Impacts of Deforestation on Some Orchids of São Paulo State, Brazil
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
NCON 55 1–5 ARTICLE IN PRESS n a t u r e z a & c o n s e r v a ç ã o x x x (2 0 1 6) xxx–xxx Natureza & Conservação Brazilian Journal of Nature Conservation Supported by Boticário Group Foundation for Nature Protection ht tp://www.naturezaeconservacao.com.br 1 Policy Forum 2 Impacts of deforestation on some orchids of São 3 Paulo State, Brazil a,∗ b c 4 Q1 Jean Carlos Cardoso , Jaime Teixeira da Silva , Wagner Vendrame a 5 Q2 Department of Rural Development, Centro do Ciências Agrárias, UFSCar, Rodovia Anhanguera, km 174, CEP 13600-970, Araras, SP, 6 Brazil b 7 Q3 P. O. Box 7, Miki cho post office, Ikenobe 3011-2, Kagawa-Ken 761-0799, Japan c 8 University of Florida, IFAS, Tropical Research and Education Center, 18905 SW 280th St, Homestead, FL 33031-3314, United States 9 a r t 10 i c l e i n f o 11 12 Article history: 13 Received 28 June 2015 14 Accepted 12 February 2016 15 Available online xxx Indonesia, which have similar policies and practices (Gilbert, 35 Deforestation impacts 2014). This represents a major concern in countries recog- 36 nized for their biodiversity because such policies undervalue 37 16 Countries that are home to high levels of biodiversity need to natural biodiversity at the expense of economic development 38 17 address a fundamental question: which is more important, (Jones-Walters and Mulder, 2009). As a consequence, the effec- 39 18 conservation of valuable – but unexplored – biodiversity, or tive conservation of plant species is placed at risk (Keith, 2014) 40 19 deforestation for economic development? Brazil is one promi- and this may represent an invaluable loss to humanity. For 41 20 nent and typical example of this struggle, finding itself at a example, about 67% of anticancer treatments contain natural 42 21 crossroad because it is one of the major biodiversity centers products derived from plants and animals (NCI, 2007). The 43 22 in the world (∼20% of Earth’s biodiversity) with one of the degree to which biodiversity is susceptible to losses is related 44 23 largest centers of endemism (Government of Brazil, 2012a). to the type of species and range of human use (Redford and 45 24 Brazil is also a nation with record-breaking deforestation, Richter, 1999) and this susceptibility to losses increases when 46 2 25 having led to the removal of more than 165,000 km from the human populations are near. Wild ornamental and medicinal 47 26 Amazon, the Cerrado, Mata Atlântica and other biomes within plant species provide an opportunity for regional economic 48 27 a period of five years, from 2000 to 2005 (Hansen et al., 2010). development while also preserving an intangible cultural 49 28 This is equivalent to double the total area of Austria. Brazilian asset, aspects that are often overlooked or undervalued. 50 29 deforestation was responsible for 30% of carbon emissions, 30 between 2000 and 2010 mainly from replacement by cattle São Paulo state in Brazil as a case study 31 (71%) and soybean production (29%) in deforested areas 32 (Karstensen et al., 2013). In situ conservation in Brazil is inef- 33 ficient because government policies encourage the economic Explosive economic development in the State of São Paulo (SP), 51 34 use of forests (Moran, 2011), similar to other countries such as Brazil caused by agriculture, industry, urbanization and other ∗ Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (J.C. Cardoso). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ncon.2016.02.001 1679-0073/© 2016 Associac¸ão Brasileira de Ciência Ecológica e Conservac¸ão. Published by Elsevier Editora Ltda. All rights reserved. Please cite this article in press as: Cardoso, J.C., et al., Impacts of deforestation on some orchids of São Paulo State, Brazil. Nat Conservacao. NCON 55 1–5 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ncon.2016.02.001 NCON 55 1–5 ARTICLE IN PRESS 2 n a t u r e z a & c o n s e r v a ç ã o x x x (2 0 1 6) xxx–xxx A generate electricity for expanding cities in the state, such as 71 Silviculture the Pardo and Novo rivers used to support the city of Águas de 72 Santa Bárbara as well as additional nearby towns (Fig. 1A and 73 Agriculture B). Companies are required under law to restore wild forests 74 Pasture in order to replace land newly occupied by water, but failure 75 Forest remnant to implement and regulate this legislation, together with the 76 lack of knowledge about many of the threatened plant species, 77 provides a weak foundation for the efficient conservation and 78 Deforested area restoration of much needed biodiversity. Wild orchid species 79 are not being restored in these new environments because 80 Forest remna nt of the complex requirements for their propagation and cul- 81 tivation. In reality, new legislation written in 2012 resulted in 82 weak support for the protection and restoration of biodiversity, 83 and even though it established delimited areas for permanent 84 preservation and legal reserves, it did not define the number 85 Pastu re and types of species that needed to be restored (Government of 86 Brazil, 2012b). Restoration procedures conserve wild species, 87 B maintain genetic flow, and reduce urban heat islands (Pollock 88 Marginal forest remnant and Beechie, 2014; Staley, 2013). In addition, many riparian 89 forests, the preferential habitat of most native orchids of SP, 90 are now used for expanding sugarcane fields (Oliveira and 91 Seraphim, 2011), pasture and urbanization, which is at odds 92 Pardo river with Brazilian environmental regulations. 93 Further compounding this problem and inhibiting orchid 94 conservation in SP is limited knowledge about the interac- 95 tion of many species in the Orchidaceae with biotic and 96 abiotic factors of forest remnants. Fundamental research is 97 Complete deforestation essential to allow an understanding of the complex relation- 98 ships among orchids and the environmental conditions that 99 influence them and are involved in the reproduction and dis- 100 semination of these species. Tw o complex questions that need 101 answers are: Why do some terrestrial and epiphytic orchids 102 live in small, restricted populations, while others are widely 103 Fig. 1 – High pressure situation of natural marginal forest disseminated? What factors prevent the wide dissemination 104 remnants from the São Paulo State due to the uses for of some of these small, restricted populations within a forest 105 economical purposes (A) and detailed deforestation of remnant? In fact, some of these species have highly restricted 106 forest remnant of marginal area from Rio Pardo, at Águas and small populations, which influences the methodologies 107 de Santa Bárbara (SP), Brazil, for construction of a new that can be used to survey them, as observed in different 108 hydroelectric station. cities of SP (Cardoso, 2014; Cardoso and Israel, 2005). Tw o 109 orchid species showing contrasting scenarios are Galeandra 110 beyrichii (Tribe Cymbidieae, Subtribe Catasetinae) (Fig. 2A) and 111 52 anthropogenic interferences has reduced the biomes in rich Oeceoclades maculata (Tribe Cymbidieae, Subtribe Eulophiinae) 112 53 and diverse areas, such as Cerrado and Mata Atlântica to small (Fig. 2B). The former is highly restricted to small populations in 113 54 forest remnants, affecting the lives and existence of most forest remnants located in specific sites of SP (Cardoso, unpub- 114 55 species and resulting in areas that are under extreme pressure lished data; Fig. 2C), while the latter is widely distributed 115 56 for use in diverse economic applications (Fig. 1A). One of the in populations with variable numbers in different environ- 116 57 clusters of organisms affected by these conditions are the wild mental conditions and cities, and even widely distributed 117 58 orchid species of SP. Orchids are among the most threatened of within the same or different forest remnants (Cardoso, 2014; 118 59 all flowering plants due to over-collection, but mainly habitat Cardoso and Israel, 2005). Similarly, two epiphytic species, 119 60 loss caused many species to become extinct in the wild. As a Oncidium crispum and Lophiaris pumilla, both in the Subtribe 120 61 result, all orchids have been placed on Appendix II or higher of Oncidiinae show more restricted and more widely distributed 121 62 the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species populations, respectively (Cardoso, 2014). A recent survey in 122 63 (CITES) (Roberts and Dixon, 2008). Orchids face high environ- the subtropical Brazilian forests of the state of Rio Grande 123 64 mental susceptibility to losses in biodiversity, which can be do Sul confirmed the hypothesis that some terrestrial orchid 124 65 caused by genetic narrowing, and they may become critically species are very restricted while others are widely distributed 125 66 endangered or extinct due to the loss of habitats associated (Colla, 2014). The status of a species for conservation based 126 67 with agriculture, urbanization and over-collection for eco- on IUCN’s seven classes of nomenclature is defined by equa- 127 68 nomic purposes (Cardoso, 2014). tions that calculate the estimated number of plants. However, 128 69 In SP, one reason for the loss of forest stands along the some Brazilian orchid species are unique to forest remnants. 129 70 banks of rivers is the development of hydroelectric projects to Caution is thus needed when using the IUCN’s estimate as it 130 Please cite this article in press as: Cardoso, J.C., et al., Impacts of deforestation on some orchids of São Paulo State, Brazil. Nat Conservacao. NCON 55 1–5 2016.