FLORA SURVEY AND BIODIVERSITY ASSESSMENT FOR CORE ZONING MUNICIPALITY OF BUSUANGA
September 2006
Prepared for:
PALAWAN COUNCIL FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT Palawan Center for Sustainable Development Sta. Monica Heights, Puerto Princesa City, Palawan, Philippines 5300 Email: [email protected] Tel.: (63-48) 434-4235, Fax: 434-4234
Funded through a loan from :
JAPAN BANK FOR INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION
Prepared by:
PACIFIC CONSULTANTS INTERNATIONAL in association with ALMEC Corporation CERTEZA Information Systems, Inc. DARUMA Technologies Inc. Geo-Surveys & Mapping, Inc.
Photo Credits:
All photos by SEMP-NP ECAN Zoning Component Project Management Office
This report can be reproduced as long as the convenors are properly acknowledged as the source of information
Reproduction of this publication for sale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without the written consent of the publisher.
Printed by:
Futuristic Printing Press, Puerto Princesa City, Philippines
Suggested Citation:
PCSDS. 2006. Flora Survey and Biodiversity Assessment for Core Zoning Municipality of El Nido. Palawan Council for Sustainable Development, Puerto Princesa City. TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page
List of Tables vi List of Figures ix List of Appendix Tables x List of Appendix Figures xi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY xii
1.0 BACKGROUND 1 1.1 The Municipality 1
2.0 OBJECTIVES 3
3.0 LIMITATION AND SCOPE 4
4.0 METHODOLOGY 4
4.1 Survey Design 4 4.2 Variables and Parameters 6 4.3 Vegetation Description and Analysis 6 4.3.1 Analytical Framework 7 4.3.2 Data Analysis 7 4.3.3 Stand and Stock Table 9 4.3.4 Identifying Core Zones 10
5.0 RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 10 5.1 Bio-physical Features of Busuanga Municipality 10 5.1.1 Topography 10 5.1.2 Geology 11 5.1.3 Climate 11 5.1.4 River Systems and Drainage 11
5.2 General Land Uses and Vegetation Cover 11 5.2.1 Land Uses 11 5.2.2 Built-up Areas and Road Network 12
5.3 Land Degradation Problems in the Uplands 12 5.3.1 Grassland Fires Encroaching into Forested Areas 12 5.3.2 Timber Poaching 13 5.3.3 Unmanaged Large Cattle Grazing 13 5.3.4 Hillside Farming 13 ______iii
Title Page
5.3.5 Soil Erosion 13
5.4 Vegetation Cover 14 5.5 Physiography of Barangays 15 5.5.1 Barangay Concepcion 15 5.5.2 Barangay Sagrada 16 5.5.3 Yulo King Ranch 16 5.5.4 Barangay Cheey 17 5.5.5 Barangay Salvacion 17 5.5.6 Barangay New Quezon 18 5.5.7 Barangay New Busuanga 18 5.5.8 Barangay San Rafael 18 5.5.9 Barangay Sto. Nino 18 5.5.10 Barangay Buluang 19 5.5.11 Barangay Bugtong 19
5.6 Vegetation Analysis 19 5.6.1 Primary vis-à-vis Non-Primary Forest 19 5.6.2 Primary Forest over Ultramafic Soil 21 5.6.3 Primary Forest over Karst Limestone 21
5.7 Overall Description of Vegetation Cover and Forest Types 22 5.7.1 Land Uses in the Uplands 23 5.7.2 Location of Upland Settlements 24
5.8 Implication to Reforestation 24 5.9 Biodiversity Assessment of Flora 24 5.9.1 The Canopy Layer 25 5.9.2 The Under Canopy Layer 28 5.9.3 The Ground Layer Stratum (Undergrowth) 31
5.10 Vegetation Analysis by Transect 33 5.10.1 Transect 1 in Barangay Sto. Nino 33 5.10.2 Transect 2 in Barangay Sto. Nino 35 5.10.3 Transect 3 in Barangays Concepcion and Sagrada and Yulo King Ranch 37 5.10.4 Transect 4 in Barangay Cheey 39 5.10.5 Transect 5 in Barangays Bogtong, Cheey and Salvacion 41 5.10.6 Transect 6 in Barangays Cheey and Salvacion 43 5.10.7 Transect 7 in Barangay Cheey 45 5.10.8 Transect 8 in Barangays New Quezon, San Rafael, New Busuanga 47 5.10.9 Transect 9 in Barangay New Busuanga 50 5.10.10Transect 10 in Barangay Buluang 52
______iv
Title Page
5.11 Endangered and Endemic Species of Plants in Busuanga 55 5.12 Recommended Core Zones for Terrestrial Flora Component 59
7.0 ISSUES, PROBLEMS AND THREATS TO CORE ZONES 62 7.1 Present and Potential Threats 62 7.2 Proposed Management Prescriptions to Protect Core Zones and Improve Forest Conditions in Busuanga 62 7.3 Proposed Measures to Rehabilitate Degraded Ecosystems in Busuanga 63 7.3.1 Grasslands 63 7.3.2 Brushlands 63 7.3.3 Denuded Forests and Eroded Slopes 64 7.3.4 Kaingin Areas 64 7.3.5 Encroachment into Primary and Secondary Forests 64 7.3.6 Recently Logged Over Areas 64
8.0 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND 65 RECOMMENDATIONS 9.1 Significant Findings from the Survey 65 9.2 Conclusions 65 9.3 Recommendations 66
REFERENCES 68
ANNEXES 71
Plate 1. The Manconos, Xanthostemon bracteatus and X. 71 verdugunianus. Plate 2. Malakatmon, Dillenia luzoniensis, found in the Parang 71 ecosystem of New Quezon, Busuanga Plate 3. The Parang Ecosystem, Habitat of the Malakatmon in New 72 Quezon, Busuanga Plate 4. The beach forest ecosystem in Sto. Niño, Busuanga, already 72 a threatened vanishing ecosystem in the Philippines
APPENDICES 73
______v LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Title Page
1 The Fernando Biodiversity Scale (1998) 7
2 Data Collection Sheet for the Stand and Stock Analysis 9
3 Soil Erosion Rates in Various Soil Cover 14
4 Dominant Vegetation in Busuanga by Transect Line 22
5 Summary of the Stand and Stock Table 24
6 Relative Values of the Top Five (5) Species in the Canopy 26 Layer
7 Similarity Values between Sampling Transects, Canopy 26 Layer
8 Plant Forms under Canopy in Busuanga 28
9 Relative Values of the Top Five (5) Species for the Under 29 Canopy Layer
10 Similarity Values Between Sampling Transects, Under 30 Canopy Layer
11 Plant Forms in the Ground Layer or Undergrowth in 31 Busuanga
12 Relative Values of the Top Five (5) Species in the Ground 32 Layer
13 Similarity Values Between Sampling Transects, Ground 32 Layer
14 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 1 34
15 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Under Canopy Layer for 34 Transect 1
16 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 1 35
17 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 2 36
______vi Table No. Title Page
18 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Under Canopy Layer for 36 Transect 2
19 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 2 37
20 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 3 38
21 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Under Canopy Layer for 38 Transect 3
22 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 3 39
23 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 4 40
24 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Under Canopy Layer for 40 Transect 4
25 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 4 41
26 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 5 42
27 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Under Canopy Layer for 42 Transect 5
28 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 5 43
29 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 6 44
30 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Under Canopy Layer for 44 Transect 6
31 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 6 45
32 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 7 46
33 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Under Canopy Layer for 46 Transect 7
34 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 7 47
35 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 8 48
36 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Under Canopy Layer for 49 Transect 8
37 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 8 49
______vii
Table No. Title Page
38 Dominant Six (6) Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 9 50
39 All Species in the Under Canopy Layer for Transect 9 51
40 All Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 9 51
41 All Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 10 52
42 All Species in the Under Canopy Layer for Transect 10 53
43 All Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 10 54
44 Busuanga Flora Species With Endangered Status, per 57 Transect
45 Busuanga Flora Species With Endangered Status, per 58 Barangay
______viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Title Page
1 Map of Palawan Showing Location of Busuanga 2 Municipality
2 Layout of Transects and Quadrats 5
3 Graphical Presentation of the Stand and Stock Table With 20 Volume and Diameter Classes as Parameters
4 Cladogram of the Cluster Analysis for the Canopy Layer 27
5 Cladogram of the Cluster Analysis for the Under Canopy 30 Layer
6 Cladogram of the Cluster Analysis for the Ground Layer 33
7 Shannon Biodiversity Index for Flora in the Canopy, 60 Under Canopy and Ground Vegetation for Busuanga, Northern Palawan
8 Recommended Core Zones in Busuanga Muncipality 61
______ix
LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table No. Title Page
1 Diversity Index per Canopy Structure per Transect 73
2 Transects of Busuanga Flora Survey Grouop: Shannon- 74 Weiner Biodiversity Indices (20x20)
3 Transects of Busuanga Flora Survey Grouop: Shannon- 76 Weiner Biodiversity Indices (5x5)
4 Transects of Busuanga Flora Survey Grouop: Shannon- 78 Weiner Biodiversity Indices (1x1)
5 Preliminary Checklist of Angiosperms (Non-monocots 80 Paleoherbs and Dicots) of Busuanga, Palawan
6 Preliminary Checklist of Gymnosperms of Busuanga, 95 Palawan
7 Preliminary Checklist of Mangrove and Beach Plants of 97 Northern Palawan
8 Busuanga Flora Species with Endangered Status per Transect 103
9 Busuanga Flora Species with Endangered Status per 104 Barangay in Busuanga
10 Coordinates of Transects per Barangay in Busuanga 105 Municipality
______x
LIST OF APPENDIX FIGURES
Appendix Figure No. Title Page
1 Shannon Biodiversity Index for Flora in the Canopy, Under 106 Canopy and Ground Vegetation for Busuanga, Northern Palawan
2 Timber Volume for Dipterocarps and Non-Dipterocarps in 107 Busuanga
______xi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Busuanga Island, located at the northernmost part of the province of Palawan, has a total land area of 52,478 ha. However, the Yulo King Ranch (22,268 has) covers more than 50%. Along its coast is 16 barangays accessible to both land and sea transport.
Busuanga has predominantly rough mountainous soils with a rolling and hilly terrain on its western part. The level areas, mostly devoted to rice production and fruit trees, abound in San Miguel loam and Busuanga type of soil. The Salvacion mountain range, the Sinabuyan mountain range between Busuanga and Cheey, and the Naapac mountain range in San Rafael are among the major mountain ranges of the Municipality.
Busuanga is also composed of numerous islets lying mostly in the western portion that greatly contributes to the fishing ventures of the populace and are high potential tourism sites.
The wet season starts from July to October. The rest of the year is dry.
The sampling design of the field survey used the nested quadrats in high forest cover areas. The nested quadrats have dimensions of 20 m x 20 m for trees having 10 cm diameter at breast height and above; 5 m x 5 m for tall shrubs and herbs (e.g. banana, papaya), and other plant forms having less than 4 m in height; 1 m x 1 m for plants less than 1 m high. This includes wildlings, small herbs, grasses, etc. Respectively, the strata represent the canopy layer, the under-canopy or intermediate layer, and the third is the ground vegetation layer.
For other land cover areas, the line intercept method was used. However, computations for this were not done since these other land cover areas inherently have lower biodiversity, which automatically disqualifies them as biodiversity hotspots.
Ten (10) Transect lines were laid from coast to coast with a direction of northeast to southwest for the municipality.
The stand and stock table was also generated.
Discussion of the full report is divided into 2 major parts. One part is the physical characterization per barangay. The other part is the bio-physical characterization per transect, per strata, in each barangay.
Busuanga has an overall flora diversity of 4.21 using the Shannon – Weiner Biodiversity Index, H’. This is quite high according to the Fernando Scale (1998) used. The distribution of species in Busuanga is rather clustered or clumped.
On a per transect basis, transect 6 in Bgys. Cheey and Salvacion had the highest floral diversity at 4.17.
______EXECUTIVE SUMMARY xii All transects have moderately high to very high flora diversity, each transect collectively having more than 2.5. However, on a per sampling site basis, majority of the sites have low to very low diversity. This would mean that as one goes along the transect, there are species that are added in the list. Hence, many rare species are cumulatively listed down to contribute to the high diversity index of each transect.
There are 15 species identified in the IUCN / CITES lists in the Canopy Layer. Some of these are the Mancono (Xanthostemon verdugonianus) and Mapilig (Xanthostemon bracteatus), Molave (Vitex parviflora), Sakat (Terminalia nitens) locally known as Taket, and the Narra (Pterocarpus indicus). Other species are listed in the main report.
The landscape of Busuanga is very fragmented with grasslands, brushlands and forests interspersed and scattered in the island. Buho bamboo clearly dominates the undercanopy growth indicating a disturbed island ecosystem. Discussion on the landscape and its vegetative cover is included with suggested measures on its management.
Much of the soil medium in Busuanga is chert – based, hence, not many but highly specialized species could be found. This adds on to the high diversity of the area.
Recent validation survey found no ultramafic ecosystem and this has been confirmed by the geologist that was interviewed in the area. Most of the land formations are karst limestone having silicon dioxide as one of its major elements.
Grasslands observed seldom have Cogon (Imperata cylindrical). Where they are present, they are in a “parang” type of ecosystem. Forage grasses dominate.
Calauit Island is already a proclaimed sanctuary and considered a core zone.
Other core zones recommended for Busuanga are found in transects 4, 5, 6, and 7. These are located in Bgys Cheey, Bugtong, San Rafael, and Old Busuanga.
______EXECUTIVE SUMMARY xiii 1.0 BACKGROUND
Environmental characterization is an important and necessary undertaking in order to sufficiently conceptualize and finalize functional management systems. Simply stated, both qualitative and quantitative data need to be generated as these are the basic requirements in developing and finalizing a natural resource management plan. Foremost of these are updating information on the various plant community types, land uses, extent of vegetation cover, associated wildlife, communities, drainage systems, access network and soil erosion classes. Equally important is the identification of the causes and sources of environmental degradation so that remedial measures could be formulated and put in place to respond to the need. Five bio-physical factors are important considerations when environmental conservation is the very purpose of the surveys. These are vegetation, soil, water, air, and temperature. However vegetation is the most important factor among these as it influences the others.
The stability of the agricultural system, human settlements, industrial systems, coastal, and marine ecosystems greatly depends upon the functionality, productivity, diversity, and stability of the forest (and watershed) ecosystems. Nature tourism, likewise, depends upon the intact and functioning natural environment. The sustainability of nature tourism hinges on the maintenance of the processes inside the forest since it greatly influences all other ecosystems. The surveys are the starting activities towards the development of management systems.
1.1 The Municipality
The Island of Busuanga lies between 12˚00’ – 12˚20’ N latitude and 119˚50’ - 120˚00’ E longitude (Figure 1). It could be accessed in one – hour direct flight from Puerto Princesa, since it has an air strip that handles light planes. Also it could be reached by sea transport for about 9 to 10 hours from Puerto Princesa City. Busuanga Island is only about 45 km away from the Island of Mindoro and is about 240 km away from Manila.
Busuanga has total land area of about 45,000 hectares and has 16 barangays.
The Municipality of Busuanga is composed of plains and valleys with a rolling to hilly land physiography at its central portion. Meander belts adjacent to rivers could also be found within and at the edges of the hilly lands. The topography is generally rolling with steep portions. The central hills have elevations that are less than 700 meters above sea level (masl). It is in these hills that the habitats of the unique flora and fauna could be found.
______BACKGROUND 1
Busuanga
Figure 1. Map of Palawan Showing Location of Barangay Municipality
______BACKGROUND 2 Ultramafic ecosystems are absent in Busuanga Island, according to a geologist in the area, Eng. Omar Alfonso (Pers.Com. 2004). He mentioned however that the composition of chert soil is basically silicon dioxide (SiO2), aside from the calcium carbonates basic to limestone. On the other hand, Silicon belongs to the metal group in the Chemical Periodic table but is not classified as heavy metal, which ultramafic soil is based. Therefore, associated vegetation of “ultramafic” substrates in Busuanga is actually silicon-based in chert rather than heavy metal – based.
In the flora survey, ten (10) transects were laid out in a northeast-southwest direction covering ten (10) barangays. The transect layout was from shore to shore of the island municipality.
These 10 barangays covered by transects are the following:
• Concepcion • New Busuanga
• Sagrada • Bogtong
• Cheey • Buluang
• Salvacion • Sto. Nino
• San Rafael • New Quezon
Another area covered by transects is the Yulo King Ranch (YKR) in Barangay Cheey in Busuanga and in Coron. It is not a barangay but the size of the YKR makes it a significant place since it straddles two municipalities.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
The terrestrial flora survey was carried out in Busuanga to determine the status of the vegetative cover, know where are these located, what factors, existing and potential, influence their stability. The survey is necessary so that a map could be finalized indicating the magnitudes of the various plant community types that are needed in management planning. Flora survey and biodiversity assessment were undertaken to have a reliable characterization of the various plant community types in the Municipality of Busuanga with the following objectives:
1) To generate information on the structure and composition of the varying major vegetation cover and land uses of uplands in Busuanga.
2) To quantify the plant compositions of the various plant community types.
______OBJECTIVES 3 3) To make recommendations on: Institutional framework for the ECAN Zoning System in Northern Palawan based on Republic Act 7611, Enhancing the capability of PCSDS and local governments in pursuing sustainable development in Northern Palawan.
4) To describe the plant diversity of Busuanga.
5) To identify and recommend core zones for the Municipality of Busuanga
3.0 LIMITATION AND SCOPE
The flora survey established in-depth sampling sites only in forest and brush lands where most vegetation and habitats of fauna are found. The size of the sampling plots (quadrats) is limited to the dimensions as stated in the Methodology. Therefore, only those species found within the quadrats are recorded; hence the biodiversity indices serve only as an indicator of biodiversity levels. On the other hand, the checklist of species includes those that have been recorded in the validation survey conducted by the Biodiversity Survey Team.
Characterization of plant diversity is done by transect and not according to barangay since biodiversity does not recognize political boundaries. However, the physiography of the municipality could be done according to barangay because of the fixed nature of landforms. The characterization, however, is based on the data gathered along transects that traverse the barangays and field observations. Areas with high vegetative cover (i.e. forest cover) were selected for the survey. Grasslands were surveyed in a superficial manner through line-intercept method for baseline information only. Grasslands are “homogeneous”, thus, computations for biodiversity were not included.
Areas between transects are not recorded or sampled, hence, there may be habitats that would be missed.
4.0 METHODOLOGY
Busuanga has been identified as a first priority site, hence, an in-depth survey was required to assess the biodiversity of the area and to identify and delineate core zones.
4.1 Survey Design
Using satellite imagery of the municipality, transect lines were drawn from coast to coast in a NE – SW direction.
Figure 2 shows the lay out of the transect lines in Busuanga. Distance between transects is 2.5 km.
______METHODOLOGY 4 For the in-depth survey, nested quadrats were established along transects in areas with high forest cover. To stratify the object of study, i.e. the forest and brush lands, three dimensions of the nested quadrats were made. These are the following:
20 m x 20 m - for sampling of trees with more than 10 cm diameter at breast height (dbh) and more than 4 m in height (Canopy Layer) 5 m x 5 m – for sampling of small to medium size trees, large herbs (e.g. banana, abaca), and large grasses (bamboo). Small to medium size trees include those having less than 10 cm dbh, less than 4 m in height. (Under Canopy Layer) 1 m x 1 m – for sampling of wildlings (< 1 m ht.), grasses, herbs, ferns, other plant forms that grow close to the ground (Ground Layer / Undergrowth).
The smaller quadrats are established within the larger one, hence, the term “nested quadrats”. The smaller quadrat is laid out in the lower right corner of the larger quadrat, the smallest quadrat is laid out in the lower right corner of the smaller quadrat.
The following figure shows the layout of the quadrats along transects.
250 m
2.5 km
Figure 2. Layout of Transects and Quadrats
______METHODOLOGY 5 4.2 Variables and Parameters
Variables and parameters are identified in accordance with the objectives of the survey. Parameters are the “description of a population” while variables are the “logical groupings of attributes or characteristics that describe an object” (Freund 1988). The following are the variables and parameters used in the assessment:
a) Species diversity (variable) ¾ Shannon- Weiner Biodiversity Index H’ (parameter) ¾ Pielou Distribution Index J’ (parameter) b) Stand-and-Stock table (variable) - contains various species and volume for each. It needs measuring DBH (parameter) and merchantable heights (parameter). c) Basal Area - circumference at breast height occupied by each species d) Frequency- Number of nested quadrats or subplots in which a species is found e) Relative Frequency- the proportion of the frequency of a species relative to all frequencies of all species in the transect f) Density – the number of individuals of a species in a given area; abundance is the number of individuals of a species regardless of area size g) Relative Density- Proportion of the number of individuals of one species relative to the total number of individuals of all species h) Dominance – the average basal area of all individuals of a species i) Relative Dominance- Proportion of the average basal area of one species relative to the total basal area of all species j) Importance Value Index- total of all relative values per species, the species with the highest value indicating the dominant species that would exert influence on the ecosystem.
Preparation for field survey, materials and equipment used are found in the Field Survey Manual.
Data collection for the actual field work in the In-Depth survey is done following the steps in the Field Manual. Plot information is recorded noting down plot numbers, plot coordinates (latitude and longitude), line transect number, and stratum, etc. All data are recorded in the Flora Survey form.
4.3 Vegetation Description and Analysis
Analysis begins by organizing the data into computational form.
______METHODOLOGY 6 4.3.1 Analytical Framework
All density or abundance data are run through the Biodiversity Professional Beta 2 Data Analysis Program (BD-Pro Beta 2 software, McAleece et.al. 1997; available free in the internet) to compute for the Shannon (H') index of diversity and other required parameters.
The Fernando Biodiversity Scale (1998) is used to determine biodiversity levels (Table 1).
Table 1. The Fernando Biodiversity Scale (1998)
Relative Shannon (H’) Pielou (J’) Values Index Evenness Index Very High 3.5 and above 0.75-1.00 High 3.0-3.49 0.50-0.74 Moderate 2.5-2.99 0.25-0.49 Low 2.0-2.49 0.15-0.24 Very Low 1.9 & below 0.05-0.14
4.3.2 Data Analysis
Data quantified for the flora of the terrestrial ecosystems shall include density/ abundance, frequency, importance value, and other biodiversity indices. The following formulae are used in the said computations:
Density (Den) = total no. of individuals in a species in all sampling plots
Frequency (Freq) = Number of times the species occurred in all plots x 100 Number of plots
Dominance (Dom) = Basal Area of a species
Relative Density ( RDen) = Den X 100 Total Den
Relative Frequency (RFreq) = Freq X 100 Total Freq
______METHODOLOGY 7 Relative Dominance (RDom) = BA of a species x 100 Total BA of all species
Importance Value (IV) = RA + RF + RDo 3
Obtained values are run in the BD Pro Beta 2 software to determine diversity and evenness indices such as the following:
Shannon-Weiner Index (H’). It is a measure of the average degree of “uncertainty” in predicting to what species an individual chosen at random from a collection of S species and N individuals will belong (Magurran 1988).
S H’ = - Σ [(ni / N) ln (ni / N)] i = 1
Pielou’s Evenness Index (J’) - expresses H’ relative to the maximum value that H’ can obtain when all of the species in the sample are perfectly even with one individual per species (Magurran 1988).
J’ = H' ln (S)
Similarity Between Sites. Similarity indices shall be used in comparing vegetative composition between transects. The Bray & Curtis Dissimilarity Measure is used and transformed into a similarity Index using the formula below and then made into a cladogram (McAleece, et.al. 1997).
B = _Σ ( Xij – Xik )__ ; 1.0 – B = SI Σ (Xij + Xik)
Where: SI = Similarity Index B = Bray – Curtis Measure of Dissimilarity
Xij, Xik = the total number of individuals in species i in each sample
Unique habitats, outstanding terrain features, and scenic spots are also described.
Cluster Analysis. This is a statistical technique for grouping samples (transects) that are similar to one another.
______METHODOLOGY 8 The results can be drawn in a cladogram as shown in the report. The use of the BD Pro Beta 2 software (McAleece, et.al. 1997) facilitates the computations and the clustering.
4.3.3 Stand and Stock Table
For the Stand and Stock Table, the data is organized into diameter classes, merchantable heights and volume (Table 2).
Table 2. Data Collection Sheet for the Stand and Stock Analysis.
Diameter Classes Merchantable Height Volume (cm) (m) (cu m) 110 - 120 100 - 109 90 - 99 80 – 89 70 - 79 60 - 69 50 - 59 40 - 49 30 – 39 20 – 29 10 - 19
The general formula used in the computation of volume is: Volume = 0.7854 D2L
Where: D = diameter at breast height L = length of the merchantable height 0.7854 = standard coefficient of a circle
For Palawan, however, a coefficient has been developed by the DENR that is being used. The formulae are as follows:
Non-dipterocarps: 0.00004874 D2 L Dipterocarps : 0.0004649 D2 L
______METHODOLOGY 9 The coefficients are already converted to the unit cubic meters.
Data is presented in graphical form. The graph could be interpreted strictly as a volume data, or, by using ecological inferences, much information could be deduced in the graph.
4.3.4 Identifying Core Zones
Transects with the highest biodiversity indices are identified and located on the map. Plots with high values are also identified and located in the map by GPS coordinates.
Criteria for the identification of core zones for the flora component are: a) vegetative cover with high biodiversity index values, b) with high forest cover, c) critically endangered/threatened habitats of endangered species, and d) presence of rare and endemic Palawan species.
A satellite image is then overlain on the map with identified high biodiversity values and other criteria as stated above. The plots on transects with high values are then connected by drawing lines following the boundaries shown on the satellite image using tree lines, ecotones, and watershed divides (i.e. ridges) in-between transects.
The result is a map with “circled” core zones.
5.0 RESULTS OF THE SURVEY
5.1 Bio-Physical Features Of Busuanga Municipality
The island of Busuanga together with Coron and Culion towns belong to the Calamianes Group of Islands in the northern tip of Palawan. Geographically, Palawan is classified under the Sunda Subregion while the rest of the Philippines is under the Wallace Subregion (Provincial Physical Framework Plan of Palawan 2001). The flora and fauna in Palawan are closely related to that of Borneo Island.
5.1.1 Topography
The Island of Busuanga is hilly with portions reaching elevations of about 500 meters above sea level. Barangays Cheey and Sto. Nino have large land area that are relatively flat and considered as the rice granary of Busuanga. Relatively large sloping lands are situated in the central southwest portion of Busuanga while about 30,000 ha are moderately sloping to steep (PPFPP 2001).
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 10 5.1.2 Geology
The geology of Busuanga consists of King Ranch Formation, Liminangcong Formation, Quarternary Alluvium, and Malajon Limestone. The Liminangcong Formation dominates the area and is characterized by bedded chert while the Quarternary Alluvium consists of unconsolidated floodplain deposits accumulated at the foot of the hills and can be found in the low – lying coastal areas and along the river channels of most of the barangays in Busuanga (PPFPP 2001).
The Malajon Limestone is typified by creamy to dark gray massive coralline, marbleized limestone and is basically situated in Elet and Kalampisauan Island northwest of the municipality (PPFPP 2001).
5.1.3 Climate
Busuanga has two distinct climatic types; six months dry from December to May and rainy from June to November. The highest recorded rainfall occurred in July. Busuanga Island has temperature similar to mainland Palawan, which is considered warm but uniform. Generally, the warmest months are March, April, and May while the coldest are December, January, and February (PPFPP 2001).
5.1.4 River Systems and Drainage
Busuanga has several river systems. The major ones are Busuanga River in Old Busuanga, Binalayan River in Cheey, Dipuyal River in Sto. Nino, Lele River in New Busuanga, Malabnas River in San Rafael, Ditapec River in Calawit, and Kiwit River in Sagrada (PPFPP 2001).
Separate river systems traverse Barangay Buluang, New Busuanga and New Quezon, while Old Busuanga and Salvacion are traversed by one river system. A river system traverses three barangays namely Bugtong, Sagrada and Concepcion near the boundary with Coron. Barangay Concepcion, because of its waterfalls, has been identified as potential site of a hydro-power plant (PPFPP 2001).
5.2 General Land Uses and Vegetation Cover of the Municipality of Busuanga
5.2.1 Land Uses
Although limited, there are lowland agricultural farms adjacent to barangays or communities. Agriculture is the main source of livelihood of several municipalities. Although the agricultural sector in Busuanga is still undeveloped it provides major employment to about 53% of the labor force in the municipality. The remaining area for agriculture in Busuanga is only 3,500 ha since most of the areas with agricultural potential were taken by the Yulo King Ranch with a total area of 28,380 ha (PPFPP 2001).
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 11 Most of the prime irrigated lands and with potential for irrigation are protected from conversion to other uses by RA 8435, otherwise known as the “Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act”. Such areas are located in Barangay Old Busuanga, Sto. Nino, and Cheey. There are upland or hillside farms where constant soil cultivation is practiced to raise annual crops. These are also the starting points of wild fires. Several cashew plantations were seen in Bgy. Cheey (PPFPP 2001).
The Yulo King Ranch is an unmanaged pasture. Residents in every barangay in Busuanga mentioned that cattle from YKR roam freely in the island. Cattle browse, trample, and cause abrasions to young plants. Soil compaction resulting to severe erosion is among the unwanted effects of an unmanaged cattle production system (PPFPP 2001).
5.2.2 Built – up Areas and Road Network
Road network is equated to accessibility and ease of travel within the island. The productivity of the agricultural sector is hampered by inadequate farm-to-market roads and insufficient farm inputs. The road or access system development seems to have been concentrated in the southern part in Busuanga. Agricultural facilities and support systems are limited. The nine barangays found in the south is the main reason of the concentration of roads (PPFPP 2001).
There are a total of about 52 km national all-weather road, about 2 km provincial roads, 15 km municipal roads, and 182 km barangay roads. The presence of the Yulo King Ranch (YKR) covering the whole north-eastern side prevented settlements. Cheey, the biggest barangay is covered by YKR. Agricultural areas and fishponds are found mostly in the southern side but these are relatively limited in magnitude (PPFPP 2001).
5.3 Land Degradation Problems in the Uplands
There are five major land degradation problems in the uplands of Busuanga: a) grassland fires spreading into forested lands, b) timber smuggling, c) uncontrolled/ unmanaged large cattle grazing, d) soil erosion, and e) hillside farming.
5.3.1 Grassland Fires Encroaching into Forested Areas
This is the most destructive form of upland degradation. It reduces dry organic matter (dead trees, branches, leaves, others) to soluble ash and releases phosphorus, calcium, potassium, and other inorganic elements that are easily washed down into waterways by rains. Fire volatizes nitrogen depriving the plants of this precious element.
Fires heat the soil and kill the roots of plants and change the composition of the soil fauna community. Fires destroy existing vegetation. Light to moderate fires may destroy only the undergrowth, kill thin-barked and fire- sensitive trees by heating the cambium. As grasslands expand into the uplands, nearby forests are burned by uncontrolled fire.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 12 5.3.2 Timber Poaching
Although the destruction caused by poaching is less compared to fire, nevertheless, it reduces the diversity of forest species. The mother trees of environmentally and economically important species are removed from the uplands. This reduces the capability of the forest to regenerate. During timber felling, young trees are also damaged and even associated epiphytes and lianas are likewise affected.
5.3.3 Unmanaged Large Cattle Grazing.
Unmanaged pasture lands or grazing lands result to upland ecosystem degradation. Unmanaged pastures almost always use fire (burning) to produce grass shoots for the cattle. Trampling of tree seedlings by cattle prevents the progressive development of vegetation from grasslands to secondary forest and eventually to mature forest stands. Soil compaction by cattle results to the formation of rill erosion after heavy rain.
5.3.4 Hillside Farming
Like the unmanaged pasturelands or grazing lands, hillside farmers use fire in their operation. The effects of burning to the nearby forests are previously discussed. Hillside farms usually last for only 5 years. Due to erosion, the productivity of the land significantly decreases so that the hillside farmer abandons the site and transfer to new sites. This is one of the causes why the Philippines have millions of hectares of grasslands.
5.3.5 Soil Erosion
The alternating long and dry summer months with equally prolonged heavy rainfall in the Philippines impacting on exposed sloping areas cause severe soil erosion. Movement of soil from the uplands to the lowlands is a result of excessive vegetation loss and directly affects the productivity of agricultural systems, human settlements, coastal areas, and spawning grounds of marine fishes, crustaceans, shells, and other marine life. The decline in the productivity of these ecosystems results to impoverishment of human settlements.
The soil erosion also affects infrastructures during flooding, destroying roads and bridges. Lowland farms are eventually abandoned due to silt deposition during floods. Fishing becomes less productive because spawning grounds of marine life will be covered with silt.
All of the above problems in Busuanga are accelerating due to unregulated human exploitation of the forests and incompatible land uses in the uplands. Nature provided trees as soil binder and sponge to retard surface water flows in the sloping terrain. When rains fall on the exposed soil, erosion occurs removing the top soil and deposits them into rivers, gullies, rice fields and settlements.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 13 Grasslands under Philippine conditions and all over Southeast Asian countries are constantly burned to the exclusion of all other vegetation. Grassland plant community type is also considered a wasteland and characterized as follows:
• Impoverished soil (infertile) • Acidic soil • High temperatures during dry season compared to forested areas. • Strong winds • Draughty conditions • Fire is a constant element in the area
Observations in many parts of the Philippines or studies conducted to quantify the amount of soil erosion in various land cover show that overgrazed lands and kaingin making resulted to high soil erosion rates.
Soil erosion rates measured in disturbed watershed are useful information (Table 3).
Table 3. Soil Erosion Rates in Various Soil Cover
SOIL COVER SOIL LOSS (TON/HA/YR)
Annual crop – pasture combination 105 Overgrazed range and new kaingin hillside farm 480 Combination of perennial crops- pasture area 26 Combination of agro forestry and annual crops 45 Reforestation – agro forestry 9 Reforestation – well managed pasture areas 19 Source: Pantabangan – Magat Watershed Feasibility Studies, National Irrigation Administration Note: Any crop production with constant soil cultivation especially in sloping areas induces soil erosion.
The absence of a well-formulated protection system that is site-and-situation- specific contributed to the worsening environmental conditions in Busuanga. A protection system is more than apprehending, enforcing “police” action.
5.4 Vegetation Cover
Boho – grasslands with intermixed brush lands in the lower and middle elevations comprise the largest plant community type in Busuanga. The areas being used as grazing lands have become perennial grass plant community type. There are intact patches of closed canopy forest in the higher elevations in Bugtong (825 ha) and between Old Busuanga and Cheey (2,163 ha). ______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 14
Mangrove stands were observed along the coastal areas in Bugtong, Sagrada, Old Busuanga, San Rafael and Buluang.
5.5 Physiography of Barangays
The following is a baseline characterization of the physical environment of the 10 barangays that the in-depth survey has sampled. Discussion revolves around the physiographic features of the landscape such as; Land Form, Elevation, Terrain, Slope, Aspect, Land Use, Stratum, Forest Type, and Stand Condition.
Definitions of the above are found in the Flora Field Survey Manual.
5.5.1 Barangay Concepcion
Seven (7) sampling plots were established in this barangay but only in one transect – Transect 3.
The barangay is composed of rolling lands having elevations of up to 100 m. It also has plains and valleys with hilly lands having elevations of up to 500 meter above sea level (masl). The rolling lands comprise 71.42% of the sampling while the hilly lands comprise only 14.28%. The plains and valleys likewise comprise 14.28% of the sampling. The elevations of the area sampled range from flat to about 500-masl. Of the 7 transects found therein, 4 transects were established in areas with 0 – 20-masl, with the rest being established above 300-masl.
Samplings have been done in rolling to hilly areas especially in the lower slopes, mid- and upper- slopes, and the hilltops. Inclinations of slopes range from zero, i.e. flat, to as steep as 45%.
Aspect is the orientation of the slopes in relation to the four (4) cardinal directions. The sampling areas have been noted to face southwest and northeast with one sampling plot-facing northwest. There are equal number of sampling plots facing northeast and southwest. This has implications on vegetative growth in the area. South-facing slopes are prone to high exposure of solar energy, hence, plant forms in this aspect would generally tend to be sunlight – loving plants and belong to the pioneer species category.
Most of the land uses in this barangay has been categorized as “other land uses” but only in one sampling site has a lowland forest been sampled. Another land use sampled is kaingin or farm lot. Most of the sites sampled are in secondary forests with one plot established in “primary forest”. Two plots have been established in brush lands.
The forest type sampled is mostly the semi-evergreen/lowland semi-deciduous type, meaning that the forest vegetation usually shed their leaves as a water-conservation adaptation to drier conditions and season. This also implies that the climate in this barangay has distinct dry and wet seasons. This could be verified in the climatology of the island. The forest type is classified under secondary growth with low, medium, and high ______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 15 density stands. Mostly, it is medium to high density with an outlying “old growth” having 6-10 m of merchantable height.
5.5.2 Barangay Sagrada
This barangay has been traversed by Transect 3 also but only two sampling sites were established. The sampling sites were in hilly lands having elevations of more than 100 m but less than 500-masl. However, the exact elevations where the sampling sites are located are between 100 – 199-masl. Although low elevations have been recorded, the sites are in a hilltop and the slope gully. Being on a hilltop and a gully, the slope is steep between 26 – 45%. The slopes face north and northeast, implying that the area faces away from the sun and is expected to have more moisture than the other slopes facing the other direction.
The area is categorized in the “other land use” classification, but one sampling site is under lowland forest. The sampling sites are recorded to be in “primary forest” and are identified as lowland semi-deciduous / semi-evergreen forest. The forest sampled is classified as “old growth” with 6-10 m of merchantable height. However, the area is also heavily logged from past years.
5.5.3 Yulo King Ranch
The YKR, as it is commonly called, is one of the biggest sites in terms of land area. Again Transect 3 traverses this barangay. Twelve (12) sampling sites were established.
The YKR is foremost a ranch for cattle livestock production. This would equate to a general grassland area with patches of forest cover in higher elevations.
The general feature of the area is rolling land to hilly lands having elevations reaching not more than 500-masl. The sampling sites however are located below 400- masl. The terrain of the sampling sites varies from the lower slopes of the hilly lands to gullies and rock slides. The presence of these indicates a more or less unstable geology of the area. The slopes range from slightly inclined at 9 – 15%, to a very steep slope of 46- 70%. With steep slopes, the area is more prone to erosion and soil slippages.
General direction of the slopes is east with slight deviations to northeast and southeast. One site is recorded as northwest. This implies a varied topography that has implications on the distribution and composition of vegetation in the area.
The general land use is for cattle grazing in the lowlands. However, the sampling sites are established in lowland forests in the hilly lands. A large portion of the YKR is grassland, but since its closure, there are other land uses identified. These may be in the form of agricultural lands, built-up areas as in the airport and settlements, and some wetlands.
It has been identified in the flora survey that the sampling sites are “primary forest” types. This could be disputed however by the succeeding findings in this report that “no primary forest” exists in Busuanga. On the other hand, vegetation over karst and limestone formations could be termed as “primary” if these have not been logged over. ______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 16 Forest cover is located in the hilly areas. Some grow over karst/limestone formations. Generally, the forest cover type is lowland evergreen to semi-deciduous types. This implies that some parts of the barangay have even distribution of rainfall while some parts have distinct dry seasons. Generally, this has medium to high density “old growth” and second growth forest types. The old growth high-density vegetation may be in karst/ limestone areas since they have the characteristics of such. These usually have short, crooked boles measuring less than 6 m of merchantable height.
5.5.4 Barangay Cheey
Bgy Cheey is probably the largest among the barangays in terms of land area. In fact, four (4) transects run through it. These transects are 4, 5, 6, & 7. Transects 4 and 7 have complete sampling plots whereas Transects 5 & 6 have half of their sampling sites inside Cheey and the other half fall inside adjacent barangays.
There are several land forms identified in the barangay and those are the rolling to hilly lands, meander belts in flat areas adjacent to rivers, plains and valleys. This means that the highest point in the barangay could be less than 500-masl and lowest points are in the plains and valleys. With such a varied landform, the data indicates that there is much diversity in habitats. There are also wide spaces between hills because of the meandering belts.
Most of the sampling sites fall below the 200 m elevations. However, a site or two fell above this at the 300-masl mark. Sampling sites are on terrain features such as hilltops, ridges, mid-slopes, slope gullies, and rock slides. Having rockslides suggest an unstable geologic environment and the rockslides usually are adjacent to rivers. Many habitats could be described here since each land feature has different environmental conditions inherent to it. For example, ridges and hilltops have different temperature regimes than the mid-slopes and lower slopes. Slope features, on the other hand are quite steep in the hilly lands. Sampling sites fell on slopes ranging from 16 – 25% to almost 100%. The slopes have a general aspect of southwest and northeast. Transect 7 has a little variation having southeast and northeast in the slope aspects.
Land-use type is generally a dry, lowland forest type with one sampling on wetlands. The stratum is identified to be generally brushland with secondary forest type. The survey also identified a “primary forest”. Having low elevations, the actual forest types range from lowland evergreen rainforest to lowland semi-deciduous forest. The forest is classified as second growth, with old growth or remnants in the sampling area. The old growth is suspected to be vegetation within the Karst limestone formations.
5.5.5 Barangay Salvacion
The barangay has half of transects 5 & 6 established in the area where the end of both transects are found in it. One portion of the barangay is rolling land with meander belts found in the tributaries. Another portion is hilly land. The barangay has elevations less than 500-masl. Sampling plots however, never went above the 300-masl mark. The terrain along the transects follow a “roller coaster” continuum wherein the sampling sites are located in gullies, rockslides, slopes and hilltops. Slope inclinations range from 0 –
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 17 45%, which is rather flat, rolling to steep. All sampling sites on slopes have an aspect of northeast.
The land use of the area is dry lowland forest with a patch of bare ground or rocks in the matrix of forest. The vegetation is generally secondary forest, lowland semi- deciduous, with patches of vegetation over ultramafic soil. The forest is second growth with evidences of logging.
5.5.6 Barangay New Quezon
Only transect 8 traverses this barangay and only two sites have been established. Terraces have been recorded suggesting an agricultural land use in rolling lands of up to 100-masl. The terrain is rolling. As such, the sampling sites have been established in lower and mid-slopes. Orientation of the slopes is southwest. The forest present in the barangay is of the dry, lowland type, semi-deciduous, second growth and has been logged over in past years.
5.5.7 Barangay New Busuanga
The barangay has the continuation of transect 8 and the start of transect 9. Again, only two sites have been established. As in Barangay New Quezon, terraces have been observed suggesting an agricultural use in rolling and hilly lands under 300-masl. Sampling sites have been established in the lower and mid-slopes with 9 – 45% inclinations and facing southwest and northeast.
The vegetation found in the barangay is dry, lowland forest with wetlands in the lower elevations. It is also a secondary forest, semi-deciduous, with “limestone vegetation” found herein. It is also recorded to be lightly logged over.
5.5.8 Barangay San Rafael
The remaining sampling sites of transect 8 are in this barangay. The area is generally rolling lands of up to 100-masl. All sites are in the upper slopes of the rolling area and all slopes face southwest.
The vegetation type sampled is dry, lowland forest, secondary, and Karst. Since this is Karst, it may suggest that it could be old growth since most species in this habitat are physically undesirable for commercial uses. The stand condition is rather lightly logged suggesting some extraction activities.
5.5.9 Barangay Sto. Nino
Two transects have been established in this barangay (Transects 1&2). The area has rolling and hilly lands of up to 500-masl. This barangay is slightly higher than the nearby barangays. Sampling sites have been established below 300-masl on hilltops, ridges with a few flat/undulating terrains. Slopes face East and northeast.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 18 The vegetation sampled is basically dry, secondary lowland forest, semi-deciduous with karst forms, and evergreen – meaning they do not shed their leaves during dry periods.
5.5.10 Barangay Buluang
Transect 10 is the only transect established in this barangay. All sampling sites fall in the rolling lands with 700-masl as its highest point. This barangay has the highest point compared to the rest of Busuanga. The terrain is rolling wherein most sampling sites are on ridges and one is established on a hilltop at 700-masl but is flat and / or rather undulating. Slopes have an inclination of 45% and below, which is quite steep; and faces a northeast direction.
Vegetative cover is dry, lowland forest and brush land over Karst conditions. The habitat is lightly logged over suggesting some extraction of resources.
5.5.11 Barangay Bugtong
Only transect 5 with 6 sampling sites have been established in this barangay. Most of the area sampled is rolling, gradually going to hilly lands of less than 500-masl, as the transect progresses. However, the elevations of sampling sites never went above 300-masl. Terrain of the sites are in mid-slopes and hill tops with steepness of slopes ranging from steep to very steep as one goes along the transect. All slopes in the transect faces northeast.
5.6 Vegetation Analysis
5.6.1 Primary vis-à-vis Non - Primary Forest
The issue on whether there still exists a primary forest cover in Busuanga could be settled in the following discussion. Figure 3 shows the stand and stock table with volume and diameter classes in graphical form.
A primary forest is characterized as having large diameters of trunks, almost always having closed canopies, and it typically epitomizes what a climax tropical rainforest is. The mainstay of the tropical rainforest is the family Dipterocarpaceae. It has associates that grow under the canopies of the Dipterocarps.
The age of the trees could be estimated by the size or diameter of the boles / trunks and the species name. This is important because each species has its own rate of growth. For example, a dipterocarp, Red Lauan (Shorea negrosensis), having 120 cm diameter could be estimated to be more than 250 years old, whereas, a non-dipterocarp e.g. Mimosaceae: Rain Tree (Samanea saman) could have 100 cm diameter but only 50 years old.
In referring to Figure 3, the dipterocarps are shown to have no more entries beyond the 60 cm diameter mark. The last entry is recorded at the 50 – 60 cm diameter range with a volume of less than 3.20 cu m. Most of the dipterocarps are recorded in the 20 – 40 cm ______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 19 diameter range. This means that the age of the remaining dipterocarps is quite young, estimated to be less than 100 years old. Rough “guesstimate” would be in the range of 50 – 75 yrs old.
Timber volume for Dipterocarps and Non Dipterocarps in Busuanga
300
250
200
150
Diptero
volume (cu.m.) 100 NonDipt
50
0 10- 20- 30- 40- 50- 60- 70- 80- 90- 100- 110- 120 19 29 39 49 59 69 79 89 99 109 119 cm DBH Clas s e s
Figure 3. Graphical Presentation of the Stand and Stock Table
with Volume and Diameter Classes as Parameters
In other words, the old growth dipterocarps of Busuanga have been taken/extracted/ logged over. What remains are what is called “second growth” dipterocarps, the next generation trees – those that were not logged because of their small diameter and volume during the height of logging activities, which now are gaining size in girth.
As mainstays of the tropical rainforest, there now remain the second generation dipterocarp trees. “Primary” trees have been removed through logging. There is even no presence of “residuals” – old growth trees not logged for later extraction. Hence, as far as the lowland dipterocarp rainforest of Busuanga is concerned, there is no “primary” forest left in the Municipality.
On the other hand, the non-dipterocarps have fairly large populations also in the 20 – 40 cm diameter range, as shown by their volume in Figure 3. There are, however, remnants of large diameter trees in the 90 - 120 cm diameter range. As to species, the tree
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 20 with the 120 cm dbh is Ipil (Instia bijuga), whereas Narra (Pterocarpus indicus) is the species in the 90 cm dbh mark. This means that there should have been large diameter trees of non-dipterocarps present in this diameter range if they were not also extracted. However, as shown in Figure 3, there are none. The absence of these large diameter non- dipterocarps means that they also have been logged over along with the dipterocarps. Therefore, this strengthens further the argument that “there is no primary forest” left in Busuanga. What remains are the “secondary forest” attested to by the presence of the trees in the 20-40 cm diameter classes.
5.6.2 “Primary Forest over Ultramafic Soil”
This is a type of vegetative cover that grows in soil with large amounts of heavy metals such as nickel, iron, zinc, chromium, etc. The effect of these heavy metals on the physiology of the plants, especially tree species, is to stunt its growth either in its girth and / or its height. This would then make it difficult to estimate the age of the plant species. Dipterocarps are not the dominant species in this habitat, hence, their absence.
What is present though are the non-dipterocarps, which also have species having large diameters but, in this habitat, would have a diameter range of 1 cm to 5 cm, sometimes up to 20 cm, at most to 40 cm, e.g. Balete (Ficus sp.). Height would be either up to 10 m, or to a minimum of only a meter or two, depending on the type of ultramafic vegetation.
Since this is the case, the trees in this habitat is not attractive in terms of their commercial value, hence they would not be logged over. They may be extracted in small numbers for domestic or community consumption, but not as heavily as the lowland forest. Being relatively untouched, the ages of the plant species would be old growth and hence could be termed as “primary” growth forest minus the large diameters. Therefore in this habitat, the forest cover could be termed as “primary forest over ultramafic” soil.
However, as mentioned in the first part of the report, there are no ultramafic soils in Busuanga.
5.6.3 “Primary Forest over Karst Limestone”
Another habitat that could be found in Busuanga is the “forest over karst limestone”. A similar argument could be applied for this type of habitat / vegetative cover. The limestone substrate also influences the physiology of the plants and would affect its diameter and height growth. They, however, are taller than the forest over ultramafic soil.
As mentioned earlier, the Karst substrate has silicon dioxides that are also essential in the growth of bamboo. The intermediate or under canopy layer is dominated by the Buho (Schizostachyum lumampao) in Busuanga. Also found in the municipality are two species of the Mankono (Xanthostemon bracteatus, and X. verdugonianus), a tree species associated with ultramafic soils, but since only Silica is found, the tree absorbs this element and incorporates it in its growth, hence the very hard texture of the wood.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 21 It also would be difficult to estimate the age of the species in this habitat. The same argument applies however that they are not commercially attractive and remains relatively unextracted; hence, their age could be categorized under old growth, thence, “primary forest over karst limestone”.
Therefore, in determining the type of forest, several factors have to be considered before one could declare a forest as “old growth” or “primary”:
1. The species 2. The age 3. The substrate 4. The degree of disturbance 5. Volume of trees per hectares
5.7 Overall Description of Vegetation Cover and Forest Types
There are three major plant community types observed in Busuanga (Table 4):
¾ Boho species (Schizostachyum lumampao) dominates the lower elevation in most parts in Busuanga. It is an extensive and distinct plant community type. It manifests extensive forest exploitation
¾ Above the extensive boho plant community types are mixtures of brush- boho-trees.
¾ Forest stands above the boho-brush mixture.
Table 4. Dominant Vegetation in Busuanga by Transect Line
Transect Barangay Covered Dominant Vegetation and Land Use Line
1 and 2 Sto. Niño Extensive boho plant community type even in higher elevation, wide boho – brush mixtures, and patches of forested areas. 3 Conception and Lowland agriculture, hillside farms, thick Sagrada secondary forests in the upper slopes surrounded by wide areas covered by boho. Grasses and boho dominate the entire length of the transect. 4 Sagrada and Bugtong Wide tract of lands are covered by boho reaching until the higher elevations. At midpoint of the transect, secondary forest stands were encountered until Cheey in the North.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 22
Transect Barangay Covered Dominant Vegetation and Land Use Line
5 Bugtong A good forest stand was encountered which is proposed to be core zone. It is surrounded by river tributaries. Extensive boho stands were encountered; at the watershed divide is a Dipterocarp forest dominated by Apitong. Below the Apitong forest stand is extensive area dominated by boho. 6 and 7 Salvacion and Old Lowland agriculture near the shoreline. As Busuanga survey crew went uplands, several hillside farms were encountered. Significant stands of more or less intact forest stands were encountered. All around those forest stands are large areas covered with boho. A core zone is proposed in those sites. Cashew plantations were encountered in Cheey. 8 San Rafael Wide tracts of land dominated by boho – grass plant community type, a secondary forest exist at the higher slopes, towards Cheey are wide tracts of boho areas. A secondary forest was encountered at the end of the transect line in Cheey. 9 New Busuanga Except for a small patch of secondary forest found in the higher elevation along the transect line, boho – grass species dominated transect 9. 10 Between New Boho – grasslands covered about 85% of the Busuanga & Buluang whole transect. A small patch of secondary forest is found along a river flowing towards Calauit. 11 Buluang Almost pure boho –grass plant community type. There were no forest stands encountered.
Vegetation cover and land use pattern were observed as follows: Firstly, lowland agriculture; secondly, boho – grass areas; then secondary forest. At the northern side of Busuanga a similar pattern of vegetation is influenced by elevation, exposure, soil fertility, and available moisture.
5.7.1 Land Uses in the Uplands
There were two distinct or significant land uses encountered during the terrestrial flora survey in Busuanga. These are upland or hillside farming and grazing that covers the entire Busuanga municipality. Several cattle from Yulo King Ranch (YKR) roamed freely from Cheey in the northeastern side to the southwestern part of Busuanga. Both land uses employ burning in its land management. The practice by YKR to burn wide grasslands is to induce grass regrowth for cattle ______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 23 5.7.2 Location of Upland Settlements
There were no upland settlements encountered during the survey.
5.8 Implication to Reforestation
In Table 5, the volume is computed taking the parameters of diameter and number of individuals. Equating it with the “stocking” of the forest, it can be concluded from the results of the computations whether the forest could use some silvicultural interventions (e.g. reforestation) or not.
For the dipterocarps, it is an imperative to conduct interventions such as enrichment planting, and maybe reforestation in some parts of the Municipality. Results show (Table 5) that the dipterocarps have only a total of 45.05 cu m for the whole of Busuanga. On a per hectare basis, this would translate to only 6.32 cu m / ha, way below that of an adequately stocked forest. Also as shown in Figure 3, there are no records of regenerants for the species for diameters of 10 – 19 cm. No sampling has been done in this category, but according to the data as discussed further, there are no second generation dipterocarps in Busuanga. This also suggests that for the past several years there has been no fruiting of the species, hence, wildlings that are supposed to be the next generation to the current population, are absent.
On the other hand, the non-dipterocarps have a total volume of 1,048.58 cu m or 147 m3/ha. This means that the area is more than adequately stocked, hence, no reforestation or other interventions are needed. Table 5 further suggests that the lowland forest of Busuanga is no longer dipterocarp – dominant but rather a non-dipterocarp forest.
Table 5. Summary of the Stand and Stock of Both Dipterocarp and Non- Dipterocarp, Busuanga, Municipality
Total no. of Species Total Volume Volume / hectare Individuals
Non-dipterocarps 1,842 1,048.58 147
Dipterocarps 62 45.05 6.32
Total 1,904 1,093.63 153.32
5.9 Biodiversity Assessment of Flora
Stratification of the vegetative cover of Busuanga has been done to better characterize or describe different habitats. Under this stratification, three layers of the forest have been sampled. These are a) Canopy Layer; b) Under Canopy Layer; and c) the ______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 24 Under Growth or Ground Layer. The canopy layer consists of the emergents (those that over-top other tall trees) and the general canopy of the forest. The under canopy is the trees and other plant forms that thrive under shaded conditions right beneath the canopy layer. The ground layer or the under growth are those plants thriving close to the ground. They consist of wildlings of the large trees, the grasses, herbs, ferns, low-level vines, and mosses if any.
To describe the biodiversity levels of these different strata, the Fernando (1998) Biodiversity Scale is used (Table 1).
5.9.1 The Canopy Layer
This stratum consists of trees with at least 10 cm diameter with total height of 4 m and above. In Figure 3, the highest diameter recorded is in the 120 cm range. Total number of individuals sampled is 1,491. Total species recorded is 191.
Busuanga has an overall flora biodiversity of H’ = 4.21 in this stratum. This is very high according to the Fernando scale. The distribution of the species within the sampling sites is also very high at J’ = 0.81. However, the J’ index also indicates that the distribution is not uniform but rather clustered or clumped.
On a per transect basis, transect 6 in Barangays Cheey and Salvacion has the highest floral diversity having H’ = 4.17 (Annex Table 1). The distribution of species is highly evenly distributed as indicated by J’ = 0.94. This means that there are more rare species in these two barangays as compared with other transects traversing the other barangays.
Of the twenty (20) sampling sites in transect 6, there are 5 sites that have moderately high diversity (i.e. above H’ = 2.5) as compared to Transects 1 & 4, its nearest rival, having only one site each with H’ = 2.58 in Barangays Sto. Niño and Cheey, respectively.
All transects have moderately high to very high flora diversity, each collectively having more than H’ = 2.5. However, on a per sampling site basis, majority of the sites have low to very low diversity (Annex Table 1). This would suggest that enrichment planting is necessary to increase the plant diversity of a particular area.
Table 6 shows the top five species and their relative values in the stratum. The dominant species is the Katpai, a palm species belonging to the family Arecaceae, which is ranked as number 1 having a computed importance value of 14.53. This is followed by Taket (Syzygium squamiferum) as the second most dominant having an importance value of 11.29. Taluto (Pterocymbium tinctorium) is third ranked with an I.V. = 11.16.
The following is a summary of the top ranked species found in this stratum.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 25 Table 6. Relative Values of the Top Five (5) Species in the Canopy Layer
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom RDom I.V.
Katpai 191 12.81 5 1.27 443.63 0.46 14.53 Taket 130 8.71 8 2.03 521.46 0.54 11.29 Taluto 134 8.98 8 2.03 139.97 0.14 11.16 Ekoyan 113 7.57 4 1.01 1037.48 1.07 9.66 Katol 109 7.31 6 1.52 678.86 0.7 9.53
Standard deviation of the densities of the species is 2.04 while the coefficient of variation is 103.03. This means that the number of individuals in the transect is highly variable since there is a higher scatter of values around the mean. This would coincide with the Pielou Distribution Index J’ that indicates the species distribution therein is clustered or quite uneven.
Similarity Index and the Matrix
The similarity index is used to compare two sites and how similar / dissimilar they are in terms of species composition. They could also be used in plant community type mapping by marking similar plant communities and laying them out in the maps. In this case, it is the transects that would be compared.
Shown in Table 7 are the similarity values comparing the transects with each other.
Table 7. Similarity Values between Sampling Transects, Canopy Layer
10 Trans 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 X 17.68 18.64 97.62 16.80 13.85 18.66 4.17 5.08 5.48 2 X X 19.10 17.8414.19 38.62 16.49 14.94 28.22 29.73 3 X X X 18.12 11.40 14.12 39.71 9.15 19.66 12.85 4 X X X X 16.93 12.80 18.81 4.21 5.13 5.53 5 X X X X X 15.67 12.27 25.55 3.80 14.51 6 X X X X X X 12.37 12.55 16.15 12.24 7 X X X X X X X 12.45 25.22 15.81 8 X X X X X X X X 15.93 12.24 9 X X X X X X X X X 22.98 10 x x X x x X x x x X
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 26 Although transects 1 and 4 are kilometers apart, their vegetative composition are 97.62% similar. Transects 7 & 3 are the next most similar having 39.71%, and transects 6 & 2 also have near 40% similarity with one another. The rest of the transects have insignificant similarities. However, since they belong to only one biogeographic region, it could not be helped that some species would be found in the other transects. This means that those species have a wider distribution in Busuanga than the other species, which could be considered as rare because of their limited distribution. It also indicates that the lower the similarity, the more rare species there are because of high dissimilarity.
Cluster Analysis
This statistical analysis is done to establish community types and thus could be mapped out spatially. The cluster analysis also is used to “detect relations between communities and the environment by analysis of the groups formed with respect to the environmental variables.” (Jongman et.al. 1987).
The result of the analysis is a cladogram grouping similar sites together. Figure 4 shows this clustering of transects.
There are three groupings or clusters that have been identified in the analysis. However, it is only transects 1 & 4 that have the highest similarities. The groupings identified are Transects 8 & 5; transects 10, 9, 6 & 2; and transects 7, 3, 4 & 1. Transects 1 & 4 have high similarities because of their similar environmental factor, which only tolerant species could survive. This environmental factor is the substrate in which the plants grow in. Identified in the two transects are karst limestone forest cover, and it is in this habitat that similar species thrive, thus explaining the high similarity of species composition.
Figure 4. Cladogram of the Cluster Analysis for the Canopy Layer ______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 27 5.9.2 The Under Canopy Layer
Plants in this stratum consist of tree species with less than 10 cm diameter or with height less than 4 m, shrubs, large herbs and grasses (such as the bamboo). Included also are the palms, pandan, lianas and epiphytes.
Table 8 shows the distribution of these plant forms under the canopy.
Table 8. Plant Forms Under Canopy in Busuanga
Plant Form Number Percentage (%)
Tree 150 85 Palm 11 6.286 Grass 2 1.143 Vine 5 2.857 Herb 2 1.143 Epiphyte 4 2.286 Pandan 1 0.571 Total 175 100 Non – tree species 25 15
Vegetation under the canopy is dominated by tree species composing 85%. Non- tree species compose only 15%. Palms have the next most number of species. The palm species are mostly crawling, therefore, for this plant form; it is mostly composed of rattan species.
Epiphytes, pandan, herbs, and vine can also be found under the canopy layer. Grass species are also present but these are mainly bamboo. This can be shown later that although there are only two grass species, the bamboo Buho (Schizostachyum lumampao) dominates the ecosystem.
Overall, the under canopy ecosystem has an index of H’ = 4.23. This is very high. The distribution of the species within transects are clustered (J’ = 0.82). In Appendix Table 3, it shows that of the ten (10) transects, transects 5 (in Barangays Bugtong, Salvacion and Cheey) & 6 (in Barangays Old Busuanga and Cheey) have the highest values, H’ = 3.62 and 3.46 respectively despite their having less sampling sites, than transect 4 (H’ = 2.91). This means that the forest ecosystem in transect 4 in the middle of Barangay Cheey is more disturbed than the other transects with many sampling sites. Comparatively, transects 1 & 2 in Barangays Sto Nino and Concepcion have higher diversity (H’ = 3.06 & 3.17, respectively) with lesser number of sampling sites than transect 4. The closest in terms of diversity index is transect 10 (H’ = 2.81) in Buluang, but only having 5 sampling sites compared to transect 4 having 38 sampling sites. This supports the argument that transect 4 is more disturbed than most of the other transects. ______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 28 In terms of species dominance, Buho (S. lumampao) dominates the under canopy ecosystem. This is attested to by its importance value of 26.69. Two rattan species, Palasan (Calamus merrillii) and Nanga (Calamus sp.), follow as ranked 2 & 3 in dominance in the ecosystem. The following table summarizes the top 5 overall dominance of species in the under canopy of Busuanga.
Table 9. Relative Values of the Top Five (5) Species for the Under Canopy Layer
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom RDom I.V.
Buho 157 15.09 100 2.97 477.56 8.62 26.69 Palasan 5 0.48 50 1.49 520.04 9.38 11.35 Nanga 5 0.48 40 1.19 302.29 5.45 7.12 Katol 44 4.23 70 2.08 27.03 0.49 6.8 Ekoyan 43 4.13 40 1.19 26.34 0.47 5.8
There is high variation of values around the means of the density parameter. Its standard deviation is computed to be 2.37 with a coefficient of variation as 138.01. The inference of this is that individuals of species are in wide distribution but the species tend to be clumped.
Similarity Indices, Matrix and the Cluster Analysis
Table 10 shows the similarity indices between transects in matrix form. The similarities of transects are significant in the sense that there are few species that could be found in any pair of transects. In other words, the transects are very different from each other. Only transect pairs 2 & 6; 1&10; 2&10; and 7&9, have modest similarity in species composition since the index is above 25. The second ranked transect is only 37.93 in transects 2 and 10. There are 4 transect pairs that are below 30 but over 25 indicating low similarities. All other transects have indices below 25 suggesting a highly dissimilar forest composition.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 29
Table 10. Similarity Values between Sampling Transects, Under Canopy Layer
Transect 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 X 27.45 25 19.94 17.84 27.08 12.24 26.01 15.68 35.65 2 X X 21.53 18.47 16.40 41.34 20.89 18.18 22.47 37.93 3 X X X 22.22 16.72 23.93 21.16 12.12 18.05 19.88 4 X X X X 19.83 20.63 9.39 7.10 6.31 18.60 5 X X X X X 21.69 12.8 17.70 9.75 18.10 6 X X X X X X 15.03 13.42 14.06 27.10 7 X X X X X X X 19.23 31.32 16.36 8 X X X X X X X X 13.56 23.25 9 X X X X X X X X X 21.53 10 X X X X X X X X X X
The pair that has the highest dissimilarity / lowest similarity is transects 4 & 9. Environmental and social factors may be the cause of these dissimilarities / similarities. They are found in Bgys Cheey and New Busuanga.
Subjecting the Similarity indices to cluster analysis, only two groupings have been identified. These are transects 7, 8, 9 in the first cluster, and the rest belong to the second cluster. Because of the low similarity values, there is a “vague clustering” of the second grouping. This is shown in Figure 5.
Figure 5. Cladogram of the Cluster Analysis for the Under Canopy Layer
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 30 5.9.3 The Ground Layer Stratum (Undergrowth)
The undergrowth is composed of herbs, small grasses, ferns, seedlings, and all other plant forms having less than 1 m in height. The overall diversity index of plant species for this stratum is H’ = 4.54, which is very high. This also means that there have been recent flowering and fruiting of trees such that the ground vegetation is covered with these wildlings. On the other hand, the distribution of these ground vegetation is not so even, J’ = 0.88.
There are 7 plant forms identified in the stratum. Tree species make up the majority of the undergrowth having 127 species identified (72.99%). Palms come in second with 14 species (8.04%) identified. Most of these palm species are rattan palms. Table 11 shows the distribution of these plant forms.
Table 11. Plant Forms in the Ground Layer or Undegrowth in Busuanga
Plant Form Number of Species Percentage (%)
Trees 127 72.99 Palm 14 8.046 Grass 3 1.724 Vine 11 6.322 Herb 9 5.172 Epiphyte 5 2.874 Fern 5 2.874 Total 174 100
Vines are also a dominant plant form in this stratum since they make up 6.32% of the plant forms found in the area. Presence of many vine species indicates a disturbed ecosystem.
The ground vegetation may be high in diversity overall but in a per transect basis, the diversity index ranges from 2.01 in transect 9 to 3.85 in transect 5 (Appendix Table 4). The appendix table also shows that certain transects have no values because of entries being too small for computations. This means that the plots in transects 3, 7 & 9 have small number of species found therein. In sum however, the transects have 2.22, 3.08, and 2.01, as their indices, respectively. This is from low to high diversity.
On the other hand, diversity is very low in most plots. Values range from as low as H’ = 0.349 to 2.4. Distribution of species range from highly even (J’ = 1) to a clumped distribution (J’ = 0.279).
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 31 Dominant species in the ground vegetation is Malulandit (Syzygium sp.) having an importance value of 8.83, ranked as 1. Dildil (Cynometra inaequifolia) is ranked number 2 with an importance value of 5.48. This is followed by some unidentified species with different plant forms and the fourth is a rattan palm. Palomaria (Calophyllum sp.) is ranked 5th. Table 12 summarizes the values of the top 5 species in the ground vegetation.
Table 12. Relative Values of the Top Five (5) Species in the Ground Layer
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq I. V.
Malulandit 57 8.47 10 0.37 8.83 Dildil 27 4.01 40 1.48 5.48 Baid 29 4.31 30 1.11 5.41 Bogtong 21 3.12 60 2.21 5.33 Palomaria 17 2.52 50 1.85 4.37
Standard deviation of the density values is 1.117 and its coefficient of variation is 96.52. These values are lower than the other two strata; therefore, there is less variation in this stratum. This is inferred to have an even distribution of individuals in the transect.
Similarity Indices, Matrix and the Cluster Analysis
Similarities between transects are quite low in most of them. Others are completely dissimilar having zero values. Table 13 shows the matrix of similarities between transects.
Table 13. Similarity Values between Sampling Transects, Ground Layer
Trans 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 X 28.57 17.39 16.7 8.205 16.67 0 2.299 0 12.82 2 X X 0 9.13 12.09 46.32 0 8.108 0 12.31 3 X X X 5.3 0 0 14.29 0 7.407 0 4 X X X X 20.16 7.14 0 3.861 0 12.8 5 X X X X X 10.05 0 19.1 0 16.57 6 X X X X X X 0 8.79 0 9.75 7 X X X X X X X 0 13.79 0 8 X X X X X X X X 0 13.11 9 X X X X X X X X X 0 10 X X X X X X X X X X
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 32
Result of Cluster Analysis has identified 3 clusters or groupings of transects using the similarity values. One group is composed of transects 3, 7, 9; the second grouping is composed of transects 4, 5, 8, 10; and the last group is made up of transects 1, 2, & 6.
Figure 6 shows the cladogram of the cluster analysis.
Figure 6. Cladogram of the Cluster Analysis for the Ground Layer
5.10 Vegetation Analysis by Transect
5.10.1 Transect 1 in Barangay Sto. Niño
Canopy Layer
In this transect, 62 species were recorded. Of the 62 species, the dominating tree is the Tarab (Diospyros sp.), a tree belonging to the Ebenaceae family of which Kamagong (Diospyros discolor) is also a member, having an importance value of 19.78. Although there is only 1 individual in the whole transect, its basal area more than makes up the difference such that it dominates over the other species. Katpai (Ficus sp.), Taluto (Pterocymbium tinctorium), Ekuyan (Madhuca leerii), Taket (S. squamiferum), and Katol (Ficus glandulifera) are the other species that dominate the forest ecosystem (Table 14).
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 33 Overall transect diversity is H’ = 3.45 (Appendix Table 1), which is high already. Species distribution is somewhat clumped / clustered (J’ = 0.835).
Table 14. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 1
Species Dens RDens Freq Rfreq Dom RDom I.V.
Tarab 1 0.15 1 0.28 7539.8419.35 19.79 Katpai 59 8.98 27 7.69 745.78 1.91 18.59 Taluto 56 8.52 20 5.70 1115.212.86 17.08 Ekuyan 55 8.37 23 6.55 387.65 0.99 15.92 Taket 46 7.00 21 5.98 226.92 0.58 13.57 Katol 37 5.63 21 5.98 734.68 1.89 13.5
Under Canopy Layer
According to plant form, grass is not the dominant plant in the under canopy. However, Table 15 shows that the ecosystem in this stratum is dominated by Buho (S. lumampao), a bamboo species classified as grass, having an importance value of 57.01. Salobagyo (Euphorbia sp.) and some unidentified species are ranked second and third with importance values of 23.67 and 15.28, respectively. Binunga (Macaranga tanarius), a pioneer species, is fourth ranked with an I.V. of 14.64. The presence of this species indicates a harsh environment brought about by the dominating Buho bamboo. The presence also of the bamboo is an indication of a much disturbed ecosystem.
Table 15. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Under Canopy Layer for Transect 1.
Species Dens RDens Freq Rfreq Dom RDom I.V.
Boho 8 9.76 27.27 5.66 433.72 41.60 57.01 Salobagyo 10 12.20 45.45 9.43 21.31 2.04 23.67 Balanigan 6 7.32 36.36 7.55 4.37 0.42 15.28 Binunga 7 8.54 18.18 3.77 24.38 2.34 14.64 Katol 4 4.88 27.27 5.66 34.47 3.31 13.84 Luboy 7 8.54 18.18 3.77 11.68 1.12 13.43
Diversity index is H’ = 3.17, considered as high with a distribution index of J’ = 0.91, considered as highly even.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 34 Ground Layer
As shown in Table 16, included in the top 6 species is again the Binunga (M. tanarius). This indicates that the tree has fruited recently in the past year or two because of the presence of wildlings recorded in this stratum.
An unidentified species dominates the ground stratum. Included also in the dominating species is Nanga (Calamus sp.), a rattan palm.
Table 16. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 1.
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq I.V.
Agpoi 8 15.38 45.45 14.29 29.67 Loboy 9 17.31 18.18 5.71 23.0 Nanga 6 11.54 27.27 8.57 20.11 Salobagyo 3 5.77 27.27 8.57 14.34 Katol 3 5.77 18.18 5.71 11.48 Binunga 3 5.77 18.18 5.71 11.48
Diversity is moderately high, the index showing a H’ = 2.66. The distribution of species in this stratum is rather even at J’ = 0.9 (Appendix Table 4).
5.10.2 Transect 2 in Barangay Sto. Nino
Canopy Layer
Overall diversity in this transect for the canopy layer is H’ = 3.02. According to the scale, this is considered high. The index of distribution of species J’ = 0.87 suggests a fairly even distribution.
On a per plot basis, the sampling sites have low diversity, ranging from a very low H’ = 1.38 to a low 2.27. However, the aggregate of species for the whole transect results to a high diversity in the barangay.
Table 17 shows the most dominant species found in the transect. Most dominant is Taluto (Pterocymbium tinctorium), followed by Katol (Ficus sp.), Taket (S. squamiferum), Baid (Euphorbia plumerioides), Palomaria (Callophyllum sp.) and Luboy (Syzygium sp.).
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 35 Table 17. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 2
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom RDom I.V.
Taluto 1 0.01 1 1.23 2290.27 26.24 27.49 Katol 16 0.18 8 9.88 18.44 0.21 10.27 Taket 13 0.15 7 8.64 28.11 0.32 9.11 Baid 13 0.15 7 8.64 13.40 0.15 8.94 Palomaria 2 0.02 1 1.23 962.21 11.02 12.28 Luboy 8 0.09 5 6.17 39.66 0.45 6.72
Under Canopy Layer
Diversity in transect 2 under canopy is a bit higher than the Canopy layer, which is H’ = 3.17. Distribution of species is more or less even, J’ = 0.91.
Again, in this layer, the Buho bamboo (S. lumampao) dominates the ecosystem. It could be deduced that the Buho under canopy growth is quite extensive in the area since the bamboo also dominates the under canopy vegetation of transect 1. There is a distance of 2 km between transects, hence, there is extensive growth.
Table 18. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Under Canopy Layer for Transect 2
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom RDom I.V.
Buho 11 15.71 63.64 11.48 11.72 1.66 28.85 Butyal 6 8.57 45.45 8.20 18.35 2.60 19.37 Nalig 4 5.71 36.36 6.56 17.72 2.51 14.78 Katol 4 5.71 27.27 4.92 28.27 4.01 14.64 Baid 3 4.29 27.27 4.92 34.91 4.95 14.15 Dularog 3 4.29 27.27 4.92 27.65 3.92 13.12
Ground Layer
The ground layer vegetation has less diversity in this area, having only 2.61 as the index. This is considered moderately high. Since the under growth has lower diversity than the two layers, this indicates that mature plants in the area have not recently fruited and dispersed their propagules. If there are, very few have done so but not contributing significantly to affect the diversity index.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 36 The Pielou distribution index J’ = 0.92, which means that the species found therein are evenly distributed.
Table 19 shows the dominant species in this layer.
Table 19. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 2
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq I.V.
Bugtong 7.00 17.95 54.55 16.22 34.16 Butyal 5.00 12.82 45.45 13.51 26.33 Baid 4.00 10.26 36.36 10.81 21.07 Palasan 3.00 7.69 27.27 8.11 15.80 Luboy 3.00 7.69 27.27 8.11 15.80 Litsik 3.00 7.69 27.27 8.11 15.80
5.10.3 Transect 3 in Bgys Concepcion and Sagrada, and Yulo King Ranch
Canopy Layer
The plots along the transect have diversity indices ranging from zero (values too small to calculate) to a low 2.05. The index values are quite low along the transect. However, in totality, the overall index is 2.93, considered as moderately high. The J’ distribution is very low indicating species distribution is quite clustered.
Having low diversity along the transect indicates that the area has been subjected to disturbances thus creating a highly clustered distribution of species. It may be said that in clustered populations of trees in this layer, it may be a closed canopy. However, between clusters, it may be open canopy.
Table 20 shows the 6 most dominant species in the transect. One tree species, the Ikuyan (Madhuca leerii), ranked as number 3.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 37 Table 20. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 3
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom Rdom I.V.
Katpay 41 16.80 28.57 6.38 1071 7.29 30.48 Malapu 18 7.37 38.09 8.51 555 3.78 19.66 Ikuyan 19 7.78 38.09 8.51 349 2.37 18.67 Bungan 4 1.63 14.28 3.19 1870 12.73 17.56 Maladuhat 16 6.55 33.33 7.44 492 3.35 17.35 Tamisan 21 8.60 28.57 6.38 234 1.59 16.58
Under Canopy Layer
For transect 3 under canopy layer, the most dominant species is again Buho (S. lumampao). The distribution of the bamboo is quite extensive already covering three transects, which are kilometers apart. Two rattan species also are found in this layer that is the Palasan (Calamus merrillii), and the Nanga (Calamus sp.) (Table 21).
Table 21. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Under Canopy Layer for Transect 3.
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom RDom I.V. Boho 14.00 11.11 52.38 13.10 1306.49 22.43 46.63 Palasan 1.00 0.79 4.76 1.19 2463.01 42.28 44.27 Nanga 2.00 1.59 9.52 2.38 1089.79 18.71 22.68 Malugay 16.00 12.70 38.10 9.52 16.44 0.28 22.50 Tamisan 10.00 7.94 23.81 5.95 23.76 0.41 14.30 Malapu 7.00 5.56 19.05 4.76 16.72 0.29 10.60
Plant diversity is high at 3.29, higher than the canopy layer. Distribution is a little even. Having a grass species, i.e. the bamboo, in this layer and a high indication of diversity suggests an open canopy of the first layer and is a disturbed ecosystem. The open canopy would allow more sunlight to penetrate to the under canopy thus providing growing conditions for other plants. This would explain the higher diversity index.
Well distributed sunlight in this layer would mean a more or less even distribution of species. Hence, the J’ index shows this at 0.88. As shown along the transect, there are plots that have high evenness distributions, the J’ index having 1 values (Appendix Table 3).
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 38 Ground Layer
A different condition exists in this layer. Since the under canopy growth has high diversity, and the growth of Buho is dominating, less sunlight now penetrates to the ground layer, effectively suppressing growth of ground vegetation. Hence, overall diversity for this layer is low at H’ = 2.22. As shown in Appendix Table 4, values are too small for calculation per plot.
Small plants mean difficult to identify, hence, the dominant species in this layer is an unidentified species. Its density is high compared to the next ranked species (Table 22).
Table 22. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 3.
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq I.V. Anagas 14.00 35.00 50.00 25.00 60.00 Tamisan 5.00 12.50 28.57 14.29 26.79 Katpay 6.00 15.00 14.29 7.14 22.14 Siksik 2.00 5.00 14.29 7.14 12.14 Kanumay 2.00 5.00 14.29 7.14 12.14 Daat (grass) 1.00 2.50 7.14 3.57 6.07
5.10.4 Transect 4 in Barangay Cheey
Canopy Layer
Transect 4 has one of the highest number of plots. It is also one of the longest transect. Because of this high number, there are more species sampled, hence, higher diversity. Therefore, the diversity for transect 4 is near borderline high of 3.438. Distribution of trees in this transect is a bit clustered, at J’ = 0.83. The transect is located near the middle of the island, bisecting it along with transects 5 and 6.
In terms of dominance, Katpay (Ficus sp) is ranked 1 having an importance value of 10.25. This is followed by Taluto (P. tinctorium), Ekuyan (Madhuca leerii), Taket (S. squamiferum), and the rest in Table 23. Taluto and Ekuyan are both pioneer species indicating the ecosystem as a disturbed one since they have grown in the area.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 39
Table 23. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 4
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom RDom I.V.
Katpai 60.00 0.18 71.05 7.80 745.78 2.27 10.25 Taluto 56.00 0.17 52.63 5.78 1075.73 3.27 9.22 Ekuyan 48.00 0.15 50.00 5.49 579.27 1.76 7.40 Taket 46.00 0.14 55.26 6.07 217.16 0.66 6.87 Katol 41.00 0.12 60.50 6.65 64.14 0.19 6.97 Laho 30.00 0.09 47.37 5.20 418.00 1.27 6.56
The immediate area around plot 6 in the transect stands out to have a moderately high diversity compared to the other plots, which have low to very low diversity (Appendix Table 1).
Under Canopy Layer
Although Buho (S. lumampao) still dominates this transect (Table 24), the under canopy growth have lower diversity compared to the first three transects. Its diversity index here is 2.91 despite having more plots to sample. Reason for this is that the canopy layer has high diversity indicating a more even and denser species distribution, hence allowing lesser sunlight to penetrate. Such conditions would suppress sunlight loving plants in the under canopy. This also would indicate a rather closed canopy layer. Because of the patches of sunlight that goes through the upper canopy, the distribution of plants in the lower layer would tend to cluster around the sources of sunlight. Therefore, the distribution of plants in this layer is J’ = 0.76, which supports the preceding discussion.
Table 24. Dominant Six (6) species in the Under Canopy Layer for Transect 4 .
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom Rdom I.V.
Buho 63.00 21.14 57.89 9.73 800.96 34.24 65.11 Katol 28.00 9.40 63.16 10.62 34.55 1.48 21.49 Ekuyan 30.00 10.07 55.26 9.29 40.64 1.74 21.10 Taket 29.00 9.73 57.89 9.73 31.28 1.34 20.80 Katpai 27.00 9.06 60.53 10.18 31.50 1.35 20.58 Bintang 16.00 5.37 34.21 5.75 37.94 1.62 12.74
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 40 In addition, the dense growth of bamboo would also tend to suppress growth of other species, thus, limiting the number of species in the area.
Ground Layer
Appendix Table 4 shows the low diversity of the ground vegetation on a per plot basis. Indices range from 0.501 to 1.61, both very low values. Distribution on a per plot basis is quite even, some plots having the highest value of 1.
Overall, however, the diversity index of transect 4 is a high 3.18. The distribution index overall tends to be clustering at 0.812.
In terms of dominance, Table 25 shows the top ranked 6 species of the transect.
Table 25. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 4
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq I.V.
Malulandit 57.00 25.33 15.79 4.20 29.53 Dildil 21.00 9.33 34.21 9.09 18.42 Sik-sik 11.00 4.89 28.95 7.69 12.58 Ekuyan 8.00 3.56 21.05 5.59 9.15 Amugis 7.00 3.11 18.42 4.90 8.01 Palumaria 9.00 4.00 13.16 3.50 7.50
Accordingly, wildlings of Amugis (Koordersiodendron pinnatum) have been recorded and they are ranked at no. 5. This indicates a recent fruiting of the tree species, as early as 1 – 2 years back.
5.10.5 Transect 5 in Barangays Bogtong, Cheey, and Salvacion
Canopy Layer
The presence of Yakal (Shorea astylosa) indicates that this area was once an expanse of dipterocarp forest. As ranked number 2, it is one of the most dominant species influencing this ecosystem in terms of species composition. Ipil (I. bijuga) and Taluto (P. tinctorium) are both medium to large trees in the same category as the dipterocarps.
Duguan (Myristica philippinensis) is an endemic species in the Philippines and it is usually a resident of the tropical forest. This tree species is not a pioneer species, but it indicates a favorable growing condition normal to climax forests. However, as seen in Figure 3, the lowland forests in Busuanga are secondary forests already.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 41 Table 26. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 5
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom RDom I.V.
Ipil 7.00 0.02 6.00 4.03 1810.63 5.93 9.98 Yakal 23.00 0.08 9.00 6.04 536.81 1.76 7.87 Taluto 6.00 0.02 6.00 4.03 973.14 3.19 7.23 Duguan 8.00 0.03 7.00 4.70 344.30 1.13 5.85 Kulotkulot 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.67 1541.33 5.05 5.72 Malapo 10.00 0.03 7.00 4.70 265.61 0.87 5.60
The diversity in this stratum is very high at H’ = 3.66. It has an index of species distribution at J’ = 0.88, which is more or less even.
Under Canopy Layer
As with the previous transects, the dominating species in this stratum is again the Buho (S. lumampao). Although the Canopy layer registers species belonging in the climax forest, the presence of Buho as a dominant plant indicates a highly disturbed forest ecosystem. The data also identified this area as heavily logged over.
Table 27. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Under Canopy Layer for Transect 5.
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom RDom I.V.
Boho 21.00 11.29 85.00 13.28 25.22 2.10 26.67 Kalantunay 2.00 1.08 10.00 1.56 122.72 10.20 12.84 Amaha 11.00 5.91 30.00 4.69 12.45 1.04 11.64 Palomarya 9.00 4.84 20.00 3.13 32.57 2.71 10.67 Yakal 10.00 5.38 20.00 3.13 18.86 1.57 10.07 Bogtong 8.00 4.30 35.00 5.47 1.74 0.14 9.91
Diversity in this stratum is very high at H’ = 3.62. Being logged over, the forest is open canopy hence high penetration of sunlight that would increase the growth of light- loving species in the under canopy stratum. Distribution is even at J’ = 0.89.
In this stratum, there is a population of Yakal (S. astylosa) as shown in Table 27. This is the next generation dipterocarp species. It also indicates that the last fruiting of Yakal has been several years ago. There is no latest fruiting of the tree species. This is indicated in the next stratum where it is not recorded.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 42 Ground Layer
The ground layer has a high plant diversity at H’ = 3.85. In Table 28, there seems to be a high species richness of rattan species. Bogtong, (Calamus subinermis), and Siksik, (Calamus microsphaerion), are all rattan species and they dominate the ground vegetation. Fruiting of the rattan palms may have been recent, hence the dominating ranks.
Talahib (Saccharum spontaneum) is a pioneer grass species ranked number 2 in the stratum. This further indicates the high disturbance condition of the ecosystem.
Table 28. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 5.
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq I.V.
Bogtong 9.00 6.29 40.00 6.96 13.25 Talahib 8.00 5.59 40.00 6.96 12.55 Amaha 10.00 6.99 25.00 4.35 11.34 Banga 7.00 4.90 20.00 3.48 8.37 Rattan 5.00 3.50 25.00 4.35 7.84 Siksik 4.00 2.80 20.00 3.48 6.28
Distribution of the species in the ground vegetation is J’ = 0.92, which is quite even.
5.10.6 Transect 6 in Barangays Cheey and Salvacion
Canopy Layer
The canopy stratum has many uncommon indigenous species dominating the ecosystem. As shown in Table 29, the top 6 species are uncommon; hence, one would not be familiar with the trees. On the other hand, the number 5 ranked species, Lanete (Wrightia pubescens), is a medium size tree and is included in the IUCN Red Data List of endangered plant species. This would indicate that the forest here is of medium height, that is, about 20 m or so.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 43 Table 29. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 6
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq RDom I.V.
Butyal 11.00 5.26 45.00 4.39 0.79 10.44 Taket 9.00 4.31 45.00 4.39 0.93 9.62 Luboy 9.00 4.31 45.00 4.39 0.86 9.55 Baid 7.00 3.35 35.00 3.41 1.30 8.06 Lanete 7.00 3.35 35.00 3.41 0.55 7.31 Tarab 6.00 2.87 30.00 2.92 2.31 8.10
The diversity of this layer is H’ = 4.17, which is very high. The distribution of species is also high or very even at J’ = 0.94. In Appendix Table 1, there are six plots that have moderately high diversity values and the rest are classified as low diversity. Furthermore, the distribution of these species along the transect is highly even, many having the value 1. Such high diversity in sections along the transect would indicate some favorable environmental conditions for the proliferation of species. Probable environmental conditions would be good soil substrate with good fertility and high moisture availability.
The ecosystem is classified as a lowland semi-deciduous forest meaning that the area has distinct wet and dry season, that is, during the dry season, the tendency of the trees would be to shed their leaves to conserve water in their biomass.
Under Canopy Layer
Again, Buho dominates the under canopy vegetation (Table 30). The same discussion as in previous transects apply here.
On the other hand, the associated species that also dominate belong to secondary forests (e.g. Butyal (Arcangelisia sp); Luboy (Syzygium sp.). Banato (Mallotus philippinensis) also belongs in secondary forests but it is more a pioneer species that have its habitat in fringes of disturbed forests and near grasslands.
Table 30. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Under Canopy Layer for Transect 6
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom RDom I.V.
Buho 18.00 16.51 65.00 12.50 17.10 1.63 30.65 Luboy 6.00 5.50 30.00 5.77 14.75 1.41 12.68 Butyal 5.00 4.59 25.00 4.81 18.10 1.73 11.12 Banato 4.00 3.67 20.00 3.85 28.27 2.70 10.21 Tarab 4.00 3.67 20.00 3.85 26.65 2.54 10.06 Sahing 4.00 3.67 20.00 3.85 20.63 1.97 9.48
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 44
The next generation of Butyal is assured in this forest, as shown in Table 30 where the species is recorded in this stratum. Sahing (Canarium asperum) is an indigenous species that has many uses for the local people. Its rank in the ecosystem (no. 6) ensures that there would be the next generation Sahing.
Diversity in this layer is a very high H’ = 3.46 with a distribution index of J’ = 0.91 that is quite even. Appendix Table 3 shows that there are also high values in distribution along the transect plots.
Ground Layer
The ground vegetation has a highly even distribution of species in the plots of the transect. All plots have the value 1. Appendix Table 4 shows the diversity index and distribution index per plot.
Overall diversity is a high 3.2 with a distribution index of 0.91.
Table 31. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 6.
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq I.V.
Bugtong 12.00 17.65 65.00 12.75 30.39 Butyal 5.00 7.35 30.00 5.88 13.24 Luya-luya 4.00 5.88 25.00 4.90 10.78 Baid 4.00 5.88 25.00 4.90 10.78 Luboy 3.00 4.41 20.00 3.92 8.33 Litsik 3.00 4.41 20.00 3.92 8.33
Dominant vegetation is a palm (Bugtong: C. subinermis) and some Herbs (e.g. Luya luya (Zingiber sp.) and tree species (Butyal). The mature trees of Butyal recently fruited thus giving wildlings in this stratum.
5.10.7 Transect 7 in Barangay Cheey
Canopy Layer
Most of the species dominating the ecosystems are indigenous with Katpay (Ficus sp.), leading the dominants. One large tree is included. This is the Taluto (P. tinctorium).
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 45 Table 32. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 7.
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom RDom I.V.
Katpay 30.00 16.76 80.00 12.12 566.96 2.28 31.16 Bikan 17.00 9.50 53.33 8.08 219.91 0.89 18.46 Laho 12.00 6.70 60.00 9.09 604.21 2.43 18.23 Maladuhat 13.00 7.26 53.33 8.08 660.52 2.66 18.00 Taluto 10.00 5.59 33.33 5.05 1288.25 5.19 15.82 Taho-tahong babae 11.00 6.15 26.67 4.04 430.39 1.73 11.92 Katul 2.00 1.12 13.33 2.02 1742.34 7.02 10.15
Diversity of this transect is high at 3.19 with a distribution index of 0.84, which is a bit clumped. On a per transect basis, the indices range from a very low 1.1 to low 2.34. Although the aggregate diversity is high, and the indices on a per transect basis is very low to low, the trend indicates that species are not being repeated along the transect in the samples. These accumulations of species contributed to the high diversity of the overall transect.
Under Canopy Layer
Buho remains the dominant plant form in this stratum as shown in the table below. It is ranked as number 1 with an importance value of 82.19. The taxonomic family of Myrtaceae is also common in this stratum as represented by Maladuhat (Syzygium sp.), which is ranked as no. 3 having an I.V. = 15.64. One requirement of the bamboo grass is that there should be adequate amount of silicon in the soil. It is this element that makes the bamboo’s epidermis hard. So it goes that the karst soil is silicon-based as discussed earlier. The family Myrtaceae is associated with karst limestone and ultramafic soil.
Table 33. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Under Canopy Layer for Transect 7.
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom RDom I.V.
Boho 4.00 6.25 26.67 8.33 1216.13 67.61 82.20 Bikan 11.00 17.19 33.33 10.42 21.76 1.21 28.81 Maladuhat 4.00 6.25 26.67 8.33 19.05 1.06 15.64 Bintang 3.00 4.69 20.00 6.25 16.62 0.92 11.86 Petkan 3.00 4.69 20.00 6.25 10.95 0.61 11.55 Lambunaw 4.00 6.25 13.33 4.17 15.55 0.86 11.28
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 46 In terms of biodiversity, the whole transect has an aggregate index of 3.05, considered as high (Appendix Table 3). But on a per plot basis, the diversity indices show very low values. This means that the species in the plots are very different from each other and they contribute to the species richness of the whole transect.
The distribution index is a high 0.92 suggesting a very even distribution of species in the plots and along the transect.
Ground Layer
Seen in Table 34, Ulawan (Lithocarpus sp.) is the dominant species in the ground vegetation. This is followed by the Kamagong (Diospyros discolor.), suggesting a recent fruiting of the tree. Malaruhat is ranked at par with Kamagong. Hence, along this transect, the next generation of trees and other plants are the Ulawan, Kamagong, Malaruhat (Syzygium sp.), and the Katul (Ficus glandulifera).
Table 34. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 7
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq I.V.
Ulawan 5 11.36 38.46 14.71 167.11 Kamagong 3 6.82 15.38 5.88 40.11 Malaruhat 3 6.82 15.38 5.88 40.11 Katul 5 11.36 7.69 2.94 33.42 Yeket-yeket 2 4.55 15.38 5.88 26.74 Katpay 2 4.55 15.38 5.88 26.74 Tahotaho lalake 2 4.55 7.69 2.94 13.37
Appendix Table 4 shows the diversity indices of the ground level vegetation for transect 7. All plots have too small values for adequate computation hence the zero index per plot. However, as an aggregate of all species in the transect, the index is a high 3.08 with a distribution index of 0.94 of which is also high.
5.10.8 Transect 8 in Barangays New Quezon, San Rafael, New Busuanga
Recent field validation survey to the sites revealed a mountain range with healthy cover of forest between these barangays. Unfortunately, the forest cover, which is identified by the GIS team as a “primary forest”, lies between transects 7 & 8. Therefore, this mountain was by-passed by the flora survey team. It is this “primary forest” cover that has been identified as one of the core zones (please see accompanying map).
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 47 As for it being identified as a “primary forest” cover, this may be considered as such despite small – medium diameter trees (Figure 3) because of the karst nature of the soils in the area that prevents trees from attaining large dimensions. As such, they are commercially unattractive for extraction up until now.
Canopy Layer
Table 35 summarizes the canopy layer. Ipil (I. bijuga) dominates the layer. Although there were only two individuals recorded, their sizes make up for the dominance; hence, they are ranked as number 1. Karne Norte or Liusin (Maranthes corymbosa), also a large tree but has smaller diameter in this sample, follows as no. 2.
Table 35. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 8
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom RDom I.V.
Ipil 2 3.23 33.33 4.65 6361.7428.43 36.30 Karne Norte 6 9.68 50 6.98 443.63 1.98 18.64 Amaha 5 8.06 50 6.98 644.22 2.88 17.92 Yakal 6 9.68 16.67 2.33 606.98 2.71 14.71 Banato 3 4.84 50 6.98 434.96 1.94 13.76 Santol Gubat 4 6.45 33.33 4.65 501.73 2.24 13.34
It is in this transect that Yakal (S. astylosa), a dipterocarp, is recorded. It is ranked as no. 4. The sample has 6 individuals along the transect, therefore, the environmental conditions for growth of this family of trees is favorable. Primarily, the soil in this area is not limestone but more clayey in texture.
Banato (Mallotus philippinensis) is a pioneer species and is a small tree but it is ranked as no. 5. Their frequency in appearing in half of the total number of plots along the transect makes up more for them to be included in the top ranked species.
There are many species identified in this transect despite its being a short one with only 6 plots. Therefore its diversity index is a high 3.21. Its distribution index is 0.93 making it highly even in the area (Appendix Table 1).
Under Canopy Layer
Prior to reaching the good “primary forest” cover, large stretches of Buho ring the mountain making access to the forest very difficult. The dominance of Buho is supported by the table below, it being ranked as no. 1 with an I.V. = 25.64. Other shrub species follow such as the Banakitan (Pouteria sp), Batobato (Drypetes littoralis), Pitkan (Sapindus sp.), Binunga (M. tanarius), and Baslayan (Fam: Rubiaceae). Binunga (M.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 48 tanarius) is a pioneer species and thrives in marginal areas. The Buho – dominant ecosystem has a very harsh environment and the Binunga fits in very well.
Table 36. Dominant Six ( 6) Species in the Under Canopy Layer for Transect 8.
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom RDom I.V.
Boho 4 10 66.67 12.5 17.72 3.14 25.64 Banakitan 2 5 33.33 6.25 53.46 9.48 20.73 Batobato 2 5 33.33 6.25 45.36 8.04 19.29 Pitkan 4 10 33.33 6.25 9.348 1.66 17.91 Binunga 4 10 16.67 3.13 24.85 4.41 17.53 Baslayan 1 2.5 16.67 3.13 63.62 11.28 16.90
The diversity of the transect is a high 3.03 with a high even distribution of 0.95. The plots support a very low diversity but the cumulative number of species makes the diversity high.
Ground Layer
The ground layer stratum is dominated by the Batobato (Drypetes littoralis) having an importance value of 20.80. An unknown species has been recorded to be the second ranked dominant species. Table 37 lists the 6 dominant species in this transect. As shown in the table, the species that has any relation to the upper strata is the Pitkan that is also shown in the under canopy layer. Otherwise, there is no similarity at all to the canopy species. This implies that the canopy stratum species have not fruited for some time now and that there is no second generation of the canopy species.
Table 37. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 8.
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq I.V.
Batobato 4 11.43 50 9.38 20.80 Pinpin 3 8.57 50 9.38 17.95 Checkit 3 8.57 50 9.38 17.95 Dildil 3 8.57 33.33 6.25 14.82 Pitkan 2 5.71 33.33 6.25 11.96 Bagin 2 5.71 33.33 6.25 11.96
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 49 Plant diversity in the stratum is a moderate high 2.99 while the distribution index is a very high 0.95.
5.10.9 Transect 9 in Barangay New Busuanga
Canopy Layer
Luboy (S. lineatum) and Katul (F. glandulifera) are the most dominant species in this transect and they have a very small difference in their importance values (Table 38). Laho (Colona subaequalis) is a small to medium tree with fruits that are used for seasoning the food of the local people. Makaasim (Syzygium nitidum) is a large tree and is usually associated with the karst limestone habitat or ultramafic soil.
Table 38. Dominant Six (6) Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 9.
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom RDom I.V.
Luboy 8 15.69 75 9.68 691.75 6.93 32.29 Katul 5 9.80 50 6.45 1385.4413.87 30.13 Laho 4 7.84 75 9.68 303.26 3.04 20.56 Makaasim 3 5.88 50 6.45 749.9 7.51 19.84 Ikuyan 5 9.80 50 6.45 337.83 3.38 19.64 Taket 1 1.96 25 3.23 1219.2212.21 17.40
The composition of the canopy layer is therefore made up of large and medium sized tree species with a mixture of pioneer and lowland forest species.
Only three plots have been established in this transect because the rest of the area have been homogenous grasslands. The plant diversity is a moderate high 2.86 with plot 3 having the highest value along the transect at 2.51. The distribution is high at 0.91 among the canopy species.
Under Canopy Layer
This stratum, the Buho bamboo again reigns over the other species. Pioneer species of Ikuyan (M.leerii), Inyam-inyam (Antidesma impressinerve), and Pagsahingin (Canarium asperum) compose the under canopy layer. Table 39 lists the species found in this layer with their corresponding importance values.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 50 Table 39. All Species in the Under Canopy Layer for Transect 9.
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom RDom I.V.
Boho 6 31.58 75 20 754.77 83.70 135.27 Bikan 2 10.53 50 13.33 10.46 1.16 25.02 Ikuyan 2 10.53 25 6.67 7.79 0.86 18.06 Inyam-Inyam 1 5.26 25 6.67 39.59 4.39 16.32 Tagbak 1 5.26 25 6.67 20.43 2.27 14.19 Ulawan 1 5.26 25 6.67 18.10 2.01 13.934 Katpai 1 5.26 25 6.67 12.57 1.39 13.32 Tibig 1 5.26 25 6.67 10.18 1.13 13.06 Lambunaw 1 5.26 25 6.67 9.62 1.07 13.00 Pagsahingin 1 5.26 25 6.67 7.07 0.78 12.71 Katul 1 5.26 25 6.67 7.07 0.78 12.71 Bintang 1 5.26 25 6.67 4.15 0.46 12.39
Plant diversity is a low 2.23 and a moderate high distribution at 0.89. All indices of plots along the transect are very low, ranging from 0.64 to 1.47.
Ground Layer
Makaasim (S. nitidum) dominate the ground layer vegetation as shown in Table 40 below. This shows that the mother tree of the species recently fruited and produced wildlings. All other species in this layer are also listed with their corresponding importance values.
Table 40. All Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 9.
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq IV
Makaasim 4 28.57 75 27.27 55.84 Kantutay 3 21.43 25 9.09 30.52 Bungan 1 7.14 25 9.09 16.23 Ateten 1 7.14 25 9.09 16.23 Kukuringin 1 7.14 25 9.09 16.23 Bugtong 1 7.14 25 9.09 16.23 Katul 1 7.14 25 9.09 16.23 Ikuyan 1 7.14 25 9.09 16.23 Ulawan 1 7.14 25 9.09 16.23
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 51 The transect has very low diversity at 2.01 but the distribution of the species is high at 0.91. Values of parameters along the transect are very low hence calculations can not be ascertained (Appendix Table 4).
5.10.10 Transect 10 in Barangay Buluang
Canopy Layer
A small community of plants are recorded in this transect mainly due to the karst condition of the area. Only a few species could tolerate karst conditions. Table 41 shows these species. The dominant species being the Ikuyan (M. leerii), a pioneer species. Composition of the canopy layer is made up of medium to large trees but due to the karst conditions, they would not be attaining their full height and girth.
Table 41. All Species in the Canopy Layer for Transect 10.
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom RDom I.V.
Ikuyan 4 11.11 3 11.54 195.44 3.95 26.59 Katol 4 11.11 2 7.69 220.35 4.45 23.25 Palomarya 3 8.33 2 7.69 324.71 6.55 22.58 Kayataw 3 8.33 2 7.69 314.16 6.34 22.37 Laho 4 11.11 2 7.69 155.59 3.14 21.94 Bintang 1 2.78 1 3.85 706.86 14.27 20.89 Malapo 2 5.56 1 3.85 551.54 11.13 20.53 Tamisan 3 8.33 2 7.69 173.58 3.50 19.53 Taluto 2 5.56 2 7.69 191.13 3.86 17.11 Bariwas 2 5.56 2 7.69 165.13 3.33 16.58 Balian 1 2.78 1 3.85 490.87 9.91 16.53 Salubagyo 1 2.78 1 3.85 346.36 6.99 13.62 Maluandit 2 5.56 1 3.85 194.82 3.93 13.33 Luboy 1 2.78 1 3.85 319.41 6.45 13.07 Dildil 1 2.78 1 3.85 254.46 5.14 11.76 Impaparay 1 2.78 1 3.85 226.98 4.58 11.21
The diversity of the area is a moderately high 2.69 with a high distribution of 0.95. Only 4 plots have been established (Appendix Table 1).
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 52 Under Canopy Layer
Again, due to the harsh conditions of the karst habitat, the Buho bamboo once again dominates in this under canopy ecosystem. The Ikuyan (M. leerii) is next which suggests that the Ikuyan in the canopy layer has been prolific in fruiting and spreading its propagules (seeds), hence the near dominance of the species in this stratum. Other species and their corresponding ranks are listed in Table 42.
The plant diversity is moderately high at 2.81 with a distribution of the species at 0.89, which is considered high.
Table 42. All Species in the Under Canopy Layer for Transect 10
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq Dom RDom I.V.
Boho 8 17.39 100 15.15 191.75 17.00 49.54 Ekoyan 8 17.39 80 12.12 26.76 2.37 31.89 Katol 3 6.52 40 6.06 35.26 3.13 15.71 Taluto 2 4.35 40 6.06 41.85 3.71 14.11 Malapo 3 6.52 40 6.06 13.85 1.23 13.81 Impaparay 2 4.35 20 3.03 67.20 5.96 13.34 Sahing 2 4.35 20 3.03 47.17 4.18 11.56 Laho 1 2.17 20 3.03 70.88 6.28 11.49 Binunga 1 2.17 20 3.03 70.88 6.28 11.49 Santol gubat 1 2.17 20 3.03 66.48 5.89 11.09 Bawan 1 2.17 20 3.03 63.62 5.64 10.84 Bariwas 1 2.17 20 3.03 63.62 5.64 10.84 Kayataw 1 2.17 20 3.03 56.75 5.03 10.23 Dildil 2 4.35 20 3.03 27.81 2.46 9.84 Palumaria 1 2.17 20 3.03 50.27 4.46 9.66 Natoputi 1 2.17 20 3.03 50.27 4.46 9.66 Kalamunding- 1 2.17 20 3.03 44.18 3.92 9.12 Kalamunding Bintang 1 2.17 20 3.03 38.48 3.41 8.62 kalamping 1 2.17 20 3.03 35.26 3.13 8.33 Luboy 2 4.35 20 3.03 6.42 0.57 7.95 Siksik 1 2.17 20 3.03 23.76 2.11 7.31 Molave 1 2.17 20 3.03 19.64 1.74 6.94 Balanihan 1 2.17 20 3.03 15.90 1.41 6.61
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 53 Ground Layer
In this layer, the Ikuyan (M. leerii) is dominant indicating a recent fruiting of the tree species. Eventually, the forest in this transect will be dominated by the Ikuyan since the species actually dominates all strata in this transect.
Table 43 lists all the species found in this layer with their corresponding importance values and ranked accordingly.
The diversity is a moderately high 2.50 with a high distribution index of 0.92. A mixture of medium – large tree species could be found in this stratum. The medium tree species are the Molave (Vitex parviflora), Sahing (C. asperum), Ekuyan and the Malugai (Pometia pinnata). The large tree species are the Taluto (P. tinctorium) and the Katol (Ficus glandulifera).These species would be the next generation of forest in this ecosystem.
Table 43. All Species in the Ground Layer for Transect 10.
Species Dens RDens Freq RFreq IV Ekuyan 5 19.23 60 15 34.23 Siksik 4 15.38 60 15 30.38 An-an 2 7.69 40 10 17.69 Impaparai 3 11.54 20 5 16.54 Sahing 2 7.69 20 5 12.69 Taluto 1 3.85 20 5 8.85 Salobagyo 1 3.85 20 5 8.85 Molave 1 3.85 20 5 8.85 Katol 1 3.85 20 5 8.85 Dildil 1 3.85 20 5 8.85 Bugtong 1 3.85 20 5 8.85 Bato-bato 1 3.85 20 5 8.85 Bariwas 1 3.85 20 5 8.85 Balanihan 1 3.85 20 5 8.85 Amliren/Malugai 1 3.85 20 5 8.85
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 54 5.11 Endangered and Endemic Species of Plants in Busuanga
Based on the Red Data List of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN, 2004) and the List of endangered plants of the Convention on the International Trade of Endangered Species (CITES), the following “endangered” species could be found in Busuanga:
MYRTACEAE: Mankono (Xanthostemon bracteatus) (Rare) and (X. verdugonianus) (Vulnerable)
These two species could be found in the southern area of Bgy Cheey in sitio San Jose. However, its range reaches down to the Yulo King Ranch and onwards to Coron Municipality near the town proper in Bgy Guadalupe.
Both are very similar to one another and their flowers have the same color and morphology. From afar, it is very difficult to distinguish one from the other. Only upon closer examination could the difference be seen, but this too is quite difficult to do without comparing it with a sample of the other.
The true Mankono is the X. verdugonianus while the other is a “cousin”. The difference lies in the flowers and the shape of the leaves. The pistils in the flower of X. bracteatus is thicker and shorter than the X. verdugonianus, whereas the latter’s is thinner, finer and a little longer. The leaves of the former is obovate, or rounded, whereas the latter’s is narrower and more pointed, almost lanceolate. (See Appendix plates for pictures)
VERBENACEAE: Molave (Vitex parviflora) (vulnerable)
It was previously thought that Molave thrives on limestone substrates hence the term “Molave – type forest” over limestone. Due to dispersals by fauna, the Molave could establish itself in substrates / areas other than limestone. In this case however, Busuanga is basically karst limestone and one could find the species in its forest.
The species could thrive under harsh conditions with high intensity sunlight and low moisture. Hence, more often, they could be found in the hill tops, forest fringes, and the Parang ecosystem.
DILLENIACEAE: Malakatmon (Dillenia luzoniensis) (vulnerable)
This species was never recorded in the field survey but was encountered during the validation field trip. The solitary individual was recorded in Bgy New Quezon in a Parang ecosystem standing approximately 10 m high with a diameter of approximately 70 cm. It is already an old tree.
The tree is endemic to the Philippines.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 55 FABACEAE: Narra (Pterocarpus indicus) (vulnerable)
The national tree, it is listed as endangered because of its high value in the furniture market and as ornamental in landscaping. It is a prolific seeder but is classified as vulnerable in the wilds. It is propagated widely in nurseries but its wild population is already depleted.
COMBRETACEAE: Sakat (Terminalia nitens) (vulnerable)
Locally known as Saket, depending on where you are in Palawan, the wild population of this tree is already depleted, hence its vulnerable status.
DIPTEROCARPACEAE: Apitong (Dipterocarpus grandiflorus) (Critically endangered) Yakal (Shorea astylosa) (Critically endangered)
Both premium species, the dipterocarps are the mainstays of the tropical rainforest and they are much sought after for their timber. It was in the 1970s that it was the height of logging and the dipterocarps were the focus of extraction.
Other species not in the IUCN / CITES lists but nevertheless also endangered, vulnerable, rare or threatened, (based on some references and expert’s opinion) are as follows:
CAESALPINIACEAE: Balitbitan (Cynometra ramiflora) (endangered)
This species was encountered in the “waterfalls” of Bgy. Sto. Niño, Busuanga. This plant is popularly cultivated for ornamental purposes and for landscaping, hence, it may be mistakenly labeled as “common”. However, finding it in the wilds is a chance event. Some botanists would claim that this is already extinct in the wilds. That is how rare the species has become, hence, its “endangered” classification.
FABACEAE: Bani (Pongamia pinnata) (vulnerable) LECYTHIDACEAE: Botong (Baringtonia asiatica) (vulnerable)
The two species were encountered in the coastal area of Bgy. Sto. Niño in Busuanga. They are associates of the Beach forest type ecosystem. As an ecosystem, the beach forest is already rare in the Philippines because of the pressures applied on it from anthropological sources. Beach development into resorts and residential areas are part of these pressures. Other species that are endangered are found in the attached check list of species for Busuanga.
5.11.1 Assessment of IUCN / CITES Listed Endangered Species
There are 15 species identified in the IUCN / CITES lists in the Canopy Layer. The Canopy Layer is chosen because it comprises the forest cover of the area. All growth under canopy is considered offspring’s of the species in the Canopy Layer exclusive of other plant forms such as rattan, large herbs and tall grasses (bamboo).
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 56 Table 44 shows the distribution of the endangered species recorded in the transects.
Table 44. Busuanga Flora Species with Endangered Status, per Transect
TRANSECT Species* 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Frequency Lanete x x 20 Kamagong x x x x 40 Ipil x x x x x x x 70 Sakat x x x x x x x x 80 Akle x x 20 Apitong x x x 30 Malasantol x x x x x x x x 80 Antipolo x x 20 Nato x x 20 Yakal x x 20 Duguan x 10 Narra x x x 30 Molave / Molawin x x 20 Mancono x 10 Kalaum x 10 Total 2 2 4 10 9 6 7 4 1 3 *IUCN; CITES Listed, 2000 (PAWB)
From the table, transects 4, 5, 6, & 7 have the highest number of endangered species. As to the species, Malasantol (Sandoricum vidallii) and Sakat (Terminalia nitens) are the most “common” in Busuanga appearing in 80% of the transects. The distribution of both species ranges from the southern barangay (Sto. Nino) towards the middle of Busuanga (Salvacion, Bogtong, Cheey) and near Buluang area.
Ipil (Intsia bijuga) is the next most “common” endangered species in Busuanga, appearing in 70% of the transects in the Municipality. Its distribution range is restricted in the middle of the municipality with an out layer located in Bgy. Buluang.
On the other hand, the following table shows the distribution of these species per barangay.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 57
Table 45. Busuanga Flora Species with Endangered Status, per Barangay.
BARANGAY
Species* Chy Nbu Con Sag YKR Bog Sal NQ SR SN Bul Freq’y
Lanete x x 18.18182 Kamagong x x 18.18182 Ipil x x x x x x 54.54545 Sakat x x x x x x 54.54545 Akle x 9.090909 Apitong x 9.090909 Malasantol x x x x x x x 63.63636 Antipolo x x 18.18182 Nato x x x 27.27273 Yakal x x x x x 45.45455 Duguan x x 18.18182 Narra x 9.090909 Molave / Molawin x x 18.18182 Mancono x 9.090909 Kalaum x 9.090909 Total number of species 13 1 2 2 2 5 7 3 2 2 3 Note: Chy- Cheey, Nbu-New Busuanga, Con-Concepcion, Sag- Sagrada, YKR- Yulo King Ranch, Bog-Bogtong, Nqu- New Quezon, Sal-Salvacion, SR-San Rafael , SN- San Nicolas, Bul- Buluang
As shown, Bgy. Cheey has the most number of endangered species found within its boundaries. This may be due to its large area. Bgy. Salvacion comes in second with 7 species recorded. Salvacion has good forest cover in its hilly areas.
Most of the other species can be seen clustered around the middle of the Municipality. These barangays are Bogtong and Salvacion, and also YKR.
Species recorded as “singletons” are Mancono, Narra, Apitong, Akle, and Kalaum (Syzygium ixoides). They may appear to be rare in this table but actually, the populations of these species are still adequate. They are just limited in their distributional ranges. For example, for Mancono, its observed range is in the YKR – Coron area up to only Sitio San Jose in Bgy. Cheey. Hence, the survey teams bypassed them. Kalaum (Syzygium ixoides), Apitong and Akle have lower populations, hence, they are truly rare in Busuanga.
Again, the endangered species that are “common” in the Municipality are Malasantol, Sakat, Ipil, and Yakal as with their frequency of appearance, 63.63%, 54.54%, and 45.45%, respectively.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 58 5.12 Recommended Core Zones for Terrestrial Flora Component
Criteria for selecting and delineating core zones based on the survey results:
a) The three transects 5,6,7 that are adjacent to each other with 2.5 kms distance in- between are habitats of wildlife, as reported by the fauna survey.
b) Apitong and yakal both dipterocarp species were encountered in higher elevations along and near transect 5. An intact forest stand considered as closed canopy were found to straddle transects 6 and 7 and believed to be habitat of wildlife species. Furthermore, those proposed core zones are important soil cover of river tributaries. Those intact closed canopy forests, when adequately protected, will enhance natural regeneration of adjacent sites.
c) Transects 5, 6, and 7 have high biodiversity indices. The core zone that is traversed by transect 5 has an area of about 825 hectares while that core zone along transect 6 and 7 has an area of about 2,163 has. The delineation of protection boundaries of the core zones considered the following criteria:
• Watershed or catchment divides is the primary consideration to protect headwaters or tributaries. • Inclusion of wide tracts of intact forested areas. • Inclusion of wildlife habitat • To protect the site from further degradation
The map of Busuanga showing the transect lines, delineation of core zones, and boundaries of the proposed protection area summarizes the results of the flora survey (Figure 8). The total area of the delineated proposed protected area that encompasses the two core zones is about 16, 841 hectares.
Figure 7 summarizes the diversity of the transects, all have very high diversity. On the other hand, on a per plot basis, the indices are either moderately high to very low. What makes the diversity of the transects high is the accumulation of all species within the transects, meaning, there are more species that could be found as one goes along the transect.
As such, the criteria for selecting core zones, as far as the Terrestrial Flora Component is concerned, would be high diversity and not necessarily the extent of forest cover. If this is so, then the following areas are recommended to be declared as core zones (Figure 8):
1. Transect 4 in Bgy Cheey because of its varied ecosystems (Lowland forest and Karst) and high diversity.
2. Transect 5 in Bgy Bugtong because of Karst ecosystems
3. Transects 6 and 7 in Bgy Cheey, San Rafael and Old Busuanga ______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 59
Transects have been overlaid on the satellite image, and by “connecting the dots”, i.e. the transect plots, and following the forest cover of the satellite image, the core zone is then mapped shown as circles.
Shannon Biodiversity Index for Flora in the Canopy, Under Canopy, and Ground Vegetation for Busuanga, Northern Palawan
4.5 Ground 4 Under Canopy 3.5 Canopy
3 2.5 2 1.5 1 Index H' 0.5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Transects
Figure 7. Shannon Biodiversity Index for Flora in the Canopy, Under
Canopy and Ground Vegetation for Busuanga, Northern
Palawan
If the criteria would be high diversity and forest cover, only two areas are selected:
1. Transect 5 in Bgy. Bugtong that corresponds to “primary forest” identified in the satellite imagery 2. Transects 6 & 7 in Bgys San Rafael, New Quezon, and Cheey, also corresponding to “primary forest” in the satellite imagery.
Both recommendations come in with Transects 5, 6, and 7 as the commonality. Hence, the core zone is finally identified as shown in Figure 8.
The proposed area to be protected is 16,841 has (Figure 8), and the core zones have 2,163 and 825 has, circled areas respectively. The basis for the boundaries of the proposed area for protection are topographic divides of the different watersheds found in the middle of Busuanga. Although the boundaries do not include the coastline (as in actual watershed boundaries), it considers the tree line / brushland / grassland ecotones as the boundaries. On the other hand, if the core zones are selected in terms of the presence of endangered species Transects 4, 5, 6, and 7 stand out. This is still in accordance with the selected core zones as discussed above.
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 60 A checklist of species that are found in Busuanga is also attached. The checklist contains the taxonomic information in terms of family name, species name (common name, local name, scientific name), its plant form or habit (whether tree, shrub, grass herb, etc.), ecological status (indigenous, endemic, rare, threatened, endangered, etc.), and the uses (economic or ecological) of the species.
Bgy. Boundary
Proposed Core Zones
Proposed area for Protection
Calauit
New Quezon Buluang
New Busuanga Cheey
San Rafael
Old Busuanga
Salvacion
Bugtong
Sagrada
Concepcion Sto. Niño
Figure 8. Recommended Core Zones in Busuanga Municipality
______RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 61
7.0 ISSUES, PROBLEMS AND THREATS TO CORE ZONES
7.1 Present and Potential Threats
a) The issue on the status of the Yulo King Ranch (YKR) should be resolved.
b) The burning in hillside agriculture by farmers to clear their hillside farms and by YKR to produce forage for their cattle is a serious resource management problem. Hillside farms are becoming more rampant and with constant burning in the uplands the core zones are in danger.
c) The absence of a well-planned and properly executed protection system for Busuanga. The above issues and problems exist due to lack of functional protection system that is specific to the biophysical, socio – cultural setting in Busuanga.
d) The need to put ground boundary delineation in protected areas surrounding core zones is highlighted. Knowing the boundaries of areas being managed makes the protection system easier to enforce.
7.2 Proposed Management Prescriptions to Protect Core Zones and Improve Forest Conditions in Busuanga
• Delineate on the ground a cattle production area with the corresponding management systems for that pasture area. In other words, implement the defined CLUP of Busuanga.
• Develop alternative livelihood or sources of income in the lowlands to divert the people from their inappropriate hillside farming practices. Those livelihood activities should capitalize on available resources in Busuanga that may include the following:
1) Establish more cashew (Anacardium occidentale) plantations, either backyard or small, medium to large plantations.
2) Pili (Canarium ovatum) nut production. Few people know that there is a pili species that bear fruits at age 3 years compared to 7 years as commonly known. Pili nut is also highly in demand in the world market.
3) Ube (Dioscorea sp.) production. The violet variety is highly in demand locally and in foreign markets.
4) Honey production. The demand for honey is also high.
______ISSUES, PROBLEMS AND THREATS TO CORE ZONES 62 The four land-based livelihood projects are not soil erosion inducing. The plantations do not need additional new forest clearings. The low, undulating lands around the fringes of Busuanga are ideal for the purpose.
Develop the great potentials of Busuanga for tourism. The production of high value crops in the lowlands of Busuanga should be encouraged through demonstration farms to motivate people to go down from their hillside farms. The wide idle YKR areas should be made productive.
It must be emphasized that the development of livelihood projects that are sustainable is among the ingredients of an effective protection system.
7.3 Proposed Measures to Rehabilitate Degraded Ecosystems in Busuanga
7.3.1 Grasslands
Grass plant community types as mentioned earlier are characterized by their acidic or alkaline soils, high temperatures during dry season as compared to forested sites, strong winds, draughty conditions, and fire. All of these are hostile to other plant species. The following approaches may be considered and carried out simultaneously if grassland rehabilitation is to succeed.
• Protect the area from burning • Plant only those species that could compete with grasses. These include some leguminous species like narra (Pterocarpus indicus) and alibangbang (Piliostigma malabaricum); Verbenaceae species like Molave (Vitex parviflora) and lingo – lingo (Viticipremna philippinensis). Tree species that competes well with cogon and survive in hot and dry areas are Bagalunga (Melia dubia) and Kalumpang (Sterculia foetida). Dapdap (Erythrina orientalis) is also a perfect species in combination with Kalumpit (Terminalia microcarpa), especially in low elevation. • Plant only during the rainy season – June to August and stop. • Cultural treatments should be sufficient, as follows:
¾ Weeding three times a year ¾ Fertilizer application at 30 grams of 14-14-14 once application only has proved beneficial. ¾ Replanting of mortality
7.3.2 Brushlands
Same prescriptions as those in grasslands, the only difference is to use species that are both shade tolerant and grow well in acidic or alkaline and dry sites. Cultural treatments are the same. Some species that perform well in brush lands are: Malapapaya (Polycias nodosa) of the family Araliaceae, Batino (Alstonia macrophylla) of the family Apocynaceae, Kusibeng (Sapindus saponaria) of the family Sapindaceae. ______ISSUES, PROBLEMS AND THREATS TO CORE ZONES 63
7.3.3 Denuded Forests and Eroded Slopes
For eroded sites, it is a combination of mechanical and vegetative interventions. Eroded sites are usually infertile since the exposed soils are parent material. Species such as Agoho (Casuarina equisetifolia), Dapdap (E. orientalis), Talisay Gubat (Terminalia foetidissima), Banaba (Lagerstoemia speciosa) could be used. These species adapt well to harsh conditions.
Mechanical interventions to arrest erosion include wattling, small check dams, rip rapping and use of grasses in steep slopes to hold soil in place.
7.3.4 Kaingin Areas
Tree species that are suited to open or dry conditions such as: Molave (Vitex parviflora), Banaba (L. speciosa), Lingo-lingo (V. philippinensis), Bagalunga (Melia dubia), and Kalumpit (T. foetidissima) could be planted in the gully areas. Lamio (Dracontomelon edule) and Dao (Dracontomelon dao) are perfect species in open areas but only in low-lying sites in the kaingin. The cultural treatments are similar to those prescribed for grasslands and brushlands.
7.3.5 Encroachment into Primary and Secondary Forests
The following are recommended which are the objectives of the Philippine Strategy for Sustainable Development.
• Promote social and intergenerational equity in the utilization of the country’s natural resources. • Develop management programs to preserve the country’s heritage of biological diversity. • Promote the technologies of sustainable lowland agriculture and upland agro- forestry through encouragement of research and development (R and D) and demonstration projects. • Achieve and maintain acceptable quality of air and water. • Enhance the foundation for scientific – decision – making through the promotion and support of education and research in ecosystems. • Expand substantially the family planning/ responsible parenthood programs. • Promote and support population concerns and family welfare in development programs but not to sacrifice ecologically critical areas.
7.3.6 Recently Logged Over Areas
Protection of the newly logged over areas from invasion of kaingineros must be efficiently undertaken so that the remaining trees regenerate the entire area.
It must be made clear that logging does not degrade the forest permanently. Once logging operations stop, the forest slowly starts to heal. It is the influx of kaingineros in logged over areas that denude existing vegetation.
______ISSUES, PROBLEMS AND THREATS TO CORE ZONES 64 8.0 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
9.1 Significant Findings of the Survey
• Based on the nested quadrat vegetation sampling in Busuanga, non- dipterocarp tree species are more numerous (1,842 individuals) with total volume of 1,048.58 cu m compared with dipterocarp (62 individuals) species with a total volume of 45 cu m or only 6.32 cu m per ha. • There are no ultramafic ecosystems in Busuanga. Only karst – limestone forest exists that is characterized by dwarf trees. • Mancono (Xanthostemon spp.) forest stand was observed during the survey. • The flora biodiversity in Busuanga has an index of 4.21 which is considered very high based on the Fernando Scale (1998). • The 11 transects indicate the relative locations of the nested quadrats (observation points) indicating those sites are forested. Those with only few or no quadrats/ observation points are wide boho or grass areas. At a glance, open areas, boho areas and brushlands dominate the landscape in Busuanga. Very little area is occupied by trees. The results of the survey indicate alternating boho-brushlands-small secondary forest in higher slopes. • Several hillside farms were encountered during the survey. Burning of hillsides were also observed, although these were outside of the transects. • There were no human settlements in the uplands, only hillside farms of lowland settlers. • Fifteen (15) tree species with endangered status were encountered in Busuanga. • Katpai, a species that belongs to the Moraceae family dominated the canopy layer; boho (Schizostachium lumampao) dominated the under canopy layer while Malulandet of the Meliaceae plant family dominated the undergrowth layer. • Significant timber volume of non- dipterocarp species came from trees with diameters from 25 cm to 45 cm, while the timber volume of dipterocarp species came from trees with diameters from 15cm to 45 cm.
9.2 Conclusions
The landscape of Busuanga is very fragmented with grasslands, brushlands and forests interspersed and scattered in the island. Buho bamboo clearly dominates the undercanopy growth indicating a disturbed island ecosystem.
Much of the soil medium in Busuanga is chert – based, hence, not many but highly specialized species could be found. This adds on to the high diversity of the area. Recent validation survey found no ultramafic ecosystem and this has been confirmed by the geologist that was interviewed in the area. Most of the land formations are karst limestone having silicon dioxide as one of its major elements.
Grasslands observed seldom have Cogon (Imperata cylindrica). Where they are present, they are in a “parang” type of ecosystem. Forage grasses dominate.
______SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 65 Calauit Island is already a proclaimed sanctuary and is considered as a core zone. Other recommended areas for core zone are located in barangays Cheey, Bogtong, San Rafael and Old Busuanga.
• Based on the results of the data analysis there is no old growth forest in Busuanga. Trees with DBH ranging from 25 cm to 45 cm dominate the forested areas. • With the abundance of boho (Schizostachium lumampao) species and predominance of small to medium diameter tree, it could be concluded that old and large diameter trees were removed or harvested. • Non – tree species (grass and brush plant species) cover much wider land area in Busuanga. Forest areas are shrinking. • The three above findings lead to the conclusion that Busuanga is undergoing rapid forest depletion pointing to serious environmental degradation. • There are 15 forest species with endangered status found in Busuanga. These are lanete, kamagong, ipil, sakat, akle, apitong, malasantol, antipolo, nato, yakal, duguan, narra, molave, mancono and kalaum. • There is no ultramatic forest in Busuanga. Only forest on karst – limestone exists. • The flora survey was a validation of the existing vegetation. Comparing what were observed during the survey with the satellite imagery found significant inconsistency in the magnitude of land cover indicated on the map. The map shows significant secondary forest cover but actually large portions of those are boho and grass areas. This was the reason why no quadrats were established during the survey in those supposedly secondary forest areas as shown in the 2003 satellite imagery. • Non availability of updated satellite imagery showing vegetation cover before the flora survey handicapped the teams. • When nothing is done to minimize if not totally stop hillside farming, burning of hillsides, timber poaching and improve the cattle production system of YKR in Busuanga (all contributing to forest depletion), the deterioration of the forest ecosystem will continue and there will come a time that degradation will be irreversible.
9.3 Recommendations
• Make available updated vegetation maps before the actual flora survey starts. The field survey is actually a “ground truthing” activity or a validation – verification of what are indicated on the imagery. The map is highly important in planning the survey. It could significantly reduce cost and duration of survey. • A field reconnaissance or preliminary survey is important. Observations on the biophysical conditions in the target area will help in adequately planning the flora survey. • Although the surveys were guided by plans based on secondary information, there is always a possibility that same information used is inadequate or outdated. Figure, schedules, and expectations were all based on assumptions.
______SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 66 • Busuanga Island comprises Busuanga town with an area of about 45,000 hectares and Coron, about 72,000 hectares. Accordingly, Yulo King Ranch (YKR) covers about 28,000 hectares. Soil compaction is extensive and rill erosion is the resultant effect of intensive grazing. The PCSDS should pursue the reversion of portions of YKR area to protection forest and orchard type plantation as livelihood. • The participation of PCSDS counterpart during the surveys should be a standard operating procedure. The presence of PCSDS counterpart helps validate the reliability of data and information generated during the survey. • As soon as practicable, a protection system should be put in place in Busuanga if the agents and processes of degradation are to be stopped. • The time for management plan development is still far. It is highly recommended that the development of a site-and-situation-specific protection system for Busuanga should already be developed as soon as possible and made operational. In this connection, it is worthwhile to emphasize that tourism and ecosystem management can be complementary, ideally and mutually beneficial. But, the success of nature tourism depends on nature, and it is critical for all involved to realize that intact natural resources are the foundation of the ecotourism industry (Boo, 1990).
______SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 67 REFERENCES
Bio-Physical Survey Report for Busuanga. July 2003. ECAN Zoning Component, Palawan Council for Sustainable Development
Carballo, Jose Luis, Lucille Gregorio, Norma A. Villanueva, Rozalinda Villavicencio. 1983. Guide to Grassland Plants. A Resource Material for Biology Teachers: Pundasyun sa pagpapaunlad ng kaalaman sa pagtuturo ng Agham 1pk. SEC. UP NRMC, Ministry of national Resources and UP p.176
Comprehensive Land Use Plan of Busuanga. Undated
De Guzman, Enriquito D., Ricardo M. Umali, Malians D. Sotalbo. 1986. Guide to Philippine Flora and Fauna Vol.111 Dipterocarps and Non Dipterocarps, p.414
Facts and Figures- A Summary, 1997. Municipality of Busuanga
Fernandez, Jose, Fe Fernandez and Edna Imelda Fernandez – Legaspi. 1995. Palawan Flora and Fauna. Palawan Tropical Forestry Protection Programme
Fernando, E.S. et.al. 2004. Flowering Plants and Ferns of Mt. Makiling. ASEAN-Korea Environmental Cooperation Unit
Fernando, E.S. 2000. Checklist of Species in FBS 21 6th Ed. UPLB CFNR
1998. Resource Inventory and Assessment of Biodiversity in the Lowland Forest of the Subic Bay metropolitan Authority. Terminal Report. UPLB CFNR and DOST - PCARRD
Flora Field Survey Manual. 2002. ECAN Zoning Component, Palawan Council for Sustainable Development
KAUAI Tropical Timber Publication. 2003. P.O. Box 1026, Koloa, Hawaii 96756 Pin22
Kent, Martin and Paddy Coker. 1992. Vegetation Description and Analysis: A Practical Approach. CRC Press, Belhaven Press London.
Ludwig, John A. and J.F. Reynolds, 1988. Statistical Ecology: A primer on methods and computing. John Wiley and Sons. New York Chichester Brisbane Toronto Singapore.
Madulid, Domingo A. 2002. A Pictorial Guide to the Noteworthy Plants of Palawan. Palawan Tropical Forestry Protection Programme
Madulid, Domingo A. 2000. A Pictorial Cyclopedia of Philippine Ornamental Plants p .388
______REFERENCES 68 Magat-Pantabangan Watershed Feasibility Study Projects. 1980. National Irrigation Administration, Diliman, Quezon City
Magurran, Anne E. 1988. Ecosystems Diversity and Its Measurements. Princeton University Press
McAleece, Neil, PJD Lampshead, GLJ Patterson, JD Gage. BD Professional ver. 2. 1998. Free software from the internet.
Melana, D.M., J. Atchue III, C.E.Yao, R.Edwards, E.E.Melana, and H.I.Gonzales. Mangrove Management Handbook. CRMP-DENR USAID
Mendoza, Valerio B. Undated. General Environmental Situation.
Mendoza, Valerio B. Undated. The Productivity and Stability of Agricultural systems and Human Settlements are Dependent on the Stability of the Watershed Ecosystems
Mendoza, Valerio B. Undated. Environmental Interpretation in the La Mesa Watershed and Revenue Generation System for Sustainable Development: A Research and Development Project.
Moody, K., C.E.Munroe, R.T.Lubigan and E.C. Paller, Jr. 1984. Major Weeds of the Philippines. Weed Science Society of the Philippines.
Mueller-Dumbois, Dieter and Heinz Ellenberg. 1974. Aims and Methods of Vegetation Ecology. John Wiley & Sons. New York Chichester Brisbane Toronto
Odum, Eugene P. 1971. Fundamentals of Ecology. W.B. Saunders Company. Philadelphia London Toronto
PAWB – DENR. 2000. Statistics on Philippine Protected Areas and Wildlife Resources
PCARRD DOST. 1987. Manual on Vegetational Analysis for Grassland and Forest Ecosystems. Book Series No. 50
Philippine Forestry Statistics. 1999. Forest Management Bureau, DENR
Provincial Physical Framework Plan. 1993-2002. Comprehensive Provincial Land Use Plan (Palwan)
Rojo, J.P. et.al. 2000. Philippine Erect Bamboos: A Field Identification Guide. FPRDI
Rojo, JP. 1999. Revised Lexicon of Philippine Trees. FPRDI DOST.
Salvosa, F.M. 1963. Lexicon of Philippine Trees. FPRDI.
Santos, Jose V., Enriquito D. De Guzman, Edwino S. Fernando. 1986. Guide to Philippine Flora and Fauna Vol. I: Bamboos, Grasses and Palms. p. 255
______REFERENCES 69 Seeber, G., H.J. Weidelt, and V.S. Banaag. 1979. Dendrological Characters of Important Forest Trees from Eastern Mindanao. GTZ Eschborn Philippine - German Rainforest Development Project.
Seidenschwarz, Franz. 1994. Plant World of the Philippines. An illustrated Dictionary of Visayan Plant Names with their Scientific, Tagalog and English Equivalents, University of San Carlos, Cebu City Palawan p. 368
Socio-Economic Survey of all Municipalities in Palawan. July 2003.
Soil Survey of Palawan Province, Philippines. Soil Report No. 27. Bureau of Soils Dept. of Agriculture and Natural Resources
Terrestrial Survey Plan ECAN Zoning Component, Palawan Council for Sustainable Development.
The La Mesa Watershed Resource Management Framework Plan. 2000. Bantay Kalikasan, ABS-CBN Foundation, Inc. Mother Ignacia Ave., Diliman, Quezon City
Whitmore, T.C. 1990. An Introduction to the Tropical Rain Forests. Clarendon Press Oxford
Zamora, Precillano M. and Leonardo Co. 1986. Guide to Philippine Flora and Fauna Vol. II: Economic Ferns, Endemic Ferns and Gymnosperms. p 27
______REFERENCES 70 ANNEXES
PLATE 1. The Manconos, Xanthostemon bracteatus and X. verdugunianus. Note the shape of leaves and the flowers that differentiate the two.
PLATE 2. Malakatmon, Dillenia luzoniensis, found in the Parang ecosystem of New Quezon, Busuanga.
______ANNEXES 71
PLATE 3. The Parang Ecosystem, habitat of the Malakatmon, in New Quezon, Busuanga.
PLATE 4. The beach forest ecosystem in Sto. Nino, Busuanga, already a threatened vanishing ecosystem in the Philippines.
______ANNEXES 72
APPENDICES
Appendix Tables
Appendix Table 1. Diversity Index per Canopy Structure per Transect
Transect Ground UnderCanopy Canopy
1 2.66 3.06 3.45 2 2.605 3.17 3.02
3 2.22 3.29 2.93
4 3.18 2.91 3.438
5 3.85 3.62 3.66 6 3.203 3.46 4.17 7 3.08 3.05 3.19 8 2.99 3.03 3.21 9 2.01 2.23 2.86 10 2.501 2.81 2.69
______APPENDICES 73 Appendix Table 2. Transects of Busuanga Flora Survey Group: Shannon-Weiner Biodiversity Indices (20x20)
Trans Overall 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 1 3.45 1.03 2.04 2.32 2.04 2.08 2.58 1.47 2.01 2.16 2.06 2.42 2.27 2.15 2.08 1.89 2.16 2.32 2.12 2.01 2.16 J' 0.835 0.93 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.94 0.94 0.97 0.94 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.9 0.96 0.92 0.96 0.94 2 3.02 1.38 2.1 1.69 2.27 1.88 1.74 1.49 2.27 2.21 1.47 2.14 J' 0.87 1 0.95 0.94 0.98 0.97 0.97 0.93 0.98 0.96 0.91 0.97 3 2.93 1.01 0.93 0.93 1.73 1.21 0 0.53 1.41 1.49 1.52 0.92 1.32 1.24 0 1.08 0.69 2.05 1.04 0.69 1.84 J' 0.837979 0.2889 0.27 0.27 0.495 0.35 0 0.15 0.403 0.43 0.43 0.26 0.38 0.35 0 0.31 0.197 0.59 0.3 0.197 0.53 4 3.438 1.03 2.04 2.23 2.02 1.95 2.58 1.56 2.01 2.17 2.1 2.43 2.26 2.26 2.2 1.89 2.27 2.4 2.11 1.88 2.15 J' 0.833 0.94 0.93 0.93 0.92 0.94 0.95 0.97 0.92 0.94 0.94 0.98 0.94 0.98 0.94 0.97 0.92 0.96 0.91 0.96 0.93 5 3.66 2.39 2.47 2.14 1.73 1.59 1.38 2.14 1.91 1.91 1.33 1.15 2.19 1.66 2.16 1.74 1.64 1.84 2.16 1.55 0.79 J' 0.886 0.96 0.96 0.97 0.96 0.88 0.86 0.93 0.98 0.98 0.96 0.83 1 0.93 0.98 0.97 0.92 0.92 0.98 0.96 0.72 6 4.17 1.79 1.61 2.3 2.19 2.39 2.3 2.71 2.37 2.48 2.71 2.3 2.1 2.16 2.48 2.54 2.3 2.4 2.56 2.1 2.1 J' 0.9411 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.98 1 1 1 1 0.98 1 0.99 1 1 1 1 1 7 3.19 1.61 1.18 1.1 2.338 1.41 1.63 1.55 1.2 2.09 2.25 1.76 2.27 2.26 1.33 2.008 J' 0.848 1 0.73 1 0.975 0.88 0.91 0.96 0.865 0.95 0.93 0.8 0.99 0.94 0.96 0.91 8 3.21 2.16 0 2.3 1.86 1.74 1.89 J' 0.934773 0.629 0 0.67 0.542 0.51 0.55 9 2.86 1.27 2.09 2.51 1.21 J' 0.912 0.92 0.95 0.95 0.87 10 2.69 1.61 1.49 2.02 1.99 J' 0.95 1 0.93 0.97 0.95 H' 4.21 Busuanga overall (Canopy Layer) J' 0.81 Biodiversity Scale (Fernando 1998) Relative Values H' J' H' = Shannon - Weiner Biodiversity Index Very High 3.5 above 0.75 - 1 J' = Pielou Distribution Index High 3.0 - 3.49 0.5-0.74 Moderate High 2.5 - 2.99 0.25-0.49 Low 2.0 - 2.49 0.15-0.24 Very Low 1.9 below 0.05-0.14 ______APPENDICES 74
Appendix Table 2 (cont’n…)
Trans 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 1 2.44 2.47 2.35 1.94 1.48 1.28 1.24 2.2 2.12 2.16 2.48 1.93 2.08 2.18 1.93 2.15 2.21 1.89 J' 0.98 1 1 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.9 1 1 0.9 1 0.9 0.9 1 0.9 0.9 1 1 2 J' 3 1.88 J' 0.54 4 2.51 2.39 2.39 1.83 1.34 1.29 1.54 2.09 2.12 2.05 2.31 2.07 1.93 2.1 2.14 2.21 1.99 1.89 J' 0.98 1 1 0.9 0.8 0.9 1 1 1 0.9 1 0.9 0.9 1 0.9 1 1 1 5 1.91 J' 0.98 6 J' 7 J' 8 J' 9 J' 10 J'
______APPENDICES 75 Appendix Table 3. Transects of Busuanga Flora Survey Group: Shannon-Weiner Biodiversity Indices (5x5) Trans Overall 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 1 3.06 1 1.27 1.49 1.83 1.05 1.27 1.94 1.33 1.79 1.21 1.46 J' 0.91 0.72 0.92 0.93 0.94 0.96 0.92 1 0.96 1 0.87 0.91 2 3.17 1.61 1.61 1.61 1.74 1.74 1.56 1.91 1.79 1.73 1.04 1.91 J' 0.91 1 1 1 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.98 1 0.96 0.94 0.98 3 3.29 1.36 1.33 1.33 1.04 1.38 1.35 1.83 1.74 2.05 1.83 0.85 1.33 1.01 1.31 0.79 1.61 1.91 0.56 J' 0.88 1 0.96 0.96 0.94 1 0.84 0.94 0.97 0.93 0.94 0.77 0.96 1 0.94 0.72 1 0.98 0.81 4 2.91 1.667 1.561 1.946 1.792 2.079 2.303 1.667 1.973 1.831 1.733 1.748 1.561 1.696 1.523 1.332 1.792 1.733 1.792 1.215 1.972 J' 0.76 0.931 0.97 1 1 1 1 0.931 0.949 0.941 0.967 0.976 0.97 0.946 0.946 0.961 1 0.967 1 0.876 0.948 5 3.62 1.889 1.768 1.633 1.581 1.559 2.043 1.748 1.696 1.561 1.834 1.748 1.906 1.332 1.972 2.164 2.043 0.956 1.003 1.696 1.831 J' 0.89 0.971 0.908 0.911 0.882 0.801 0.983 0.976 0.946 0.97 0.943 0.976 0.98 0.961 0.948 0.985 0.983 0.87 0.723 0.946 0.941 6 3.46 1.946 1.748 1.792 1.332 1.609 1.386 1.748 1.099 1.609 1.099 1.609 1.748 1.386 1.906 2.079 1.386 1.609 1.099 1.946 1.792 J' 0.91 1 0.976 1 0.961 1 1 0.976 1 1 1 1 0.976 1 0.98 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 3.05 0 1.242 1.277 0 1.386 0.693 1.733 0.562 1.277 0.95 1.099 0.637 0.637 1.099 1.946 J' 0.92 0 0.896 0.921 0 1 1 0.967 0.811 0.921 0.865 1 0.918 0.918 1 1 8 3.03 1.946 1.154 1.733 1.748 1.561 1.332 J' 0.95 1 0.832 0.967 0.976 0.97 0.961 9 2.23 1.386 1.332 1.475 0.637 J' 0.89 1 0.961 0.917 0.918 10 2.81 1.523 1.677 1.889 1.889 2.025 J' 0.89 0.946 0.936 0.971 0.971 0.974 H' 4.23 Busuanga overall (Under Canopy) J' 0.82 Plant Plant Forms No. % Forms No. % Trees 150 85.714 Epiphyte 4 2.2857 Palm 11 6.2857 Pandan 1 0.5714 Grass 2 1.1429 Total 175 100 Non-tree Vine 5 2.8571 species 25 14.3 Herb 2 1.1429 ______APPENDICES 76 Appendix Table 3 (cont’n…)
Trans 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 1 J' 2 J' 3 J' 4 1.83 1.61 1.73 1.55 1.48 1.61 1.33 1.56 1.7 1.68 1.83 1.67 1.67 1.73 1.73 1.49 1.49 1.55 J' 0.94 0.9 0.97 0.96 0.92 1 0.96 0.97 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.93 0.93 0.97 0.97 0.93 0.93 0.96 5 J' 6 J' 7 J' 8 J' 9 J' 10 J'
______APPENDICES 77 Appendix Table 4. Transects of Busuanga Flora Survey Group: Shannon-Weiner Biodiversity Indices (1x1)
Trans Overall 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 1 2.66 0.637 0.5 1.792 1.04 0.693 1.386 1.55 1.099 1.154 0.349 0.693 J' 0.9 0.918 0.72 1 0.946 1 1 0.963 1 0.832 0.503 1 2 2.605 1.099 1.1 1.609 0.637 1.609 1.099 1.386 1.04 1.099 1.386 0.693 J' 0.92 1 1 1 0.918 1 1 1 0.946 1 1 1 3 2.22 Values too small for computations J' 0.8 4 3.18 1.099 1.56 1.386 1.609 1.099 1.332 1.099 0.501 1.332 1.099 1.099 1.04 0.637 1.386 0.637 1.332 1.04 1.332 1.099 0.637 J' 0.812 1 0.97 1 1 1 0.961 1 0.279 0.961 1 1 0.946 0.918 1 0.918 0.961 0.946 0.961 1 0.918 5 3.85 0.693 2.08 1.673 1.792 1.946 2.146 2.398 1.748 1.748 1.792 1.445 1.099 1.099 1.946 1.946 1.332 1.792 0.377 1.04 1.889 J' 0.925 1 1 0.86 1 1 0.977 1 0.976 0.976 1 0.898 1 1 1 1 0.961 1 0.544 0.946 0.971 6 3.203 0.693 1.39 1.099 1.099 0.693 1.099 1.099 1.386 0.693 1.386 1.386 1.386 1.386 1.099 1.386 1.609 1.099 1.386 1.099 1.386 J' 0.91 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 3.08 Values too small for computations J' 0.945 8 2.99 1.561 1.95 2.079 1.099 1.386 1.55 J' 0.953 0.97 1 1 1 1 0.963 9 2.01 Values too small for computations J' 0.914 10 2.501 1.748 1.1 1.332 1.332 1.011 J' 0.923 0.976 1 0.961 0.961 0.921 H' 4.54 Busuanga overall (Undergrowth)/Ground Layer J' 0.88 Plant Plant Forms No. % Forms No. % Trees 127 72.99 Vine 11 6.322 Palm 14 8.046 Herb 9 5.172 Grass 3 1.724 Epiphyte 5 2.874 Fern 5 2.874 Total 174 100 ______APPENDICES 78 Appendix Table 4 (cont’n…)
Trans Overall 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 1 2.66 J' 0.9 2 2.605 J' 0.92 3 2.22 J' 0.8 4 3.18 0.95 1.39 1.61 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.33 1.61 1.04 1.24 1.33 1.95 1.56 1.24 1.15 1.33 1.56 J' 0.812 0.87 1 1 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 1 0.95 0.9 0.96 1 0.97 0.9 0.83 0.96 0.97 5 3.85 J' 0.925 6 3.203 J' 0.91 7 3.08 J' 0.945 8 2.99 J' 0.953 9 2.01 J' 0.914 10 2.501 J' 0.923
______APPENDICES 79 Appendix Table 5. Preliminary Checklist of Angiosperms (Non-Monocots Paleoherbs and Dicots) of Busuanga, Palawan
ANGIOSPERMS (NON-MONOCOT PALEOHERBS)
FAMILY SPECIES LOCAL NAME COMMON NAME ECONOMIC/ECOLOGICAL ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE STATUS PIPERACEAE Peperomia pellucida (L.) HBK. Pansit-pansitan Medicinal Common Piper betle L. Ikmo Medicinal Common Piper interruptum Opiz var. interruptum Pamintang aso Species Diversity Common Piper interruptum Opiz var. loheri (C.DC.) Quis. Litlit Species Diversity Common Piper nigrum L. Paminta Food Additives Common ANGIOSPERMS (DICOTS) MAGNOLIACEAE *Magnolia coco (Lour.) DC. Magnolia Ornamental Common *Michelia alba DC. Champakang puti Ornamental Rare *Michelia champaca L. Champaka Ornamental Rare Talauma villariana Rolfe Patangis Species Diversity Rare ANNONACEAE *Annona muricata L. Guyabano Edible Fruit, Medicinal Common *Annona reticulata L. Anonas Edible Fruit, Medicinal Common *Annona squamosa L. Atis Edible Fruit, Medicinal Common Cananga odorata (Lamk.) Hook. f. & Thoms Ilang – ilang Medicinal, Essential oils Common Goniothalamus amuyom (Blanco) Merr. Amuyong Light Construction Common Miliusa vidalii Sinc. Takulau Light Construction Rare Papualthia lancealata (Vid.) Merr. Anolang Fences Common Phaeanthus ebracteolatus (Presl,) Merr. Kalimatas Light Construction Rare Polyalthia flava Merr. Yellow lanutan Light Construction Rare *Polyalthia longifolia Benth. & Hook.f. Indian lanutan Ornamental Common Mitrephora weberi Merr. Species Diversity Indeterminate ______APPENDICES 80 FAMILY SPECIES LOCAL NAME COMMON NAME ECONOMIC/ECOLOGICAL ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE STATUS MYRISTICACEAE Knema glomerata (Blanco)Merr. Tambalau Light Construction Rare Myristica elliptica Wall ex Hook f. & Thoms.var. simiarum (A.DC.)Sincl. Tanghas Light Construction Rare Myristica philippinensis Lam. Duguan Light Construction Rare LAURACEAE *Cinnamomum mercadoi Vid. Kalingag Food Additives Rare Litsea perrottetii (Blume) F.-Vill Marang Edible Fruit Rare Litsea sebifera Blume Sablot Light Construction Indeterminate *Persea gratissima Gaertn. Avocado Edible Fruit, Medicinal Common MENISPERMACEAE Arcangelisia flava (L.) Merr. Albutra Medicinal Common VITACEAE (LEEACEAE) Cayratia trifolia (L.) quis. Alangingi Species Diversity Common Leea aculeata Blume ex Spreng Amamali Species Diversity Common Leea guineensis G. Don Mali-mali Species Diversity Common Leea philippinensis Merr. Kaliantan Species Diversity Common Tetrastigma harmandii Planch. Ayo Species Diversity Common Tetrastigma loheri Gagnep. Loher’s ayo Species Diversity Common Allophylus lopezii Merr. Species Diversity Common Cissus simplex Blanco Species Diversity Common Columella geniculata (Blume) Merr. Sampang Species Diversity Common NYCTAGINACEAE *Bougainvillea spectabilis Willd. Bougainvillea Ornamental Common *Pisonia grandis R. Br. Maluko Light Construction Common POLYGONACEAE *Triplaris cumingiana Fisch. & Mey. Palosanto Light Construction Common LORANTHACEAE Loranthus philippinensis Cham & Schlecht. Dapong kahoy Species Diversity Common OLACACEAE Strombosia philippinensis (Bail.) Rolfe. Tamayuan Light Construction Rare CELASTRACEAE Euonymus javanicus Blume Malasangki Light Construction Rare ICACINACEAE Gomphandra luzoniensis (Merr.)Merr. Mabunot Light Construction Rare Gonocaryum calleryanum (Baill.)Becc Taingang babui Light Construction Rare Rare ______APPENDICES 81 FAMILY SPECIES LOCAL NAME COMMON NAME ECONOMIC/ECOLOGICAL ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE STATUS MALPHIGIACEAE Xanthophyllum excelsum (BI.) Miq. Anono, Bagaulan,; Managbak (Tagb.) Banig (Tag.) Common CLUSIACEAE Calophyllum blancoi Pi. & Tr. (GUTTIFERAE) Bitanghol General Construction Rare Calophyllum inophyllum L. Bitaog General Construction Rare Cratoxylum formusum (Jack) Dyer Salingogon Light Construction Common Cratoxylum sumatranum (Jack) Dyer Paguringon Light Construction Common Garcinia binucao (Blanco) Choisy Food Additives, Light Binukaw Construction Common Garcinia dives Pierre Pildes Light Construction Rare Garcinia dulcis (Roxb.)Kurz Taklang anak Light Construction Rare Garcinia busuanganensis Merr. Indeterminate Garcinia sulphurea Elm. Indeterminate Garcinia venulosa (Blanco) Choisy Gatasan Light Construction Rare EUPHORBIACEAE Acalypha amentacea Roxb. Bogus Species Diversity Common Antidesma bunius (L.) Spreng Bignai Fruit for Wine Making Rare Antidesma ghaesembilla Gaertn. Binayuyu Species Diversity Common Antidesma impressinerve Inyam Species Diversity Common Antidesma pentandrum (Blanco) Merr. Bignai pugo Species Diversity Common Antidesma pleuricum Tul. Bignai kalabaw Species Diversity Rare Bischofia javanica Blume Tuai General Construction Rare Bridelia penangiana Hook. f. Subiang Light Construction Rare Drypetes subcrenata (Merr.) Pax & K. Hoffm. Kari-kari Species Diversity Rare Endospermum peltatum Merr. Gubas Novelties, Pulp and Paper, Rare Light Wood Materials *Hevea brasiliensis (HBK.) Muell. Arg. Para rubber Source of Rubber Common Homolanthus populneus (Geisel.) Pax. Balanti Species Diversity Common Homonoia riparia Haw Agooi Species Diversity Common Macaranga bicolor Meull. Arg. Hamindang Light Construction Common ______APPENDICES 82 FAMILY SPECIES LOCAL NAME COMMON NAME ECONOMIC/ECOLOGICAL ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE STATUS Macaranga grandifolia (Blanco.)Merr. Takip asin Light Construction Common Macaranga tanarius (L.) Muell. Arg. Binunga Light Construction Common Mallotus philippinensis (Lam.)Muell. Arg. Banato Light Construction Rare Mallotus ricinoides (Pers.) Muell. Arg. Hinlaumo Species Diversity Common Melanolepis multiglandulosa (Reinw.Ex Blume.) Reichb.f. & Zol. Alim General Construction Common Neotrewia cumingii (Muell. Arg.) Pax & K. Hoffm. Novelties and Light Apanang Construction Rare Phylanthus debilis Klein & Willd. Sampa-sampalukan Species Diversity Common
Phylanthus reticulatus Poir. Tinta-tintahan Species Diversity Common Reutealis trisperma (Blanco) Airy Shaw Baguilumbang Species Diversity Common Sapium luzonicum (Vid.) Merr. Balakat gubat General Construction Rare Trigonostemon philippinensis Stapf. Katap Light Construction Common RHIZOPHORACEAE Carallia branchiate (Lour.) Merr. Bakauan gubat Light Contruction Rare PASSIFLORACEAE Passiflora foetida L. Karunggut Edible Fruit Common CHRYSOBALANACEAE Atuna racemosa Raf. Tabon-tabon Light Construction Rare Maranthes corymbosa Blume. Liusin General Construction Rare FLACOURTIACEAE Pangium edule Reinw. ex. Blume. Pangi Light Construction Common Taraktogenos heterophylla (Blume) van Magluhi Slooten Batu-bato Species Diversity Indeterminate OXALIDACEAE *Averrhoa bilimbi L. Edible Fruit, Food Additives and Kamias Medicinal Common *Averrhoa carambola L. Balimbing Edible Fruit, Medicinal Common
DATISCACEAE Octomeles sumatrana Miq. Binuang Light Construction Common FABACEAE ( LEGUMINOSAE, *Acacia auriculiformis A. Cunn. ex Benth. MIMOSACEAE, CAESALPINIACEAE) Acacia General Construction Common *Acacia farnesiana ( L.) Willd. Aroma Light Construction Common ______APPENDICES 83 FAMILY SPECIES LOCAL NAME COMMON NAME ECONOMIC/ECOLOGICAL ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE STATUS *Acacia mangiumWilld. Mangium General Construction Common Adenathera favonina Merr. Malatanglin Light Construction Common Afzelia borneensis Harris Malaipil General Construction Rare Afzelia rhomboidea (Blanco.) Vid. Tindalo General Construction Rare Albizia acle (Blanco.) Merr. Akle General Construction Endangered Albizia procera (Roxb.) Benth. Akleng parang Light Construction Rare Archidendron scutiferum (Blanco)Nielsen Anagap Light Construction Rare Archidendron clypearia (Jack.) Nielsen Tiagkot Light Construction Rare *Bauhinia acuminate L. Kulibangbang Landscape Plant Common Bauhinia integrifolia Roxb. Agpoi Rope Making, Handicraft Common Bauhinia malabarica Roxb. Light Construction, Food Alibangbang Additives Common *Caesalpinia pulcherrima (L.) Swartz. Caballero Ornamental Common *Calliandra haematocephala Hassk. Fireball Ornamental Common * Cassia fistula L. Golden shower Ornamental Common Cassia occidentalis L. Balatong-aso Species Diversity Common Cassia tora L. Maning aso Species Diversity Common *Clitoria ternatea L. Pukinggang baging Species Diversity Common Koompasia excelsa Manggis General Construction Endangered Cynometra ramiflora L. Balitbitan Ornamental Endangered *Delonix regia (Boj. Ex Hook.) Raf. Fire tree Ornamental Common Dioclea reflexa Hook. Bai (Ig.) Species Diversity Common Entalada phaseoloides (L.) Merr. Gogo Soap Making, Handicraft Endangered *Erythrina crista galli L. Dapdap palong Ornamental Common Erythrina orientais (L.) Murr. Dapdap Ornamental Common *Gliricidia sepium (acq.) Walp. Kakauate Light Construction Common Instia bijuga (Colebr.) O. Ktze. Ipil General Construction Endangered Leucaena leucocephala (Lam.) de Wit. Ipil-Ipil Light Construction, Fuel Wood Common
______APPENDICES 84 FAMILY SPECIES LOCAL NAME COMMON NAME ECONOMIC/ECOLOGICAL ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE STATUS Moghania strobilifera (L.) St-Hill. ex jacobs. Payang –payang Species Diversity Common Parkia roxburghii G. Don. Kupang Light Construction Common Peltrophorum pterocarpum (DC.)Back & Heyne. Siar Light Construction Rare *Pithecellobium dulce (Roxb.) Benth. Kamachile Edible Fruit Common Pongamia pinnata (L.) Merr. Bani Medicinal, Light Construction Common Pterocarpus indicus Willd formaindicus Smooth narra General Construction Endangered Pterocarpus indicus Willd. forma echinatus (Pers.)Rojo. Prickly narra General Construction Endangered *Samanea saman (Jacq.) Merr Rain tree . General Construction Common *Sesbania gradiflora (L.) Pers. Katurai Edible Flowers and Agroforestry Common *Tamarindus indica L. Edible Fruits, Food Additives, Sampalok Medicinal Common Wallaceodendron celebicum Steen. Koord. Banuyo General Construction Endangered CASUARINACEAE Casuarina equisetifolia Forst. General Contruction, Agoho Ornamental Endangered Gymnostoma rumphianum (Miq.) L. Johnson General Contruction, Agoho del monte Ornamental Endangered FAGACEAE Lithocarpus ovalis (Blanco) Rehd Manggasiriki Light Construction Rare CELTIDACEAE Celtis luzonica Warb. Magabuyo General Contruction Rare Celtis philippinensis Blanco Malaikmo General Contruction Rare Trema orientalis (L.) Blume Anabiong Light Construction Common ROSACEAE Prunus grisea (C. Muell.) Kal km. Lago General Construction Common Angelesia splendens Korth. Balik (P. Bis.), Dangigan Species Diversity Indeterminate (S.L. Bis.) RHAMNACEAE Zizyphus talanai (Blanco.) Merr. Balakat General Construction Rare CECROPIACEAE Poikilospermum erectum (Blanco) Merr. Hanopol tindig Species Diversity Common
______APPENDICES 85 FAMILY SPECIES LOCAL NAME COMMON NAME ECONOMIC/ECOLOGICAL ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE STATUS Poikillospermum suaveulens (Blume.) Merr. Hanopol Species Diversity Common MORACEAE *Artocarpus altilis (Park.) Fosb. Rimas Edible Fruit Rare Artocarpus blancoi (Elm.) Merr. Antipolo General Construction Common *Artocarpus communis J. R. & G. Forst. Kamansi Edible Fruit Common Artocarpus heterophyllus Lam. Edible Fruit, General Nangka Construction Common Artocarpus odoratisimus Blanco. Marang banguhan General Construction Common Artocarpus ovatus Blanco. Anubing General Construction Common Artocarpus rubrovenius Warb. Kalulot Light Construction Common Broussonetia luzonica (Blanco.) Burr. Himbabao Light Construction Common Ficus benjamina L. Salisi Ornamental Common Ficus botryocarpa Miq. Basikong Species Diversity Common Ficus botryocarpa Miq. var.linearrifolia(Elm.)Corner Basikong kalauang Species Diversity Common Ficus collosa Willd. Kalukoi Ornamental Common Ficus congesta Roxb. Malatibig Species Diversity Common Ficus gul Laut. & K. Schum. Butli Species Diversity Common Ficus heteropoda Miq. Alangas Species Diversity Common Ficus irisana Elm. Aplas Light Construction Common Ficus magnoliifolia Blume. Kanapai Light Construction Common Ficus minahassae (Tejism & de Vr.) Hagimit Species Diversity Common Ficus nota (Blanco) Merr. Tibig Species Diversity Common Ficus orodata (Blanco) Merr. Pakiling Species Diversity Common Ficus pseudopalma Blanco Niog-niogan Edible Leaves Common Ficus pubinervis Blume Dungo Light Construction Common Ficus septica Burm. f. Hauili Species Diversity Common Ficus ulmifolia Lam. Is-is Species Diversity Common ______APPENDICES 86 FAMILY SPECIES LOCAL NAME COMMON NAME ECONOMIC/ECOLOGICAL ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE STATUS Ficus variegate Blume. Tangisang bayawak Species Diversity Common Ficus variegata Blume.var.sycomoroides (Miq.)Corner Dolalo Species Diversity Common Streblus asper Lour. Kalios Ornamental Common URTICACEAE Leucosyke capitellata(Poir.) Wedd. Alagasi Species Diversity Common *Pilea microphylla (L.) Liebm. Alabong Species Diversity Common Pipturus arborescens (Link) C.B Rob. Dalunot Species Diversity Common COMBRETACEAE Terminalia catappa L. Talisai Landscape Plant, Edible Fruits Common Terminalia foetidissima Griff. Talisai gubat Light Construction Rare Terminalia microcarpa Decne Kalumpit Edible Fruit Rare Terminalia nitens Presl. Sakat Light Construction Rare LYTHRACEAE *Cuphea hyssopifolia HBK. Singapore bush Ornamental Common *Lagerstroemia indica L. Melendres Ornamental Common Largerstroemia speciosa (L.) Pers. Banaba Ornamental, Medicinal Rare *Punica granatum L. Pomegranate Ornamental, Medicinal Common MELASTOMATACEAE MYRTACEAE *Psidium guajava L. Guava Edible Fruit, Medicinal Common Syzygium calubcob (C.B.Rob.) Merr. Kalubkob Edible Fruit, Medicinal Common Syzygium cumini (L.) Skeels Duhat Edible Fruit, Medicinal Common Syzygium nitidum Benth. Makaasim Light Construction Rare *Syzygium samarangense (Blume) Merr. & Perry Makopa Edible Fruit Common Syzygium squamiferum Takut/Taket Taket Syzygium simile (Merr.) Merr. Panglomboien Light Construction Common MORINGACEAE * Moringa oleifera Lam. Edible Leaves and Fruits, Malungai Medicinal Common CARICACEAE *Carica papaya L. Papaya Edible Fruits Common DILLENIACEAE Dillenia luzoniensis (Vid.) Martelli Malakatmon Light Construction Endangered ______APPENDICES 87 FAMILY SPECIES LOCAL NAME COMMON NAME ECONOMIC/ECOLOGICAL ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE STATUS Dillenia philippinensis Rolfe Katmon Bundok Edible Fruits, General Katmon Construction Endangered Tetracera scandens (L.) Merr. Katmon baging Species Diversity Common DIPTEROCARPACEAE Dipterocarpus grandiflorus Blanco Apitong General Construction Endangered Hopea plagata (Blanco) Vid Yakal-Saplungan General Construction Endangered Shorea astylosa Foxw. Yakal General Construction Endangered MALVACEAE *Ceiba pentandra (L.) Gaertn. (STERCULIACEAE, BOMBACACEAE, TILIACEAE) American kapok Furniture making Common Colona serratifolia Cav. Anilau Species Diversity Common Commersonia bartramia (L.) Merr. Kakaag Species Diversity Common Corchorus acutangulus Lam. Saluyot Edible Leaves, Medicinal Common Grewia acuminata Juss. Bagun, Alagau (Tagb.) Alagat, Danloi (Tag.) Species Diversity Indeterminate Grewia eriocarpa Juss. Baronhasi; Bariwas kanas-kanas (Tag.) Species Diversity Indeterminate Heritiera littoralis Ait. Dungon late Light Construction Rare Heritiera sylvatica Vid. Dungon Light Construction Rare Hibiscus camphylosiphon Turcz. var.glabrescens (Warb.ex Perk.) Borss. Vidal’s lanutan Light Construction Indeterminate *Hibiscus rosa-sinensis L. Gumamela Ornamental Common Hibiscus schizopetalus (M.T.Mast.)Hook.f. Gumamela de araña Ornamental Common Hibiscus tiliaceus L. Malubago Light Construction Indeterminate Kleinhovia hospita L. Tan-ag Light Construction Common *Muntingia calabura L. Datiles Edible Fruit, Medicinal Common Pterocymbium tinctorium (Blanco) Merr. Taluto General Construction Common Pterospermum obliquum Blanco Kulatingan Light Construction Rare Pterospermum celebicum Miq. Bayok-bayokan Light Construction Rare Pterospermum diversifolium Blume Bayok Light Construction Rare *Sida acuta Burm. f. Walis-walisan Species Diversity Common *Sida rhombifolia L. Takling baka Species Diversity Common ______APPENDICES 88 FAMILY SPECIES LOCAL NAME COMMON NAME ECONOMIC/ECOLOGICAL ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE STATUS Sterculia crassiramea Merr. Tapinag Light Construction Rare Sterculia foetida L. Kalumpang Light Construction Rare Sterculia montana Merr. Mountain tapinag Light Construction Rare Sterculia oblongata R. Br. Malabuho Light Construction Rare Sterculia philippinensis Merr. Banilad Pulp and Paper Rare' *Theobroma cacao L. Cacao Edible Fruit, Medicinal Common *Triumfetta rhomboidea Jacq. Kulot-kulotan Species Diversity Common *Urena lobata L. Kollo-kollot Species Diversity Common ELAEOCARPACEAE Elaeocarpus candollei Elm. Impaparai (Tagb.) Impaparai Species Diversity Common Elaeocarpus grandiflorus Sm. Species Diversity Common BIXACEAE *Bixa orellana L. Achuete Food Additives and Coloring Common SAPINDACEAE Allophyllus lopezii Merr. Species Diversity Indeterminate Guioa koelreuteria (Blanco)Merr. Alahan Light Construction Common Litchi chinensis Sonn ssp. philippinensis Radlk.Leenh. Alupag Light Construction Common Mischocarpus pentapetalus (Roxb.)Radlk. Ambalag Light Construction Common Pometia pinnata Forst. & Forst. Malugai Light Construction Rare Pomelia pinnata Forst. & Forst. forma repanda Jacobs Malugai liitan Light Construction Rare Sapindus saponaria L. forma microcarpa Radlk. Kusibeng Light Construction Rare BURSERACEAE Canarium asperum Benth. Light Construction, Source of Pagsahingin Elemi Rare Canarium calophyllum Perk. Light Construction, Source of Pagsahingin bulog Elemi Rare ANACARDIACEAE *Anacardium occidentale L. Kasoy Edible Fruit Common Buchanania arborescens (Blume) Blume Balinghasai Light Construction Rare Buchanania nitida Engl. Balitantan Light Construction Rare Dracontomelon dao (Blanco) Merr. Dao General Construction Rare Dracontomelon edule ( Blanco) Skeels. Lamio General Construction Rare
______APPENDICES 89 FAMILY SPECIES LOCAL NAME COMMON NAME ECONOMIC/ECOLOGICAL ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE STATUS Koordersiodendron pinnatum (Blanco) Merr. Amugis General Construction Rare Mangifera altissima Blanco Pahutan General Construction Rare *Mangifera indica L. Mangga Edible Fruit Common Spondias purpurea L. Sineguelas Edible Fruit Common MELIACEAE Aglaia edulis (Roxb.) Wall. Malasaging Light Construction Rare Aglaia rimosa (Blanco) Merr. Bayanti Light Construction Rare Aphanamixis polystachya (Wall.)R.N. Parker Kangko Light Construction Rare *Azadirachta indica A. Juss. Neem tree Light Construction Rare Chisocheton cumingianus (C.DC.) Harms.ssp. cumingianus Balukanag Light Construction Rare Chisocheton pentandrus (Blanco) Merr.ssp. pentandrus Katong matsing Light Construction Rare Dysoxylum arborescens (Blume)Miq. Kalimutain Light Construction Rare Dysoxylum cumingianum C.DC. Tara-tara Light Construction Rare Lansium domesticum Correa Himamao Light Construction Rare Sandoricum vidallii Malasantol Light Construction Common Sandoricum koetjape (Burm.f.) Merr. Edible Fruits, Novelties, Light Santol Construction Common *Swietenia macrophylla King Big leaf mahogany General Construction Common Toona calantas Merr. & Rolfe Kalantas General Construction Rare RUTACEAE Citrus grandis (L.) Osb. Lukban Edible Fruit Common Citrus madurensis Lour. Kalamunding Edible Fruit Common Clausena brevistyla Oliv. Kalomata Edible Fruit Rare Evodia confusa Merr. Bugauak Light Construction Rare Melicope triphylla (Lam.) Merr. Matang-araw Species Diversity Common Murraya paniculata Jack Kamuning Ornamental Rare SIMAROUBACEAE Ailanthus integrifolia Lam. Malasapsap Light Construction Rare EBENACEAE Diospyros ferrea (Willd.) Bakh. Ebony General Construction Endangered Diospyros philippinensis (Desr.)Gurke Kamagong General Construction Endangered Diospyros pilosanthera Blanco Bolong eta General Construction Endangered ______APPENDICES 90 FAMILY SPECIES LOCAL NAME COMMON NAME ECONOMIC/ECOLOGICAL ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE STATUS Diospyros pyrrhocarpa Miq. Anang General Construction Endangered MYRSINACEAE Ardisia clementis Presl. Katagpo Species Diversity Common Ardisia pyramidalis (Cav.) Pers. Aunasin Ornamental Common Ardisia squamulosa Elm. Tagpo Species Diversity Common SAPOTACEAE Chrysophyllum cainito L. Caimito Edible Fruits Common Madhuca betis (Blanco)Macbr.&Merr. Betis Light Construction Rare *Manilkara sapota (L.) Royer. Chico Edible Fruits Common Mimusops elengi L. Bansalagin Light Construction Rare Palaquium foxworthyi Merr. Tagotoi Light Construction Rare Palaquium luzoniense (F.Vill.) Vid. Nato Light Construction Rare Palaquium merrillii Dub. Dulitan Light Construction Rare Planchonella nitida (Blume) Dub. Duklitan Light Construction Rare Pouteria macrantha (Merr.)Baenhi White Nato Light Construction Rare *Pouteria rivicoa (Gaertn.f.) Ducke Tiesa Edible Fruits Common THEACEAE Camelia lanceolata (Blume)Seem. Haikan Species Diversity Rare LECYTHIDACEAE Barringtonia asiatica (L.)Kurz Botong Ornamental Rare Barringtonia racemosa (L.) Blume ex DC. Putat Ornamental Common SOLANACEAE Cestrum nocturnum L. Dama de Noche Ornamental Common Datura metel L. Talong punay Species Diversity Common Solanum biflorum Lour. Bagan bagan Species Diversity Common Solanum ferox L. Talong gubat Species Diversity Common Solanum torvum Sw. Talong-talungan Species Diversity Common COVOLVULACEAE Ipomea batatas (L.) Lamk. Sweet potato Edible Leaves , Rootcrops Common Ipomea pes-caprae (L.) R.Br. Lambayong Species Diversity Common Ipomea purpurea (L.)Roth Morning glory Ornamental Common Merremia peltata (L.) Merr. Bulakan Species Diversity Common Merremia vitifolia (Burm.f.)Hall.f. Kalalaknit Species Diversity Common APOCYNACEAE Dischidia tonsa Schltr. Species Diversity Indeterminate Alstonia macrophylla Wall.ex DC. Batino Light Construction Common ______APPENDICES 91 FAMILY SPECIES LOCAL NAME COMMON NAME ECONOMIC/ECOLOGICAL ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE STATUS Alstonia scholaris (L.) R.Br. Dita Light Construction Common *Catharanthus roseus (L.)G.Don Chichirica Ornamental, Medicinal Common Ervatamia mucronata (Merr.)Markgr. Taparak Species Diversity Common Ervatamia pandacaqui (Poir)Pich. Pandakaki Medicinal Common Ichnocarpus volubilis Merr. Hingiw Rope Making, Handicrafts Common Kibatalia gitingensis (Elm.)Woods. Laneteng gubat Light Construction Rare Voacanga globosa (Blanco) Merr. Bayag usa Species Diversity Rare Wrightia pubescens R.Br. ssp. laniti (Blanco) Ngan Lanete Light Construction Rare LOGANIACEAE Fagraea cochinchinensis (Lour.)A. Chev. Dolo, Dulo, Uling (Tagb.); Susulin (Tag.) Dolo Posts, beams, fence posts Endangered RUBIACEAE Anthocephalus chinensis (Lamk.) Rich.ex Walp Kaatoan bangkal Light Construction Rare Hedyotis asperrima (Merr.) Merr. Species Diversity Common Hedyotis costata (Roxb.) Kurz Species Diversity Common Uncaria insignis DC. Bungkauit Species Diversity Common Myrmeconauclea strigosa (Korth) Merr. Amontong Species Diversity Rare Gardenia lagunensis Merr. Makaboyo Species Diversity Rare Gardenia merrilli Elm. bagaoi (P.Bis); Niog-niog Ligad – ligad Species Diversity Rare (P.Bis); Tayakan (Mang.)
Gardenia pseudopsidium (Blanco) F.-Vill. Gilikak, Klapi (Tag.) Bayag- usa, Species Diversity Rare Prismatomeris obtusifolia Merr. Species Diversity Rare Lasianthus cyanocarpus Jack Maratagata (Neg.) Species Diversity Rare *Coffea Arabica L. Kape Beverages Common Gardenia jasminoides Ellis. Rosal Ornamental Common Gardenia longiflora Vid. Balanigan (Tagb.); Balanigan Ornamental Rare Kalmala
______APPENDICES 92 FAMILY SPECIES LOCAL NAME COMMON NAME ECONOMIC/ECOLOGICAL ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE STATUS Hedyotis biflora (L.) Lam. Hedyotis Species Diversity Common *Ixora chinensis Lam. Santan Ornamental Common Morinda bracteata Roxb. Nino Species Diversity Common Mussaenda philippica A. Rich. Kahoy dalaga Ornamental Rare Nauclea orientalis (L.) L. Bangkal Light Construction Common Neonauclea bartlingii (DC.) Merr. Lisak Light Construction Rare Neonauclea calycina (Bartl.) Merr. Kalamansanai Light Construction Rare Neonauclea media (Havil.) Merr. Wisak Light Construction Rare OLEACEAE Jasminum sambac (L.) Ait. Sampaguita Ornamental, Essential Oils Common BIGNONIACEAE *Spathodea campanulata Beauv. African tulip Ornamental Rare LAMIACEAE Clerodendrum intermedium Cham. (VERBENACEAE) Kasupangil Ornamental Common *Gmelina arborea Roxb. Gmelina General Construction Common Premna odorata Blanco Alagau Medicinal Common *Tectona grandis L.f. General Construction, Pulp and Teak Paper Common Vitex negundo L. Lagundi Medicinal Common Vitex parviflora Juss. Molave General Construction Rare Viticipremna philippinensis (Turcz.) H.J.Lam. Lingo-lingo General Construction Rare VERBENACEAE *Lantana camara L. Coronitas Species Diversity Common ARALIACEAE *Brassaia actinophylla Endl. Octopus tree Ornamental Common Polyscias nodosa (Blume.) Seem. Malapapaya Light Contrustion Common *Polyscias ornatum (Bull.) Meer. Yellow Papua Ornamental Common Schefflera orodata (Blanco) Merr.& Rolfe Galamay –amo Ornamental Common PITTOSPORACEAE Pittosporum pentandrum (Blanco)Merr. Mamalis Light Construction Rare GOODENIACEAE Scaevola frutescens (Mill.) Krause Balak-balak, Balok-balok Bokabok Species Diversity Common ______APPENDICES 93 FAMILY SPECIES LOCAL NAME COMMON NAME ECONOMIC/ECOLOGICAL ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE STATUS ASTERACEAE *Chromolaena odorata (L.) R.M King & H. Rob. Hagonoy Species Diversity Common Mikania cordata (Burm.f.) B.L.Rob. Uoko Species Diversity Common Tithonia diversifolia Asa Gray Wild sunflower Species Diversity Common Vernonia vidalii Merr. Malasambong Species Diversity Common Vernonia pyrrhopappa Schulz- Bip ex Klatt Species Diversity Common *This Checklist is only partial and exclusive for the whole Busuanga, Palawan Forest Plant Taxonomy. The families and species of this ecosystems can be found distruibutedly in the Municipality. The Classification follow the New Classification System of Angiosperm Phylogeny Group, Annals of the Missouri Botanical Gardens 85: 531 – 553 (1998). Other Information are taken from the various references of Philippine Flora.This intend for the use of ECAN Zoning Component-SEMP, PCSDS, January, 2004
** Biodiversity and Taxonomy Specialist, ECAN Zoning Component-SEMP, PCSDS, January, 2004 *** Research Assistant, ECAN Zoning Component-SEMP, PCSDS, January, 2004
______APPENDICES 94
Appendix Table 6. Preliminary Checklist of Gymnosperms of Busuanga, Palawan
Family Species Local Name Common name Economic / Ecological Importance Ecological Status CYCADS CYCADACEAE *Cycas revoluta Oliva Ornamental Common Thunb. Cycas rumphii Miq. Pitogo Ornamental Rare Cycas edentata de Pitogong dagat Ornamental Rare Laub. Cycas circinalis Miq. Pitogo Ornamental, Edible Seeds and Rare/ Endemic Leaves, Medicinal
CONIFERS ARAUCARIACEAE Agathis celebica Bagtik (Kuy.), Baltik Palawan almaciga Endagered (Koord.) Warb. (Tagb.) Agathis philippinensis Bagtik (Kuy.), Baltik Almaciga Manila Copal, Contruction, Endagered Warb. (Tagb.) Novelties, Pulpand Paper, Veneer
*Araucaria columnaris Auracaria Ornamental Plant Common (Forst) Hook. *Araucaria Norfolk Island pine Ornamental Plant Common heterophylla (Salisb.)Franco CUPRESSACEAE *Platycladus orientalis Arbor vitae Ornamental Plant Common (L.) Franco
______APPENDICES 95 Family Species Local Name Common name Economic / Ecological Importance Ecological Status GNETACEAE Gnetum gnemon L. Bago Fiber for Rope Making, Edible Fruit Rare and Leaves PODOCARPACEAE Podocarpus Bantigi (Neg.), Common polystachyus R. Br. ex Inamagyo (Tagb.) Endl. Podocarpus neriifolius Malaadelfa (Tag.) Ornamental Common D. Don ex Lamb.
*This Checklist is only partial and exclusive for the whole Busuanga, Palawan Forest Plant Taxonomy. The families and species of this ecosystems can be found distributed in the Municipality. The Classification follows the system of A. Cronquist, The Evolution and Classification of Flowerng Plants. Other Information are taken from the various references of Philippine Flora. This is intended for the use of ECAN Zoning Component-SEMP, PCSDS, April, 2004 ** Biodiversity and Taxonomy Specialist, ECAN Zoning Component-SEMP, PCSDS, January, 2004 *** Research Assistant, ECAN Zoning Component-SEMP, PCSDS, January, 2004
______APPENDICES 96 Appendix Table 7. Preliminary Checklist of Mangrove and Beach Plants of Northern Palawan.
Common Economic / Ecological Family Species Local Name name Habit Importance Ecological Status FERNS PTERIDACEAE Acrostichum aureum L. Lagolo Fern Edible; Medicinal Abundant
ANGIOSPERMS (DICOTS) ACANTHACEAE Acanthus ebracteatus Tigbau Herb Species Diversity Abundant Vahl. Acanthus ilicifolius L. Diluario Herb Species Diversity Abundant
AIZOACEAE Sesuvium Dampalit Creeping Herb Fodders Abundant portulacastrum L.
APOCYNACEAE Cerbera manghas L. Lipata Baraibai Tree Firewood; Medicinal Common AVINCENNIACEAE Avicennia alba Blume Bungalon puti Tree Firewood; Resin; Medicinal; Common Food Source Avicennia marina Bungalon Tree Firewood Common (Forsk.) Vierh. Avicennia marina Piapi Tree Firewood Common (Forsk.)Vierh. var.rumphiana (Hallier)Bakh.
______APPENDICES 97 Common Economic / Ecological Family Species Local Name name Habit Importance Ecological Status Avicennia officinalis L. Api – api Tree Construction; Source of Organic Rare Compounds BIGNONIACEAE Dolichandrone Tañgas Tui Tree Wooden Shoe; Scabbards; Depleted spathacea (L.f.) Household Implements K,Schum. BOMBACACEAE Camptostemon Gapas –gapas Tree Pulp and Paper; Hoousehold Not Common philippinense (Vid.) Implements; Interiors Becc. BORAGINACEAE Tournefortia argentea Patayud Species Diversity Abundant L.f. CAESALPINIACEAE Caesalpinia crista L. Bayag Kalumbibit Creeping Vine Species Diversity Abundant Kambing, Dalagdag Caesalpinia nuga (L.) Bakaig, Sapinit Creeping Vine Species Diversity Abundant Ait. Kalauinit CASUARINACEAE Casuarina equisetifolia Agoho Tree General Construction; Tannin Abundant Forst. CLUSIACEAE Calophyllum Dangkalan Bitaog Tree Oil is use for Furniture Making Depleted inophyllum L. COMBRETACEAE Lumnitzera littorea Tabau Tree General Construction; Furniture Depleted (Jack.) Voigt. Making; Ship Building Lumnitzera racemosa Kulasi Tree Novelties; Tannin ; Wood Depleted Willd. Articles
______APPENDICES 98 Common Economic / Ecological Family Species Local Name name Habit Importance Ecological Status Terminalia catappa L. Talisai Tree Ornamental Shade Tree; Food Common Source CONVOLVULACEAE Ipomoea pes-caprae Lambayong Vine Species Diversity Abundant (L.) Roth. EUPHORBIACEAE Excoecaria agallocha Buta-buta Tree Medicianal; Matchsticks; Pulp Common L. and Paper Glochidion littorale Kayong Tree Firewood; Fences and Post Common Blume FABACEAE Cynometra ramiflora L. Balitbitan Tree Ornamental Shade Tree; Rare Lanscape Plant Derris trifoliata Lour. Mangasin Shrub Species Diversity Abundant Erythrina orientalis Dapdap Tree Ornamental Shade Tree; Depleted (L.) Murr. Lanscape Plant Intsia bijuga (Coelbr.) Ipil Tree General Construction; Furniture; Fairly Common O. Ktze. Medicinal; Household Implements Pongamia pinnata (L.) Bani Tree Medicinal; Contruction Material Not Abundant Pierre GOODENIACEAE Scaevola sericea Vahl. Linu Shrub Ornamental Common
LECYTHIDACEAE Barringtonia asiatica Botong Tree Ornamental Shade Tree Depleted (L.) Kurz Barringtonia racemosa Potat Putat Tree Firewood Common (L.) Blume ex DC.
______APPENDICES 99 Common Economic / Ecological Family Species Local Name name Habit Importance Ecological Status LYTHRACEAE Pemphis acidula J.R. & Bantigi Tree Household Implements; Common Forst. Novelties MALPHIGIACEAE Tristellateia Binusisi Creeping Vine Species Diversity Abundant australasiae A. Rich. MALVACEAE Hibiscus tiliaceus L. Malubago Tree Household Interiors; Musical Common Instruments; Novelties Thespesia populnea Banalo Tree Scabbarb; household Utensils Common Soland. Thespesia populneoides Malabanalo Tree Scabbarb; household Utensils Common (Roxb.) Kostel
MELIACEAE Xylocarpus granatum Tabigi Tree Tannin; Household Implements; Abundant Koen. Oil; Medicinal Xylocarpus moluccensis Piagau Tree Tannin; Household Implements; Abundant (Lamk.) M. Roem. Oil; Medicinal
MIMOSACEAE Acacia farnesiana (L.) Aroma Tree Gum; Essential Oil; Medicinal Exotic; Abundant Willd. MYRSINACEAE Aegiceras corniculatum Saging – Tree Firewood; Tannin Common (L.) Blanco saging
Aegiceras floridum Tiduk – Tree Firewood; Tannin Common Roem & Schult. tindukan MYRTACEAE ______APPENDICES 100 Common Economic / Ecological Family Species Local Name name Habit Importance Ecological Status Osbornia octodorta F. Tuauis Taualis Tree Boat Caulking; Railroad Ties; Muell. Construction RHIZOPHORACEAE Bruguiera cylindrica Biuas, Banal- Pototan lalake Tree Firewood; Food Source Rare (L.) Blume. babae Bruguiera gymnorrhiza Busain Tree Furniture; Firewood; Common (L.) Lamk. Charcoal;Making Food Source
Bruguiera parviflora Hangalai Langarai Tree Furniture; Firewood; Common (Roxb.) W. & A. ex Charcoal;Making Food Source Griff. Bruguiera sexangula Balinsasayaw Pototan Tree Furniture; Firewood; Charcoal Common (Lour.) Poir. Making; Food Source; Medicinal Ceriops decandra Malatangal Tree Firewood; Tannin; Dye and Fairly Common (Griff.) Ding Hou Wine Making Ceriops tagal (Perr.) Pakat Tangal Tree Firewood; Tannin Fairly Common C.B. Rob. Rhizophora apiculata Bakauan- Tree Construction; Firewood; Common Blume. lalake Charcoal Making; Tannin; Dye ; Household Implements Rhizophora mucronata Bakauan- Tree Construction; Firewood; Common Lamk. babae Charcoal Making; Tannin; Dye ; Household Implements; Medicinal Rhizophora stylosa Bangkau Tree Construction; Firewood; Common Griff. Charcoal Making; Tannin; Dye ; Household Implements SONNERATIACEAE Sonneratia alba L. Pagatpat Tree General Construction; Novelties Common Smith
______APPENDICES 101 Common Economic / Ecological Family Species Local Name name Habit Importance Ecological Status Sonneratia caseolaris Pedada Tree Tannin; Shoemaking; Food Common (L.) Engl. Preparation; Light Contruction STERCULIACEAE Heritiera littoralis Dungon – late Tree Food Sources; General Common Dryand ex W. Ait. Construction; Tannin VERBENACEAE Premna intergrifolia L. Alagau dagat Tree Medicinal; Firewood Common
RUBIACEAE Morinda citrifolia L Bangkoro Tree Food Source; Species Diversity Common . Scyphiphora Nilad Tree Firewood; Dye ; Tannin; Post Common hydrophyllacea Gaertn.f. ANGIOSPERMS (MONOCOTS) ARECACEAE Nypa fruticans Nipa Palm Nipa Shingles; Wine and Abundant Wurmb. Vinegar Making PANDANACEAE Pandanus tectorius Pandan dagat Herb Ornamental Abundant Soland *This Checklist is only partial and exclusive for the whole Northern Palawan Mangrove and Beach Forest Plant Taxonomy. The families and species of this ecosystems are few and can be found distruibutedly in each Municipality. The Classification follow the system of A. Cronquist, The Evolution and Classification of Flowerng Plants. Other Information are taken from the various references of Philippine Flora.This intend for the use of ECAN Zoning Component-SEMP, PCSDS, January, 2004
** Biodiversity and Taxonomy Specialist, ECAN Zoning Component-SEMP, PCSDS, January, 2004 *** Research Assistant, ECAN Zoning Component-SEMP, PCSDS, January, 2004
______APPENDICES 102
Appendix Table 8. Busuanga Flora Species with Endangered Status, per Transect
Species* /Transect 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Freq
Lanete x x 20 Kamagong x x x x 40 Ipil x x x x x x x 70 Sakat/taket x x x x x x x x 80 Akle x x 20 Apitong x x x 30 Malasantol x x x x x x x x 80 Antipolo x x 20 Nato x x 20 Yakal x x 20 Duguan x 10 Narra x x x 30 Molave / Molawin x x 20 Mancono x 10 Kalaum x 10 Total 2 2 4 10 9 6 7 4 1 3 *IUCN; CITES Listed, 2000 (PAWB)
______APPENDICES 103
Appendix Table 9. Busuanga Flora Species with Endangered Status, per Barangay in Busuanga
Species*/Bgy Chy Nbu Con Sag YKR Bog Sal NQ SR SN Bul Freq
Lanete x x 18.181818 Kamagong x x 18.181818 Ipil x x x x x x 54.54545 Sakat / taket x x x x x x 54.54545 Akle x 9.0909091 Apitong x 9.0909091 Malasantol x x x x x x x 63.63636 Antipolo x x 18.181818 Nato x x x 27.272727 Yakal x x x x x 45.45455 Duguan x x 18.181818 Narra x 9.0909091 Molave / Molawin x x 18.181818 Mancono x 9.0909091 Kalaum x 9.0909091 Total number of spp. 13 1 2 2 2 5 7 3 2 2 3
______APPENDICES 104
Appendix Table 10. Coordinates of Transects per Barangay in Busuanga Municipality
Transect Coordinates Barangay Number Tie Point End Point
Concepcion 3 N1202.73’ E119058.47’ N1203.97’ E119059.03’ Sagrada 3 N1204.175’ E119059.137’ N1206.483’ E12000.199’
Yulo King Ranch 3 N1206.164’ E12000.263’ N12011.678’ E12002.723’
4 N12014.187’ E12001.986’ N1205.012’ E119059.902’ Cheey 5 N12011.372’ E119059.25’ N12012.376’ E119059.685’
6 N1208.751’ E119056.586’ N12013.204’ E119058.33’
7 N12014.742’ E119058.225’ N12012.324’ E119056.988’ Salvacion 5 N1207.344’ E119057.462’ N12011.285’ E119059.198’ 6 N12013.339’ E119058.609’ N12014.149’ E119058.967’ New Quezon 8 N12015.560’ E119056.582’ N12012.865’ E119055.395’
New Busuanga 9 N12013.611’ E119054.11’ N12013.986’ E119054.304’
San Rafael 8 N12012.595’ E119055.277’ N12012.459’ E119055.216’
Sto. Nino 1 N1204.637’ E12002.275’ N1207.066’ E12003.346’
2 N1202.629’ E119059.911’ N1208.076’ E12002.291’
Buluang 10 N12015.006’ E119053.338’ N12015.546’ E119053.576’
Bogtong 5 N1205.918’ E119056.828’ N1207.162’ E119057.383’
______APPENDICES 105
APPENDIX FIGURES
Appendix Figure 1. Shannon Biodiversity Index for Flora in the Canopy, Under Canopy and Ground Vegetation for Busuanga, Northern Palawan.
Shannon Biodiversity Index for Flora in the Canopy, Under Canopy, and Ground Vegetation for Busuanga, Northern Palawan
4.5 Ground 4 UndrCanopy 3.5 Canopy 3 2.5 2
Index H' 1.5 1 0.5 0 12345678910 Transects
______APPENDICES 106
Appendix Figure 2. Timber Volume for Dipterocarps and Non-Dipterocarps in Busuanga.
300
250
200
150 Diptero NonDipt
volume (cu.m.) 100
50
0 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-99 100- 110- 120 cm 109 119 DBH Clas s e s
______APPENDICES 107