4. Cluster 4

Cluster 4 comprised two communities (28 and 38) recorded from Khawaj Seri and

Baboon Valley. A total of 65 species were recorded from these two sites with Juniperus communis as the dominant species followed by Aconitum chysmanthium, Sibalddia purpurea, Penesetum lanatum and Anaphalis boisseri (Figure 4.10).

4.65. 5. Cluster 05

In this cluster a total of four communities (20, 23, 21 and 22) showed a close relationship with each other. These sites were all taken from Rati Gali Hills at an

248 altitudinal range of 3715-3900m dominated by Bistorta affinis. The associated co- dominants included Geranium himalayense, Aconitum chysmanthium, Thymus linearis,

Sibalddia cuneata, Geum elatum and Potentilla nepalense among 115 plant species

(Figure 4.10).

4.65. 6. Cluster 06

Eight communities were clustered in this group, further divided into two sub groups named as cluster 6 A and cluster 6 B. Cluster 6 A consisted of 5 communities ( 49,

41, 17, 48 and 56) taken from Sheesha Mali, Baboon Valley, Machiara National Park,

Yadori Top and Sankh Hill having an altitudinal range of 2939-3395m. A total of 219 plant species were recorded from these with exclusive dominance of Salix flabellaris in all sites. The co dominant species included Pinus wallichiana, Prunus padus, Betula utilus, Sibalddia cuneata, Lonicera webbiana, Viburnum grandiflorum, Fragaria nubicola, and Pseudomertensia nermosa.

Cluster 6 B comprises of three communities (11, 55 and 19) taken from Peer

Hasimar, Brithwar Gali and Machiara National Park with 127 species in all. The dominant species among these sites were Salix flabellaris, Vibernum cotinifolium, Poa anguastifolia, with following Osmunda claytoniana, Juniperus communis, Lonicera bwebbiana and Penesetum lanatum. These stands had an elevational range of 2971-

3300m (Figure 4.10).

4.65. 7. Cluster 07

This was the largest cluster identified by the cluster analysis comprised of 26 plant communities. This cluster was divided into two larger groups named as cluster 7 A and cluster 07 B each having thirteen communities. Cluster 7 A comprised of thirteen different communities (29, 30, 42, 45, 37, 44, 50, 54,52, 51, 53, 46 and 47) taken from

249

Khwaja Seri Hill, Baboon Valley, Ganga Choti, Brithwar Hill, Haji Peer, Shero Dhara and Sheesha Mali with an Altitude ranging from 2846-4017m. One small sub group formed at Khwajaseri Hill was dominated by Betula utilus and Juniperus communis at an elevation of 3323-3400m on Southern Aspect. Four communities from Baboon Hill clustered in separate small sub groups which were dominated by Sibalddia cuneata,

Gaultheria trichophylla, and Anaphalis boisseri followed by Poa alpina, Poa nemoralis,

Pedicularis pyramydata, Lagotis cashmiriana, Geum elatum and Salix flabellaris. These all sites were laid on sunny slopes and Top plateaus. Soil of these sites was sandy and dry with low degree of slope. Community no 50, 54, 52, 51 and 53 showed a close similarity taken from Ganga Choti, Brithwar, Haji Peer and Shero Dhara at an elevational range of

2846-3580m. Last small sub group comprises of two communities (C46, C47) taken from

Sheesha Mali at South facing aspect. Dominant species in these two sites was Juniperus communis.

Custer 07 B aggregated a total of 13 different plant communities further divided into five different sub groups. First sub group consisted upon three plant communities (

01, 02, 03) taken from Shounther Valley dominated by Polygonum alpinum, Salix lindeliana, Rheum australe, Pedicularis punctata, Rosa alpina, Artemisia absanthium and

Senecio chrysanthemoides. These sites were located at South Western aspects, soil in these sites have considerable amount of moistre which contributed in closeness. Second sub group had two sites from Rati Gali (24) and Shounther Valley (05) dominated by

Juniperus communis, at an altitude of 3650-3730m. Third sub group had two sites taken from Shounther Spoon Lake (07, 02). Both communities were wet lands with high contents of moister and sandy soil dominated by moister loving species as Carex atrofusca, Myricaria elegans, Caltha alba, Swertia petiolata and Trifolium repens.

250

Fourth sub group had three different stands (18, 27, 32) taken from Machiara

National Park and Khwaja Seri with a total of 140 plant species and Pinus wallichiana recorded as first dominant. Co dominant species were Abies pindrow, Vibernum grandiflorum, Indegofera heterantha, Lonicera webbiana and Berberis jaesckyana. South facing slopes and dry habitat were common in all these communities. Last sub group included three communities laid at Peer Hasimar and Machiara National Park at an altitudinal range of 3050-3150m. Dominant species among these stands were Vibernum grandiflorum, Lonicera webbiana, Juniperus communis, Berberis jaesckyana, and Salix flabellaris (Figure 4.10).

251

Figure 4.10: Cluster analysis dendrogram of the investigated plant communities from the study area

Key: C1…C56 represents the Community One…..Community Fifty Six in Cluster Dendrogram

252

Chapter 5

DISCUSSION

Current research was designed to to document and evaluate the floristic composition, community structure and sustainability, conservation status of Western Himalayan sub alpine and alpine zones of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Objectives also included quantification of ecosystem services provided by the highland flora and their contributions in the livelihood of locals. The study area being a remote and climatically harsh zone has been deprived of due exploration and limited work has been done on biodiversity assessment ecosystem services of the area (Khan et al., 2011). Considering these knowledge gaps, current study was designed to investigate the phytodiversity patterns in the Western Himalayan sub-alpine and alpine zones in Azad Jammu and Kashmir.

1.1. FLORISTIC COMPOSITION

Floristic diversity of a region is the total of the plant species within its limitations, whether wild or cultivated, which is a reflection of vegetation and plant resources in the prevailing area (Ahmad et al., 2012). Floristic composition is a parameter of plant life, gene pool and diversity of plants in any area. The ecological behavior of plants like life form, leaf size spectra, phenology, habit and its ethno ecological potential are necessary to be worked out in this regard (Khan et al., 2014).

The flora of Western Himalayan High Lands of Azad Jammu and Kashmir comprised

517 plant species belonging to 78 families and 239 genera. Pteridophytes with 48 plant species included in herbaceous flora. Asteraceae, Roaceae, Poaceae and Lamiaceae, were the leading families in the investigated area. They were followed by Ranunculaceae, Fabaceae,

Apiaceae and Dryopteridaceae. Families with high number of species as, Poaceae, Fabaceae,

253

Rosaceae, Caprifoliaceae and Ranunculaceae are the characteristic and best representative families of the western Himalayan highlands (Mir et al., 2015; Bano et al.,2013,2014 a,b,

2017). The presence of a large number of herbaceous families may be attributed to their adaptations to the alpine environment (Chawla et al., 2008). Plants of these typical indicator families are growing at extreme altitudes are adapted to multiple stresses and some species are even restricted to the extreme conditions of alpine zone in all regions of the world

(Scherrer et al., 2011; Gottfried et al., 2012). The members of these families have a broad ecological amplitude and unique growth pattern therefore these are present in high number in each site (Klimes and Dolezal, 2010; Korner et al., 2011). Approximately 86 plant species of family Poaceae, Cyperaceae and Juncaceae were reported from high mountains of Azad

Jammu and Kashmir (Ullah et al., 2015).

Floral inventory revealed that Dryopteris, Poa, Astragalus, Potentilla, Primula,

Polystichum and Polygonum were recorded as dominant genera represented by more than 5 plant species in the local flora. These genera are the characteristic species of high altitude in the western Himalayan region (Chowdhery and Wadhwa, 1984; Aswal and Mehrotra, 1994).

This composition may be changed in case of Short growing season, disturbance, and over exploitation in the area (Gairola et al., 2008; Yu at al., 2010; Shrestha et al., 2012). Literature review reveals that the early phytogeographers who worked on the Himalayan region have also reported the same distribution and dominance pattern of these characteristic families and genera from the western Himalayan Highlands (Hooker, 1906, Rau, 1975).

Thymus linearis, Aster falconeri, Poa alpina, Bistorta affinis, and Iris hookeriana along with sparsely distributed Betula utilus and Juniperus species are among the predominant species of alpine pastures in Kashmir Himalaya (Gairola et al., 2015; Shaheen

254 et al., 2017). Overall dominancy was shown by few alpine grasses and herbs, including

Carex, Juncus, Poa alpina, Sibalddia cuneata, Primula stewartii, P.denticulata, and P. vulgaris indicated their wide environmental amplitude (Bhattarai et al 2004; Ge et al., 2005).

These high elevation plant species are distinguished by low production, high power of solar waves, and seasonal availability of resources because of soaring ultraviolet (UV) radiations, speedy wind, snowstorms and freezing temperature (Nautiyal et al., 2004). Plant diversity of alpine and sub-alpine zones is adapted to the severe environment taking place with sparse population that is generally stunted, dwarfed and develops a mosaic patch or cushion forms with a short vegetative period ranges from three to four months (Tasser and Tappeiner, 2002;

Adhikari & Rawat, 2012b).

It has been reported that the opportunistic plants including Rumex nepalensis, Rumex acetosa, Polygonum cognatum, Polygonum amplexicaule, Impatiens sulcata, Sibaddia cuneata and Urtica dioica dominate the camping and disturbed sites in the Himalayas (Singh

& Rawat, 1999; Rikhari et al., 1992). The same pattern has also been recorded during the current study which may be attributed to seasonal live stock movements, specific climatic and topographic conditions along with human interferences in these delicate ecological zones.

5.2. BIOLOGICAL SPECTRUM OF THE HIGHLAND FLORA

Life form and Leaf size class indicate the climatic conditions and ecophysiological uniqueness of the investigated area (Ali et al., 2016). Results revealed that Hemicryptophytes and Geophytes were the dominant life forms in the investigated area whereas Chaemeophytes and Lianas were recorded as low in number in the investigated area. Hicryptophytes and

Geophytes may appear as dominant due to harsh climatic conditions in Sub-alpine and alpine

255 vegetation (Shaheen et al., 2017; Sher and Khan, 2007). Hicryptophytes are recorded as abundant in several ecological zones due to their broad ecological adaptations and their percentage in floras of different zones gradually increases from low lands to Alpines zone

(Noroozi et al., 2008). The findings by Rawat & Chandra (2014) from Khan-Gormaz and

Garhwal Himalaya with vegetation dominated by Hemicryptophytes supports the present findings. Studies on alpine pastures of Kashmir also represented the dominance of

Hemicryptophytic life form at an altitudinal range of 3250-4000m (Panthi et al., 2007;

Shrestha and Jha, 2009). Excessive grazing as observed in many sites also causes soil degradation, erosion and a nutrient cycle alteration which may increases the dominance of

Hemicryptophytes in the area (Holzner and Kriechbaum, 2001).

The result of the Leaf size class revealed that Microphylls were recorded as dominant

Leaf Size category in the investigated area followed by Megaphylls in sub-alpine and alpine zone. Microphylls and Mesophylls are the true characteristics of cold and harsh climate of mountain regions (Sher and Khan, 2007; Shaheen et al., 2017). Results are in harmony with the investigations of many ecologists for Himalayan high land vegetation (Pande et al., 2002;

Singh and Kaushal, 2006; Sharma et al., 2009; Shaheen et al., 2011; Khan et al., 2012).

Changes in altitude and topography along with grazing intensity play an important role in the composition of plant communities and its other attributes such as diversity, life form and

Leaf size class (Sharma et al., 2014).

5.3. PHYTOSOCIOLOGICAL ATTRIBUTES OF THE PLANT COMMUNITIES

A total of 56 plant communities were studied from ecologically diverse localities in high lands of Azad Jammu and Kashmir at an altitudinal range of 2700m-4170m. A total of

256

38 plant communities were established in sub alpine zone at an altitudinal range of 2700-

3450m whereas 18 plant communities were recorded from alpine pastures at an altitude of

>3500m.

Phytosociological investigations of Himalayan high land showed the dominance of few representative plant species on the basis of average importance value index included as Salix flabellaris (IVI 12.03), Juncus membraneous (IVI 10.02) Abies pindrow (IVI 09.21). These indicator species were followed by Betula utilus, Vibernum grandiflorum, Senecio graceliforois, Rhododendron campanulatum, Pinus wallichiana and Bistorta amplexicaule.

These species with highest average importance values are the structural and keystones, as well as indicators of the typical Himalaya Highland vegetation of sub-alpine and alpine vegetation (Cochaard and Dar, 2014; Shaheen et al., 2017). Several floristic and

Phytosociological studies on high mountains in different parts of the world supported the prevailing research by showing the maximum importance value percentages were recorded for the similar taxa in the Himalayan regions of Pakistan, India, Nepal and Tibet (Sharma et al., 2014; Negi et al., 2014; Shaheen et al., 2017; Mir et al., 2017).

Vegetation of the sub alpine and alpine highlands showed variations in the vegetation structure, diversity, and Life forms are directly related to the environmental factors and anthropogenic activities (Dolezal and Strutek, 2002). Most of the communities sampled in similar ecological zones showed similarity in the species composition due to similar habitat conditions in terms of nutrients and climate as well (Khan et al., 2016). The distribution pattern of plant species within alpine and sub-alpine region is mostly regulated by climate or climate influenced ecological factors (Pauli et al., 2007). Communities exhibit seasonal fluctuations in structure and composition, strongly influenced by ecological factors such as

257 soil nutrient composition, altitude, aspects and variable slopes to exert control on species diversity and Richness (Kharakwal et al., 2005). Hail, Sleet, High solar radiations, moist summer, and soaring wind are the characteristics of Alpine and Sub-alpine zone’s vegetation which affects the vegetation significantly (Nautiyal et al., 2002). Short growing period, regular disturbances, and over utilization of biodiversity in the area are the causes of highest dissimilarity in species composition (Gairola et al., 2008).

5.3.1. Effect of Altitude on the Species Distribution Pattern

Altitude plays a major role in determining the vegetation patterns in the sub-alpine and alpine zone (Tambe and Rawat, 2010). Betula utilus, Salix flabellaris, Rhododendron campanulatum, and Abies pindrow and Picea smithiana were recorded as dominant species from 2700m to 3450m. Species including as Rheum australe, Pleurospermum sp and Allium humile, Gentionodes alii, Cassiope fastigiata, Jurinea macrocephala were confined to very high alpine zones above 3500m whereas Caltha, Anemone, Fragaria, Delphinium,

Podophyllum, Fritillaria, Gentiana, Iris, Potentilla, Juncus, Primula, Dactylorhiza hatagirea, Aconitum heterophyllum, and Saussurea costus were found even in the lower sub alpine zones at 3000-3500m.

Sub-alpine forest in the Himalayan region is often dominated by coniferous or broad leaved deciduous plant species (Malik & Nautiyal, 2016). The Himalayan region has distinctive topography and environment where biodiversity varies from aspect to aspect and habitats of the plant communities. With increasing altitude the dominant plant cover and its physical characteristics changes from a deciduous broad-leaved forest to coniferous forest and to a woody shrub nature communities and ultimately alpine meadows (Dolezal & Srutek,

2002; Gairola et al., 2008). Microclimate, topography (Aspects and slope differences) and

258 altitude are the most significant attributes in determining the structure and function of plant communities along these timberlines (Xu et al., 2009; Mir et al., 2017).

Deforestation has changed species composition and community structure of sub- alpine forest (Ghimire & Lekhak, 2007). Betula utilus may be found at the upper belt on moist northern slopes up to tree line. Lower belt should be dominated by Abies sp, Acer caesium and Pinus wallichiana at 3000 – 3200 m altitude these tree species may share dominance with nearly equal importance value indices (Gairola et al., 2008).

5.3.2. Overgrazing as a Major Threat to Floral Diversity of the Area

Overgrazing is another important factor that affects the species distribution pattern in pastures. Overgrazing results in decreases in vegetation cover, reductions in palatable species, and changes in vegetation patterns and community structure (Scherrer and Pickering,

2006). Intense grazing affects the balance between survival and vegetative spread of plants and establishment of its seedlings (Singh & Rawat, 2012). Non palatable species like

Taraxacum officinale, Potentilla atrosanguinea, Anemone rivularis, Ranunculus hirtellus and

Anaphalis sp increased under grazing, browsing and trampling activities in the area (Awan et al., 2007; Negi, 2009).

The expansion of non-palatable species in sub alpine and alpine region appears more concentrated near the heaps of dung that accumulate from large herds of sheep, goat and buffalo (Baba et al., 2017). At such places these species are found to regenerate rapidly through underground parenting organs and have wide range of adaptability. Taraxacum officinale, Plantago alpina, Inula grandiflora, Rumex nepalensis, Impatience spp,

Polygonum cognatum, Polygonum amplexicaule and Urtica dioica show an affinity to

259 enlarge under heavy grazing and browsing in forest lands and alpine pastures (Khan et al.,

2016).

In the Himalayan region, overgrazing is detrimental to forests and other vegetation types which alters functioning, structure and organization of ecosystem by reducing species richness and diversity due to selective browsing, increasing the proportion of unpalatable weed species, slow regeneration of valuable species, in extreme cases, causing severe ecological tragedies (Roder et al. 2002), increasing speed of soil erosion and depleting the nutrient pool, soil acidification due to removal of biomass, compaction of top soil and damage to tree roots that facilitates root rot (Kumar and Shahabuddin, 2005). Uncontrolled grazing, browsing and trampling by livestock harm the ground flora and delay regeneration of dominant tree species in Himalayan region (Houehanou et al., 2012).

Long term conservation goals can be achieved in the area by improving the living standards and by giving benefits of conservation to the local communities. An effective conservation measure for these vegetation types is not possible without the involvement of the local populations (Malik, 2014).

5.4. DIVERSTY AND ITS COMPONENTS

Species diversity, richness and evenness are determined by the availability of water, soil moisture and climate change by affecting species composition. Climate change, topographic features, soil properties and anthropogenic disturbances may be related to the species diversity and composition along other Phytosociological attributes (Colwell and

Lees, 2000). The variations among diversity indices are attributed to topographic features which are directly mediated by water availability. Species diversity (richness and evenness) can be changed from ridges to the inner valleys due to sever environmental conditions such

260 as burly winds thin soils and extreme climatic conditions which may restricts the distribution pattern and amount of species capable to continue to exist in these irregular conditions

(Gosselin, 2006).

There is a general trend that species richness and diversity decreases with an increase of altitudinal gradients but according to “Rapport Rule”, the diversity and richness of species may increase with an increase of altitude due to some factors such as topography and soil moisture (Schuster and Diekmann, 2005). Species abundance and diversity are positively related to species richness but most of the studies showed that the relationship between diversity, species richness and evenness have negative relationship among plants because of independence of richness and evenness upon each other (Bhattarai et al., 2004 a,b,c). These indices depend on both species richness and evenness, although they weight rare species differently (Gosselin, 2006). Diversity can change with some ecological processes like competition, succession and predation. Each of these factors can alter proportional diversity through changes in evenness without any change in species richness (Rey and Scheiner

2002).

Simpson’s index and Shannon Weiner index of diversity were calculated for all the

56 vegetation communities. Calculated diversity values varied from site to site at different elevational gradients due to direct and indirect diversity controlling factors. Both indices are reciprocal to each other therefore measurements were taken to show the relationship among these and other components side by side. Maximum value of Simpson’s diversity index was recorded as 0.97 from site 1 in Shounther Valley. Similarly Shannon Weinner index of diversity value of 3.9 was also shown by the same community taken at an altitude of 3200m in Shounther Valley with 70 species at all. Similarly a value of 0.96 was recorded from six

261 plant communities in an elevational range of 2940m-3580m from Sheesha Mali, Haji Peer,

Shero Dhara, Brithwar Top all taken on South facing aspects and top plateaus. Lowest diversity values of Simpson’s index and Shannon Weiner index of diversity were recorded as

0.72 and 2.37 respectively in sub-alpine Betula forest in Shounther valley at an altitude of

3450m on North facing aspect. Shannon Weiner index values usually falls from 1.5 to 3.5, and rarely exceeds up to 4. Simpson’s dominance index gives the probability of few dominant individual taken from the community belonging to different species.

Shannon Diversity Index values may range from 3.35 and 4 in least disturbed and moderately grazed area. Lower plant diversity at north facing slopes and high altitudes can be associated to snow cover period which is longer in sub-alpine forest and herbaceous vegetation as compared to the southern slopes (Del Moral et al., 2010; Holzinger et al.,

2008). Variations in aspects also enhance habitat heterogeneity and change in plant species richness and diversity that is strongly influenced by elevation, aspect and soil depth micro environmental variations (Khan et al., 2011). Simpson diversity is least sensitive to richness and more sensitive to evenness than Shannon diversity which is more sensitive to evenness (Jost,

2010).

5.4.1. Species Richness

Diversity levels as a whole in any region at any place is determined by the combating effects of species richness and species evenness (Rey and Scheiner 2002). Species richness is the number of total species present in the stand and is positively related to the species diversity. Increase in species count diversity also increases by obtaining highest values of richness (Stevens, 1992). Highest value of species richness was recorded as 4.04 from

Shounther Valley at an altitude of 3200m followed by 3.34 and 3.17 in community no 48

262 taken at Yadori Top and community no 51 at Haji Peer, with altitudes of 3292m and 2940m and having species up to 58 and 55 respectively. Lowest value of species richness was recorded as 1.27 in Rati Gali at an altitude of 3836m on North facing aspect with 22 plant species. This large difference among the all sites showed the direct relationship between species number and species richness (Grytnes and Vetaas, 2002). All other sites have the intermediate range of variations with the average value of 2.26 on the whole. On the ridges and tops, environmental conditions are harsh due to high wind speed, intense precipitation, hail and sleet. Richness levels may also change due to effects of environmental instability or special adaptions in anatomical structure and morphological variations of plants (Kornor et al., 2011). Timber extraction and overgrazing in area negatively affected the richness but possess minor effects on species composition (Gairola et al., 2015).

5.4.2. Species Evenness

Evenness or Equitability refers to the equal or unequal distribution of different species in a given plot. General range of evenness values is between “0”& “1”. Zero value indicates the unequal distribution and one indicate the equal dispersion pattern of all species in prevailing site (Whittaker et al., 2001). The studied vegetation communities were characterized by a high degree of species evenness with an average value of 0.801 indicating that individual species exhibit uniform distribution. Fewer numbers of species in each community decreases the inter-specific competition resulting in high degree of species evenness (Tiessen and Wu, 2002; Bhattarai & Vetaas, 2004).

The highest value of evenness was shown by the community number 54 with the value of

0.81 at an altitude of 3320m containing 46 species. Lowest value of evenness was shown by

263 the community number 8 with the value of 0.25 at an altitude of 3450 m containing 43 species.

The present study showed the lowest value of species evenness in those communities which had low values of Simpson and Shannon diversity of indices. The relationship between evenness and richness is negative in some cases due to invasion and biotic interaction.

Although the migration regulate the local biodiversity and biotic interactions may affect the abundance due to competition for natural resources. Richness indicates the direct effect of migration while evenness indicates the direct effect of biotic interaction on biodiversity

(Stirling and Wilsey, 2001).

5.4.3. Community Maturity

Maturity of a community refers to the equal distribution of all species. Generally its value lies in between 1 to 100. Highest values indicate the climax stage of community while lowest stage indicates the regular disturbance in investigated area (Singh et al., 2014). For a community to become mature there must be regular distribution of species with high number of frequencies in the prevailing areas (Pichi-Sermolli, 1948). Most of the values of community maturity ranged between 20-25% with an average value of 25.20%. All plant communities showed low maturity index values in the study areas which indicates the sever disturbance and heterogeneity nature of community structure due to diverse nature of disorders (Tiessen and Wu, 2002).

The highest value of 40% was recorded from Rati Galli at an altitude of 3730m with the evenness value of 0.6 followed by community 35 and 40 with the value of maturity as 34.72% and 34.48 respectively from Baboon Valley at an altitude of 3112m and 3920m. The lowest value of maturity index was 14.82 % recorded from Yadori Top at an altitude of 3292m. The cause for lowest value of maturity was competition, habitat patchiness and environmental instability in the correspondent area. Species at high altitude must be able to withstand a broad range of climatic

264 conditions which contribute the increase in the climax stage of community. At high altitude,

Hicryptophytes and Gphytes generally increases with the change in Mi climates and Mi habitat conditions which causes reduction in the level of maturity index and value of Chaemeophytes

(Rodolfo and Sermolli, 1948). The study revealed that although the diversity values were high in all communities but no community was found mature due to regular disturbances especially change in slope and over grazing (Shreshta et al., 2012). High degree of anthropogenic insecurity and unforgiving climatic conditions regularly disturb the natural balance of fragile alpine vegetation communities in the short growing life period, thus avoiding them from the accomplishment stage of maturity in the Himalayas (Saxena and Singh 1982).

5.5. FUEL WOOD CONSUMPTION PATTERNS AND IMPACTS ON LOCAL

FLORA

Fuel wood consumption is an important component of household economy in

Himalayas which approximately covers about 50% of total annual domestic as this is the main source of energy (Hafeez, 2000; IUCN, 2002). Forests of the Himalayas are considered as the most damaged and depleted in the world mainly due to heavy fuel wood extraction by the locals (Siddiqui, 2000). Tremendous population explosion has resulted in increased demands of natural resources, leading to severe resource depletion particularly deforestation due to fuel wood extraction (Butt, 2006; Dar et al., 2012). Most results from the surveys indicated that local fuel wood extraction is the major cause of deforestation, about 30% deforestation during the last three decades in the area (Shaheen et al., 2011; All and

Binjaminsen, 2004; Hamayun et al., 2013).

Azad Kashmir is generally a mountainous and hilly region with 88% populations in rural areas where basic requirements of sustainable life including heating and cooking

265 resources and are unavailable. Most of the fuel wood needs of the locals are met by the forest and the locals exploit the natural resources regularly (Qazi, 2005; Shaheen et al., 2017). The overall rate of dependence on fuel wood as a source of heating and cocking in Hilly areas of

A J & K is 94.12 percent, whereas the share of LPG and other sources are only 5.88 percent

(FAO, 2001). Reported data showed an annual average fuel wood consumption of 16.642 tons/year with a per capita consumption of 5.18 kg/day. The huge levels of fuel wood consumption in Neelum valley are due to high elevation, poverty, easy approach to forest, harsh climatic conditions and unavailability of alternative fuel resources (Cochaard and Dar,

2014; Shaheen et al., 2011).

Results of comparable assessment in various Himalayan regions showed that fuel wood consumption pattern in our study area is significantly higher than those like 1.5kg used per capita in mountain areas of western Himalayas (Bhatt et al., 1994), and 1-2 kg in Southern

India (Hedge, 1984), whereas 1.5-2.5 kg/capita/day was recorded from Nepal (Mahat et al.,

1986). The highest level of consumption of fuel wood in upper Neelum Valley of district is very high. It was may be due to having an easy access to the forest reserves of the area and non-availability of other sources of fuel (IUCN, 1996).

Preferable tree species for fuel wood include Pinus wallichiana, Cedrus deodara,

Abies pindrow, Aesculus indica, Picea smithiana, Taxus bacatta, Quercus dilatata, Salix flabellaris, Juniperus communis, Betula utilus, Rhododendron campanulatum, and Acer caesium. Lopping and felling of key tree species were observed in the forest for fodder purposes. Forest resources are the only fuel wood and timber source for poor and local people of the areas (Dar et al., 2012).

266

In summer season from (April to September) the demand on the forest resources for the fuel wood is comparatively lower as locals do not need wood for heating their houses while in winter days due to severe and cold climatic conditions for heating and cooking three to four folds higher wood consumption was recorded (Gairola et al., 2008). Timber Extraction activities by departmental and local populations were not managed properly in the mountain areas. This practice leads to destruction of young seedlings of valuable tree species along with other delicate species in whole region of Azad Kashmir (IUCN, 1996; Butt, 2006).).

These practices in the region enhanced the land degradation due to soil erosion which ultimately destructs the local flora (Qadir, 1994; Dar et al., 2012). It was noted that village populations having low income consumed more fuel wood as compared to those areas where most locals are educated with high income and had alternate energy sources of fuel, such as

LPG and electricity (Shaheen et al., 2011). Cochard & Dar, (2014) have estimated that if the current rate of forest resources depletion due to fuel wood and timber extraction in the State of Azad Jammu and Kashmir remain continues, the forest resources (Timber and Non-

Timber) of the State will largely disappear by the middle of 21st Century.

5.6. INDIGENOUS ENTHOMEDICINAL UTILIZATIONS OF LOCAL FLORA

About 70% populations of the Himalayan Mountains are dependent upon herbal medicine for their primary health care (Ahmed, 2003; WHO, 2002). More than 1.5 billion people residing in` the developing countries are dependent upon traditional medicines either because the people cannot afford synthetic medicine or because traditional medicine is more acceptable (FAO, 2001; Naithani et al., 2007). The local inhabitants have a significant reservoir of primitive and traditional knowledge about the medicinal uses of plants

(Agnihotri et al., 2013). More than fifty thousand plant species are used for medicinal

267 purposes worldwide (Schippmann et al., 2002). Over 8000 species are used traditionally and also in drug industries in India, a neighborhood country of Pakistan. A total of 67 plant species were recorded to have medicinal usage in the surveyed area including trees, shrubs, herbs, climbers and mushrooms for the treatment of various diseases. Skimmia laureola,

Thymus linearis, Rheum australe, Sinopodophyllum hexandrum, Geranium wallichianum,

Berberis lyceum, Bergenia ciliata, Aconitum heterophyllum, Arnebia benthamii, Allium wallichii, Trillium govanianum, and Saussurea costus were the most important plants having significant medicinal wealth are used in rural areas of the region continuously. About 75.31

% locals were found to be involved in the collection, usage and exploitation of many plants from the pastures and forest areas. Main reason behind this high dependence on medicinal plants is low per capita income, unavailability of the alternate modern medical facilities, belief and faith of locals on herbal remedies, and easy availability of medicinal plants (Dar et al., 2007).

Medicinal herbs are also used by the local people of the area for the treatment of the animal diseases by different means, such as Diarrhea, Dysentery, indigestion etc. About 24 plant species were found to be used as a veterinary medicine. During the present research it has been observed that old age (40-70 years old) people in the upper sides of the villages mostly use the medicinal plants instead of Pharmaceutical products for the treatment of diseases. The local inhabitants and old age persons have great faith in traditional knowledge of plants and their uses (Munsi et al., 2010).

In most Himalayan regions native people use medicinal plants as their own assets

(Ahmed et al., 2005). Bergenia cilliata, Synopodoplyllum haxandrum, Fritilla royleoi,

Trillium govanianum and Valiriana wallichiaii are extracted on large scale. Local poor

268 people are reported to sell up to 10 kg - 50 kg roots of Trillium govanianum. Considering this increasing demand for herbal drugs and medicinal plants and consequent depletion of several species, it is imperative to initiate urgent steps for conservation of flora of any site (Nautiyal et al., 2001; Singh, 2006).

In Azad Jammu and Kashmir Forest department annually auctions the extraction of some plants such as Saussuria costus, Aconitum hetrophyllum along with Morchella esculenta, under the wrap of which important medicinal plants are exploited indiscriminately

(Ibrar et al., 2007). Government contractors and their focal persons extract these medicinal species many times more than as per the agreement (IUCN, 2006). These extra medicinal herbs exploited by the middle men are smuggled to the local markets of the country without any permission at low rate. Migrated Nomads from low land areas of Pakistan and Azad

Kashmir are also involved in illicit extraction and trade (Qamar and Minhas, 2006). It is indispensable to take the necessary steps to protect the plant wealth from degradation

(Dobhal and Bhandari, 2006).

5.7. MUSHROOM EXTRACTION

Mushrooms are the edible fungi which are collected from the field and used as a source of food and traditional medicines (Zhang et al., 2014). Owing to these benefits, people all over the world collect the mushrooms from the forest lands and utilize them for food and commercial purposes (Arora, and Shepard, 2008). In Pakistan and Azad Kashmir there is a great diversity of Morales and Mushrooms naturally produced and contributing to the sustainability of inhabitants (Ullah et al., 2017). Among mushroom species Polyporous sp,

Sparassi scrispa, Hydnum sp and Pleurotus species are collected during the rainy season and

269 used as a delicious food in Himalayan region of Azad Jammu & Kashmir (Ullah et al., 2017).

Morales and mushroom contribute significantly in rural livelihood of the area. Medicinal mushrooms have also been used as a dietary food supplement or medicinal food throughout the world for over 2000 years (Negi, 2006).

Current study revealed significant utilization and collection of mushrooms in the local populations of the area having progressive impacts on livelihood support as well as health care (Pilz and Molina, 1996; Butt, 2006). About 16.1 % people were recorded to be involved in the collection and usage of mushroom species. Villages of Neelum valley were found to have highest mushroom collection and sale rates in the whole study area. It was reported that locals in the Neelum Valley sell up to 02-5kg of Morchella esculenta annually to earn Pak

Rs. 20,000-10,000 rupees per household. Season of growth and collection varies from March to June at the altitude of 1600m-2900m.

The important mushroom forest product found in the forests of the AJK State is

Morchella esculenta locally called “Guchhi”.It has been reported that approximately a total of 150 tons of Morales are produced in the world (Negi, 2006). Major contributor countries are the India and Pakistan each producing about 50 tons of dry Morales annually (Negi,

2006). From Pakistan 100 tons of Morchella spp are transported to Europe, Germany,

Holland, France and other countries of the world (Shinwari, 2002). In rural areas villagers have no access and right to the national market for sale of these valuable species. Due to this, greedy contractors purchase at a very low price of Morchella species from the locals just twenty to twenty five thousand rupees per Kg which is a threat to the local communities

(Sher et al., 2015).

270

5.8. WILD VEGETABLES COLLECTION

Wild edible plant species play a significant role in the diet of human beings across the world. These plants represented a good source of food in rural and developing areas (MEA,

2005). These Wild food plants are rich source of fibers, vitamins, and trace minerals which are essential for human growth and development and are medicinally important (Guil et al.,

1998; Modi et al., 2006). They are a great source of Minutrients, which are essential for reduction of malnutrition effects (Flyman and Afolayan, 2006b). Extraction and utilization of wild vegetables is being experienced the entire Himalayan region. Locals collect these wild vegetables in early growing period and use these in fresh form as well as in dry form round the year (Kar and Borthakur, 2008; Dar et al., 2012; Ranfa et al., 2014).

Our results revealed that a total of 34 plant species used as wild vegetables among locals of different sites of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Hundred percent populations of

Machiara, Dawarian, Dosut, Khwaja Seri and Bagh Barikot areas were found using wild vegetables. Important wild vegetables recorded from the area included Dryopteris spp,

Chenopodium album, Rheum australe, R. webbianum, Polygonum, Lagotis cashmiriana,

Plantago, Rumex, Taraxacum, Alliums, Amaranthus and Phytolacca spp. Most species belonged to the family Chenopodiaceae, Asteraceae, Fabaceae and Brassicaceae. Mostly leaves or Arial parts are used as vegetable but fruit, seed, flower, roots and stalk of some species were also used. These vegetables play a basic role in uplifting the livelihood of poor people (FAO, 2001; Cochaard and Dar, 2014; Nadeem et al., 2017). Informants were found to use the wild vegetables in different seasons of the year either in fresh or dry condition, separately or mixed with cereals or meat.

271

These plants have greater level of antioxidants, flavonoid, carbohydrate, polyphenol,

OMa 3 fatty acid, protein and lipids (Maurizi et al., 2014). A large number of plants used as wild vegetables have also been reported from Hindukush and Himalayan mountain populations of India, China, Afghanistan and Pakistan (FAO, 2008). Mostly people residing in the forest communities living below the poverty line and having easy access to use this wealth are involved in collection and usage of wild vegetables (Abbasi et al., 2013 a,b).

5.9. HERD SIZE, GRAZING AREA AND FORAGE, FODDER COLLECTION

Livestock is an essential provider of many necessities such as food, clothing, and manure, medium to plough the land in the mountain communities (Kala et al., 1998). It is also a sign of social prestige especially in the villages (Sundariyal and Joshi, 1990).

Livestock provides the populations with daily life commodities including milk, butter, manure fertilizers and money by selling them (Saberwal, 1996). Besides, livestock has its own religious and cultural values for the local people frequently used while making offerings to their divinities and in different ritual and ceremonies (Thakur et al., 2011).

Results of the current study revealed that the investigated area exhibited an average herd size in of 17.96 grazing unit/ house hold with an average grazing area of 0.683 hectare family and average gazing area for stall feeding is only 0.092 ha /grazing unit.

People extract the forbs and fodder from the natural forest and pasture lands with an average of 26.61 head loads/family/year of grasses and forbs. Along the forbs, leaf and young shoots of shrubs and some palatable tree species were also taken from the forests to fulfill the fodder needs of cattle at home (Baba et al., 2017). About 60 plant species were recorded to be used as fodder, among these grasses and forbs had the highest contribution. It

272 has been estimated that an average of 43.79 % people of the region were found using fodder from the natural resources. The common livestock seen in the investigated sites include goat, sheep, chicken, donkey, horses, cows and oxen.

The average available grazing area/grazing unit as 0.092 hectare is far smaller than the permissible limit of 8.51 hectares/grazing unit / year for the Himalayan regions (Singh et al., 1984). It should be realized that with more cattle being in the grazing land, the continuous trampling of the land by the cattle would loosen the soil and make them fragile with more chances of erosion and landslides (Negi & Todadario, 1993; Negi et al., 1992). All the needed fodder for the livestock is managed privately by the people from the state forest areas and alpine pastures. This situation is worse in the Himalayas because there is a lack of private pastures and reduced amount of fodder and forbs are produced from their own land

(Rawat and Uniyal, 1993). The meadows in the sub-alpine and alpine regions have undergone extensive grazing and habitat degradation which resulted in over 70% loss in natural vegetation. Besides the residential nomadic pressure alpine mammals also reduce the vegetation cover by browsing and trampling activities (Singh, 1991; Rawat, 2007). Highest grazing pressure enhanced the increased growth of non-palatable or less palatable species and also reduced the regeneration capacity of trees and all other seedlings of important species

(Hussain and Perveen, 2009).

The investigated results showed that grazing areas were scattered in almost all altitudes, slopes and aspects in the region. High species density and low diversity in highly grazed areas indicated the dominance of few grazing indicator species which are less palatable (Gairola et al., 2010). Highly grazed areas have shown low above ground biomass

273 and dominance of opportunistic herbs such as Rumex nepalensis, Polygonum amplexicaule,

P. polystachyum and Impatiens sulcata (Singh, 1999; Nautiyal et al., 2001).

There was a seasonal variation in the type of fodder collection because of availability of different fodder resources in different seasons of the year. Trees and shrubs such as Salix flabellaris, Betula utilus, Acer caesium, Aesculus indica, Salix spp, Taxus bacata, Indegofera spp, Quercus spp were lopped for summer and winter stall feeding (Shaheen et al., 2017). It seems that grazing stress is constantly shifting towards the neighboring vegetation cover and causing the interruption in local biodiversity (Negi, 2009). This practice by locals leads to greater harm to natural vegetation (Nyborg, 2002; Shaheen et al., 2011). Over grazing and deforestation practices modifies natural habitat by limiting the available grazing area and damages the flora vary badly in the Himalayas. Severe grazing in forest demarcated reserves is also a major threat to young seedlings of tree species (Alam and Ali, 2010).

5.10. CONSERVATION STATUS OF THE LOCAL FLORA

Plant diversity is under tremendous pressure in the Himalayan highlands due to population expansion, unplanned urbanization, deforestation, over usage of natural resources and conversion of forest areas for crop and vegetable cultivation are the serious threats

(IUCN, 2008; Alam and Ali, 2009). There is a little work available on the conservation status of plant species according to IUCN red list which indicates status of just 19 species out of

6000 species in the country (Alam and Ali, 2009). The rate of plant species loss has reached one species per day as a result of anthropogenic activities and this is quicker than would occur naturally in the world (Woodruff, 2001; Bramwell, 2002).

Phytosociological studies provide an excellent basis for the understanding of distribution and conservation measures of sparsely and rarely distributed species across the

274 different environmental gradients on the basis of importance value index in the sampled region (Pujol et al., 2006, Negi et al., 1992). Local flora of sub alpine and alpine highlands of

AJK was categorized as vulnerable, threatened and rare species based upon the Importance values. Socioeconomic constraints, climatic severities and climate change are the basic causes of depletion of natural flora and ecological degradation (Rehman and Ghafoor, 2000;

Haq, 2011).

Trees species such as Acer caesiun with an IVI of 0.465 followed by Acer cappdocium (0.098), Prunus cornuta (0.791) and Aesculus indica (0.025) were recorded as vulnerable and rare species in the western Himalayan in timberline vegetation. The possible reason for their low abundance and distribution are anthropogenic activities including fuel wood, lopping, fodder collection and some natural phenomenon such as low light exposure, avalanches, erosion, cold and harsh climate (Korner, 2003a).

Several shrub species present at higher altitude showed low IVI values (<1) in the sub-alpine and alpine grasslands of the investigated area. Cassiope fastigiata had an IVI value of 0.574 followed by Lonicera myrtillus (0.154), Rhododendron arborium (0.178),

Skimmea anquetilia (0.103), Juniperus excelsa (0.097), Spiraea arcuata (0.093), Ribes himalaense (0.086), Rhododendron anthopogon (0.070), Spiraea bella (0.066) Lonicera govaniana (0.024), Rubus ulmifolius (0.022), and Gaultheria trichophylla (0.015). Lowest

IVI values of these above are due to fuel wood uses, fodder preferences, grazing pressure and extraction of medicinal herbs (Jabeen, 2006; Khan et al., 2013). Pastoral life style of Local

Himalayan populations impacts the natural vegetation and other valuable resources of high altitude region by using the, as a summer grazing grounds, medicinal plant extraction and fuel wood extraction (Gairola et al., 2008; Tiwari, and Joshi, 2012a)

275

More than 400 species recorded from the area were herbaceous in nature. Several herbaceous species were also recorded to be rare and threatened having very low importance values (<0.1). These species had lower densities as well as occasional distribution in few sites and are hence categorized as declared as threatened and rare in the local alpine flora.

The herbs and grasses having very low values included Aconitum violaceum with an IVI of

0.059, Allium wallichii (0.091), Hypoxis aurea (0.073), Roscoea alpina (0.071), Heracleum candicans (0.071), Rheum tibeticum (0.068), Astragalus rhizanthus (0.049), S. jacquemontiana (0.049), Rosularia adenotricha (0.046), Thalictrum alpinum (0.045),

Meconopsis acuelata (0.045), Potentillla anserina (0.043), Campanula aristata (0.042),

Carex cardiolepis (0.041), S. strigosa (0.041), Saxifraga flagellaris (0.039), Androsace sempervioides (0.039), Cuscuta reflexa (0.036), Taraxacum laevigatum (0.035), Codonopsis ovata (0.034), Polygonatum multiflorum (0.029), A. rotundifolia (0.026), Chenopodium phyloglosum (0.026) Inula hookeri (0.025) Rumex acetosa (0.024), Circaea alpina (0.023),

Carduus edelbergii (0.020), and Anagalus arvense (0.011).

Lowest values of the fragile and delicate species including Hypoxis aurea, Roscoea alpina, Androsace spp, Circaea alpina, Polygonatum multiflorum and Cuscuta reflexa may be due to disturbances like trampling and deforestation in the area because of their delicate nature (Dvorsky et al., 2011). Harsh environmental conditions, anthropogenic disturbances and inter specific, intraspecific competitions among some plant species reduces the plant diversity in these ecological zones (Ghimire et al., 2006).

Saxifraga spp, Codonopsis ovata, Rosularia adenotricha and Maconopsis aculeata have the unique habitat such as rocky and high slope degree and may be favored by north facing mountains (Nautiyal et al., 1997). These species are threatened by dry habitats of

276 rocks and high intensity of hail, sleet and rainfall during summer season because of their delicate nature and texture (Pandey et al., 2000). These species has important conservation implications due to specific habitat requirements and are at a greater risk than those species with broad ecological amplitudes and resistance against any prevailing threat (Samant et al.,

1996; Bisht and Bhat, 2013). All these factors add to their low density and availability in

Himalaya’s vegetation which is well reflected from current results (Chandrasekhar et al.,

2007).

Anagalus arvenses is a low altitude species of temperate region but due to climate change and transportation vehicles, this species has shifted its range upward and indicated that there is an alarming threat of warm temperature which may produce tremendous negative changes in the biodiversity of Himalayas in coming years (Vashistha et al., 2006).

Mushroom collection activities in early season of year such as from March to May are a serious threat to the angiosperm species or members of Orchidaceae, Rosaceae,

Polygonaceae etc. (Nautiyal et al., 2002). Most species of these families prefer to grow in forest due to high litter contents and also grows in shade of rocks and damaged by trampling and new track formations for the collection of valuable morels by humans in forest areas

(Alam and Ali, 2009). These are unique micro sites for mushroom growth and therefore locals explore these limited habitats thoroughly every year which decreases the number of all these species growing in their vicinity (Kala, 2006).

Fern and fern allies also plays an important role in community structure and biodiversity regulation in the mountainous regions of the world (Dar and Khuroo, 2013). Pteridophytes have unique distribution among different habitats mostly depending upon the moisture contents in the area along with a diversity of threats natural as well as man-made (Mir et al.,

277

2015). Out of 48 fern species a few of them have a considerably lower important value and are considered vulnerable. These species include Botrychium lunaria with an IVI of 0.052 followed by Polystichum attenuatum (0.048), Pteris stenophylla (0.046), Athyrium fimbriatum (0.045), P. younnanense (0.044), Cystopteris fragilis (0.040), C.montana (0.040),

Onychium japonicum (0.028), Dryopteris wallichianum (0.020) and Cryptogramma sterllei

(0.020).

Botrychium sp was present only in a single site at Rati Gali along with running water channel due to its unique habitat and beside fresh water not was recorded from any other site.

Polystichum and Dryopteris species are used as a wild vegetable in local areas therefore are present in low quantity (Nautiyal et al., 1997). Cryptogramma sterllei prefers the sandy soil and rocky habitat where land sliding along with some other factors contributes to its reduction in the distribution in area (Bisht and Bhat, 2013). The present study revealed that these ferns were not utilized by grazing mammals but trampling, land sliding, avalanches and water resources for animals, collection of other medicinal herbs and extraction of fuel wood from their habitat are the major threats to their diversity (Khuroo et al. 2007). It was concluded that the decline in plant diversity of high mountains in Azad Kashmir is due to a range of factors such as high population growth, high rate of habitat modification, deforestation, climate change, over exploitation of NTFPs, timber extraction, fodder collection and pollution. The spread of invasive alien species and range shifting of

Therophytes species due to changing environment are continually going on (Sudhersan et al.,

2003; Pitman and Jorgensen, 2002). Increasing population with decreased average land holding creates the threat for hunger and land ownership that’s why locals try to spread out

278 their existing land into adjacent unclaimed lands (IUCN, 2006). Vast forest areas have cleared and brought under cultivation or settlements (Qazi, 2005).

For many years plants have been collected from wild habitats by destructive and unscientific means in Himalayas since a long time (Singh et al., 2009). Over exploitation of trade species, destructive methods of extraction (Bhattarai and Karki, 2004), vulnerability due to human activities, trampling by animals, livestock pressure, and collection of morels by locals in early season of growth of vascular plants are some serious threats to these medicinal plants (Kala, 2006). For achievement of sustainability of flora and other NTFPs in

Himalayas, a multi-disciplinary approach must be considered for conservation process

(Ghimire et al. 2004). The large scale collection of medicinal plants for illegal trade; induced by changed land use has also been of concern throughout the Himalayas (Ram et al., 2004).

Further depletion and degradation of plant resources can be saved at the local level by proper management of existing resources by involving people, government and NGOs as well as research institutions (Pandey & Shukla, 2003; Geneletti and Dawa, 2009). Active participation and involvement of local people is an important factor in reduction and deterioration of plant wealth at any locality (Saxena et al., 2002). It is essential to formulate integrated and effective conservation management strategies involving local communities, policy makers, researchers and Government departments. There is a need to integrate the livelihood of local inhabitants with conservation measures through participatory forest management in such a way so that the local communities are able to draw large share of services from these areas Our findings may help to formulate the regional conservation strategies for the AJK region.

279

CONCLUSION

This research contributes an enhanced level of understanding of plant diversity in

Western Himalayan alpine and sub alpine ecosystems with special reference to species composition, community structure, diversity, ecosystem services and sustainability. Present research reported a total of 517 plant species belonging to 78 families distributed among 56 plant communities along altitudinal gradients lying on varying topographic features of the western Himalayan highlands of AJK. The local highland flora was revealed to be dominated by Hicriptophytic life forms synchronized with Miphyllous taxa specially adapted to the specific highland climates, freezing temperatures and high altitudes. A few plant families including Asteraceae, Poaceae, Rosaceae, Lamiaceae, and Fabaceae and Ranunculaceae having broad ecological amplitudes and adaptive niches dominated the local flora comprising

63% of the recorded taxa. Species with highest IVI vales which dominated the communities included Salix flabellaris, Juncus membraneous, Abies pindrow, Betula utilus and Viburnum grandiflorum. The co dominant taxa included species of Polygonum, Geranium, Fragaria,

Impatiens Sibbaldia, Pedicularis, Artemisia, Bistorta, Potentilla, Anaphalis, Nepeta and

Saussurea having abundant distribution owing to their non-palatability and opportunistic niches.

The communities exhibited moderate levels of species diversity and richness, comparable to the other Himalayan regions whereas the communities were found to be disturbed and degraded with low maturity Index values (>20) attributed to the frequent anthropogenic disturbances and climatic severities. Phytosociological attributes of the sampled plant communities responded significantly to environmental variables as well as anthropogenic disturbances. Species diversity and richness showed a decreasing trend with

280 increasing altitudes across the study area. A continuous grazing pressure along moderate erosion practice was observed in the entire study area owing to the large herd sizes but little available grazing area in the villages. Sub alpine and alpine flora contributed significantly to the livelihood support of the local communities in terms of fuel wood, fodder, medicinal plants, wild vegetables, mushroom collection and fruits. Current study identified anthropogenic impacts including deforestation, overgrazing, overexploitation of medicinal plants and soil erosion as serious threats to the local plant biodiversity. A total of 45 plant species were found to be seriously threatened having very low (<0.05) IVI vales in the area.

We recommend immediate conservation measures in the Western Himalayan

Highlands of AJK to ensure the sustainable utilization and healthy ecosystem functioning of these vital biodiversity hotspots which will ensure the environmental stability as well as

Human wellbeing in the area.

281

RECOMENDATIONS

We recommend immediate conservation measures in the study area in order to protect the floristic wealth and ensure the sustainable utilization of associated ecosystem services.

The multiple steps may involve proper documentation of the indigenous knowledge, regular surveying and monitoring of Floral biodiversity with species emphasis on threatened taxa, capacity building and training of local communities, conservation of threatened and endangered taxa in Botanical gardens, socioeconomic uplift of the locals, planning of effective developmental activities and sustainable use of resources in the area. There is a need to integrate the livelihood of local inhabitants with conservation measures through participatory forest management in such a way so that the local communities are able to draw large share of services from these areas. There is also a general desire to maintain the natural habitat and biodiversity for the enjoyment of life and continue wellbeing of nature. For the sake of future generations afforestation and reforestation in the degraded forest lands involving keystone plant species is the need of hour. Based upon our findings, and identified threats to the local ecosystems, the following are a few specific recommendations for the alpine and sub-alpine vegetation zones of AJK in western Himalayas.

1. Species with low IVI values and localized distribution in the study area deserve

immediate and effective conservation strategies. We have identified about 45 plant

species with IVI values lower than 0.05 which are under serious threat in the area. For

this purpose effective measures should be taken for the exploration and sustainability of

these plants along with dependency level of local communities on these plants. Regular

monitoring and population surveys of these important medicinal plants are recommended.

282

2. A large number of medicinal plants (67) were recorded as having medicinal applications,

collected extensively for large scale commercial trade which has become a threat for their

existence. It is imperative to understand their distribution and conservation status in their

natural habitats. The collection and trade of the medicinal plants should be strictly

monitored and regulated within the threshold level of the species. The collection where

allowed should be conducted scientifically after the formation and dispersal of seeds to

ensure recruitment.

3. Over grazing appeared to be a major threat to the precious herbs, forest seedlings and

palatable species of the area attributed to the large herd size per family (17.96) in the area

with a very small available grazing area of just 0.62 ha. This grazing pressure needs to be

immediately controlled any regulated by promoting rotational grazing, avoiding livestock

concentrations at specific sites, closing the vulnerable areas to live stock and providing

alternate fodder to livestock.

4. Significant soil erosion intensity was also observed at more than 50% of the study sites

due to over grazing, trampling, snow melt and floods. The vulnerable areas must be

identified and soil conservation techniques should be applied at once including increased

vegetation, agrostological approaches, reforestation, stream bank protection and slope

stabilization.

5. The preferred fuel wood tree species in the area include Juniperus communis,

Rhododendron companulatum, Pinus wallichiana and Betula utilus which face a constant

logging pressure round the year due to continuous demand. It is recommended to provide

alternate energy resources to the local communities like solar panels and LPG to reduce

the fuel wood pressure. Alternative option could be to provide gas stoves and cylinders to

283

these rural populations at subsidized rates so as to decrease their dependency on the forest

resources for fuel wood.

6. Another important step is to regulate the logging practices and excavate the frequent

fallen logs due to avalanches, lightening and landslides rather than cutting live trees.

7. About 53 herb species are regularly being collected by the locals for fodder demands. It is

recommended to promote plantation of fast growing fuel and fodder species in the private

lands to reduce the pressure from forest lands. The seedlings and saplings of these species

should be distributed to local people at subsidized rates.

8. The local inhabitants of western Himalayan sub alpine and alpine highlands are living in

close association with native flora. The indigenous knowledge about sustainable

utilization of plants in different socio-cultural, economic and medicinal perspectives is a

huge wealth indeed. This great reservoir of knowledge requires detailed and in depth

documentation and preservation including the identification of endangered, endemic and

threatened floral elements.

9. Community based forest management should be introduced and promoted in the area.

Local people must be provided with information and awareness on the importance of

floral wealth and the need for immediate biodiversity conservation.

10. Afforestation projects should be launched on suitable degraded lands to restore the

vegetation cover in the AJK range.

11. The cultivation of commercially important mushrooms and vegetable species should be

promoted on private land holdings for the uplift of local’s livelihood and reducing

pressure on the mushroom and vegetation species.

284

REFERENCES

Abbas, H. (2010). Ex-situ conservation of some threatened endemic and rare plants of

southern Pakistan through tissue culture. University of Karachi, Karachi.

Ali, H. & M. Qaiser. 2010. Contribution to the Red List of Pakistan: a case study of

Astragalus gahiratensis Ali (Fabaceae-Papilionaceae). Pak. J. Bot., 42(3),

1523-1528.

Ali, S. I., & Qaiser, M. (1986). A phytogeographical analysis of the phanerogams of Pakistan

and Kashmir. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Section B:

Biological Sciences, 89, 89-101.

Ali, S.I. & Nasir, Y.J. (Eds.). (1989-1992). Flora of Pakistan. Nos. 191-204. Islamabad,

Karachi.

Ali, S.I. & Qaiser, M. (Eds.). (1993-2007). Flora of Pakistan. No. 191-215. Islamabad,

Karachi.

Nasir, E. & Ali, S.I. (Eds.). (1980-1989). Flora of Pakistan. No. 132-190. Islamabad,

Karachi.

Nasir, E. & Ali, S.I. (Eds.). (1970-1979). Flora of West Pakistan. No. 1-131. Islamabad,

Karachi.

Abbasi, A. M., Khan, M. A., & Zafar, M. (2013a). Ethno-medicinal assessment of some

selected wild edible fruits and vegetables of Lesser-Himalayas, Pakistan. Pak

J Bot, 45(SI), 215-222.

Abbasi, A. M., Khan, M. A., Shah, M. H., Shah, M. M., Pervez, A., & Ahmad, M. (2013b).

Ethnobotanical appraisal and cultural values of medicinally important wild

285

edible vegetables of Lesser Himalayas-Pakistan. Journal of ethnobiology and

ethnomedicine, 9(1), 66.

Acharya, K. P., Vetaas, O. R., & Birks, H. (2011). Orchid species richness along Himalayan

elevational gradients. Journal of Biogeography, 38(9), 1821-1833.

Adhikari, B. S., Babu, M., Saklani, P., & Rawat, G. (2010). Medicinal plants diversity and

their conservation status in Wildlife Institute of India (WII) campus,

Dehradun. Ethnobotanical Leaflets, 2010(1), 6.

Adhikari, B.S & Rawat, G.S. (2012b). Floral diversity along sub-alpine and alpine

ecosystems in Tungnath area of Kedarnath wildlife sanctuary, Uttarakhand.

Indian Forester, 138(10), 927-940.

Agnihotri1, P., Semwal, M., Singh, H., & Husain, T. (2013). A glimpse on vegetation and

threatened medicinal plants of Govind Wild life Sunctury, Garowal Himalaya.

Journal of Biodiversity Management and Forestry, 2:4.

Ahmad, H. (2003). Cultivation and sustainable harvesting of medicinal and aromatic plants

through community involvement. Intern. Paper presented at the Workshop on

conservation and sustainable use of medicinal and aromatic plants in Pakistan.

WWF, MINFAL and Qarshi industries Pvt. Ltd P.

Ahmad, H., Alam, M., & Haq, F. (2010). Species Diversity and Conservation Status of the

Diversity of Vascular Plants of Nandiar Khwar District Batagram, Pakistan.

Paper presented at the Workshop on International Symposium on Biology of

Rare and Endemic Plant Species.(Biorare Symposium May 26-29, Fethiye-

Mugla, Turkey.

286

Ahmad, I., Hussain, M., Ahmad, M. S. A., & Hameed, M. (2008). Spatio-temporal effects on

association of plant species in soone valley of Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot, 40(5),

1865-1876.

Ahmad, K. S., Hamid, A., Nawaz, F., Hameed, M., Ahmad, F., Deng, J., . . . Mahroof, S.

(2017). Ethnopharmacological studies of indigenous plants in Kel village,

Neelum Valley, Azad Kashmir, Pakistan. Journal of ethnobiology and

ethnomedicine, 13(1), 68.

Ahmad, K. S., Qureshi, R., Hameed, M., Ahmad, F., & Nawaz, T. (2012). Conservation

assessment and medicinal importance of some plants resources from Sharda,

Neelum Valley, Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan. Int J Agric Biol, 14(6),

997-1000.

Ahmed, M., & Shaukat, S. S. (2012). A text book of vegetation Ecology: Abrar Sons.

Ahmed, M., Khan, N., Wahab, M., Hamza, S., Siddiqui, M. F., Nazim, K., & Khan, M. U.

(2009). Vegetation structure of Olea ferruginea Royle forests of lower Dir

district of Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot, 41(6), 2683-2695.

Ahmed, S., Beg, A. H., Dasti, A.A., & Shinwari, Z.K. (2005). Ethnobotanical studies on

some medicinal plants of Boony Valley, Chitral Pakistan. Medicinanal Plants

of Pakistan, 31, 67-71.

Alam, G., & Belt, J. (2004). Searching synergy. Stakeholder views on developing a

sustainable medicinal plant chain in Uttaranchal–India.

Alam, J., & Ali, S. I. (2009). Conservation status of Astragalus gilgitensis Ali (Fabaceae): a

critically endangered species in the Gilgit District, Pakistan. Phyton (Horn), 48(2),

211-223.

287

Alam, J., & Ali, S. I. (2010). Contribution to the red list of the plants of Pakistan. Pakistan

Journal of Botany, 42(5), 2967-2971.

Ali, J., & Benjaminsen, T. A. (2004). Fuelwood, timber and deforestation in the Himalayas:

the case of Basho Valley, Baltistan region, Pakistan. Mountain Research and

Development, 24(4), 312-318.

Ali, M., Sher, H., Ahmad, S., Wadan, E., & Ali, M. (2016). Evaluation Of Timber And Fuel

Wood Consumption And Its Impact On Vegetation Cover In Northern Parts

Of Pakistan. Journal of Biodiversity and Environmental Sciences, 9(2),183-

190.

Ali, S. (2008). Significance of flora with special reference to Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot, 40(3),

967-971.

Allen, C. E., & Burns, S. F. (2000). Characterization of Alpine Soils, Eagle Cap, Wallowa

Mountains, Oregon. Physical Geography, 21(3), 212-222.

Altesor, A., Oesterheld, M., Leoni, E., Lezama, F., & Rodríguez, C. (2005). Effect of grazing

on community structure and productivity of a Uruguayan grassland. Plant

Ecology, 179(1), 83-91.

Ambasht, R. S. (1969). A text book of Plant Ecology (No. 581.5 A491). Students' Friends.

Apiah, M., Damnyag, Blay D., Dwomoh, L., Pappinen, F. K., & Luukkanen, A. (2007).

Depandanc on forest resoueces and tropical deforestation in Ghana Springer.

A Research Report.

Appiah, M., Blay, D., Damnyag, L., Dwomoh, F. K., Pappinen, A., & Luukkanen, O. (2009).

Dependence on forest resources and tropical deforestation in

Ghana. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 11(3), 471-487.

288

Arora, D., & Shepard, G. H. (2008). Mushrooms and economic botany. Economic Botany,

62(3), 207-212.

Asian Development Bank/ICIMOD (2006). Environment Assessment of Nepal: Emerging

Issues and Challenges,

Aswal, B., & Mehrotra, B. N. (1994). Flora of Lahaul-Spiti: a cold desert in north west

Himalaya. Dehra Dun: Bishen Singh Mahendra Pal Singh iii, 761p.-illus., col.

illus.. ISBN 8121100992 En Keys Plant records. Geog, 6.

Assessment, M. E. (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Millennium

Ecosystem Assessment Series. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC,

155.

Assessment, M. E. (2003). Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA): Strengthening

Capacity to Manage Ecosystems Sustainably for Human Well-Being. World

Resources Institute.

Ataman, E., De Salvo, P., Zanetti, M., Bloise, M., Bel, J., Francheschini, G., & Fed’Ostiani,

L. (2003). Towards a GIS-Based Analysis of Mountain Environments and

Populations. FAO,Rome, IT.

Auer, I., Böhm, R., Jurkovic, A., Lipa, W., Orlik, A., Potzmann, R., . . . Briffa, K. (2007).

HISTALP—historical instrumental climatological surface time series of the

Greater Alpine Region. International journal of climatology, 27(1), 17-46.

Awan, A. A., Akhtar, T., & Dar, M. E. U. I. (2007). Fodder Plants of Some Selected Areas of

Jhelum Valley. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences, 10(9), 1547-1549.

289

Baba, A. A., Geelani, S. N. U. Z., Saleem, I., & Husain, M. (2017). Effect of grazing on

floristic composition at selected site (grazed site-Yousmarag) in Kashmir

Valley, India. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, 6(4), 339-342.

Badola, H. K., & Aitken, S. (2003). The Himalayas of India: A treasury of medicinal plants

under siege. Biodiversity, 4(3), 3-13.

Badshah, L., Hussain, F., Sher, Z., & Burni, T. (2014). Harvesting and consumption of fuel

and timber wood in rural area of district Tank, Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of

Botany, 46(5), 1719-1724.

Bano, A., Ahmad, M., Hadda, T. B., Saboor, A., Sultana, S., Zafar, M., . . . Ashraf, M. A.

(2014a). Quantitative ethnomedicinal study of plants used in the skardu valley

at high altitude of Karakoram-Himalayan range, Pakistan. Journal of

ethnobiology and ethnomedicine, 10(1), 43.

Bano, A., Ahmad, M., Zafar, M., Sultana, S., Rashid, S., & Khan, M. A. (2014b).

Ethnomedicinal knowledge of the most commonly used plants from Deosai

Plateau, Western Himalayas, Gilgit Baltistan, Pakistan. Journal of

ethnopharmacology, 155(2), 1046-1052.

Bano, A., Ayub, M., Rashid, S., Sultana, S., & Sadia, H. (2013). Ethnobotany and

conservation status of floral diversity of Himalayan range of Azad Jammu and

Kashmir Pakistan. Pak J Bot, 45(SI), 243-251.

Baqir, M., Ashish, K., Kothari, R., & Pratap, S. (2017). Calorific value and fuel wood

consumption patterns of a forest plantation made by villagers at Kahinure

(Distt Mau), Uttar Pradesh, India. Climate Change and Environmental

Sustainability, 5(1), 35-41.

290

Baqir, M., Kothari, R., & Singh, R. P. (2018). Fuel wood consumption, and its influence on

forest biomass carbon stock and emission of carbon dioxide. A case study of

Kahinaur, district Mau, Uttar Pradesh, India. Biofuels, 1-10.

Barnett, T. P., Adam, J. C., & Lettenmaier, D. P. (2005). Potential impacts of a warming

climate on water availability in snow-dominated regions. Nature, 438(7066),

303.

Bartoli, F., & Burtin, G. (1979). Etude de quatre séquences sol-végétation à l'étage alpin.

Doc. de cartographie écologique, 21, 79-93.

Benayas, R., José, M., & Scheiner, S. M. (2002). Plant diversity, biogeography and

environment in Iberia: patterns and possible causal factors. Journal of

Vegetation Science, 13(2), 245-258.

Beniston, M. (2003). Climatic change in mountain regions: a review of possible impacts

Climate variability and change in high elevation regions: Past, present &

future (pp. 5-31): Springer.

Bhatt, B., Negi, A., & Todaria, N. (1994). Fuelwood consumption pattern at different

altitudes in Garhwal Himalaya. Energy, 19(4), 465-468.

Bhatt, S. (1988). Quantitative analysis of high altitude (2600-3900 m asl vegetation on the

way to Pindari glaciers. M. Sc. dissertation, Kumaun University, Naini Tal.

Bhattarai, K. R., Vetaas, O. R., & Grytnes, J. A. (2004a). Fern species richness along a

central Himalayan elevational gradient, Nepal. Journal of Biogeography,

31(3), 389-400.

291

Bhattarai, K. R., Vetaas, O. R., & Grytnes, J. A. (2004 b). Relationship between plant species

richness and biomass in an arid sub-alpine grassland of the central Himalayas,

Nepal. Folia Geobotanica, 39(1), 57-71.

Bhattarai, N., & Karki, M. (2004). MEDICINAL, FOOD AND AROMATIC PLANTS|

Medicinal and Aromatic Plants: Ethnobotany and Conservation Status.

Bhutiyani, M., Kale, V. S., & Pawar, N. (2007). Long-term trends in maximum, minimum

and mean annual air temperatures across the Northwestern Himalaya during

the twentieth century. Climatic Change, 85(1-2), 159-177.

Billings, W.D. (1972). Plants, man, and the ecosystem, 2nd edn. London: Macmillan

Bisht, A., & Bhat, A. (2013). Vegetational structure and plant diversity relation in a sub-

alpine region of Garhwal Himalaya, Uttarakhnad India. African Journal of

Plant Science, 7(8), 401-406.

Bisht, V., Negi, J., Bh, A., & Sundriyal, R. (2013). Traditional use of medicinal plants in

district Chamoli, Uttarakhand, India. Journal of Medicinal Plants Research,

7(15), 918-929.

Bock, J., Jolls, C., & Lewis, A. (1995). The effects of grazing on alpine vegetation: a

comparison of the central Caucasus, Republic of Georgia, with the Colorado

Rocky Mountains, USA. Arctic and Alpine Research, 27(2), 130-136.

Bockheim, J., Munroe, J., Douglass, D., & Koerner, D. (2000). Soil development along an

elevational gradient in the southeastern Uinta Mountains, Utah, USA. Catena,

39(3), 169-185.

292

Bolin B., Döös B. R., Jager J., & Warrick R. A.,eds., (1989). The Green House Effect climate

change and Ecosystems: SCOPE 29 International Council of Scientific Union.

Great Britain.

Bowman, W. D., Theodose, T. A., Schardt, J. C., & Conant, R. T. (1993). Constraints of

nutrient availability on primary production in two alpine tundra communities.

Ecology, 74(7), 2085-2097.

Boyd, J, & Banzhaf, S. (2006). What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized

environmental accounting units. RFFP Discussion Paper 06–02. Washington,

DC.

Boyd, J., & Banzhaf, S. (2007). What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized

environmental accounting units. Ecological economics, 63(2-3), 616-626.

Bramwell, D. (2002). How many plant species are there. Plant Talk, 28(32-34).

Braun-Blanquet, J. (1932). Plant sociology, the study of plant community. Translation by HS

Conard and GD Fuller.](McGraw Hill: New York.).

Breckle, S. W. (2007). Flora and vegetation of Afghanistan. Basic and Applied Dryland

Research, 1(2), 155-194.

Breckle, S.-W. (1974). Notes on alpine and nival flora of the Hindu Kush, East Afghanistan.

Bot. Notiser, 127(2), 278-284.

Brohan, P., Kennedy, J. J., Harris, I., Tett, S. F., & Jones, P. D. (2006). Uncertainty estimates

in regional and global observed temperature changes: A new data set from

1850. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 111(D12).

Brower, J. E., Zar, J. H., & von Ende, C. (1998). Field and laboratory methods for general

ecology.

293

Butler, C. D., & Oluoch-Kosura, W. (2006). Linking future ecosystem services and future

human well-being. Ecology and Society, 11(1).

Butt, T. M. (2006). Sustainable forest management: A case study on machiara national park

In district muzaffarabad, state of Azad jammu and kashmir, Pakistan.

Geografisk institutt.

Buurman, P., Van der Plas, L., & Slager, S. (1976). A toposequence of Alpine soils on

calcareous micaschists, northern Adula region, Switzerland. Journal of soil

science, 27(3), 395-410.

Carpenter, C. (2005). The environmental control of plant species density on a Himalayan

elevation gradient. Journal of Biogeography, 32(6), 999-1018.

Carpenter, S. R., DeFries, R., Dietz, T., Mooney, H. A., Polasky, S., Reid, W. V., & Scholes,

R. J. (2006). Millennium ecosystem assessment: research needs.

Chakraborty, A., Saha, S., Sachdeva, K., & Joshi, P. K. (2018). Vulnerability of forests in the

Himalayan region to climate change impacts and anthropogenic disturbances:

a systematic review. Regional Environmental Change, 1-17.

Champion, S. H., Seth, S. K., & Khattak, G. (1965). Forest types of Pakistan. Forest types of

Pakistan.

Chandra, J., Rawat, V. S., Rawat, Y., & Ram, J. (2010). Vegetational diversity along an

altitudinal range in Garhwal Himalaya. Int. J. Biodiversity and Conservtion,

2(1), 14–18.

Chandrasekhar, K., Rao, K., Maikhuri, R., & Saxena, K. (2007). Ecological implications of

traditional livestock husbandry and associated land use practices: A case study

294

from the trans-Himalaya, India. Journal of Arid Environments, 69(2), 299-

314.

Chaudhri, M. N., & Qureshi, R. A. (1991). Pakistan's endanagered flora: 2.(A checklist of

rare and seriously threatened taxa of Pakistan). Pakistan Syst, 5(1-2), 1-84.

Chawla, A., Rajkumar, S., Singh, K., Lal, B., Singh, R., & Thukral, A. (2008). Plant species

diversity along an altitudinal gradient of Bhabha Valley in western Himalaya.

Journal of Mountain Science, 5(2), 157-177.

Chettri, N., Sharma, E., Shakya, B., Thapa, R., Bajracharya, B., Uddin, K., . . . Oli, K. P.

(2010). Biodiversity in the Eastern Himalayas: Status, trends and vulnerability

to climate change: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development

(ICIMOD).

Chettri, N., Sharma, E., Shakya, B., Thapa, R., Bajracharya, B., Uddin, K., Krishna P Oli, &

Choudhury, D. (2014). A report on Biodiversity in the Eastern Himalayas:

Status, Trends and Vulnerability to Climate Change for mountain people –

ICIMOD, Kathmandu, Nepal. Climate Change Impact and Vulnerability in the

EH – Technical Report 2

Chowdhery, H., & Wadhwa, B. (1984). Flora of Himachal Pradesh: Analysis. Flora of India

series, 2.

Clift, P. D., Giosan, L., Blusztajn, J., Campbell, I. H., Allen, C., Pringle, M., . . . Alizai, A.

(2008). Holocene erosion of the Lesser Himalaya triggered by intensified

summer monsoon. Geology, 36(1), 79-82.

295

livelihoods and perceptions of forest ׳Cochard, R., & Dar, M. (2014). Mountain farmers

resource degradation at Machiara National Park, Pakistan-administered

Kashmir. Environmental Development, 10, 84-103.

Colwell, R. K., & Lees, D. C. (2000). The mid-domain effect: geometric constraints on the

geography of species richness. Trends in ecology & evolution, 15(2), 70-76.

Cramer, W., Yohe, G., Auffhammer, M., et al (2014). Detection and attribution of observed

impacts. In: Field CB, Barros V, Dokken DJ, Mastrandrea MD, Mach KJ

(eds) Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A:

Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth

Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 979–1037

Criddle, R., Church, J., Smith, B., & Hansen, L. (2003). Fundamental Causes of the Global

Patterns of Species Range and Richness1. Russian journal of plant physiology,

50(2), 192-199.

Cruz, R. V. (2007). Asia. Climate Change 2007: Impact, Adaptation and Vulnerability.

Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 469-506.

Daba, A. S., Kabeil, S., Botros, W. A., & El-Saadani, M. (2008). Production of mushroom

(Pleurotus ostreatus) in Egypt as a source of nutritional and medicinal food.

World J. Agric. Sci, 4(5), 630-634.

Dad, J. M., & Khan, A. B. (2011). Threatened medicinal plants of valley, Kashmir

Himalayas: distribution pattern and current conservation status. International

296

Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management, 7(1), 20-

26.

Dai, Y.-C., Yang, Z.-L., Cui, B.-K., Yu, C.-J., & Zhou, L.-W. (2009). Species diversity and

utilization of medicinal mushrooms and fungi in China. International Journal

of Medicinal Mushrooms, 11(3).

Dar, G., & Khuroo, A. (2013). Floristic diversity in the Kashmir Himalaya: progress,

problems and prospects. Sains Malaysiana, 42(10), 1377-1386.

Dar, G., Khuroo, A. A., & Nasreen, A. (2012). Endemism in the angiosperm flora of Kashmir

Valley, India: Stocktaking. Paper presented at the Proceedings of International

Seminar on Multidisciplinary Approaches in Angiosperm Systematics.

Dar, I.Y. (2011). Edaphic factors and plant community organization in Branwar forest of

Kashmir Himalaya. M. Sc Thesis Submitted to University of Kashmir

Srinagar, 30-36.

Dar, G., Khuroo, A., Khan, Z., & Dar, A. (2007). Medicinal flora of the Kashmir Himalaya: a

taxonomic overview. J. Himalayan Ecology and Sustainable Development, 2,

13-20.

Dar, M. E. U. I., Cochard, R., Shreshta, R., & Ahmad, S. (2012). Plant resource utilization by

local inhabitants around Machiara National Park, Azad Kashmir, Pakistan.

Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment, 10(3&4), 1139-1148.

Daubenmire, R. F. (1959). Canopy coverage method of vegetation analysis. Northwest Sci,

33, 39-64.

297 de Groot, R.S., Wilson, M.A. & Boumans, R.M. (2002) A typology for the classification,

description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services.

Ecological Economics 41: 393–408

De Scally, F. A., & Gardner, J. S. (1994). Characteristics and mitigation of the snow

avalanche hazard in Kaghan Valley, Pakistan Himalaya Recent Studies in

Geophysical Hazards (pp. 197-213): Springer.

Del Moral, R., Saura, J. M., & Emenegger, J. N. (2010). Primary succession trajectories on a

barren plain, Mount St. Helens, Washington. Journal of Vegetation Science,

21(5), 857-867.

Dhar, U., & Kachroo, P. (1983). Alpine Flora of Kashmir Himalaya.

Dickoré, W. B., & Nüsser, M. (2000). Flora of Nanga Parbat (NW Himalaya, Pakistan): An

annotated inventory of vascular plants with remarks on vegetation dynamics.

Englera, 3-253.

Dimri, A., & Dash, S. (2012). Wintertime climatic trends in the western Himalayas. Climatic

Change, 111(3-4), 775-800.

Dimri, A.P., & Dash, S.K. (2011). Wintertime Climatic Trends in the Western Himalayas.

Climatic Change. doi:10.1007/s10584-011-0201-y.

Diodato, N., Bellocchi, G., & Tartari, G. (2012). How do Himalayan areas respond to global

warming? International Journal of Climatology, 32(7), 975-982.

Dobhal, U., & Bhandari, S. L. (2006). Medicinal wealth of district Pauri Garhwal,

Uttaranchal, India. J. Cur. Sci, 9(2), 899-902.

298

Dobson, A., Lodge, D., Alder, J., Cumming, G. S., Keymer, J., McGlade, J., . . . Wolters, V.

(2006). Habitat loss, trophic collapse, and the decline of ecosystem services.

Ecology, 87(8), 1915-1924.

Doležal, J., & Šrůtek, M. (2002). Altitudinal changes in composition and structure of

mountain-temperate vegetation: a case study from the Western Carpathians.

Plant Ecology, 158(2), 201-221.

Dorman, H., & Deans, S. G. (2000). Antimicrobial agents from plants: antibacterial activity

of plant volatile oils. Journal of applied microbiology, 88(2), 308-316.

Du, M., Kawashima, S., Yonemura, S., Zhang, X., & Chen, S. (2004). Mutual influence

between human activities and climate change in the Tibetan Plateau during

recent years. Global and Planetary Change, 41(3-4), 241-249.

Dvorský, M., Doležal, J., De Bello, F., Klimešová, J., & Klimeš, L. (2011). Vegetation types

of East Ladakh: species and growth form composition along main

environmental gradients. Applied Vegetation Science, 14(1), 132-147.

Dvorsky, M., Dolezal, J., de Bello, F., Klimesova, J. & Klimes, L. (2010). Vegetation types

of East Ladakh: species and growth form composition along main

environmental gradients. Applied Vegetation Science, 1–17.

Egoh, B., Reyers, B., Rouget, M., Richardson, D. M., Le Maitre, D. C., & van Jaarsveld, A.

S. (2008). Mapping ecosystem services for planning and management.

Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 127(1-2), 135-140.

Elmendorf, S. C., Henry, G. H., Hollister, R. D., Björk, R. G., Bjorkman, A. D., Callaghan,

T. V., . . . Day, T. A. (2012). Global assessment of experimental climate

299

warming on tundra vegetation: heterogeneity over space and time. Ecology

letters, 15(2), 164-175.

Eriksson, M., Xu, J., Shrestha, A. B., Vaidya, R. A., Santosh, N., & Sandström, K. (2009).

The changing Himalayas: impact of climate change on water resources and

livelihoods in the greater Himalayas: International centre for integrated

mountain development (ICIMOD).

ERTUĞ, F. (2004). Wild edible plants of the Bodrum area (Muğla, Turkey). Turkish Journal

of Botany, 28(1-2), 161-174.

FAO, (2001): Global forest resource assessment. (2000): main report. FAO Forestry Paper

140, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy,

479 pp.

FAO, (2015). Global Forest Resources Assessment ,2015. FAO Forestry Paper No. 1⁄⁄. UN

Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.

Flyman, M., & Afolayan, A. (2006). The suitability of wild vegetables for alleviating human

dietary deficiencies. South African Journal of Botany, 72(4), 492-497.

Flyman, M., & Afolayan, A. (2006b). A survey of plants used as wild vegetables in four

districts of Botswana. Ecology of food and nutrition, 45(6), 405-415.

Food and Agricultural Organization. (2008). Food Security in Mountains–High time for

action. Brochure of the international mountain day 2008.

Forrest, J. L., Wikramanayake, E., Shrestha, R., Areendran, G., Gyeltshen, K., Maheshwari,

A., ... & Thapa, K. (2012). Conservation and climate change: Assessing the

vulnerability of snow leopard habitat to treeline shift in the

Himalaya. Biological Conservation, 150(1), 129-135.

300

Fowler, H. J., & Archer, D. R. (2005). Hydro-climatological variability in the Upper Indus

Basin and implications for water resources. Regional Hydrological Impacts of

Climatic Change—Impact Assessment and Decision Making, 295, 131-138.

Frei, E., Bodin, J., & Walther, G.-R. (2010). Plant species’ range shifts in mountainous

areas—all uphill from here? Botanica Helvetica, 120(2), 117-128.

Gairola, S., Rawal, R. S., & Todaria, N. (2015). Effect of anthropogenic disturbance on

vegetation characteristics of sub-alpine forests in and around Valley of

Flowers National Park, a world heritage site of India. Tropical Ecology, 56(3).

Gairola, S., Rawal, R., & Todaria, N. (2008). Forest vegetation patterns along an altitudinal

gradient in sub-alpine zone of west Himalaya, India. African Journal of Plant

Science, 2(6), 042-048.

Gairola, S., Shariff, N. M., & Bhatt, A. (2010). Influence of climate change on production of

secondary chemicals in high altitude medicinal plants: issues needs immediate

attention. Journal of Medicinal Plants Research, 4(18), 1825-1829.

Gallai, N., Salles, J.-M., Settele, J., & Vaissière, B. E. (2009). Economic valuation of the

vulnerability of world agriculture confronted with pollinator decline.

Ecological economics, 68(3), 810-821.

Gaur, U. N., Raturi, G., & Bhatt, A. (2005). Current vegetation pattern along glacial

landscape in Central (Garhwal) Himalaya, India. Journal of Mountain

Science, 2(3), 255-264.

Gautam, M. R., Timilsina, G. R., & Acharya, K. (2013). Climate change in the Himalayas:

current state of knowledge: The World Bank.

301

Ge, X.-J., Zhang, L.-B., Yuan, Y.-M., Hao, G., & Chiang, T.-Y. (2005). Strong genetic

differentiation of the East-Himalayan Megacodon stylophorus (Gentianaceae)

detected by inter-simple sequence repeats (ISSR). Biodiversity &

Conservation, 14(4), 849-861.

Geneletti, D., & Dawa, D. (2009). Environmental impact assessment of mountain tourism in

developing regions: A study in Ladakh, Indian Himalaya. Environmental

impact assessment review, 29(4), 229-242.

Ghimire, B., & Lekhak, H. D. (2007). Regeneration of Abies spectabilis (D. Don) Mirb. in

sub-alpine forest of upper Manang, north-central Nepal. Chaudhary, RP,

Aase, TH, Vetaas,. O, and Subedi, BP (eds.), Local Effects of Global Changes

in the Himalayas: Manang, Nepal. Tribhuvan University, Nepal, and

University of Bergen, Norway, 139149.

Ghimire, S. K., Gimenez, O., Pradel, R., McKey, D., & Aumeeruddy‐Thomas, Y. (2008).

Demographic variation and population viability in a threatened Himalayan

medicinal and aromatic herb Nardostachys grandiflora: matrix modelling of

harvesting effects in two contrasting habitats. Journal of Applied Ecology,

45(1), 41-51.

Ghimire, S. K., McKey, D., & Aumeeruddy-Thomas, Y. (2004). Heterogeneity in

ethnoecological knowledge and management of medicinal plants in the

Himalayas of Nepal: implications for conservation. Ecology and Society, 9(3).

Ghimire, S. K., Mckey, D., & Aumeeruddy-Thomas, Y. (2006). Himalayan medicinal plant

diversity in an ecologically complex high altitude anthropogenic landscape,

Dolpo, Nepal. Environmental Conservation, 33(2), 128-140.

302

GOAJK, (1998). Azad Kashmir Statistical Book. Planning and Development Department

Azad Government of the State Jammu and Kashmir, Pp. 1-210.

GOAJK, (2015). AJK at a glance, Planning &Development Department, Gov,t of Azad

Jammu and Kashmir, p.1-113.

Gonnet, J. M., Guevara, J. C., & Estevez, O. R. (2003). Perennial grass abundance along a

grazing gradient in Mendoza, Argentina. Journal of range management, 364-

369.

Gosselin, F. (2006). An assessment of the dependence of evenness indices on species

richness. Journal of theoretical biology, 242(3), 591-597.

Gottfried, M., Pauli, H., Futschik, A., Akhalkatsi, M., Barančok, P., Alonso, J. L. B., . . .

Kazakis, G. (2012). Continent-wide response of mountain vegetation to

climate change. Nature Climate Change, 2(2), 111.

Greig-Smith, P. (2010). Quantitative plant ecology. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford. 581.5 p.

Grytnes, J. A., & Vetaas, O. R. (2002). Species richness and altitude: a comparison between

null models and interpolated plant species richness along the Himalayan

altitudinal gradient, Nepal. The American Naturalist, 159(3), 294-304.

Guil‐Guerrero, J. L., Giménez‐Giménez, A., Rodríguez‐García, I., & Torija‐Isasa, M. E.

(1998). Nutritional composition of Sonchus species (S asperL, S oleraceusL

and S tenerrimusL). Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 76(4),

628-632.

Gupta, R. (1977). Energy forests in farm and community lands. Indian farming.

Gupta, R. (1978). Impact of human influences on the vegetation of the Western Himalaya.

Vegetatio, 37(2), 111-118.

303

Habib, T., Malik, Z. H., Hussain, M. A., & Awan, A. A. (2013). The folklore of medicinal

plants recorded from Leepa Valley, Azad Jammu and Kashmir. African

Journal of Plant Science, 7(7), 268-272.

Hafeez, S. (1997). Bio-energy for meeting growing energy needs. Paper presented at the

RWEDP [Regional Wood Energy Development Programme], editor. Wood

Fuel Production and Marketing in Pakistan. National Workshop, Faisalabad,

Pakistan.

Hafeez, S.M. (2000). Bio-energy for meeting growing energy needs. In: RWEDP [Regional

Wood Energy Development Programme], editor. Wood Fuel Production and

Marketing in Pakistan. National Workshop, Faisalabad, Pakistan, 28-30

October 1997. RWEDP Report No 49. Bangkok, Thailand: FAO [Food and

Agriculture Organization of the United Nations], pp 143–149.

Hamayun, M., Khan, S. A., Ahmad, H., Shin, D. H., & Lee, I. J. (2006). Morel collection and

marketing: A case study from the Hindu-Kush mountain region of Swat,

Pakistan. Lyonia, 11, 7-13.

Hamayun, M., Khan, S.A & Khan, A.L. (2013) Wood as a Fuel Source in the Hindukush: A

Case Study of Utror and Gabral Valleys, Northren Pakistan Pakhtunkhwa J.

Life Sci. Volume 01, Issue 02, P 94-99.

Hamilton, A. C. (2008). Medicinal plants in conservation and development case studies and

lessons learnt.

Hamilton, A., & Radford, E. (2007). Identification and conservation of Important Plant Areas

for medicinal plants in the Himalaya. Plantlife International, Salisbury,

United Kingdom, and Ethnobotaniocal Society of Nepal, Kathmandu, Nepal.

304

Haq, F. U. (2011). Conservation status of the critically endangered and endangered species in

the Nandiar Khuwar catchment District Battagram, Pakistan. International

Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation, 3(2), 27-35.

Hegde, M. (1984). Fuel problem in villages: challenges and opportunities. Bulletin of

Science, 8, 8-13.

Hein, L., Van Koppen, K., De Groot, R. S., & Van Ierland, E. C. (2006). Spatial scales,

stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecological economics,

57(2), 209-228.

Helmer, E., Ramos, O., López, T. d. M., Quinones, M., & Diaz, W. (2002). Mapping the

forest type and land cover of Puerto Rico, a component of the Caribbean

biodiversity hotspot. Caribbean Journal of Science, Vol. 38, No. 3-4, 165–

183.

Hill, M. O., & Gauch, H. G. (1980). Detrended correspondence analysis: an improved

ordination technique Classification and ordination (pp. 47-58): Springer.

Holzinger, B., Hülber, K., Camenisch, M., & Grabherr, G. (2008). Changes in plant species

richness over the last century in the eastern Swiss Alps: elevational gradient,

bedrock effects and migration rates. Plant Ecology, 195(2), 179-196.

Holzner, W., & Kriechbaum, M. (1998). Man’s impact on the vegetation and landscape in the

Inner Himalaya and Tibet. Sediments of time. Environment and society in

Chinese history. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 53-106.

Holzner, W., & Kriechbaum, M. (2001). Pastures in south and central Tibet (China) II.

Probable causes of pasture degradation. Die Bodenkultur, 52(1).

Hooker, J.D. (1904). A Sketch of the Flora of British India. London: Kessinger Publishing.

305

Hooker, J.D. (1906). A sketch of the Flora of British India. Clarendon, Oxford. Bishen

Houehanou, T.D., Gle`le` Kakaı, R. L., Assogbadjo, A.E., Kindomihou, V., Houinato, M.,

Wittig R., Sinsin, B.A. (2012). Change in the woody floristic composition,

diversity and structure from protected to unprotected savannahs in Pendjari

Biosphere Reserve (Benin, West Africa). African Journal of Ecology 1-8.

DOI: 10.1111/aje.12046

Huddleston, B., Ataman, E., & d'Ostiani, L. F. (2003). Towards a GIS Based Analysis of

Mountain Environment and Population: FAO Rome.

Hussain, F, & Ilahi, I. (1991). Ecology and Vegetation of Lesser Himalayas Pakistan.

Peshawar, Pakistan: Jadoon Printing Press; 1991:1–185.

Hussain, F., & Ilahi, I. (1991). Ecology and vegetation of lesser Himalayas Pakistan.

Department of Botany, University of Peshawar, 187.

Hussain, M. I., & Perveen, A. (2009). Plant biodiversity and phytosociological attributes of

Tiko Baran (Khirthar Range). Pakistan Journal of Botany, 41(2), 581-586.

Hussain, M., & Ghani, A. (2008). Herbal remidies used for gastrointestinal disorders in

Kaghan valley, NWFP, Pakistan. Pak. J. Weed Sci. Res, 14(3-4), 169-200.

Hussain, S., Malik, Z. H., Malik, N. Z., & Ajaib, M. (2014). Life Form and Leaf size class

Reported from India Morr District , Azad Jammu & Kashmir. Biologia

(Pakistan), 60(1), 129-133.

Ibrar, M., Hussain, F., & Sultan, A. (2007). Ethnobotanical studies on plant resources of

Ranyal hills, District Shangla, Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Botany, 39(2),

329.

306

ICIMOD. (2009). Mountain Biodiversity and Climate Change in the Himalayas, for

mountains and people: A technical report on Sustainable Mountain

Development; No. 55, ICIMOD, Spring 2009, Kathmandu, Nepal.

Ilyas, S. Z. (2006). Biogas support program is a reason for its success in Pakistan. American-

Eurasian Journal of Scientific Research, 1(1), 42-45.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2007). Contribution of Working Group

II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change, 2007. In ML Parry, OF Canziani, JP Palutikof, PJ van der Linden and

CE Hanson (Eds). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom

and New York, NY, USA.

International Energy Agency (IEA). (1998). Energy statistics and balances of non-OECD

Countires 1995-1996 IEA, Paris.

IPCC. (2013). Climate change 2013—the physical science basis. Working group I

contribution to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on

climate change—summary for policy makers. http://ecite.utas.edu.au/99278.

Iqbal, M. Z., Shan, S. Z., & Shafiq, M. (2008). Ecological survey of certain plant

communities around urban area of Karachi. J. Appl. Sci. Enviro. Manage,

12(3): 51-60.

IUCN (The World Conservation Union). (2002). Environmental Issues. Land. Fuelwood.

http://www.edu.sdnpk.org/edu/land.htm; accessed on 15 March 2003

IUCN, (1996). Natural Resource and Environmental Survey of Azad Jammu and

Kashmir.The World Conservation Union (IUCN). Karachi,

307

IUCN, (2001). IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria; version 3.1. IUCN Species Survival

Commission, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

IUCN, (2008). IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.www.iucnredlist.org cited on March

02, 2008.

Iucn, U. (2008). WWF, 1980. World conservation strategy: Living resource conservation for

sustainable development.

IUCN. 2006. IUCN red list of threatened species. . Downloaded on 03

March 2007.

Jabeen, A. (2006). Fodder Management in and Around Ayubia National Park, Nathia Gali,

Hazara Division, NWFP, Pakistan. Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad.

Jan, A., & Ali, S. I. (2009). Conservation status of Astragalus gilgitensis Ali (Fabaceae): a

critically endangered species in the Gilgit District, Pakistan. Phyton (Horn),

48(2), 211-223.

Jan, S., Ajab Khan, A., Siraj ud din, Waheed Murad, M., Manzoor Hussain,M., and Aneela

Ghani, A. (2008). Herbal Rmidies used for Gastrointestinal Disorders in

Kaghan Valley, Nwfp, Pakistan. Pak. J. Weed Sci. Res. 14(3-4): 169-200.

Jasmine, B., Singh, Y., Onial, M., & Mathur, V. (2016). Traditional knowledge systems in

India for biodiversity conservation.

Jiangming, M. A., Shirong, L., Zuomin, S., Yuandong, Z. B., K., & Baoyu, C. (2008).

Changes in species composition and diversity in the restoration process of

sub-alpine dark brown coniferous forests in western Sichuan Province, China.

Frontiers of Biology in China, 3, 300 -307

308

Jordan, S. A., Cunningham, D. G., & Marles, R. J. (2010). Assessment of herbal medicinal

products: challenges, and opportunities to increase the knowledge base for

safety assessment. Toxicology and applied pharmacology, 243(2), 198-216.

Joshi, G., & Negi, G. C. (2011). Quantification and valuation of forest ecosystem services in

the western Himalayan region of India. International Journal of Biodiversity

Science, Ecosystem Services & Management, 7(1), 2-11.

Jost, L., DeVries, P., Walla, T., Greeney, H., Chao, A., & Ricotta, C. (2010). Partitioning

diversity for conservation analyses. Diversity and Distributions, 16(1), 65-76.

Kala, C. P. (2005). Indigenous uses, population density, and conservation of threatened

medicinal plants in protected areas of the Indian Himalayas. Conservation

Biology, 19(2), 368-378.

Kala, C. P. (2006). Medicinal plants of the high altitude cold desert in India: diversity,

distribution and traditional uses. The International Journal of Biodiversity

Science and Management, 2(1), 43-56.

Kala, C. P. (2006a). Medicinal plants of the high altitude cold desert in India: diversity,

distribution and traditional uses. The International Journal of Biodiversity

Science and Management, 2(1), 43-56.

Kala, C. P. (2006b). Problems and prospects in the conservation and development of the

Himalayan medicinal plants sector. International Journal of Sustainable

Development, 9(4), 370-389.

Kala, C. P. (2007). Local preferences of ethnobotanical species in the Indian Himalaya:

Implications for environmental conservation. Current science, 1828-1834.

309

Kala, C. P., & Mathur, V. B. (2002). Patterns of plant species distribution in the

Trans‐Himalayan region of Ladakh, India. Journal of Vegetation Science,

13(6), 751-754.

Kala, C., Rawat, G. S., & Uniyal, V. (1998). Ecology and conservation of the valley of

flowers national park, Garhwal Himalaya: Wildlife Institute of India.

Kammer, P. M., & Möhl, A. (2002). Factors controlling species richness in alpine plant

communities: an assessment of the importance of stress and disturbance.

Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine Research, 34(4), 398-407.

Kandel, P., Gurung, J., Chettri, N., Ning, W., & Sharma, E. (2016). Biodiversity research

trends and gap analysis from a transboundary landscape, Eastern Himalayas.

Journal of Asia-Pacific Biodiversity, 9(1), 1-10.

Kar, A., & Borthakur, S. (2008). Wild vegetables of Karbi-anglong district, Assam.

Keenan, R. J., Reams, G. A., Achard, F., de Freitas, J. V., Grainger, A., & Lindquist, E.

(2015). Dynamics of global forest area: Results from the FAO Global Forest

Resources Assessment 2015. Forest Ecology and Management, 352, 9-20.

Khan, A. (2003). NASSD Background Paper: rangelands and livestock. IUCN Pakistan,

Northern Areas Programme, Gilgit, 47.

Khan, F. M. (2009). Ethno-veterinary medicinal usage of flora of Greater Cholistan desert

(Pakistan). Pakistan Veterinary Journal, 29(2).

Khan, I., & Razzaq, I. M. (2007). Ethnobotanical studies of some medicinal and aromatic

plants at higher altitudes of Pakistan. Am Eurasian J Agric Environ Sci, 2,

470-473.

310

Khan, K, Shah, M, Ahmad, H, Khan, SM, Rahman, I. U., Iqbal, Z, & Aldubise, A. (2017).

Exploration and local Utilization of Medicinal Vegetation Naturally Grown in

the Deusai plateau of Gilgit, Pakistan. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs (online).

Khan, K. U., Shah, M., Ahmad, H., Khan, S. M., Rahman, I. U., Iqbal, Z., . . . Hashem, A.

(2018). Exploration and local utilization of medicinal vegetation naturally

grown in the Deusai plateau of Gilgit, Pakistan. Saudi journal of biological

sciences, 25(2), 326-331.

Khan, M., Khan, S. M., Ilyas, M., Alqarawi, A. A., Ahmad, Z., & Abd_Allah, E. F. (2017).

Plant species and communities assessment in interaction with edaphic and

topographic factors; an ecological study of the mount Eelum District Swat,

Pakistan. Saudi journal of biological sciences, 24(4), 778-786.

Khan, M.A.M., Khan, A., Hussain, M., & Mujtaba, G. (2014). Plant diversity and

conservation status of Himalayan Region Poonch Valley Azad Kashmir

(Pakistan) Pakistan. Journal of Pharmaceutical Science 127: 1215-1239.

Khan, S. M. (2012). Plant communities and vegetation ecosystem services in the Naran

Valley, Western Himalaya. University of Leicester.

Khan, S. M., Ahmad, H., Ramzan, M., & Jan, M. M. (2007). Ethnomedicinal plant resources

of Shawar Valley. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences, 10(10), 1743-

1746.

Khan, S. M., Harper, D., Page, S., & Ahmad, H. (2011). Species and community diversity of

vascular flora along environmental gradient in Naran Valley: A multivariate

approach through indicator species analysis. Pak. J. Bot, 43(5), 2337-2346.

311

Khan, S. M., Harper, D., Page, S., & Ahmad, H. (2011a). Residual value analyses of the

medicinal flora of the Western Himalayas: the Naran Valley, Pakistan.

Pakistan Journal of Botany, 43(SI), 97-104.

Khan, S. M., Harper, D., Page, S., & Ahmad, H. (2011b). Species and community diversity

of vascular flora along environmental gradient in Naran Valley: A

multivariate approach through indicator species analysis. Pak. J. Bot, 43(5),

2337-2346.

Khan, S. M., Page, S. E., Ahmad, H., & Harper, D. M. (2013). Sustainable utilization and

conservation of plant biodiversity in montane ecosystems: the western

Himalayas as a case study. Annals of botany, 112(3), 479-501.

Khan, S. M., Page, S., Ahmad, H., & Harper, D. (2013). Identifying plant species and

communities across environmental gradients in the Western Himalayas:

Method development and conservation use. Ecological informatics, 14, 99-

103.

Khan, S. M., Page, S., Ahmad, H., Shaheen, H., & Harper, D. (2012). Vegetation dynamics

in the Western Himalayas, diversity indices and climate change. Sci., Tech.

and Dev, 31(3), 232-243.

Khan, S. M., Page, S., Ahmad, H., Shaheen, H., Ullah, Z., Ahmad, M., & Harper, D. M.

(2013). Medicinal flora and ethnoecological knowledge in the Naran Valley,

Western Himalaya, Pakistan. Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine,

9(1), 4.

312

Khan, S. M., Page, S., Ahmad, H., Ullah, Z., Shaheen, H., Ahmad, M., & Harper, D. (2013).

Phyto-climatic gradient of vegetation and habitat specificity in the high

elevation Western Himalayas. Pak. J. Bot, 45, 223-230.

Khan, S. W., & Khatoon, S. (2007). Ethnobotanical studies on useful trees and shrubs of

Haramosh and Bugrote valleys in Gilgit northern areas of Pakistan. Pak J Bot,

39(3), 699-710.

Khan, S. W., & Khatoon, S. (2008). Ethnobotanical studies on some useful herbs of

Haramosh and Bugrote valleys in Gilgit, northern areas of Pakistan. Pakistan

Journal of Botany, 40(1), 43.

Khan, S. W., Khatoon, S., Abbas, Q., Raza, G., & Hussain, A. (2016). Inventory of the

Alpine Flora of Haramosh and Bagrote Valleys (Karakoram Range) District

Gilgit, Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot, 48(4), 1559-1572.

Khan, S.M., Page, S., Ahmad, H. & Harper, D.M. ( 2014). Ethnoecological importance of

plant biodiversity in mountain ecosystems with special emphasis on indicator

species; a case study of the Naran Valley in the Northern Pakistan. J. Eco.

Ind., 37(Part A): 175-185.

Khan, Z., Khuroo, A., & Dar, G. (2004). Ethnomedicinal survey of Uri, Kashmir Himalaya.

Kharkwal, G. (2009). Qualitative analysis of tree species in evergreen forests of Kumaun

Himalaya, Uttarakhand, India. African Journal of Plant Science, 3(3), 049-

052.

Kharkwal, G., Mehrotra, P., Rawat, Y., & Pangtey, Y. (2005). Phytodiversity and growth

form in relation to altitudinal gradient in the Central Himalayan (Kumaun)

region of India. Current Science, 873-878.

313

Khattak, M. S., Babel, M., & Sharif, M. (2011). Hydro-meteorological trends in the upper

Indus River basin in Pakistan. Climate research, 46(2), 103-119.

Khuroo, A. A., Malik, A. H., Dar, A., Dar, G., & Khan, Z. (2007). Ethno-veterinary

medicinal uses of some plant species by the Gujar tribe of the Kashmir

Himalaya. Asian Journal of Plant Science, 6(1), 148-152.

Klimes, L. (2003). Life-forms and clonality of vascular plants along an altitudinal gradient in

E Ladakh (NW Himalayas). Basic and Applied Ecology, 4(4), 317-328.

Klimeš, L., & Doležal, J. (2010). An experimental assessment of the upper elevational limit

of flowering plants in the western Himalayas. Ecography, 33(3), 590-596.

Körner, C. (1999). Global Change at High Elevation; In Alpine Plants Life : Functional

Plant Ecology of High Mountain Ecosystem, Springer – Verlag, Berlin, P 298.

Korner, C. (2003). Alpine Plant Life In: Functional Plant Ecology of High Mountain

Ecosystems, 2ndedn. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.

Korner, C. (2003a). Alpine plant life: functional plant ecology of high mountain ecosystems;

with 47 tables: Springer Science & Business Media.

Korner, C. (2003a). Ecological impacts of atmospheric CO2 enrichment on terrestrial

ecosystems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A:

Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 361(1810), 2023-2041.

Korner, C. (2003b). Ecological impacts of atmospheric CO2 enrichment on terrestrial

ecosystems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A:

Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 361(1810), 2023-2041.

Korner, C. (2003b). Global change at high elevation Alpine Plant Life (pp. 291-298):

Springer.

314

Korner, C. (2006). Significance of temperature in plant life. Plant growth and climate

change, 48-69.

Korner, C. and Ohsawa, M. (2005) Mountain systems. Chapter 24 In Hassan et al. (eds.)

Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Current State and Trends, Volume 1,

Island Press, Washington DC: pp 681-716

Korner, C., Paulsen, J., & Spehn, E. M. (2011). A definition of mountains and their

bioclimatic belts for global comparisons of biodiversity data. Alpine Botany,

121(2), 73.

Krauchi, N., Brang, P., & Schönenberger, W. (2000). Forests of mountainous regions: gaps

in knowledge and research needs. Forest Ecology and Management, 132(1),

73-82.

Kremen, C. (2005). Managing ecosystem services: what do we need to know about their

ecology? Ecology letters, 8(5), 468-479.

Kumar, G. P., Kumar, R., & Chaurasia, O. (2011). Conservation status of medicinal plants in

Laclakh: cold arid zone of Trans-Himalayas. Res. J. Med. Plants, 5, 685-694.

Kumar, R., & Shahabuddin, G. (2005). Effects of biomass extraction on vegetation structure,

diversity and composition of forests in Sariska Tiger Reserve, India.

Environmental Conservation, 32(3), 248-259.

Kumar, S. & Sharma, S. (2014). Diversity, disturbance and regeneration status of forests

along an altitudinal gradient in Paddar Valley, Northwest Himalayas. Indian

Forester, 140(4):348-353.

Kumar, S., & Kumar, M. (2015). Fuelwood Consumption in Takoli Gad Watershed of

TehriGarhwal in Garhwal Himalaya. India. Forest Res, 4(138), 2.

315

Kumar, S., & Sharma, S. (2014). Diversity, disturbance and regeneration status of forests

along an altitudinal gradient in Paddar Valley, Northwest Himalayas. Indian

Forester, 140(4), 348-353.

Kuniyal, J. C. (2003). Regional imbalances and sustainable crop farming in the Uttaranchal

Himalaya, India. Ecological economics, 46(3), 419-435.

Kunwar, R.M, & Sharma, S.P. (2004). Quantitative analysis of tree species in two

community forests of Dolpa district, mid–west Nepal. Himalayan Journal of

Sciences, 2(3): 23–28.

Lal, R. (2004). Soil carbon sequestration to mitigate climate change. Geoderma, 123(1-2), 1-

22.

Le Roux, P. C., & McGeoch, M. A. (2008). Changes in climate extremes, variability and

signature on sub-Antarctic Marion Island. Climatic change, 86(3-4), 309-329.

Legros, J. (1992). Soils of Alpine mountains Developments in Earth Surface Processes (Vol.

2, pp. 155-181): Elsevier.

Lindroos, O. (2011). Residential use of firewood in Northern Sweden and its influence on

forest biomass resources. Biomass and Bioenergy, 35(1), 385-390.

Liu, Q.-J. (1997). Structure and dynamics of the sub-alpine coniferous forest on Changbai

mountain, China. Plant Ecology, 132(1), 97-105.

Liu, X., & Chen, B. (2000). Climatic warming in the Tibetan Plateau during recent decades.

International journal of climatology, 20(14), 1729-1742.

Mahat, T. B. S., Griffin, D. M., & Shepherd, K. (1986). Human impact on some forests of the

middle hills of Nepal 1. Forestry in the context of the traditional resources of

the state. Mountain Research and Development, 223-232.

316

Mahmood, A., Mahmood, A., & Malik, R. N. (2012). Indigenous knowledge of medicinal

plants from Leepa valley, Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan. Journal of

ethnopharmacology, 143(1), 338-346.

Mahmood, A., Malik, R. N., Shinwari, Z. K., & Mahmood, A. (2011). Ethnobotanical survey

of plants from Neelum, Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan. Pak J Bot,

43(105), 10.

Malik, N. Z., Arshad, M., & Mirza, S. N. (2007). Phytosociological attributes of different

plant communities of Pir Chinasi hills of Azad Jammu and Kashmir.

International journal of agriculture & biology, 9(4), 569-574.

Malik, N., & Malik, Z. (2004). Present status of subtropical chir pine vegetation of Kotli

Hills, Azad Jammu and Kashmir. J. Res. Sci, 15(1), 85-90.

Malik, Z. (2005). Comparative study of the vegetation of Ganga Chotti and Bedori Hill Dist.

Bagh Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Ph. D. thesis University of Peshawar.

Peshawar.

Malik, Z. (2014). Phytosociological behavoiur, anthropogenic disturbances and regeneration

status along an altitudinal gradient in Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary (KWLS)

and its adjoining areas. HNB Garhwal University, Uttarakhand,

Uttarakhand, India.

Malik, Z. A., & Bhatt, A. (2015). Phytosociological analysis of woody species in Kedarnath

Wildlife Sanctuary and its adjoining areas in Western Himalaya, India.

Journal of Forest and Environmental Science, 31(3), 149-163.

317

Malik, Z. A., & Bhatt, A. (2016). Regeneration status of tree species and survival of their

seedlings in Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary and its adjoining areas in Western

Himalaya, India. Trop. Ecol, 57(4), 677-690.

Malik, Z. A., & Nautiyal, M. C. (2016). Species richness and diversity along the altitudinal

gradient in Tungnath, the Himalayan benchmark site of HIMADRI. Tropical

Plant Research, 3(2), 396-407.

Malik, Z., Hussain, F., & Malik, N. (2007). Life form and leaf size spectra of plant

communities Harbouring Ganga Chotti and Bedori Hills during 1999-2000.

Int. J. Agric. Biol, 9(6), 833-838.

Mancinelli, A. L. (1984). Photoregulation of anthocyanin synthesis: VIII. Effect of light

pretreatments. Plant Physiology, 75(2), 447-453.

Mats, E., Xu, J., Arun Bhakta, S., Ramesh Ananda, V., Santosh, N., & Klas, S. (2009). The

Changing Himalayas Impact of Climate Change on Water Resources and

Livelihoods in the Greater Himalayas: International Centre for Integrated

Mountain Development (ICIMOD).

Maurizi, A., De Michele, A., Ranfa, A., Ricci, A., Roscini, V., Coli, R., . . . Burini, G.

(2015). Bioactive compounds and antioxidant characterization of three edible

wild plants traditionally consumed in the Umbria Region (Central Italy):

Bunias erucago L.(corn rocket), Lactuca perennis L.(mountain lettuce) and

Papaver rhoeas L.(poppy). Journal of Applied Botany and Food Quality,

88(1).

318

Mayer, R., Kaufmann, R., Vorhauser, K., & Erschbamer, B. (2009). Effects of grazing

exclusion on species composition in high-altitude grasslands of the Central

Alps. Basic and Applied Ecology, 10(5), 447-455.

Menhinick, E. F. (1964). A comparison of some species‐individuals diversity indices applied

to samples of field insects. Ecology, 45(4), 859-861.

Messerli, B., & Ives, J. D. (1997). Mountains of the world: a global priority. New York:

Parthenon. (E)

Mijitaba, M., & Jing, F. (2013). Fuelwood consumption in Niger: A review. International

Journal of Research Studies in Management, 2(2), 67-76.

Mishra R. (1968). Ecology work book. Calcutta, New Delhi: Oxford and IBH Publishing

Company.

Mir, N. A., Masood, T., Sofi, P., Husain, M., & Rather, T. (2017). Life form spectrum of

vegetation in Betula dominant tree stands along the available altitudinal

gradient in north western Himalayas of Kashmir. Journal of Pharmacognosy

and Phytochemistry, 6(4), 267-272.

Mir, S.A. , Anand, K. Mishra., Pala, S.A., Zafar, A., Reshi, X, Sharma, M.P. (2015). Ferns

and Fern allies of District Shopian, Kashmir Valley, India. BIODIVERSITAS,

16 (28 1), 27-43,

Mirza, U. K., Ahmad, N., & Majeed, T. (2008). An overview of biomass energy utilization in

Pakistan. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 12(7), 1988-1996.

Mishra, B., Tripathi, O., Tripathi, R., & Pandey, H. (2004). Effects of anthropogenic

disturbance on plant diversity and community structure of a sacred grove in

Meghalaya, northeast India. Biodiversity & Conservation, 13(2), 421-436.

319

Mitchell, R. D. (1979). analysis of Indian agro-ecosystems.

Modi, M., Modi, A., & Hendriks, S. (2006). Potential role for wild vegetables in household

food security: a preliminary case study in Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa.

African Journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition and Development, 6(1), 1-13.

Mondoni, A., Pedrini, S., Bernareggi, G., Rossi, G., Abeli, T., Probert, R. J., . . . Orsenigo, S.

(2015). Climate warming could increase recruitment success in glacier

foreland plants. Annals of Botany, 116(6), 907-916.

Mooney, H. A., Cropper, A., & Reid, W. (2004). The millennium ecosystem assessment:

what is it all about? Trends in ecology & evolution, 19(5), 221-224.

Muhammad, H., Khan, S., & Khan, A. (2013). Wood as a fuel source in the Hindukush: a

case study of Utror and Gabral valleys, northren Pakistan. Pakhtunkhwa

Journal of Life Science, 1(2), 94-99.

Muhammad, Z. I., Shah, S., & Shafiq, M. (2008). Ecological surveys of certain plant

communities around urban areas of Karachi. Journal of Applied Sciences and

Environmental Management, 12(2).

Mueller-Dombois, D., & Ellenberg, H. (1974). Aims and methods of vegetation ecology.

Munsi, M., Malaviya, S., Oinam, G., & Joshi, P. (2010). A landscape approach for

quantifying land-use and land-cover change (1976–2006) in middle Himalaya.

Regional Environmental Change, 10(2), 145-155.

Muslim, C. M., & Sikander, S. (2010). Ethnobotany of Medicinal Plants of Leepa Valley

(Azad Kashmir). Pakistan Journal of Forestry, 60, 2.

320

Nadeem, A., Nisar, A. S., Hassnain, S., Shari, M., & Sajida, T. (2017). Economics of

Vegetable Production in Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan. Journal of

Sustainable Development, 4(1), 8-16.

Naithani, A., Bhatt, A. K., & Sundriyal, Y. (2007). Landslide hazard zonation mapping: A

case study for the hydropower project in a Part of Garhwal Himalaya,

Uttaranchal, India. Jour. Himalayan Geol, 28(1), 63-73.

Nasir, Y. (1991). Threatened plants of Pakistan. Plant Life of South Asia, 229-234.

Nasir, E., & Ali, S.I. (Eds.). (1980-1989). Flora of Pakistan. No. 132-190. Islamabad,

Karachi.

Nautiyal, B., Pandey, N., & Bhatt, A. (1997). Analysis of vegetation pattern in an alpine zone

in North West Himalaya: a case study of Garhwal Himalaya with reference to

diversity and distribution patterns. Int J Ecol Environ Sci, 23(1), 49-65.

Nautiyal, B., Prakash, V., Bahuguna, R., Maithani, U., Bisht, H., & Nautiyal, M. (2002).

Population study for monitoring the status of rarity of three Aconite species in

Garhwal Himalaya. Tropical Ecology, 43(2), 297-303.

Nautiyal, M., Nautiyal, B., & Prakash, V. (2001). Phenology and growth form distribution in

an alpine pasture at Tungnath, Garhwal, Himalaya. Mountain Research and

Development, 21(2), 168-174.

Nautiyal, M., Nautiyal, B., & Prakash, V. (2004). Effect of grazing and climatic changes on

alpine vegetation of Tungnath, Garhwal Himalaya, India. Environmentalist,

24(2), 125-134.

321

Nautiyal, S., Maikhuri, R., Rao, K., & Saxena, K. (2001). Medicinal plant resources in Nanda

Devi Biosphere Reserve in the central Himalayas. Journal of herbs, spices &

medicinal plants, 8(4), 47-64.

Nazir, A., Malik, R. N., & Ajaib, M. (2012). Phytosociological Studies of the vegetation of

Sarsawa Hills District Kotli, Azad Jammu & Kashmir. Biologia (Pakistan),

58(1&2), 123-133.

Negi, A., & Todaria, N. (1993). Studies on the impact of local folk on forests of Garhwal

Himalaya. 1: Energy from biomass. Biomass and Bioenergy, 4(6), 447-454.

Negi, C.H. 2006. Morales (Morchella spp) in Kumaun Himalaya. Natural Product Radiance,

5 (3): 306-310.

Negi, G., Rawal, R., Sharma, S., Kumar, K., & Dhyani, P. (2014). Meeting Report: Need for

strengthening mountain-specific research. Current science, 106(5), 659-661.

Negi, G., Rikhari, H., & Singh, S. (1992). Phenological features in relation to growth forms

and biomass accumulation in an alpine meadow of the Central Himalaya.

Vegetatio, 101(2), 161-170.

Negi, S. P. (2009). Forest cover in Indian Himalayan states-An overview. Indian Journal of

Forestry, 32(1), 1-5.

Negi, S.S. (1995). Cold deserts of India. Indus Publishing Company, New Delhi.

Negi, V.S., Maikhuri, R.K., Rawat, L.S. (2011). Non-timber forest products (NTFPs): a

viable option for biodiversity conservation and livelihood enhancement in

central Himalaya. Biodiversity and Conservation, 20:545–559.

Nogués-Bravo, D., Araújo, M., Romdal, T., & Rahbek, C. (2008). Scale effects and human

impact on the elevational species richness gradients. Nature, 453(7192), 216.

322

Noor, A., & Khatoon, S. (2013). Analysis of vegetation pattern and soil characteristics of

Astore valley Gilgit-Baltistan. Pak. J. Bot, 45(5), 1663-1667.

Noroozi, J., Akhani, H., & Breckle, S.-W. (2008). Biodiversity and phytogeography of the

alpine flora of Iran. Biodiversity and Conservation, 17(3), 493-521.

Nyborg, I. (2002). Yours today, mine tomorrow?: a study of women and men’s negotiations

over resources in Baltistan, Pakistan: Agricultural University of Norway.

Olsen, C.S & Larsen, H. O. (2003). Alpine medicinal plant trade and mountain livelihood

strategies. Geog. J., 169 (3), 243– 254.

Organization, W. H. (2002a). Traditional medicine-growing needs and potential. WHO

policy perspectives on medicine, No. 2. WHO, Genève.

Organization, W. H. (2002b). The world health report 2002: reducing risks, promoting

healthy life: World Health Organization.

Oswalt, S. N., Brandeis, T. J., & Dimick, B. P. (2006). Phytosociology of Vascular Plants on

an International Biosphere Reserve: Virgin Islands National Park, St. John,

US Virgin Islands. Caribbean Journal of Science, Vol. 42, No. 1, 53-66.

Pak-Met, (2017). The Normals of climatic data of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Islamabad,

Pakistan.Pakistan Meteorological Deptortment Islamabad.

Pande, P., Negi, J., & Sharma, S. (2002). Plant species diversity, composition, gradient

analysis and regeneration behaviour of some tree species in a moist temperate

western Himalayan forest ecosystem. Indian Forester, 128(8), 869-886.

Pandey, N., Nautiyal, B., & Bhatt, A. (2000). Studies on vegetation analysis, plant form and

biological spectrum of an alpine zone of north-west Himalaya. Tropical

Ecology, 40, 163-166.

323

Pandey, S., & Shukla, R. (2003). Plant diversity in managed sal (Shorea robusta Gaertn.)

forests of Gorakhpur, India: species composition, regeneration and

conservation. Biodiversity & Conservation, 12 (11), 2295-2319.

Pant, S., & Samant, S. (2012). Diversity and regeneration status of tree species in Khokhan

Wildlife Sanctuary, north-western Himalaya. Tropical ecology, 53(3), 317-

331.

Panthi, M. P., Chaudhary, R. P., & Vetaas, O. R. (2007). Plant species richness and

composition in a trans-Himalayan inner valley of Manang district, central

Nepal. Himalayan Journal of Sciences, 4(6), 57-64.

Part, B. (2014). Climate Change 2014 Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability.

Pauli, H., Gottfried, M., Reiter, K., Klettner, C., & Grabherr, G. (2007). Signals of range

expansions and contractions of vascular plants in the high Alps: observations

(1994–2004) at the GLORIA* master site Schrankogel, Tyrol, Austria. Global

change biology, 13(1), 147-156.

Pederson, G. T., Betancourt, J. L., & McCabe, G. J. (2013). Regional patterns and proximal

causes of the recent snowpack decline in the Rocky Mountains, US. Geophys.

Research. Letters., 40:1811–1816.

Peer, T., Gruber, J. P., Millinger, A., & Hussain, F. (2007). Phytosociology, structure and

diversity of the steppe vegetation in the mountains of Northern Pakistan.

Phytocoenologia, 37(1), 1-65.

Perveen, A., & Hussain, M. I. (2007). Plant biodiversity and phytosociological attributes of

Gorakh Hill (Khirthar Range). Pak. J. Bot, 39(3), 691-698.

324

Pichi-Sermolli, R. E. (1948). An index for establishing the degree of maturity in plant

communities. Journal of Ecology, 36(1), 85-90.

Pielou, E. C. (1975). Ecological diversity.John Wiley & Sons, New York, 165 pp.

Pilz, D., & Molina, R. (1996). Managing forest ecosystems to conserve fungus diversity and

sustain wild mushroom harvests. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-371. Portland,

OR: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest

Research Station. 104 p, 371.

Pitman, N. C., & Jørgensen, P. M. (2002). Estimating the size of the world's threatened flora.

Science, 298(5595), 989-989.

Poulenard, J., Podwojewski, P., & Herbillon, A. J. (2003). Characteristics of non-allophanic

Andisols with hydric properties from the Ecuadorian páramos. Geoderma,

117(3-4), 267-281.

Pujol, J. L. P., Zhang, F., & Song, G. (2006). Plant biodiversity in China: Richly varied,

endangered, and in need of conservation. Biodiversity and Conservation, 15:

3983–4026.

Putman, R. J. (1994). Community Ecology. Chapman and Hall, London.

Qadir, M. A. (1994). Revised Management Plan for the Forests of

(1994-2003). Forest Department, Government of Azad Jammu and Kashmir,

Muzaffarabad.

Qamar, Z. & Minhas, R.A. (2006). Important medicinl plants and their indigenous

knowledge in Machiara National Park.PMP-PAMP-Machiara Muzaffarabad,

AJK (in ), 61 pp.

325

Qamer, F. M., Shehzad, K., Abbas, S., Murthy, M., Xi, C., Gilani, H., & Bajracharya, B.

(2016). Mapping deforestation and forest degradation patterns in western

Himalaya, Pakistan. Remote Sensing, 8(5), 385.

Qazi, Z.A. (2005). Socio-economic Baseline of the Communities around Machiara National

Park. Protected Areas Management Project (PAMP). Department of Wildlife

& Fisheries, Muzaffarabad.

Ram, J., Kumar, A., & Bhatt, J. (2004). Plant diversity in six forest types of Uttaranchal,

Central Himalaya, India. Current Science, 975-978.

Ranfa, A., Maurizi, A., Romano, B., & Bodesmo, M. (2014). The importance of traditional

uses and nutraceutical aspects of some edible wild plants in human nutrition:

the case of Umbria (central Italy). Plant Biosystems-An International Journal

Dealing with all Aspects of Plant Biology, 148(2), 297-306.

Rasul, G. (2010). The role of the Himalayan mountain systems in food security and

agricultural sustainability in South Asia. International Journal of Rural

Management, 6(1), 95-116.

Rau, M. A. (1975). High altitude flowering plants of West Himalaya. Howrah: Botanic

Survey of India x, 234p.-Illus., keys.. Icones. Geog, 6.

Raunkiaer, C. (1934). The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography; being the

collected papers of C. Raunkiaer. The life forms of plants and statistical plant

geography; being the collected papers of C. Raunkiaer.

Raunkier, C. (1956). The Life Form of Plants and Statistical Plant Geography. Oxford,

United Kingdom: Clarendon.

326

Rawat, G. (2007). Pastoral practices, wild mammals and conservation status of alpine

meadows in Western Himalaya. JOURNAL-BOMBAY NATURAL HISTORY

SOCIETY, 104(1), 5.

Rawat, G. S., & Adhikari, B. S. (2005a). 14 Millennia of Grazing History in Eastern Ladakh,

India, Reflected in Rangeland Vegetation.

Rawat, G. S., & Adhikari, B. S. (2005b). Floristics and distribution of plant communities

across moisture and topographic gradients in Tso Kar basin, Changthang

plateau, eastern Ladakh. Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine Research, 37(4), 539-

544.

Rawat, G. S., & Uniyal, V. K. (1993). Pastoralism and plant conservation: The Valley of

Flowers dilemma. Environmental Conservation, 20(2), 164-167.

Rawat, R. (2001). Phytosociological studies of woody vegetation along an altitudinal

gradient in a montane forest of Garhwal Himalaya. Indian Journal of

Forestry, 24(4), 419-426.

Rawat, V. S., & Chandra, J. (2014). Vegetational diversity analysis across different habitats

in Garhwal Himalaya. Journal of Botany, 2014.

Rawat, V. S., Rawat, Y., & Ram, J. (2010). Vegetational diversity along an altitudinal range

in Garhwal Himalaya. International Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation,

2(1), 014-018.

Raymond, C.M., Bryan, B. A., Mac Donald, D. H., Cast, A., Strathearn, S., Grandgirardand,

A., Kalivas, T. (2009). Mapping community values for natural capital and

ecosystem services. Ecological economics, 68 (5): 1301-1315.

327

Rehman, A., Jingdong, L., Chandio, A. A., & Hussain, I. (2017). Livestock production and

population census in Pakistan: Determining their relationship with agricultural

GDP using econometric analysis. Information Processing in Agriculture, 4(2),

168-177.

Rehman, H. (2004). Baseline Study. Azad Jammu & Kashmir Community Development

Programme (AJKCDP)/Socio-Engineering Consultants (SEC), House No.4-B,

street 48,nF-7/4, Islamabad, Pakistan.

Rehman, M., & Ghafoor, S. (2000). The natural resources and human ecology of Mount

Elum District Swat. Consultancy Report. Pakistan: World Wildlife Fund

Peshawar (WWF-P).

Rey Benayas, J.M. & Scheiner, S.M. (2002). Plant diversity, biogeography and environment

in Iberia: Patterns and possible causal factors. J. Veg. Sci. 13: 24

Rieley, J. O., & Page, S. E. (1990). Ecology of plant communities. A phytosociological

account of the British vegetation: Longman Scientific and Technical.

Rikhari, H., Negi, G., Pant, G., Rana, B., & Singh, S. (1992). Phytomass and primary

productivity in several communities of a central Himalayan alpine meadow,

India. Arctic and Alpine Research, 24(4), 344-351.

Roder, W., Gratzer, G., & Wangdi, K. (2002). Cattle grazing in the conifer forests of Bhutan.

Mountain Research and Development, 22(4), 368-374.

Rodolfo E. Pichi-Sermolli . (1948). An Index for Establishing the Degree of Maturity in

Plant Communities Journal of Ecology, Vol. 36, No. 1 (Jul., 1948), pp. 85-90.

328

Root, T. L., Price, J. T., Hall, K. R., Schneider, S. H., Rosenzweig, C., & Pounds, J. A.

(2003). Fingerprints of global warming on wild animals and plants. Nature,

421(6918), 57.

Saberwal, V. K. (1996). Pastoral politics: Gaddi grazing, degradation, and biodiversity

conservation in Himachal Pradesh, India. Conservation Biology, 10(3), 741-

749.

Sala, O. E., Chapin, F. S., Armesto, J. J., Berlow, E., Bloomfield, J., Dirzo, R., . . . Kinzig, A.

(2000). Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. science, 287(5459),

1770-1774.

Salick, J., Ghimire, S. K., Fang, Z., Dema, S., & Konchar, K. M. (2014). Himalayan alpine

vegetation, climate change and mitigation. Journal of Ethnobiology, 34(3),

276-293.

Samant, Pant, S., Singh, M., Lal, M., Singh, A., Sharma, A., & Bhandari, S. (2007).

Medicinal plants in Himachal Pradesh, north western Himalaya, India. The

International Journal of Biodiversity Science and Management, 3(4), 234-

251.

Samant, S. (1996). Conservation of rare endangered plants: The context of Nanda Devi

Biosphere Reserve. Conservation and management of biological resources in

Himalaya.

Saxena, A., & Singh, J. (1982). A phytosociological analysis of woody species in forest

communities of a part of Kumaun Himalaya. Vegetation, 50(1), 3-22.

329

Saxena, A., & Singh, J. (1984). Tree population structure of certain Himalayan forest

associations and implications concerning their future composition. Vegetatio,

58(2), 61-69.

Saxena, K., Maikhuri, R., & Rao, K. (2005). Changes in agricultural biodiversity:

Implications for sustainable livelihood in the Himalaya. Journal of Mountain

Science, 2(1), 23.

Saxena, K., Rao, K., Sen, K., Maikhuri, R., & Semwal, R. (2002). Integrated natural resource

management: approaches and lessons from the Himalaya. Conservation

Ecology, 5(2).

Sayers, J. (2001). The world health report 2001-Mental health: new understanding, new

hope. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 79, 1085-1085.

Scherrer, D., & Körner, C. (2011). Topographically controlled thermal‐habitat differentiation

buffers alpine plant diversity against climate warming. Journal of

biogeography, 38(2), 406-416.

Scherrer, D., Schmid, S., & Körner, C. (2011). Elevational species shifts in a warmer climate

are overestimated when based on weather station data. International Journal

of Biometeorology, 55(4), 645-654.

Scherrer, P., & Pickering, C. M. (2006). Recovery of alpine herbfield on a closed walking

track in the Kosciuszko Alpine Zone, Australia. Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine

Research, 38(2), 239-248.

Schickhoff, U. (2005). The upper timberline in the Himalayas, Hindu Kush and Karakorum:

a review of geographical and ecological aspects Mountain ecosystems (pp.

275-354): Springer.

330

Schickhoff, U., Bobrowski, M., Böhner, J., Bürzle, B., Chaudhary, R., Gerlitz, L., . . .

Scholten, T. (2015). Do Himalayan treelines respond to recent climate

change? An evaluation of sensitivity indicators. Earth System Dynamics, 6(1).

Schild, A. (2008). ICIMOD's Position on Climate Change and Mountain Systems: The Case

of the Hindu Kush–Himalayas. Mountain Research and Development, 28(3),

328-331.

Schild, A. (2016). The Himalayas as the Providers of Essential Ecosystem Services—

Opportunities and Challenges Globalization and Marginalization in Mountain

Regions (pp. 111-119): Springer.

Schild, A., & Sharma, E. (2011). Sustainable mountain development revisited. Mountain

Research and Development, 31(3), 237-241.

Schild, A. (2011). The Himalayas as the providers of essential ecosystem services,

opportunites and challenges. Paper delivered at the IGU Commision Conference, 1-9

May 2011, Naintal, India.

Schippmann, U., Leaman, D. J., & Cunningham, A. (2002). Impact of cultivation and

gathering of medicinal plants on biodiversity: global trends and issues.

Biodiversity and the ecosystem approach in agriculture, forestry and fisheries.

Schneider, S. H. (1989). The greenhouse effect: science and policy. Science, 243(4892), 771-

781.

Schulze, E.D., Beck, E. & Müller-Hohenstain, K. (2005). Plant Ecology. Springer, Berlin-

Heidelberg, 702 pp.

331

Schuster, B., & Diekmann, M. (2005). Species richness and environmental correlates in

deciduous forests of Northwest Germany. Forest Ecology and Management,

206 (1-3): 197-205.

Semwal, R., Tewari, A., Negi, G., Thadani, R., & Phartiyal, P. (2007). Valuation of

ecosystem services and forest governance: a scoping study from Uttarakhand.

LEAD India, New Delhi Google Scholar.

Seppelt, R., Dormann, C. F., Eppink, F. V., Lautenbach, S., & Schmidt, S. (2011). A

quantitative review of ecosystem service studies: approaches, shortcomings

and the road ahead. Journal of applied Ecology, 48(3), 630-636.

Shabbir, R., & Jabeen, A. Contribution to the red list of plants of Pakistan: A Review.

Shahbaz, B., Ali, T., & Suleri, A. Q. (2007). A critical analysis of forest policies of Pakistan:

implications for sustainable livelihoods. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies

for Global Change, 12(4), 441-453.

Shaheen, H., & Shinwari, Z. K. (2012). Phyto diversity and endemic richness of Karambar

lake vegetation from Chitral, Hindukush-Himalayas. Pak. J. Bot, 44(1), 17-21.

Shaheen, H., Awan, S. N., & Aziz, S. (2017). Distribution Pattern, Conservation Status, and

Associated Flora of the Genus Juniperus in Sub-alpine Pastures of the

Kashmir Himalayas. Mountain Research and Development, 37(4), 487-493.

Shaheen, H., Aziz, S., & Dar, M. E. U. I. (2017). Ecosystem services and structure of western

Himalayan temperate forests stands in Neelum valley, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot,

49(2), 707-714.

Shaheen, H., Khan, S. M., Harper, D. M., Ullah, Z., & Allem Qureshi, R. (2011). Species

diversity, community structure, and distribution patterns in western

332

Himalayan alpine pastures of Kashmir, Pakistan. Mountain Research and

Development, 31(2), 153-159.

Shaheen, H., Qureshi, R. A., & Shinwari, Z. K. (2011). Structural diversity, vegetation

dynamics and anthropogenic impact on lesser Himalayan subtropical forests

of Bagh district, Kashmir. Pak. J. Bot, 43(4), 1861-1866.

Shaheen, H., Ullah, Z., Khan, S. M., & Harper, D. M. (2012). Species composition and

community structure of western Himalayan moist temperate forests in

Kashmir. Forest Ecology and Management, 278, 138-145.

Shameem, S., & Kangroo, I. N. (2011). Comparative assessment of edaphic features and

phytodiversity in lower Dachigam National Park, Kashmir Himalaya, India.

African Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 5(11), 972-984.

Shannon, C. E. (1949). The Mathematical Theory of Communication. By CE Shannon and

Warren Weaver: Urbana.

Sharma, C., Ghildiyal, S., Gairola, S., & Suyal, S. (2009). Vegetation structure, composition

and diversity in relation to the soil characteristics of temperate mixed broad-

leaved forest along an altitudinal gradient in Garhwal Himalaya. Indian

Journal of Science and Technology, 2(7), 39-45.

Sharma, C., Mishra, A. K., Prakash, O., Dimri, S., & Baluni, P. (2014). Assessment of forest

structure and woody plant regeneration on ridge tops at upper Bhagirathi basin

in Garhwal Himalaya. Tropical Plant Research, 1(3), 62-71.

Sharma, E., Chettri, N., & Oli, K. P. (2010). Mountain biodiversity conservation and

management: a paradigm shift in policies and practices in the Hindu Kush-

Himalayas. Ecological Research, 25(5), 909-923.

333

Sharma, I., Kanta, C., Semwal, S., & Goswami, N. (2017). Wild Fruits of Uttarakhand

(India): Ethnobotanical and Medicinal Uses. Int J Complement Alt Med, 8(3),

00260.

Sharma, J., Gairola, S., Sharma, Y. P., & Gaur, R. (2014). Ethnomedicinal plants used to

treat skin diseases by Tharu community of district Udham Singh Nagar,

Uttarakhand, India. Journal of ethnopharmacology, 158, 140-206.

Sharma, N., & Raina, A. K. (2013). Composition, structure and diversity of tree species

along an elevational gradient in Jammu province of north-western Himalayas,

Jammu and Kashmir, India. Journal of Biodiversity and Environmental

Sciences, 3(10), 12-23.

Sharma, P., & Samant, S. (2014). Assessment of fuel resource diversity and utilization

pattern in Nargu Wildlife Sanctuary of Himachal Pradesh, NW Himalaya.

International Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation, 6(1), 17-27.

Sher, H., & Hussain, F. (2009). Ethnobotanical evaluation of some plant resources in

Northern part of Pakistan. African journal of Biotechnology, 8(17).

Sher, H., Ali, H., & Rehman, S. (2012). Identification and conservation of important plants

areas (IPAS) for the distribution of medicinal aromatic and economic plants in

the Hindukush and Himalayan mountain range. Pak. J. Bot, 44, 187-194.

Sher, Z., & Khan, Z. (2007). Floristic composition, life form and Leaf size class of the

vegetation of Chagharzai Valley, District Buner. Pakistan Journal of Plant

Sciences (Pakistan).

334

Sher, H., Aldosari, A., & Bussmann, R. W. (2015). Morels of Palas Valley, Pakistan: A

potential source for generating income and improving livelihoods of mountain

communities. Economic botany, 69(4), 345-359.

Shinwari, Z, K. (2002). Ethnobotany and its applications to conservation in Swat-Himalaya,

Pakistan.Chines Journal of Mesdicinal plants. Email: Shinwari

[email protected]

Shinwari, Z. K., Gilani, S.S., Shoukat, M., Hamilton, A., & Khan, A.A. (2002).

Ethnobotanical resources and implications for curriculum.Proceedings of

Workshop on Curriculum Development in Nathiagali, Abbotaad fromMay, 2-

4, WWF, Pakistan. Appli. Ethno., p. 21‒34.

Shinwari, Z., Gilani, S., Kohjoma, M., & Nakaike, T. (2000). Status of medicinal plants in

Pakistani Hindukush Himalayas. Paper presented at the Proceedings of

Nepal–Japan Joint Symposium on Conservation and utilization of Himalayan

Med. Resour.

Shrestha, A. B., Wake, C. P., Mayewski, P. A., & Dibb, J. E. (1999). Maximum temperature

trends in the Himalaya and its vicinity: an analysis based on temperature

records from Nepal for the period 1971–94. Journal of climate, 12(9), 2775-

2786.

Shrestha, B. B., & Jha, P. K. (2009). Habitat range of two alpine medicinal plants in a trans-

Himalayan dry valley, Central Nepal. Journal of Mountain Science, 6(1), 66-

77.

Shrestha, K. B., Måren, I. E., Arneberg, E., Sah, J. P., & Vetaas, O. R. (2013). Effect of

anthropogenic disturbance on plant species diversity in oak forests in Nepal,

335

Central Himalaya. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem

Services & Management, 9(1), 21-29.

Shrestha, T. B., Bhandari, B., & Belbase, N. (1999). Nepal country report on biological

diversity: Iucn Nepal.

Shrestha, U. B., Gautam, S., & Bawa, K. S. (2012). Widespread climate change in the

Himalayas and associated changes in local ecosystems. PLoS One, 7(5),

e36741.

Siddiqui, K. (1997). Wood fuel in the national energy balance. Paper presented at the

National Workshop on Woodfuel production and marketing in Pakistan,

RWEDP Report.

Siddiqui, K., & Amjad, M. (1993). Marketing of woodfuels in Peshawar City (a case study),

Pakistan.

Siddiqui, K.M. (2000). Wood fuel in the national energy balance. In: RWEDP (Regional

Wood Energy Development Program), editor. Wood Fuel Production and

Marketing in Pakistan. National Workshop, Faisalabad, Pakistan, 28-30

October 1997. RWEDP Report No 49. Bangkok, Thailand: FAO (Food and

Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) pp. 25-30.

Siddiqui, M. F., Ahmed, M., Wahab, M., Khan, N., Khan, M. U., Nazim, K., & Hussain, S.

S. (2009). Phytosociology of Pinus roxburghii Sargent (Chir pine) in lesser

Himalayan and Hindu Kush range of Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot, 41(5), 2357-2369.

Signorini, M. A., Piredda, M., & Bruschi, P. (2009). Plants and traditional knowledge: An

ethnobotanical investigation on Monte Ortobene (Nuoro, Sardinia). Journal of

ethnobiology and ethnomedicine, 5(1), 6.

336

Simpson, E., Sutherland, G., & Blackwell, D. (1949). Nature. Measurement of diversity, 163,

688.

Singh, C., Panigrahy, S., Thapliyal, A., Kimothi, M., Soni, P., & Parihar, J. (2012).

Monitoring the alpine treeline shift in parts of the Indian Himalayas using

remote sensing. Current Science, 102(4), 559-562.

Singh, G., & Rawat, G. (2012). Depletion of oak (Quercus spp.) forests in the Western

Himalaya: grazing, fuelwood and fodder collection Global Perspectives on

Sustainable Forest Management: InTech.

Singh, G., Rawat, G., & Verma, D. (2010). Comparative study of fuelwood consumption by

villagers and seasonal “Dhaba owners” in the tourist affected regions of

Garhwal Himalaya, India. Energy Policy, 38(4), 1895-1899.

Singh, H., Kumar, M., & Sheikh, M. A. (2009). Distribution pattern of Oak and Pine along

altitudinal gradients in Garhwal Himalaya. Nature and Science, 7(11), 81-85

Singh, H., Saklani, A., & Lal, B. (1990). Ethnobotanical observations on some gymnosperms

of Garhwal Himalaya, Uttar Pradesh, India. Economic Botany, 44(3), 349-

354.

Singh, J. (2006). Sustainable development of the Indian Himalayan region: Linking

ecological and economic concerns. Current Science, 784-788.

Singh, J., Pandey, U., & Tiwari, A. (1984). Man and forests: a Central Himalayan case study.

Ambio, 13(2), 80-87.

Singh, J., Rawat, Y., & Chaturvedi, O. (1984). Replacement of oak forest with pine in the

Himalaya affects the nitrogen cycle. Nature, 311(5981), 54.

337

Singh, K., & Kaushal, R. (2006). Diversity and quantitative analysis of dominant tree species

in District Chamba of Himachal Pradesh. Indian Journal of Forestry, 29(3),

245-251.

Singh, K., Kumar, A., Lal, B., & Todaria, N. (2008). Species diversity and population status

of threatened plants in different landscape elements of the Rohtang Pass,

Western Himalaya. Journal of Mountain Science, 5(1), 73-83.

Singh, N., & Sundriyal, R. (2009). Fuelwood, fodder consumption and deficit pattern in

central Himalayan village. Nature and Science, 7(4), 85-88.

Singh, N., Tamta, K., Tewari, A., & Ram, J. (2014). Studies on vegetational analysis and

regeneration status of Pinus roxburghii, Roxb. and Quercus leucotrichophora

forests of Nainital Forest Division. Global Journal of Science Frontier

Research, 14(3), 41-47.

Singh, R. B., Mal, S., & Kala, C. P. (2009). Community responses to mountain tourism: A

case in Bhyundar Valley, Indian Himalaya. Journal of Mountain

Science, 6(4), 394-404.

Singh, S. (1991). Structure and function of the low and high altitude grazing ecosystems and

impact of the livestock component in the central Himalaya: Final Technical

Report. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, New

Delhi.

Singh, S. (1999). A study on the plant community composition and species diversity in Great

Himalayan National Park, Western Himalaya. Unpublished Ph. D. thesis.

Kumaun University, Nainital, India.

338

Singh, S. P. (2002). Balancing the approaches of environmental conservation by considering

ecosystem services as well as biodiversity. Current Science, 82(11), 1331-

1335.

Singh, S. P. (2007). Himalayan forest ecosystem services: Incorporating in national

accounting (Vol. 9): Central Himalayan Environment Association (CHEA)

Uttarakhand, Nainital, India.

Singh, S., & Rawat, G. (1999). Floral diversity and vegetation structure in great Himalayan

National Park, Western Himalaya. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehra-Dun.

Singh, S., Farswan, M., Ali, S., Afzal, M., Al-Abbasi, F. A., Kazmi, I., & Anwar, F. (2014).

Antidiabetic potential of triterpenoid saponin isolated from Primula

denticulate. Pharmaceutical biology, 52(6), 750-755.

Singh, S.K. (1999). A study on the plant community composition and species diversity in

Great Himalayan National Park, Western Himalaya. Ph.D. Thesis, Kumaun

University Nainital.

Singh, S.P. (2009). Himalayan forest ecosystem services incorporating in national accunting.

Central Himalayan Environmental Association (CHEA) 9 Waldorf

Coumpound National Utarakhand India.

Smith Olsen, C., & Overgaard Larsen, H. (2003). Alpine medicinal plant trade and

Himalayan mountain livelihood strategies. Geographical Journal, 169(3),

243-254

Smith, R. D., & Maltby, E. (2003). Using the ecosystem approach to implement the

convention on biological diversity: key issues and case studies: IUCN.

339

Sodhi, N. S., Koh, L. P., Brook, B. W., & Ng, P. K. (2004). Southeast Asian biodiversity: an

impending disaster. Trends in ecology & evolution, 19(12), 654-660.

Soil Survey Staff. Soil . A Basic System of Soil Classification for Making and

Interpreting Soil Surveys ; USDA-NRCS: Washington, DC, 1999.

Solomon, S., Qin, D., Manning, M., Chen, Z., Marquis, M., Averyt, K. B., . . . Miller, H. L.

(2007). Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the

intergovernmental panel on climate change, 2007: Cambridge University

Press, Cambridge.

Sood, R., Aggarwal, R., Mahajan, P., Bhardwaj, S., & Sharma, S. (2014). Estimation of

domestic energy consumption and carbon emission in Mid Himalayan Region

of Himachal Pradesh, India. Journal of Agriculture and Environmental sci

loopet exerts 4nces, 3(1), 141-147.

Statistics, I. (1998). Energy Statistics and Balances of Non-OECD Countries 1995–1996.

Org. for Econ. Co-op. and Dev., Paris.

Steininger, K. W., & Weck-Hannemann, H. (2002). Global environmental change in alpine

regions: recognition, impact, adaptation and mitigation. Edward Elgar

Publishing Ltd.

Stevens, G. C. (1992). The elevational gradient in altitudinal range: an extension of

Rapoport's latitudinal rule to altitude. The American Naturalist, 140(6), 893-

911.

Stirling, G., & Wilsey, B. (2001). Empirical relationships between species richness,

evenness, and proportional diversity. The American Naturalist, 158(3), 286-

299.

340

Stocker, T. (2014). Climate change 2013: the physical science basis: Working Group I

contribution to the Fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on

Climate Change: Cambridge University Press.

Stoffel, M., Tiranti, D., & Huggel, C. (2014). Climate change impacts on mass movements—

case studies from the European Alps. Science of the Total Environment, 493,

1255-1266.

Sudhersan, C., AboEl-Nil, M., & Hussain, J. (2003). Tissue culture technology for the

conservation and propagation of certain native plants. Journal of arid

environments, 54(1), 133-147.

Sundriyal, R., & Joshi, A. (1990). Effect of grazing on standing crop, productivity and

efficiency of energy capture in an alpine grassland ecosystem at Tungnath

(Garhwal Himalaya), India. Tropical ecology, 31(2), 84-97.

Swift, M. J., Izac, A.-M., & van Noordwijk, M. (2004). Biodiversity and ecosystem services

in agricultural landscapes—are we asking the right questions? Agriculture,

Ecosystems & Environment, 104(1), 113-134.

Tambe, S., & Rawat, G. (2010). The alpine vegetation of the Khangchendzonga landscape,

Sikkim Himalaya: community characteristics, diversity, and aspects of

ecology. Mountain Research and Development, 30(3), 266-274.

Tang, Z., & Fang, J. (2004). A review on the elevational patterns of plant species diversity.

Biodiversity Science, 12(1), 20-28.

Tasser, E., & Tappeiner, U. (2002). Impact of land use changes on mountain vegetation.

Applied vegetation science, 5(2), 173-184.

341

Ter Braak, C. J., & Smilauer, P. (2002). CANOCO reference manual and CanoDraw for

Windows user's guide: software for canonical community ordination (version

4.5): www. canoco. com.

Thakur, R., Jain, N., Pathak, R., & Sandhu, S. S. (2011). Practices in wound healing studies

of plants. Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine, 2011.

Theurillat, J.-P., & Guisan, A. (2001). Potential impact of climate change on vegetation in

the European Alps: a review. Climatic change, 50(1-2), 77-109.

Thukral, A. (2012). Vascular plants, Kinnaur, Himachal Pradesh, India. Check list, 8(3), 321-

348.

Tiessen, H, & Wu, R. (2002). Effect of land use on soil degradation in alpine grassland soil,

China. Soil Science Society of America Journal 66:1648–1655

Timilsina, N., Ross, M. S., & Heinen, J. T. (2007). A community analysis of sal (Shorea

robusta) forests in the western Terai of Nepal. Forest Ecology and

Management, 241(1-3), 223-234.

Tiwari, A., Agarwal, A., Kumar, S., & Tiwari, S. (2005). Analysis of landuse and biomass in

Khanda watershed, Garhwal Himalaya, using satellite remote sensing data.

Tropical ecology, 46(2), 253-264.

Tiwari, J., Ballabha, R., & Tiwari, P. (2010). Some promising wild edible plants of Srinagar

and its adjacent area in Alaknanda valley of Garhwal Himalaya, India.

Journal of American Science, 6(4), 167-174.

Tiwari, P. (2000). Land-use changes in Himalaya and their impact on the plains ecosystem:

need for sustainable land use. Land Use Policy, 17(2), 101-111.

342

Tiwari, P. (2008). Land use changes in Himalaya and their impacts on environment, society

and economy: A study of the Lake Region in Kumaon Himalaya, India.

Advances in Atmospheric Sciences, 25(6), 1029.

Tiwari, P. C., & Joshi, B. (2012). Natural and socio-economic factors affecting food security

in the Himalayas. Food Security, 4(2), 195-207.

Todario, N.P., Pokhriyal, P., Uniyal, P., & Chauhon, D.S. (2010). Regenration status of tree

species in forest of Phakot and PhathriRao water sheds in Garhwal Himalaya.

Curr. Sci., 98(2): 171-175.

Tugel, A., Herrick, J., Brown, J., Mausbach, M., Puckett, W., & Hipple, K. (2005). Soil

change, soil survey, and natural resources decision making. Soil Science

Society of America Journal, 69(3), 738-747.

Tulachan, P. M. (2001). Mountain agriculture in the Hindu Kush–Himalaya: A regional

comparative analysis. Mountain Research and Development, 21(3), 260-267.

Tylianakis, J. M., Didham, R. K., Bascompte, J., & Wardle, D. A. (2008). Global change and

species interactions in terrestrial ecosystems. Ecology letters, 11(12), 1351-

1363.

Ullah, T. S., Firdous, S. S., Mehmood, A., Shaheen, H., & Dar, M. E. U. I. (2017).

Ethnomycological and Nutritional Analyses of Some Wild Edible Mushrooms

from Western Himalayas, Azad Jammu and Kashmir (Pakistan). International

journal of medicinal mushrooms, 19(10).

Ullah, Z., Ahmad, M., Sher, H., Shaheen, H., & Khan, S. M. (2015). Phytogeographic

analysis and diversity of the grasses and sedges (Poales) of northern Pakistan.

Pak. J. Bot, 47, 93-104.

343

Uniyal, P., Pokhriyal, P., Dasgupta, S., Bhatt, D., & Todaria, N. (2010). Plant diversity in

two forest types along the disturbance gradient in Dewalgarh Watershed,

Garhwal Himalaya. Current Science, 938-943.

USDA-NRCS, Washington and DC. (1999). Characterization of Alpine soils, Eagle Cap,

Wallowa Mountains, Oregon. Phys. Geogr., 20 (3): 212- 222.

Vashistha, R., Nautiyal, B., & Nautiyal, M. (2006). Conservation status and morphological

variations between populations of Angelica glauca Edgew. and Angelica

archangelica Linn. in Garhwal Himalaya. CURRENT SCIENCE-

BANGALORE-, 91(11), 1537.

Vetaas, O. R., & Grytnes, J. A. (2002). Distribution of vascular plant species richness and

endemic richness along the Himalayan elevation gradient in Nepal. Global

Ecology and Biogeography, 11(4), 291-301.

Vitousek, P. M., D'antonio, C. M., Loope, L. L., Rejmanek, M., & Westbrooks, R. (1997).

Introduced species: a significant component of human-caused global change.

New Zealand Journal of Ecology, 1-16.

Vitousek, P. M., Mooney, H. A., Lubchenco, J., & Melillo, J. M. (1997). Human domination

of Earth's ecosystems. Science, 277 (5325), 494-499.

Walker, L. R., Shiels, A. B., Bellingham, P. J., Sparrow, A. D., Fetcher, N., Landau, F. H., &

Lodge, D. J. (2013). Changes in abiotic influences on seed plants and ferns

during 18 years of primary succession on Puerto Rican landslides. Journal of

Ecology, 101(3), 650-661.

Walker, M. D., Wahren, C. H., Hollister, R. D., Henry, G. H., Ahlquist, L. E., Alatalo, J. M.,

. . . Carroll, A. B. (2006). Plant community responses to experimental

344

warming across the tundra biome. Proceedings of the National Academy of

Sciences, 103(5), 1342-1346.

Walther, G.-R., Post, E., Convey, P., Menzel, A., Parmesan, C., Beebee, T. J., . . . Bairlein, F.

(2002). Ecological responses to recent climate change. Nature, 416(6879),

389.

Wang, B., Bao, Q., Hoskins, B., Wu, G., & Liu, Y. (2008). Tibetan Plateau warming and

precipitation changes in East Asia. Geophysical Research Letters, 35(14).

Wang, G., Mao, T., Chang, J., & Du, J. (2014). Impacts of surface soil organic content on the

soil thermal dynamics of alpine meadows in permafrost regions: data from

field observations. Geoderma, 232, 414-425.

Wang, Z., Tang, Z., & Fang, J. (2007). Altitudinal patterns of seed plant richness in the

Gaoligong Mountains, south‐east Tibet, China. Diversity and Distributions,

13(6), 845-854.

Wangchuk, S., Siebert, S., & Belsky, J. (2014). Fuelwood use and availability in Bhutan:

implications for national policy and local forest management. Human ecology,

42(1), 127-135.

Watson, I., & Novelly, P. (2004). Making the biodiversity monitoring system sustainable:

Design issues for large‐scale monitoring systems. Austral Ecology, 29(1), 16-

30.

Wehn, S., Lundemo, S., & Holten, J. I. (2014). Alpine vegetation along multiple

environmental gradients and possible consequences of climate change. Alpine

Botany, 124(2), 155-164.

345

Whiteman, C. D. (2000). Mountain meteorology: fundamentals and applications: Oxford

University Press.

Whittaker, R. J., Willis, K. J., & Field, R. (2001). Scale and species richness: towards a

general, hierarchical theory of species diversity. Journal of biogeography,

28(4), 453-470.

Woodruff, D. S. (2001). Declines of biomes and biotas and the future of evolution.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(10), 5471-5476.

World Health Organization. (2003). Diet, nutrition, and the prevention of chronic diseases:

report of a joint WHO/FAO expert consultation (Vol. 916). World Health

Organization.

World Health Organization (WHO). (2002). Traditional medicine-growing needs and

potential. WHO policy perspectives on medicine, No. 2.

World Health Organization (WHO). (2003). Diet, nutrition, and the prevention of chronic

diseases: report of a joint WHO/FAO expert consultation (Vol. 916). World

Health Organization.

World Health Organization (WHO). (2008). Food and Agriculture Organization of the

United Nations (FAO). 2003. Diet, Nutrition, and the Prevention of Chronic

Disease. Geneva: WHO.

World Health Organization (WHO). (2016). Food and Agriculture Organization (2003) Diet,

Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases. Report of a Joint

WHO/FAO Expert Consultation. World Health Organisation, Geneva.

Wu, R., & Tiessen, H. (2002). Effect of land use on soil degradation in alpine grassland soil,

China. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 66(5), 1648-1655.

346

WWF Pakistan, (2003). Study Existing use Regime of Key Floral Species, Identify Issues and

Threats. Consultancy No 5, Palas Conservation and Development Project,

Palas, Kohistan.

Xu, J., Grumbine, R. E., Shrestha, A., Eriksson, M., Yang, X., Wang, Y., & Wilkes, A.

(2009). The melting Himalayas: cascading effects of climate change on water,

biodiversity, and livelihoods. Conservation Biology, 23(3), 520-530.

Xu, J., Yang, Y., Li, Z., Tashi, N., Sharma, R., & Fang, J. (2008). Understanding land use,

livelihoods, and health transitions among Tibetan nomads: a case from

Gangga Township, Dingri County, Tibetan Autonomous Region of China.

EcoHealth, 5(2), 104.

Xu, X., Lu, C., Shi, X., & Gao, S. (2008). World water tower: An atmospheric perspective.

Geophysical Research Letters, 35(20).

Xu, Z., Gong, T., & Li, J. (2008). Decadal trend of climate in the Tibetan Plateau—regional

temperature and precipitation. Hydrological Processes: An International

Journal, 22(16), 3056-3065.

Yao, T., Duan, K., Xu, B., Wang, N., Guo, X., & Yang, X. (2008). Ice core precipitation

record in central Tibetan plateau since AD 1600. Climate of the Past

Discussions, 4(1), 233-248.

Yao, T., Wang, Y., Liu, S., Pu, J., Shen, Y., & Lu, A. (2004). Recent glacial retreat in High

Asia in China and its impact on water resource in Northwest China. Science in

China Series D: Earth Sciences, 47(12), 1065-1075.

Yavari, A., & Shahgolzari, S. (2010). Floristic study of Khan-Gormaz protected area in

Hamadan province, Iran. Int J Agric Biol, 12, 271-275.

347

Yu, H., Luedeling, E., & Xu, J. (2010). Winter and spring warming result in delayed spring

phenology on the Tibetan Plateau. Proceedings of the National Academy of

Sciences, 107(51), 22151-22156.

Zhang, Y., Geng, W., Shen, Y., Wang, Y., & Dai, Y.-C. (2014). Edible mushroom cultivation

for food security and rural development in China: bio-innovation,

technological dissemination and marketing. Sustainability, 6(5), 2961-2973.

Zhang, Y., Xu, H., Chen, H., Wang, F., & Huai, H. (2014). Diversity of wetland plants used

traditionally in China: a literature review. Journal of ethnobiology and

ethnomedicine, 10(1), 72.

Zobel, D. B., & Singh, S. P. (1997). Himalayan forests and ecological generalizations.

BioScience, 47(11), 735-745.

Zobel, M., Öpik, M., Moora, M., & Pärtel, M. (2006). Biodiversity and ecosystem

functioning: It is time for dispersal experiments. Journal of Vegetation

Science, 17(4), 543-547.

348

APPENDICES

THREATENED TAXA

A B

C D

Appendix 1:(A) Roscoea alpina ( B) Malaxis muscifera (C) Astragalus rhizanthus( D) Maconopsis aculeata

349

THREATENED TAXA

E F

G H

Appendix 2: (E) Trolis acaulis F) Botrychium lunaria G) Aconitum violaceum H) Rosularia adenotricha

350

MEDICINAL PLANTS

A B

C D

Appendix 3: A) Trillium govanianum B) Bergenia stracheyi, C) Saussurea costus D) Geranium himalayense

351

MEDICINAL PLANTS

E F

G H

Appindix 4: E) Bistorta affinis F) Jurania macrocephala G) Arnebia benthamii H) Dioscorea deltoides

352

WILD VEGETABLES

B A

C D

Appendix 5: (A) Cardamine sp B) Rheum australe C) Taraxacum obovatum D) Malva parviflor

353

A

B

C

Appendix 6: Wild vegetables collection

354

WILD EDIBLE FRUITS

B A

C D

Appendix 7: (A) Berberis jaeschkeana B) Rosa macrophylla C) Fragaria nubicola D) Rubus idaeus

355

EDIBLE MUSHROOM

B A

C D

Appendix 8: (A) Gyromitra esculenta B) Hericium sp C) Morchella esculenta D) Coprinus sp

356

FUEL WOOD AND TIMBER EXTRACTION

Appendix 09: Fuel wood and Timber Extraction

357

FODDER COLLECTION

Appendix 10: Fodder Collection

358

SOIL EROSION AND LAND DEGRADATION

Appendix 11: Soil erosion and land degradation

359

DISTURBANCES AND OVERGRAZING IN THE INVESTIGATED AREA.

Appendix 12: Disturbances and ovegrazing in the investigated area.

360

DEFORESTATION

Appendix 13: Deforestation in the area

361