Philippine Journal of Science 141 (2): 165-177, December 2012 ISSN 0031 - 7683 Date Received: 15 Nov 2011

Developing a Georeferenced Database of Selected Threatened Forest Tree Species in the

Lawrence Tolentino Ramos1, Alfie Misena Torres1, Florencia Bacani Pulhin1,2, and Rodel Diaz Lasco1

1World Agroforestry Centre, 2F Khush Hall, IRRI Campus, Los Baños, , Philippines 2Forestry Development Center, College of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of the Philippines Los Banos, College, Laguna, Philippines

Georeferenced species occurrence is a prerequisite in species distribution modeling and species- ecosystem correlation analysis and also aids in tracking species and prioritizing scarce resources for conservation. The Global Biodiversity Information Facility, legacy literature of biodiversity, contemporary literature, technical reports and biodiversity surveys are important sources of species occurrence data waiting to be georeferenced. In this paper, we discussed a method used to georeference occurrences of threatened forest tree species from the above sources. Locality descriptions were initially narrowed down in geographic information system using administrative maps and further confined using two criteria: 1) elevation and 2) surface cover information from remotely-sensed images. The result was a georeferenced database of 2,067 occurrence records of 47 threatened forest species on a national scale. Each record had a unique point feature per species and enough metadata directing the database user to the source of occurrence data. The database can be used as a tool in determining priority species for specimen or germplasm collection, for taxonomic identification and historical mapping. It also serves as an integral component in spatially modeling the distribution of tree species and forest formations in the past and in a possible future scenario.

Key Words: database, georeference, species occurrence, threatened forest trees

INTRODUCTION and 64 other threatenedplant speciesin the Philippines. The International Union for Conservation of Nature The Philippines is a tropical country hosting a high (IUCN 2003) Red list of threatened plant species also concentration of plant species diversity, ranking 5th in the provides an annually updated listing. Forest tree species world, and housing 5% of the world’s flora (RP 2009). are particularly threatened due mainly for their timber Yet ironically, it is also a leading biodiversity hotspot of resource. threatened forest trees in the world due to anthropogenic habitat alteration (Myers et al. 2000). The environment There is much information contained in legacy literature department’s administrative order (DAO) 2007-01 (DENR as well as in herbaria collections, domestic and abroad. 2007), which constitutes the official country listing of A great challenge now is the process of translating threatened plant species, lists 174 , 101 these sources from analogue to digital form to enable critically-endangered species, 187 endangered species access by a wider public. In the case of legacy literature, digitization has made some headway already under *Corresponding author: [email protected]; [email protected] the Biodiversity Heritage Library (BHL) portal, which

165 Philippine Journal of Science Ramos LT et al.: Georeferenced Database of Selected Threatened Vol. 141 No. 2, December 2012 Forest Tree in the Philippines aims to make legacy literature accessible to the public as cardinal offsets to political or geographic features (Gwinn & Rinaldo 2008). For instance, the voluminous (Beaman & Conn 2003). This unstandardized way of publications of Merrill, which document the diversity describing localities poses many challenges to automated and spatial distribution Philippine forests used to have parsing and interpretation (Beaman et al. 2004). are already digitized and can be accessed through the More than 90% of the billion or more occurrence BHL portal. Among Merrill’s significant publications is records found in biological specimens worldwide are the Enumeration of Philippine Flowering Vol I-IV not georeferenced (Duckworth et al. 1993; Beaman & (1923-1926) which is the most comprehensive species list Conn 2003; Beaman et al. 2004; Guralnick et al. 2006). on a national scale to date. Relatively accurate georeferenced information associated Extensive work needs to be done, however, for the case with specimen collections only came with the use of GPS of herbarium specimen collections which remain largely (Global Positioning System) devices. analogue in form, if not entirely raw specimen tags. In the case of the Philippines, there are only a few, recent The discrepancy is easily appreciated if they are to be records in GBIF which have specific fine-scale location compared with biological information in the molecular information. Species occurrence data before GPS only and ecosystem levels which are largely digitized (Lane mention of localities, usually in the scale of provinces & Edwards 2007). Another issue is access, for although and municipalities. To compound the problem, names or biodiversity is concentrated in the developing countries, boundaries of some localities have changed over the last the wealth of scientific information in digitized form is hundred years. Formerly large provinces and districts concentrated in the libraries and natural history institutions have been subdivided giving way to the creation of new of developed countries, probably very remote from the government units. specimen’s origin (Edwards 2000). Various authors have already contributed in documenting Specimens contain basic, yet important information, threatened forest tree species occurrence on a national i.e. scientific name, collector name, collection date, and scale. The works of De Guzman et al. (1986) and Rojo locality description, at the least. Traditionally, locality (1999) are contemporary examples of these. There are also descriptions are based on names of places or situational numerous peer-reviewed journal articles, technical reports, landmarks that change over time (Beaman et al. 2004). and biodiversity surveys done on watershed or protected At best, a species locality description should be specific area scale that are good sources of occurrence data. But enough, leaving no room for uncertainty in interpretation these are often analogue in form. If there happens to be (Chapman & Wieczorek 2006). georeferenced information as is the usual practice today, The need for such primary scientific information has been the location data often stays with the collector and is not growing (Lane & Edwards 2007), especially as conservation indicated in the specimen tag. efforts scramble to preserve the remaining tracts of In compliance to the Convention of Biological Diversity, undisturbed ecosystems. Chapman (2005) discusses the the Philippines is an active participant of the ASEAN multiple uses of primary species occurrence data. Clearing House Mechanism (CHM). The ASEAN CHM is To satisfy such a growing demand for biodiversity envisioned as a harmonized regional gateway of publicly information, not only does information need to be available biodiversity information held by ASEAN digitized for ease of access, but also the framework for member countries. However, the ASEAN CHM is still information sharing requires interoperability in searching in its infancy stage and is not yet included in the GBIF through multiple online databases seamlessly (Edwards network. There is yet to be a holistic, georeferenced and 2000). This was the rationale for the establishment of validated biodiversity information system on a national the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF), a scale in the Philippines that aids decision-making and worldwide network to make primary information of all knowledge sharing. species freely and universally available via the internet. A database of georeferenced species occurrence paves Its current focus for the next years is the digitization of the way for visualization and higher forms of analysis natural history specimens collected over the last 300 years like modeling the potential distribution of a species and and its migration into modern information management ecological analysis (Beaman & Conn 2003). It can also systems and platforms (Lane & Edwards 2007). serve practical conservation efforts like tracking plant Legacy literature and GBIF records both contain species, protected area planning, and prioritizing resources occurrence information, but these are not necessarily for biodiversity surveys and specimen collections. georeferenced information. Georeferencing means putting However, georeferencing can be tedious and suffers in the map the exact location of species. For the past 300 from major limitations as summarized by Guralnick et years, specimen locality descriptions had been recorded

166 Philippine Journal of Science Ramos LT et al.: Georeferenced Database of Selected Threatened Vol. 141 No. 2, December 2012 Forest Tree in the Philippines al. (2006): 1) It is slow; 2) The accuracy and precision taxonomic identification; 3) Give information where and of assigned coordinates are usually unknown; 3) A large when tree species were surveyed; and, 4) Provide some fraction of available coordinates are inconsistent with insight to the possible distribution of forest formations in locality information; 4) Materials and methods are poorly the Philippines by using indicator tree species occurrence documented; and 5) many localities are georeferenced as proxy. many times over with different results. The development of georeferencing solutions which are automated, interoperable, and process-documented has MATERIALS AND METHODS long been sought by the scientific communities that rely on biological collections (Beaman & Conn 2003; Beaman et The method described below applied the point method al. 2004; Graham 2004; Wieczorek et al. 2006). The same in georeferencing locality descriptions. Every mention sentiment has given rise to various projects which aim to of a species occurrence assigned a unique location or a provide tools for batch processing of locality descriptions single coordinate pair.. No two locations are used twice and protocols for georeferencing biodiversity information, for the same species to avoid duplicity. For instance a (e.g. MaNIS, MapSteDI, NatureServe, ERIN, CONABIO, point feature is not a georeferenced representation of a BioGoemancer) (Chapman & Wieczorek 2006). locality, this method ignores the fact that a locality record always describes an area rather than a dimensionless This paper addresses the need to georeference the point and that collecting may have occurred anywhere occurrence of threatened tree species in the Philippines within the area denoted (Wieczorek et al. 2004). The based on locality descriptions, established species elevation method applied projection and geographic coordinates range requirement, recent surface cover, administrative where point features and elevation and surface cover were and protected area boundaries. It addresses the limitations used, respectively. The database followed the element cited by Guralnick et al. (2006) except for automated occurrence (EO) concept (Gaul 1997) for representing flow. Species occurrence information are taken from rare, threatened or endangered species first used by the GBIF entries and legacy literature, primarily. GBIF was California Natural Diversity Database. An EO is defined as established by the governments in 2001 to encourage free an abstraction describing an existing or historical species and open access to biodiversity data. Through a global population or a subset of it. Each EO record contained network of countries and organizations, GBIF promotes both spatial and non-spatial attributes that represent the and facilitates the mobilization, access, discovery and the mappable position in space and the supporting source of use of information about the occurrence of organisms over a species occurrence, respectively. time and across planet. Legacy literature include the works of Elmer (1906-1908, 1908-1910, 1912-1913 and 1915- The spatial attribute of each record consisted of an 1919), Merill (1906, 1908, 1909, 1910, 1918, 1923-1926) assigned point feature (latitude, longitude) and its and Merritt and Whitford (1906). Some occurrence reported corresponding location accuracy index (LAI). Each point in recent published literature of Abraham et al. (2010), De feature may either be a georeferenced representation of a Guzman et al. (1986), Fernando et al. (2009), Fernando et locality or the original location coordinates of a species al. (2008), Gruezo (2009), Hamann (2002), Lagenberger et (when available) converted to decimal degrees. The LAI al. (2006). Others are from the technical and biodiversity referred to how well a point feature represented the true surveys of Garcia (2002) and Clemeno et al. (2005).The location where species were collected or observed. It was result is a georeferenced database of occurrence records of ranked from 1-5, 1 being the most accurate (Table 1). threatened forest species, each with a unique location per species and enough metadata directing the database user Step 1: Search species and localities from sources to the source of occurrence data. An initial list of forest tree species was selected from DAO 2007-01 based on the criteria of ecological and economic importance. This was composed of 57 vulnerable species (VU), 15 critically-endangered species (CR), OBJECTIVES 42 endangered species (EN), and 30 other threatened The study aims to 1) Georeference the occurrence of species (OTS). Also added to this initial list were 16 tree threatened tree species in the Philippines based on species listed under the 2003 IUCN Red List which we locality descriptions, established species elevation range also considered ecologically and economically important requirement, recent surface cover, administrative and trees. The total number of species in the initial list was 160. protected area boundaries; 2) Provide information that All the plant specimen records in the GBIF portal under can be useful in determining which species should be Phylum Magnoliophyta, which occur in the Philippines, prioritized for specimen or germplasm collection and were filtered and then downloaded as a spreadsheet.

167 Philippine Journal of Science Ramos LT et al.: Georeferenced Database of Selected Threatened Vol. 141 No. 2, December 2012 Forest Tree in the Philippines

of Global Administrative Areas) maps of the country from Table 1. Example of localities and corresponding LAI*. the provincial level to the village level. LAI Definition Example of Locality 1 coordinate-specific Digallorin (16.8333333333°, If more than one locality pops up in the query-search, as lifted from the 122.433333333°) the correct locality was determined by cross-checking source with the collector’s collecting localities and the date. 2 specific to a sitio, Bicobian, Brgy Villa Imelda, Ilagan, This was done in two sub-steps. First, we referred to village, tractor or the National Herbarium Nederland’s online query of plot Brgy Bugsoc, Sierra Bullones 600 m Cyclopaedia of Malesian Collectors (CMC) (http:// Port Banga Tract Plot 1, Brgy Maria Concepcion, Socorro, www.nationaalherbarium.nl/fmcollectors/). If this was Oriental not enough, we reviewed the GBIF records under the 3 specific to mountain Foothills of Mt Pangasugan, same collector. / protected area / Sibulan watershed, Polilio watershed A good example of this was a specimen by Merrill in 1916 collected in the locality “Antipolo” (http:// 4 specific to a town Antipolo, or city data.gbif.org/occurrences/250855958/). Our initial hypothesis was that this referred to Antipolo Town 5 province in Rizal Province because it was uncommon practice LAI* means location accuracy index and refers to how well a point feature represents the true location where species were collected or observed. among collectors during that period to include the name of the village in the locality description. If one referred to contemporary administrative units in the Philippines with the name “Antipolo”, a query-search This spreadsheet was searched iteratively for matching will result to 31 villages dispersed in more than 20 scientific names of species and their localities. provinces and 1 city (i.e., Antipolo City in Rizal Merrill’s Enumeration of Philippine Flowering Plants Province). The CMC did not positively state that Vol I-IV (1923-1926) was the main source of species Merrill collected in “Antipolo’ during 1916 but did occurrence published in legacy literature. This was state “vicinity of Manila”. The matter was concluded PDF-searched for every mention of a species‘ name. when, upon reviewing other GBIF records, a number of Earlier literature cited by Merrill were also PDF- locality descriptions under Merrill’s 1916 collections searched for more fine-scaled locality descriptions like specifically stated “Antipolo, Rizal”. the one below: In the case where a query-search from GADM maps “...the area lying between the Himugaan and Hitalon returned nothing, similar to cases wherein a place was Rivers, where the surveys were made...The land is actually a natural geographic feature (e.g. mountain, characterized by gentle slopes, with alternating ridges at river), an internet search for any mention of a place was the base of Mount Silay. The elevation ranges from 100 resorted to. An example of this was a specimen collected feet at points on the northern boundary to 1,200 feet at the by Conklin in the locality “Yagaw.” The CMC informed highest point on the southern boundary. Small streams and that Yagaw is a mountain in Mindoro Island. In order to arroyos are scattered profusely over the tract...” (Everett determine which specific place in Mt Yagaw Conklin &Whitford 1906) collected from, we referred to his 1954 publication showing a village map of the Hanunoo Mangyan tribe The same search for any mention of species was done where he conducted his study. for a selected number of journal articles, books, technical reports, and biodiversity surveys. In the case of formerly larger provinces and districts that exist now as subdivided government units (e.g., Negros, , , Camarines, , Step 2: Narrow down locality Lanao, , Cotabato, Mindoro, and Surigao), If GBIF records of the same species included multiple the province retaining the former capital was used. In mentions of reported localities in the same scale, then the case of reported localities which had a different only one GBIF record was considered as an EO record. contemporary name, historical research was used Preference was given to primary species information (e.g., formerly Magallanes is now Magdiwang Town reported by GBIF over the species information provided in Sibuyan Island, Romblon). by legacy literature, if both sources reported the same locality in the same scale. GBIF records were dropped from the compilation when we failed to georeference its reported locality due to Using a geographic information system (GIS), the reported ambiguity or lack of other information. locality from sources was queried from GADM (Database

168 Philippine Journal of Science Ramos LT et al.: Georeferenced Database of Selected Threatened Vol. 141 No. 2, December 2012 Forest Tree in the Philippines

Step 3: Narrow down further using elevation and Firstly, a point feature for a locality should satisfy the surface cover species’ known elevation range based on literature. Within a locality, the area for assigning a point feature When a qualitative elevation description such as “low was further narrowed down using two parameters from elevation forest” was given instead of a numeric range, we remotely-sensed images, i.e., elevation and surface cover. assumed that this meant elevations 500 masl and below. Surface cover for year 2009 was used in georeferencing By “medium elevation forest,” we assumed 500 > 900 following the assumption that after a hundred years or masl. Such qualitative elevation descriptions abound in more, the original sites of collection may have already many legacy literature, especially because in the early been converted to other land uses, thus we looked for 20th century elevation was often measured inaccurately remnants of secondary and primary forests where there (MaPStedi 2004 as cited by Chapman & Wieczorek is high likelihood that threatened forest tree species can 2006). Elevation in meters was determined using Shuttle still be found. Radar Topographic Mission (SRTM v. 4) image (Jarvis et al. 2008; www.srtm.csi.cgiar.org). Next, this range was further confined to areas where secondary or primary Step 1: Search species name and locality from sources forests exist using GlobCover 2009 v2.3 (http://ionia1. Example: ocuminota - , , Nueva esrin.esa.int). Particularly used was Class 40: closed Vizcaya, , Pangasinan, , , , Laguna, Tayabas, Camarines, , , Mindoro, Leyte, to open broadleafed evergreen semi-deciduous forest. : Misamis, Davao (Merrill, 1923-1926, Vol II). Georeferencing for a large geographic scale, i.e. provincial boundaries, was made convenient by overlaying the country’s protected area maps in GIS.

Step 2: Narrow down locality Step 4: Limited validation using Google Earth Limited validation was done by cross checking in Google Earth if a point feature was indeed forested. From our experience, GlobCover 2009 v2.3 tended to non-differentiate forests from dense coconut plantations. A Google Earth placemark was then added to mark a location and its latitude and longitude in decimal degrees were included in the database. Each placemark preserved the hierarchy of GADM provincial Town boundary Village boundary boundary administrative units and indicated an approximate elevation (e.g. Bicobian, Brgy Villa Imelda, Ilagan, Isabela 80 m).

Step 5: Georeference quality check and include Step 3: Narrow down further using elevation and surface cover metadata When a location coordinate was provided in the original data source, the given point feature is plotted in GIS and counter-checked if it was consistent with the reported locality and known elevation range. If an anomaly existed GADM GADM boundary GADM boundary such as when a given coordinate actually fell on the boundary + + SRTM v4 SRTM v4 sea or was unbelievably far from the reported locality, + the original coordinate was discarded and the anomaly GlobCover 2009 noted in the record. Although we also referred to reported elevations where species were collected or observed, more weight was given to the name of the locality rather than Step 4: Validate and reported elevation. add placemark in Google Earth In the case of reported localities which had a different contemporary name, its contemporary name was used to identify its associated Google Earth placemark. No two identical point features were used for the same species.

Step 5: Georeference quality check Each EO record contained the sources where either locality and include metada or location was based from. If additional information were used to georeference, this were also noted in the record. Figure 1. Illustrative flow of the georeferencing process. Additional metadata fields were also populated.

169 Philippine Journal of Science Ramos LT et al.: Georeferenced Database of Selected Threatened Vol. 141 No. 2, December 2012 Forest Tree in the Philippines

RESULTS Table 3 summarized the number of point features while Fig. 2 showed their position in space. The total number of Version 1.0 of the database contained 2,067 EO records point features was 329 and was unevenly distributed across (Table 2) compiled from 40 sources and 312 GBIF records. the archipelago. Six percent of these were found within the It included 47 species across 13 families, constituting Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park (NSMNP), indicating 29% of an initial listing of 160 threatened species. Each that NSMNP was the most surveyed protected area in the EO record contained several fields for metadata purposes country. The highest density of point features was found (Table 4). in the Polilio Islands in province, attributed mainly

Table 2. Species included in Version 1.0 of the database, including family, conservation status, and number of records per LAI. DAO IUCN Family Species LAI =1 LAI =2 LAI =3 LAI =4 LAI=5 Total 2007-01 2003 Anacardiaceae Dracontomelon dao VU - 1 19 6 0 0 26 Anacardiaceae Koordersiodendron pinnatum VU - 0 21 12 2 54 89 Anacardiaceae Mangifera altissima VU VU 4 19 4 3 9 39 Araucariaceae Agathis philippinensis VU VU 1 9 3 1 59 73 Burseraceae Canarium luzonicum OTS VU 0 17 2 3 1 23 Burseraceae Canarium ovatum OTS VU 0 15 3 2 9 29 Cannabaceae Celtis luzonica - VU 2 18 0 0 59 79 gracilis VU CR 1 21 12 8 33 75 Dipterocarpaceae Dipterocarpus grandiflorus - CR 2 23 11 3 36 75 Dipterocarpaceae Dipterocarpus hasseltii VU CR 5 2 5 5 6 23 Dipterocarpaceae Dipterocarpus validus - CR 4 0 2 2 0 8 Dipterocarpaceae Hopea acuminata CR CR 5 21 4 3 18 51 Dipterocarpaceae Hopea foxworthyi CR VU 0 1 0 1 15 17 Dipterocarpaceae Hopea malibato - CR 2 16 1 1 5 25 Dipterocarpaceae Hopea plagata EN CR 0 2 0 2 15 19 Dipterocarpaceae Parashorea malaanonan - CR 0 17 4 2 18 41 Dipterocarpaceae Shorea almon VU CR 0 20 3 4 17 44 Dipterocarpaceae Shorea astylosa CR CR 0 15 1 0 8 24 Dipterocarpaceae Shorea contorta VU CR 12 36 15 9 17 89 Dipterocarpaceae Shorea guiso - CR 7 25 10 7 34 83 Dipterocarpaceae Shorea negrosensis VU CR 3 20 0 2 18 43 Dipterocarpaceae Shorea palosapis - CR 4 24 2 3 24 57 Dipterocarpaceae Shorea polysperma VU CR 10 26 5 9 30 80 Dipterocarpaceae Vatica mangachapoi VU EN 5 21 3 10 26 65 Dipterocarpaceae Vatica pachyphylla CR CR 0 19 0 2 1 22 Ebenaceae Diospyros blancoi CR VU 1 15 5 5 66 92 Ebenaceae Diospyros curanii VU - 0 3 4 6 13 26 Ebenaceae Diospyros pilosanthera EN - 0 19 4 1 64 88 Euphorbiaceae Macaranga bicolor - VU 4 18 1 2 18 43 Euphorbiaceae Mitrephora lanotan - VU 1 17 0 3 14 35 intermedia OTS VU 2 3 4 4 44 57 Fabaceae Afzelia rhomboidea EN VU 4 26 8 25 36 99 Fabaceae Kingiodendron alternifolium EN - 0 1 0 8 10 19 Fabaceae Pterocarpus indicus forma indicus CR VU 1 19 6 2 10 38 Fabaceae Sindora supa EN VU 1 2 0 5 7 15 Fabaceae Wallaceodendron celebicum EN - 5 1 1 6 10 23 Lauraceae Cinnamomum mercadoi VU VU 1 25 6 7 44 83 Lauraceae Cinnamomum oroi EN - 1 1 0 0 0 2 Meliaceae Aglaia edulis VU NT 6 0 0 0 0 6 Meliaceae Aglaia rimosa VU NT 1 17 3 2 10 33

Table 2 continued next page

170 Philippine Journal of Science Ramos LT et al.: Georeferenced Database of Selected Threatened Vol. 141 No. 2, December 2012 Forest Tree in the Philippines

Moraceae Artocarpus rubrovenius VU VU 2 15 1 0 0 18 Meliaceae Aphanamixis polystachya VU VU 3 16 5 2 0 26 Meliaceae Toona calantas CR - 1 0 7 4 27 39 Moraceae Xanthostemon verdugonianus VU VU 0 1 3 4 3 11 Sapotaceae Palaquium luzoniense VU VU 1 21 8 3 4 37 Lamiaceae Tectona philippinensis CR EN 0 2 0 1 4 7 Lamiaceae Vitex parviflora EN EN 0 4 2 7 58 71 Total 103 653 176 181 954 2067 % Total 4.98 31.6 8.51 8.76 46.2 100 Legend: EN – Endangered; CR – Critically endangered; VU – Vulnerable; OTS – Other Threatened Species; NT – Near Threatened

Table 3. Summary of point features per LAI. LAI Number of point features % 1 38 12 2 78 24 3 60 18 4 80 24 5 73 22 Total 329 100

Table 4. Fields, field codes, and field descriptions used in the database.

Field Field code Description Scientific name Species Scientific name excluding authors Synonym Synonym includes heterotypic synonyms based from GBIF classification Occurrence source Source May either be in the form Author,year,page; Author, year; or GBIF portal URL Reported locality (location) Rep_loc May include name of province, town, village, sitio, mountain or watershed where species were collected or observed Reported description Rep_desc May include field notes, distribution, qualitative elevation range, elevation in meters, endemicity Point feature longitude Long Assigned longitude in decimal degrees Point feature latitude Lat Assigned latitude in decimal degrees Location accuracy index LAI In order of 1-5, 1 being most accurate Additional georeferencing source Add_source Other information used for determining location Placemark name KML_name Placemark name given as administrative unit or mountain name and its approximate elevation in meters Georeference remarks Geof_rem Issues encountered in georeferencing like inconsistencies with given coordinates or changed names of localities Georeferencer name Geof_by Geoferencer's name Georeferencer institution Geof_insti Geoferencer's institution Georeferencer email Geof_email Geoferencer's email Georeference determined date Geof_date Format: MM-DD-YEAR Version number Vers Database version number

171 Philippine Journal of Science Ramos LT et al.: Georeferenced Database of Selected Threatened Vol. 141 No. 2, December 2012 Forest Tree in the Philippines

Figure 2. Georeferenced species occurrences of threatened forest trees in the Philippines. A point feature corresponds to one or more occurrence by different species.

172 Philippine Journal of Science Ramos LT et al.: Georeferenced Database of Selected Threatened Vol. 141 No. 2, December 2012 Forest Tree in the Philippines to the surveys documented by Clements (2001). Forty This information can be useful in determining which percent of point features were found in the main island of species should be prioritized for specimen or germplasm . Although many expeditions were done in Mindanao collection and taxonomic identification. and the Visayas Islands during the last hundred years, the localities where specimens were found were predominantly This study paves the way for many museums particularly described under the name of provinces or an island group. in the Philippines to start the process of georeferencing These provinces and island groups eventually subdivided their collection data to provide network access to vast into smaller provinces, hence georeferencing localities amounts of collection-based data and the tools to make with this condition tended to be conservative, the species sense of that data especially for some geospatial analyses. occurrences underrepresented. The database is also convenient for visualizing species occurrence on a country scale and can also be used for historical spatial mapping. It contains 2 key identifiers: the scientific name that links a species’ taxonomic DISCUSSION attributes and the placemark name that links a species to georeferenced locations in space. These two identifiers, in Tool for conservation and research combination with herbaria records, can be used to extend The database is an indicator of how well a species is the functionality of the database for historical mapping of known based from species occurrences. For instance, specimen collections. Fig. 3a illustrates this for the species Cinnamomum oroi is the least known species in the Shorea negrosensis, an endemic dipterocarp species, using database, having been collected only in two localities: GBIF records. Kagaskas in Quezon Province in 1929 (http://data.gbif. The database can also provide some insight to the possible org/occurrences/216518942/) and Calayan Island in distribution of forest formations in the Philippines by Cagayan Province in 2005 (Clemeno et al. 2005). On the using indicator tree species occurrence as proxy. For other extreme is Afzelia rhomboidea, a widely distributed instance, 3 species were used to illustrate this (Fig. 3b- species found in the Philippines and . 3d). The spatial occurrence of Dipterocarpus grandiflorus

Figure 3. Map showing where and when Shorea negrosensis specimens have been collected in the Philippines in the last century based on GBIF.Fig. 3b, 3c, and 3d. Occurrence map of Dipterocarpus grandiflorus, Agathis philippinensis, and Vitex parviflora, respectively.

173 Philippine Journal of Science Ramos LT et al.: Georeferenced Database of Selected Threatened Vol. 141 No. 2, December 2012 Forest Tree in the Philippines

is indicative of the occurrence of tropical lowland transects which may stretch from a distance of 100 m to evergreen forest formations. The occurrence of Agathis a kilometer. The method which we used utilized only a philippinensis and Vitex parviflora meanwhile indicates dimensionless point feature that neither captures extent tropical lower montane forest formations and forest over in terms of length or area. As for EO records with LAI = limestone formations, respectively (Fernando et al 2009). 2 or higher, the point features therein are only estimates based on what is known about the species’ elevation If coupled with various environmental data as well as range and recent surface cover, since it is impossible projected climate, the database serves as an integral to determine where exactly a species occurred without component in spatially modeling the distribution of tree access to the collector’s field notes. Other topographic species and forests formations in the recent past as well as parameters which may also be important such as in a possible future scenario. With this output, the behavior aspect, slope or proximity to rivers were ignored in of selected threatened species can be determined under the georeferencing process. The datum of all reported different climate change scenarios. locations were assumed to have a datum of WGS (World Geodetic System) 1984 eventhough the said ellipsoid is Sources of uncertainty only applicable from 1984 up to present time. The user should be aware of the sources of uncertainty when using the database. Underscored here is the fact that the database is not a validated compilation of georeferenced species occurrences. Although we CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION referred here to sources which explicitly state the This paper demonstrates that there is a rich source occurrence of species in terms of latitude and longitude of species occurrence data that could provide useful coordinates, i.e. LAI = 1, consideration should be information for research as well as practical conservation. given to the level of accuracy of location information However, there is still a wealth of data sources that the during the time of specimen collection or observation, compilation was not able to include due to time constraint. as well as to the sampling method. Field surveys are traditionally conducted either by plots which may have This paper echoes the need for a holistic, georeferenced, an area ranging from 10 m x 10 m to a hectare or by and validated biodiversity information system on a national

174 Philippine Journal of Science Ramos LT et al.: Georeferenced Database of Selected Threatened Vol. 141 No. 2, December 2012 Forest Tree in the Philippines scale that aids knowledge sharing and decision-making CHAPMAN AD. 2005. Uses of primary species- process. However, some challenges need to be addressed occurrence data. Version 1.0 Report for the Global to achieve this. Foremost of this is digitized access. We Biodiversity Information Facility, Copenhagen. 111p. resorted to using GBIF records particularly because local CHAPMAN AD, WIECZOREK J (Eds.). 2006. Guide herbaria that house the largest specimen collections in to Best Practices for Georeferencing. Copenhagen: the post-war years are still largely in analogue form. The Global Biodiversity Information Facility. 90p. next challenge is to develop methods for georeferencing occurrence data which is documented and interoperable, CLEMENO BJB, LORICA MRP, DE LA CRUZ JF, and ideally, semi-automated. The third challenge is the ZABLAN J. 2005. A floral diversity assessment of provision of a cyber-infrastructure and protocols to enable Calayan Island. Retrieved from www.isla.org.ph/pdf/ different institutions and individuals to contribute, verify f011.pdf on 12 Sep 2011. and validate georeferenced species occurrence information. CLEMENTS T. 2001. Inventory of Forest Fragments This paper only contributes to a small subset of solutions to in the Polillo Islands. Blumea (21p). Retrieved from these challenges. An effort like this on a national scale will http://polillo.mampam.com/pdf/allforests.pdf. probably take decades or so to fully complete. But the need to come up with a georeferenced database of threatened CONKLIN HC. 1954. An ethnological approach to species occurrence becomes more imperative as human shifting agriculture. Transactions of the New York activities encroach more and more to fragile ecosystems Academy of Sciences, 17 (2nd ser), 133-142. which are fast disappearing. CYCLOPAEDIA OF MALESIAN COLLECTORS. Retrieved from http://www.nationaalherbarium.nl/ fmcollectors/ on 02 Oct 2011. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS DE GUZMAN E, UMALI RM, SOTALBO ED. 1986. Guide to Philippine Flora and Fauna Vol III. Quezon The authors would like to thank the United States City, Philippines: University of the Philippines, Natural Agency for International Development (USAID) for Science Research Center. 256p. funding support to the project. Invaluable assistance was also provided by the Philippine Tropical Forest [DENR] Department of Environment and Natural Conservation Foundation (PTFCF) in sharing their PDF Resources. 2007. Administrative Order No.2007-01. copies of botanical legacy literature and the Department Establishing the national list of threatened Philippine of Environment and Natural Resources-Protected Area plants and their categories, and the list of other wildlife and Wildlife Bureau (DENR-PAWB) in sharing their map species. Approved January 22, 2007. of protected areas. The views expressed here are of the DUCKWORTH WD, GENOWAYS HH, ROSE CL. 1993. authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the above- Preserving natural science collections: Chronicle of our mentioned organizations. environmental heritage. Washington (DC): National Institute for the Conservation of Cultural Property. 140p. REFERENCES EDWARDS JL. 2000. Interoperability of Biodiversity Databases: Biodiversity Information on Every ABRAHAM ERG, GONZALEZ JCT, CASTILLO, ML, Desktop. Science, 289 (5488), 2312-2314. LIT IL.JR, FERNANDO ES. 2010. Forest Cover and Biodiversity Profile of the Crater Area of Mt. Makiling, ELMER ADE. (ed). 1906-1908. Leaflets of Philippine Luzon, Philippines. Asia Life Sciences Supplement Botany Vol 1, Art 1-16. Manila, Philippine Islands. 4: 49-82. (414p). BEAMAN RS, CONN BJ. 2003. Automated geoparsing ELMER ADE. (ed). 1908-1910. Leaflets of Philippine and georeferencing of Malesian collection locality data. Botany Vol 2, Art 17-43. Manila, Philippine Islands. Telopea 10, 43-52. (375p). BEAMAN R, WIECZOREK J, BLUM, S. 2004. ELMER ADE. (ed). 1912-1913. Leaflets of Philippine Determining Space from place for natural history Botany Vol 5, Art 76-94. Manila, Philippine Islands. collections in a distributed digital environment. D-Lib (363p). Magazine 10. Retrieved from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/ ELMER ADE. (ed). 1915-1919. Leaflets of Philippine may04/beaman/05beaman.html on 15 Sep 2011. Botany Vol 8, Art 115-121. Manila, Philippine Islands. (396p).

175 Philippine Journal of Science Ramos LT et al.: Georeferenced Database of Selected Threatened Vol. 141 No. 2, December 2012 Forest Tree in the Philippines

EVERETT HD, WHITFORD HN. 1906. A Preliminary of Library Associations and Institutions. p. 1-23. Working Plan for the Public Forest Tract of the Insular HAMANN A. 2002. The North Negros Forest Reserve: a Lumber Company, Negros Occidental, P.I. Manila: Biodiversity Hotspot at Risk, Siliman Journal 43(1), Bureau of Printing. 54p. 84-89. FERNANDO ES, SUH MH, LEE J, LEE DK. 2008. Forest [IUCN] International Union for the Conservation of Formations of the Philippines. Seoul, Korea: ASEAN- Nature. 2003. 2003 IUCN Red List of Threatened Korea Environmental Cooperation Unit (AKECU), Species. Geneva: Switzerland. National Seoul University. 232p. LANE MA, EDWARDS JL. 2007. The Global Biodiversity FERNANDO ES, BANDE MJM, PIOLLO RA, SOPOT Information Facility (GBIF). In G. B. Curry and C. J. DD, DOLOTINA NA, GRANERT WG. (2009). Humphries (Eds.), Biodiversity Databases: Techniques, Dipterocarpaceae of Bohol Island Philippines. Asia politics and applications. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Life Sciences 18(1), 121-138. Press Taylor & Francis Group. p. 1-4. GARCIA HG. 2002a. Floristic study of lowland LANGENBERGER G, MARTIN K, SAUERBORN J. dipterocarp forest at western part [Apaya] of Northern 2006. Species Inventory of a Philippine Sierra Madre Natural Park. Technical report, Northern Lowland Rain Forest and its Conservation Value. Sierra Madre Natural Park—Conservation Project, Biodiversity and Conservation, 15(4), 1271-1301. Cabagan MERRILL ED. 1906. The Flora of the Lamao Forest GARCIA HG. (2002b). Floristic study of lowland Reserve. Philipp J Sci 1(Supplement 1), 1-142. dipterocarp forest at eastern part [Dimolid] of Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park. Technical report, Northern MERRILL ED. 1908. On a Collection of Plants from the Sierra Madre Natural Park—Conservation Project, Batanes and Babuyanes Islands. Philipp J Sci 3C(6), Cabagan 385-444. GARCIA HG. (2002c). Floristic study of mossy forest in MERRILL ED. 1909. New or Noteworthy Philippine Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park. Technical report, Plants, VII. Philipp J Sci 4c(3), 247-330. Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park—Conservation MERRILL ED. 1910. An Enumeration of Philippine Project, Cabagan. Leguminosæ, with keys to the genera and species. GAUL P. 1997. The California Natural Diversity Philipp J Sci 5c(1), 1-136. Database: A Spatial Model for Cataloging Biodiversity. MERRILL ED. 1918. Species Blancoanae: a Critical 1997 ESRI User Conference. San Diego, California: Revision of the Philippine Species of Plants Described ESRI. Retrieved from http://proceedings.esri.com/ by Blanco and Llanos. Manila, Philippines: Bureau library/userconf/proc97/proc97/to600/pap564/p564. of Printing. 423p. htm on 13 Sep 2011. MERRILL ED. (1923-26). An Enumeration of Philippine GRAHAM CH, FERRIER S, HUETTMAN F, MORITZ Flowering Plants Vol. I-IV. The Government of the C, PETERSON AT. 2004. New development in Philippine Islands Department of Agriculture and museum-based informatics and applications in Natural Resources, Bureau of Science, Manila. biodiversity analysis. Trends in ecology and evolution 9(19), 497-503. MERRITT ML, WHITFORD HN. 1906. A Preliminary Working Plan for the Public Forest Tract of the GRUEZO WSM. 2009. Vegetation and Flora of Naujan Mindoro Lumber and Logging Company, Bongabon, lake National Park Watershed Zone, Mindoro Oriental Mindoro, P.I. 54p. Province, Philippines, I. Upper Watershed Zone. Asia Life Sciences 18(2): 281-315. MYERS NA, MITTERMEIER RA, MITTERMEIER CG, DA FONSECA GAB, KENT J. 2000. Biodiversity GURALNICK RP, WIECZOREK J, BEAMAN R, hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853- HIJMANS, RJ. 2006. BioGeomancer: automated 858. georeferencing to map the world’s biodiversity data. PLoS Biology 4(11), e381. ROJO JP. 1999. Revised lexicon of Philippine trees. Forest Product Research and Development Institute, GWINN NE, RINALDO C. 2008. The Biodiversity Department of Science and Technology (FPRDI- Heritage Library: sharing biodiversity literature with DOST), College, Laguna, Philippines. 484p. the world. World Library and Information Congress: 74th IFLA General Conference and Council, Quebec, [RP] REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES. 2009. Canada. August 10-14 2008. International Federation Assessing progress towards the 2010 biodiversity

176 Philippine Journal of Science Ramos LT et al.: Georeferenced Database of Selected Threatened Vol. 141 No. 2, December 2012 Forest Tree in the Philippines

target: The 4th National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau – Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 108p. WIECZOREK J, GUO Q, HIJMANS RJ. 2004. The point- radius method for georeferencing locality descriptions and calculating associated uncertainty. International Journal Geogrpahical Information Science 18(8) 745-767. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/ http://www.gadm.org/ http://www.gbif.org/ http://www.ionia1.esrin.esa.int/ http://srtm.csi.cgiar.org JARVIS A, REUTER HI, NELSON A, GUEVARA E. 2008. Hole-filled SRTM for the globe Version 4, available from the CGIAR-CSI SRTM 90m Database (http://srtm.csi.cgiar.org).

177