ECOLOGICAL APPRAISAL OF PLANT RESOURCES OF TERICH VALLEY, HINDUKUSH RANGE CHITRAL, PAKISTAN
BY
AKHTAR ZAMAN
DEPARTMENT OF BOTANY UNIVERSITY OF PESHAWAR Session: 2016-17
ECOLOGICAL APPRAISAL OF PLANT RESOURCES OF TERICH VALLEY, HINDUKUSH RANGE CHITRAL, PAKISTAN
A dissertation submitted in partial completion of the requirement for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN BOTANY
BY AKHTAR ZAMAN
DEPARTMENT OF BOTANY UNIVERSITY OF PESHAWAR Session: 2016-17
Certificate of Approval
This is to certify that the research work presented in this thesis entitled “Ecological Appraisal of Plant Resources of Terich Valley, Hindukush Range Chitral, Pakistan” was conducted by Mr. Akhtar Zaman under the Supervision of Dr. Lal Badshah. No part of this thesis has been submitted anywhere else for any other degree. This thesis is submitted to the Department of Botany, University of Peshawar in the partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of “Doctor of Philosophy” in the field of Botany.
Student Name: Akhtar Zaman Signature: ______Examination Committee
a) External Examiner I. Signature:______Dr. Farrukh Hussain (Rtd. Meritorious Professor) Director Institute of Biological Sciences, Sarhad University of Science and Technology, Peshawar
b) External Examiner II. Signature:______Prof. Dr. Sultan Mehmood Department of Botany & Dean Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Science and Technology, Bannu, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
c) Internal Examiner Signature:______Prof. Dr. Ghulam Dastagir Department of Botany, University of Peshawar Supervisor Signature:______Dr. Lal Badshah Assistant Professor Department of Botany, University of Peshawar
Chairman Signature:______Prof. Dr. Ghulam Dastagir Department of Botany, University of Peshawar
IN THE NAME OF
ALLAH
THE MOST MERCIFUL
THE MOST GRACIOUS
LET THE ONE- DEAD EARTH BE ASSIGNED TO THEM.
WE GAVE IT LIFE, AND FROM IT PRODUCED
GRAIN FOR THEIR SUSTENANCE (YASIN, 36:33) SEEK YOUR LIVING UNDER THE CRUST OF
EARTH.
(THE HOLLY PROPHET MUHAMMAD PEACE BE UPON HIM)
AUTHOR’S DECLARATION
I Akhtar Zaman hereby stated that my Ph.D. thesis “Ecological Appraisal of Plant Resources of Terich Valley, Hindukush Range Chitral, Pakistan” is my own work and has not been submitted previously by me for taking degree from this University, University of Peshawar or anywhere in the country/world. At any time if my statement is found to be incorrect even after my graduation the university has the right to withdraw my Ph.D. degree.
Akhtar Zaman
Date:10/03/2021
i PLAGIARISM UNDERTAKING
I solemnly declare that research work presented in the thesis titled “Ecological Appraisal of Plant Resources of Terich Valley, Hindukush Range Chitral, Pakistan” is solely my research work with no significant contribution from any other person. Small contribution/help wherever taken has been duly acknowledged and that complete thesis has written by me. I understand the zero tolerance policy of the HEC and University of Peshawar towards plagiarism. Therefore I as an author of the above titled thesis declare that no portion of my thesis has been plagiarized and any material used as reference is properly referred/cited. I undertake that if I am found guilty of any formal plagiarism in the above titled thesis even after award of Ph.D. degree, the university reserves the rights to withdraw/revoke my Ph.D. degree that HEC and the university has to right to publish my name on the HEC/University Website on which names of students are placed who submitted plagiarized thesis.
Scholar/Author Signature: ______
Name: ______
ii
DEDICATION “This dissertation manuscript is dedicated to my Parents”
iii University of Peshawar Peshawar ECOLOGICAL APPRAISAL OF PLANT RESOURCES OF TERICH VALLEY, HINDUKUSH RANGE CHITRAL, PAKISTAN
A dissertation submitted in partial completion
of the requirement for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
in
Botany
by
Akhtar Zaman
Graduate Study Committee:
1. Prof. Dr. Ghulam Dastagir Convener
2. Prof. Dr. Siraj ud Din Member
3. Dr. Zahir Muhammad Member
4. Dr. Tanveer Burni Member
5. Dr. Rasool Khan Member
iv
PUBLICATION OPTION
I hereby resrve the rights of publication, including Right to reproduce this thesis in any form for a period of 5 year from the Date of Submittion
Akhtar Zaman
v ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Thanks Almighty Allah. I offer my humble words of gratitude to the Holy the most perfect and dignified among and of ever ﷺ Prophet of mercy, Muhammad born on the surface of the earth who light the candle of Islam and removed all darkness of our life. First and foremost I offer my sincere gratitude and deepest appreciation to my supervisor, Dr. Lal Badshah Mehsood for his kind supervision, propitious guidance, sympathetic attitude, motivation and encouragement. My appreciation to Prof. Dr. Ghulam Dastagir chairman, Prof. Dr. Muhammad Ibrar (Rtd), Prof. Dr. Siraj ud Din, Dr. Zahir Muhammad, Dr. Nadeem Ahmad, Dr. Samiullah, Dr. Rahmanullah, Dr. Fazal Hadi, Dr. Tanvir Burni, Ghulam Jelani, Usman Ali and Dr. Abdur Razzaq for their moral support. I extremely thanks to Mehboob-ur-Rahman from Chitral, being a guide during my field visits to Terich valley. I also extend my heartfelt respect and deepest love to my beloved family mainly my parents for their pation, patience and encouragement throughout my studies. I am also grateful to my elder brothers Mr. Gohar Zaman, Mr. Tahir Zaman, Mr. Wahid Zaman, for their financial support, encouragement and prayer. I could not have completed this work without their encouragement, support and brotherhood.
Akhtar Zaman
vi
VITAE
March 12th, 1991- Born, Jhandi Kalpani, Tehsil Takht Bhai, District Mardan
2011- B.Sc. Govt Degree College Takht Bhai Mardan
2014 M.Sc. Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan
2016 M.Phil. University of Peshawar
2021 Ph.D. University of Peshawar
September 29th, 2018- Secondery School Teacher (SST) Mardan
Major Field: Botany Field of specialization: Vegetation Ecology Courses studied: :Teacher 1. Biodiversity & its Conservation :Dr. Lal Badshah 2. Intensive studies in plant Ecology :Dr. Lal Badshah 3. Allelopathy :Dr. Zahir Muhammad 4. Plant Physiology under stress :Dr. Sami Ullah 5. Intensive studies in plant Physiology :Dr. Sami Ullah 6. Limnology :Dr. Nadeem Ahmad
vii ABSTRACT
ECOLOGICAL APPRAISAL OF PLANT RESOURCES OF TERICH VALLEY, HINDUKUSH RANGE CHITRAL, PAKISTAN This dissertation communicates the results of scientific endeavor regarding the ecological appraisal of plants resources of Terich valley, Hindukush Range Chitral during 2016-2019. A total of 445 species were documented belonging to 272 genera and 71 families. The dominant families in terms of species richness were Asteraceae (88 species), Poaceae (49 species), Papilionaceae (34 species) and Brassicaceae (30 species). Among, the existing genera there are 29 monotypic genera, 11 genera with two species, 10 genera with three species and others with more than 4 species each. Therophytes with 166 (37.30%) species followed by 140 (31.46%) hemicryptophytics were the dominant life form classes. Chamaephytes with 60 (13.48%) species was the coexisting life form group while, the leaf spectrum was dominated by nanophylls (136 species, 30.49%) followed by leptophylls (107 species, 23.99%) and microphylls (97 species, 21.74%). Based on phenology 253 species was found in reproductive stage in summer, followed by 154 species in spring and some 58 taxon exhibited the same in autumn. This phenological variation clearly depicted the sharp seasonal variation in the temperature of this region. Moreover Alcea nudiflora and Eremostachys speciosa was reported as suspected species as a new record to the flora of Pakistan. Phytosociological study enumerated a total of Ten communities viz: Elaeagnus-Prunus-Adiantum and Heracleum-Artemisia-Capparis communities were established at Shagrom. Fraxinus-Rosa-Acanthophylum and Prangos-Ribes-Berberis communities were established at Warimon, While Zondrangam have Hippophae- Sophora-Poa and Astragalus-Astragalus*-Eremurus communities. Similarly Rosh Gol and Ghari exhibited Artemisia-Rhodiola-Rosularia, Betula-Scutellaria- Taraxacum and Anaphalis-Cousinia-Kobresia, Alajja-Oxyria-Oxytropis association respectively. Ward‟s clustering technique separated the vegetation into three distinct groups in contrast to that of manual association. While PCA and CCA were applied to correlate the vegetation data with environmental variables. However, statistical analysis showed that PCA and CCA ordination axis of stands and species were significantly correlated with OM, N, P and K nutrients. The Proximate composition and elemental profile of Heracleum polyadenum, Hippophae rhamnoides, Ephedra gerardiana, Fraxinus xanthoxyloides,
viii Glycyrrhiza glabra, and Calamogrostris pseudophragmites give sporadic increase and decrease, for various micro-macronutrients in various growth events. The amount and concentration of the nutrient level in these species have a promising potential to maintain a healthy life and balance diet for the livestock. Being a remote area the locals still rely on plant resources for their health care. The present work reported 64 plant species used in various treatment as a tradition. This study showed that leaves and fruits (26.56 % each) were consumed for Asthma and stomachache. Similarly, the common mode of preparation of remedies was usually decoction while mode of administration was as orally. Most of these medicinal plants were observed to be used in multipurpose treatment. Endemism of the area provides a scientific database to develop conservation strategies for endemic flora of Pakistan. The endemic taxa were identified through available literature and herbarium specimens. Five of the locations were designated as radiation centers in Terich valley for 61 endemic taxa. Of them, 9 endemic species were considered for their conservation status. Conservation status of 9 endemic taxa was assessed following IUCN Red list Criteria, 2010, Version 8.1. It was concluded that 4 endemics were declared as Endangered and 5 endemics were found to be Critically Endangered. It was concluded, that the area is rich in flora diversity along with sufficient amount of endemic plants. It was observed that the area is under heavy stress for deforestation and new settlements, therefore both habitat and plant conservation is urgently needed before vanishing the previous, plant resources.
Akhtar Zaman
ix TABLE OF CONTENTS
AUTHOR‟S DECLARATION ...... i PLAGIARISM UNDERTAKING ...... ii PUBLICATION OPTION ...... v ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...... vi VITAE ...... vii ABSTRACT ...... viii TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... x LIST OF FIGURES ...... xiv LIST OF TABLES ...... xvi Chapter-1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Chitral ...... 1 1.2 Terich Valley...... 1 1.3 Flora ...... 2 1.4 Vegetation structure ...... 2 1.5 Proximate and Elemental Analysis ...... 2 1.6 Ethnobotany ...... 3 1.7 Endemism and Conservation ...... 3 Chapter-2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE ...... 7 2.1 Floristic composition and its ecological attributes ...... 7 2.2 Vegetation structure ...... 11 2.3 Proximate and Elemental Analysis ...... 13 2.4 Ethnobotany ...... 15 2.5 Endemism and Conservation status ...... 18 Objectives of the study ...... 21 Chapter-3 MATERIALS AND METHODS ...... 22 3.1 Floristic composition and Ecological Attributes ...... 22 3.1.1 Biological spectrum ...... 22 b) Leaf size spectrum ...... 24 3.2 Vegetation Structure ...... 25 3.2.1 Data collection ...... 25 3.2.2 Sampling Unit ...... 25 3.2.3 Density (D1) ...... 25 3.2.4 Frequency (F1) ...... 26
x 3.2.5 Cover (C1) ...... 27 3.2.6 Importance value index (IVI) ...... 28 3.2.7 Diversity indices ...... 28 3.2.7.1 Similarity index ...... 28 3.2.7.2 Simpson diversity index ...... 28 3.2.7.3 Species Richness ...... 29 3.2.7.4 Ecological maturity index ...... 29 3.2.8 Vegetation Classification and Ordination ...... 29 3.2.8.1 Ward‟s Cluster analysis ...... 30 3.2.8.2 Ordination ...... 30 3.2.8.2.1 Principal Component Analysis (PCA) ...... 30 3.2.8.2.2 Canonical Correspondence Analysis (CCA) ...... 30 3.2.9 Edaphology ...... 31 3.2.9.1 Collection of soil samples ...... 31 3.2.9.2 Laboratory procedure ...... 31 3.2.10 Palatability ...... 31 3.3 Chemical analysis of selected plants ...... 32 3.3.1 Proximate Analysis ...... 33 3.3.2 Mineral analysis ...... 34 3.4 Ethnobotany ...... 34 3.5. Endemism and Conservation status ...... 35 Chapter-4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ...... 38 4.1 Floristic composition and Ecological Attributes...... 38 4.1.2 Biological spectrum ...... 39 4. 2 Phytosociological attributes of Terich valley ...... 88 4.2.1 Shagrom (Site I) ...... 90 4.2.2 Warimon (Site II) ...... 92 4.2.3 Zondrangam (Site III) ...... 94 4.2.4 Rosh Gol (Site IV) ...... 96 4.2.5 Ghari (Site V) ...... 98 4.2.3 Diversity indices ...... 111 4.2.3.1 Similarity index ...... 111 4.2.3.2 Simpson diversity index ...... 112 4.2.3.3 Species richness ...... 113
xi 4.2.3.4 Ecological index of maturity ...... 113 4.3 Agglomerative cluster analysis of species (Ward‟s method) ...... 117 4.4 Ordination ...... 133 4.4.1 Principal Component Analysis (PCA) ...... 133 4.4.2 Canonical Correspondence Analysis (CCA) ...... 140 4.5 Edaphology ...... 143 4.5.1 Soil texture ...... 143 4.5.2 Physico-chemical properties...... 144 4.5.3 Macronutrients ...... 145 4.5.4 Micronutrients ...... 146 4.6 Proximate analysis ...... 154 4.7 Elemental analysis ...... 164 4.7.1 Fraxinus xanthoxyloides (G. Don) DC...... 164 4.4.2 Hippophae rhamnoides L...... 165 4.4.3 Ephedra gerardiana L...... 166 4.4.4 Heracleum polyadenum Rech. f. & Rieddl ...... 166 4.4.5 Glycyrrhiza glabra var. glandulifera (Waldst. & Kit.) Boiss...... 167 4.4.6 Calamogrostris pseudophragmites (Hall.f.) Koel ...... 167 4.8 Palatability ...... 177 4.8.1 Palatability and related features ...... 177 4.9 Ethnobotany ...... 180 4.9.1 Plant parts used in Preparation of remedies ...... 180 4.9.2 Preparation mode and Rout of administration ...... 180 4.9.3 Quantitative appraisal of Ethnomedicinal use ...... 181 4.9.3.1 Relative Frequency of Citation (RFC) ...... 181 4.9.3.2 Family Importance Value (FIV) ...... 182 4.9.3.3 Therapeutic uses ...... 182 4.10 Endemism ...... 197 4.11 Conservation ...... 203 4.11.1 Conservation of Endemic Taxa ...... 203 4.11.2 Distribution of endemics ...... 204 4.11.3 Assessment of threat status...... 205 4.11.4 Operative threats to endemics ...... 207
xii 4.12 Chorology ...... 227 PLATES…..……………………………………………………………………….249 CONCLUSION ...... 250 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 252 REFERENCES ...... 253 APPENDICES ...... 285 Appendix 1. Phytosociological attributes of Elaeagnus-Prunus-Adiantum Community ...... 285 Appendix 2. Phytosociological Attributes of Heracleum-Artemisia-Capparis Community ...... 286 Appendix 3. Phytosociological Attributes of Fraxinus-Rosa-Acanthophylum Community ...... 287 Appendix 4. Phytosociological Attributes of Prangos-Ribes-Berberis Community ...... 289 Appendix 5. Phytosociological Attributes of Hippophae-Sophora-Poa (HSP) Community ...... 290 Appendix 6. Phytosociological Attributes of Astragalus-Astragalus*-Eremurus Community ...... 292 Appendix 7. Phytosociological Attributes of Artemisia- Rhodiola- Rosularia Community ...... 293 Appendix 8. Phytosociological Attributes of Betula- Scutellaria-Taraxacum Community ...... 294 Appendix 9. Phytosociological Attributes of Anaphalis-Cousinia-Kobresia Community ...... 295 Appendix 10. Phytosociological Attributes of Alajja- Oxyria-Oxytropis Community ...... 296 Appendix 11 Profarma Used for quantitative Data ...... 297 Appendix 12. Palatability and animal preference of forage plants ...... 298 Appendix 13 Questionnaire for Ethnobotany ...... 324
xiii LIST OF FIGURES
Fig 1. Map of the study area Terich valley (Chitral) encompassing parts of the world tallest mountain ranges of Hindukush, Himalya, Karakurum...... 6 Fig 2. Showing five different life-form classes; 1. Phanerophytes 2.Chameophytes 3. Hemicryptophytes 4. Cryptophytes 5. Therophytes ...... 24 Fig 3. IUCN Conservation Criteria ...... 37 Fig 4. Seasonality of species ...... 88 Fig 5. Life form diversity ...... 88 Fig 6. Leaf size adaptation ...... 88 Fig 7. Map of the monitoring sites showing all the sampling spots ...... 89 Fig 8. Simpson‟s diversity, among communities through PAST ...... 116 Fig 9. Species richness among communities through PAST ...... 116 Fig 10. Maturity index among communities through PC-Ord ...... 116 Fig 11. Dendrogram of 10 stands based on Wards method ...... 132 Fig 12. Dendrogram of the cluster grouping of the study releve´s. Grouping was performed using Wards method...... 132 Fig 13. PCA bi-plot showing (a) stands ordination (b) species ordination along the environmental gradient (axis 1 & axis 2) ...... 137 Fig 14. PCA diagram showing (a) stands ordination (b) species ordination along the gradient (axis 2 & axis 3) ...... 138 Fig 15. PCA bi-plot showing (a) stands ordination (b) species ordination along the environmental gradient (axis 1 & axis 3) ...... 139 Fig 16. CCA bi-plot showing distribution of 4 plant communities among 10 stands in relation to environmental variables ...... 142 Fig 17. CCA bi-plot showing distribution of 195 plant species among 4 plant communities with environmental gradients ...... 142 Fig 18. Soil texture ...... 152 Fig 19. Physicochemical properties of soil ...... 152 Fig 20. Micronutrients of soil ...... 153 Fig 22. Concentration of OM in plants at three phenological stages ...... 162 Fig 23. % age of Moisture in plants at three phenological stages ...... 162 Fig 24. % age of Ash in plants at three phenological stages ...... 162 Fig 25. % age of CP in plants at three phenological stages ...... 163 Fig 26. % age of Cf in plants at three phenological stages ...... 163 Fig 27. % age of CF in plants at three phenological stages ...... 163 Fig 28. % age of NFE in plants at three phenological stages ...... 164 Fig 29. Plants for Proximate and Elemental analysis ...... 173 Fig 30. Elemental analysis of Fraxinus xanthoxyloides ...... 174 Fig 31. Elemental analysis of Hippophae rhamnoides ...... 174 Fig 32. Elemental analysis of Ephedra gerardiana ...... 174 Fig 33. Elemental analysis of Heracleum polyadenum ...... 175 Fig 34. Elemental analysis of Glycyrrhiza glabra ...... 175 Fig 35. Elemental analysis of Calamogrostris pseudophragmites ...... 175
xiv Fig 36. Mean values for various minerals ...... 176 Fig 37. Palatability classes of plants ...... 179 Fig 38. Preference of plant species by livestock ...... 179 Fig 39. Plant parts preferred by animals …………………………………….165 Fig 40. No of medicinal species per family...... 193 Fig 41. Classification of medicinal plants by part used ...... 194 Fig 42. Different modes of drug formulation ...... 194 Fig 43. Mode of administration of drugs ...... 194 Fig 44. Highest RFC values ...... 195 Fig 45. FIV of the leading families ...... 195 Fig 46. % age of each ailment ...... 196 Fig 47. Family wise distribution of endemic flora based on their respective family ...... 202 Fig 48. Allium chitralicum: A, Habitat; B, Inflorescence...... 212 Fig 49. Anaphalis chitralensis: A, Habitat; B, Inflorescence ...... 212 Fig 50. Astragalus chitralensis: A, Habitat; B, Inflorescence ...... 213 Fig 51. Astragalus imitensis: A, Habitat; B, inflorescence ...... 213 Fig 52. Cuscuta villosa : A, Habitat; B, Inflorescence ...... 214 Fig 53. Delphinium chitralense: A, Habitat; B, Inflorescence ...... 214 Fig 54. Delphinium nordhagenii: A, Habitat; B, Flower ...... 215 Fig 55. Pedicularis stantonii; A, Habitat; B, Inflorescence ...... 215 Fig 56. Tanacetum chitralense: A, Habitat; B, Flower ...... 216 Fig 57. No. of sub-populations of endemics ...... 217 Fig 58. EOO and AOO of endemics ...... 217 Fig 59. Total no of mature individuals during 2016-2018……………….. 199 Fig 60. AOO and EOO of Allium chitralicum during 2016-2018 ...... 218 Fig 61. AOO and EOO of Anaphalis chitralensis during 2016-2018 ...... 219 Fig 62. AOO and EOO of Astragalus chitralensis during 2016-2018 ...... 220 Fig 63. AOO and EOO of Astragalus imitensis during 2016-2018 ...... 221 Fig 64. AOO and EOO of Cuscuta villosa during 2016-2018 ...... 222 Fig 65. AOO and EOO of Delphinium chitralense during 2016-2018 ...... 223 Fig 66. AOO and EOO of Delphinium nordhagenii during 2016-2018 ...... 224 Fig 67. AOO and EOO of Pedicularis stantonii during 2016-2018 ...... 225 Fig 68. AOO and EOO of Tanacetum chitralense during 2016-2018 ...... 226 Fig 69. Phytochoria of Terich valley ...... 228
xv LIST OF TABLES
Table. 3.1 Leaf size nomenclature ...... 24 Table. 3.2 Density classes and their mid-point values ...... 26 Table. 3.3 Cover classes ...... 27 Table. 3.4 Plant species selected for chemical analysis ...... 32 Table. 3.5. Reference wavelength range for minerals in soil and plant samples ...... 34 Table. 3.4 Grazing index of individuals ...... 36 Table 4.1 Floristic Inventory and ecological characteristics of flora ...... 42 Table 4.2. Diversity and Ecological adaptation of flora ...... 87 Table 4.3. Quantitative values of different communities ...... 100 Table 4.4 Similarity index for 10 different communities ...... 114 Table 4.5 Simpson‟s diversity, among different communities ...... 115 Table 4.6 Species richness among different communities ...... 115 Table 4.7 Maturity index among different communities ...... 115 Table 4.8. Quantitative values for Group-I ...... 119 Table 4.9. Quantitative values for Group-II ...... 127 Table 4.10. Quantitative values for Group-III ...... 128 Table 4.11. Results of PCA of edaphic characteristics of the 10 stands ...... 136 Table 4.12. Correlation co-efficient between the PCA axes with edaphic variables 136 Table 4.13. Summary of the first four axes of the CCA for the vegetation data using Importance values ...... 141 Table 4.14. Soil Texture ...... 149 Table 4.15 Physicochemical properties ...... 149 Table 4.16 Macronutrients in soil...... 149 Table 4.17 Micronutrients in soil ...... 149 Table 4.18. Summary of ANOVA for edaphic variables ...... 150 Table 4.19. Proximate composition (%) of forage plants ...... 160 Table 4.20. Mineral profile of forage plants ...... 171 Table 4.21. Ethnomedicinal uses of plants ...... 184 Table 4.22. Exclusively endemic taxa of Terich valley ...... 198 Table 4.24. Conservation status of endemics ...... 208 Table 4.25. IUCN threat categories to selected endemics ...... 210 Table 4.26. Chorological analysis of flora ...... 228 Table 4.27. Chorology of Terich valley, Chitral ...... 229
xvi
INTRODUCTION
Chapter-1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Chitral
Chitral is situated towards North and Northwestern part of Pakistan. It stretches from 71o 13´ to 73o 52´ E longitude and 35o 15´ to 36o 54´ N latitude. The altitude of District Chitral ranges from 1493-7685 m (Ali and Qaiser, 2009). Towards the North Chitral is separated from Tajikistan via a narrow strip of Wakhan. It is bordered with Nuristan in the West, District Upper Dir in the South and District Ghizer of Gilgit-Baltistan in the East (Fig. 1). The terrain of District Chitral is characterized by high mountainous peaks of the Hindukush range. The total area of Chitral is 14850 km2. The population of Chitral is 447362, with a density of 21 individuals/sq km. The forests and pasturage constitute 20% of the total land whereas the remaining 4% of the land is covered by crops and orchards (GOP, 2017).
1.2 Terich Valley
Terich is a charming valley of Chitral which supports a lot of wild flora. It is located 72o 07´ to 73o 97´ E longitude and 35o 20´ to 36o 55´ N latitude in Chitral. It is bounded on the North by Tajikistan, on the West by Badakhshan, on the South by Nuristan while on the East by District Ghizer of Gilgit-Baltistan. Rugged and uneven terrain characterizes the valley. The climate is cold temperate type. Temperature ranges from mean minimum of -12oC in winter to mean maximum of 30oC in summer. Phytogeographically, Terich valley lies in the Irano-Turranian floristic region (Ali and Qaiser, 1986). Floristically, the Irano-Turranian region is luxuriant and contributed 45.6% to the flora of Pakistan. Geo-climatically and ecologically, Terich valley is characterized by the dry temperate, sub-alpine and alpine type of vegetation. The vegetation of the area is mostly scrubby, characterized by herbaceous, shrubby plants and rarely trees (Nusser and Dickore, 2002). Terich Mir (7685 m) the highest peak of the Hindukush range is followed by Saraghrar (7349 m), Shakawar (7116 m), Langar Peak (7100 m) and many other peaks with low altitudes (Scott, 1986).
1 1.3 Flora
Flora refers to the sum total of plant species in a specific geographic region, which is characterized by a particular geological period of an ecosystem (Safidkon et al., 2003; Durrani et al., 2005; Khan et al., 2012; Williamson and Balkwill, 2015). The floristic composition displays physiognomy of vegetation in different territories (Catarino et al., 2002). A floristic inventory not only reveals the identification and description of local and regional species but also provides the evidence of plant phenology, invasion of new species and vegetation stress (Amjad, 2016; Saand et al., 2019). Many researchers had also enlisted flora of different regions including (Badshah et al., 2013; Salama et al., 2015; Zhu et al., 2015; Ganji, 2016; Tadesse et al., 2017; Ali et al., 2018).
1.4 Vegetation structure
Vegetation means an assemblage of plants growing together in a particular area (Wahab et al., 2010). Vegetation and its structure reflect the ecological conditions of plants of an area in which they are growing (Salehi et al., 2005; Ahmad et al., 2006). Phytosociology deals with the study of plant communities and their classification within vegetation (Ahmad and Shaukat, 2012). Phytosociological attributes vary among positions and aspects, even in the same vegetation type (Ahmed et al., 2006). Phytosociological methods are basic tools to investigate species diversity within a particular habitat (Lovett et al., 2006). The impact of edaphic and climatic factors on vegetation composition of the Himalaya and Hindukush regions of Pakistan has been recognized by (Moinuddin et al., 2006). Phytosociological study is aimed to design the conservation strategy for plant diversity (Sher et al., 2014; Badshah et al., 2016; Hussain et al., 2019).
1.5 Proximate and Elemental Analysis
Proximate Analysis is the partitioning of the compounds in plants into moisture contents, ash contents, crude proteins, lipids, fibers and nitrogen-free extract (AOAC, 1990). The determination of ash content is important because mineral contents is the cause of pharmacological effect (Hameed et al., 2008), and an element is essential when it reduces below a certain limit and results consistently in the reduction of physiologically important functions of living organisms (Armah et al.,
2 2001). About forty macro-micro elements have been considered essential to living organisms for their survival (Linder and Azam, 1996). Proximate and elemental composition of plants plays a vital role in evaluating their nutritive significance to living organisms (Pandey et al., 2006), and similarly its composition in plants provides valuable information about medicinal and nutritional quality (Tomescu et al., 2015). Proximate composition and elemental contents of plants help to understand the nutritional value and palatability status (Akinleye et al., 1996). The continuing threat to biodiversity due to destruction of marine and terrestrial ecosystems lends urgency to the prerequisite to expand the systematic assessment of plant resources in the search of new macro-micro nutrients. This study of proximate composition and elemental analysis provides systematic investigations on some selected plants of the total flora, and larger fraction is virtually untapped and remains to be investigated.
1.6 Ethnobotany
Ethnobotany is the study of past and current interrelationships between human societies and plants, animals and other species in their environment (McClatchy, 2009). The total flora of Pakistan is about 6000 of which 600-700 species are used in various therapeutic determinations (Shinwari, 2010). Hindukush-Karakorum- Himalaya is the three major ranges which jointly supports 25,000 species (10 %) of the total flora of the world consisting of more than 10000 plants of medicinal importance (Pei, 1992). Medicinal flora is used as food to tests its nutritional quality, which can help to understand the importance of plant species (Pondey et al., 2006). Most people belonging to remote areas rely on traditional herbal recipes because of the easy availability and financial condition. The herbal recipes have not only been used in national and traditional treatment but have also been used in drugs licensed for pharmacopeia (Ali et al., 2018; Gulzar et al., 2019). Local knowledge of medicinal plants is useful for pharmacologists, ecologists, taxonomists; watersheds and wildlife managers in increasing the valley‟s income, in addition to tracking local use (Ibrar et al., 2007).
1.7 Endemism and Conservation
Flora restricted in their distribution to a small region are called endemics and this phenomenon of restricted distribution is associated with some geographical or
3 ecological factors (Pandey and Misra, 2008). Hotspots of flora in Pakistan stretch in about thirteen natural zones from alpine pastures to the mangrove forests. Of the, total flora of Pakistan 405 species are recognized as endemics (Shinwari et al., 2002). Endemic diversity is an essential component of the ecosystem and faces multiple threats like habitat fragmentation, invasion of exotic plant species, climatic factors and unsustainable utilization (Brinkmannn et al., 2009; Ali and Qaiser, 2010). Conservation of flora and vegetation plays an important role in protecting natural resources. Plant resources of dry temperate regions are almost conserved in their native mountainous habitats (Hussain et al., 1991). Forests of Pakistan are under anthropogenic stresses for deforestation and commercial consumption and declining at a rate of 1.5% annually (Shinwari and Qaisar, 2011).
4
Panoramic views of Terich valley
5
Fig 1. Map of the study area Terich valley (Chitral) encompassing parts of the world tallest mountain ranges of Hindukush, Himalya, Karakurum.
6
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Chapter-2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 Floristic composition and its ecological attributes
Physiognomic attributes like life form and leaf size spectra reflect the adaptation of vegetation of an area. Life form adaptation informs us the macro-micro climatic conditions, while adaptation of the leaf size is useful in understanding the morpho-physiological processes of plants communities in an area (Oosting, 1956; Shimwell, 1971). A portion of earlier floristic composition studies and their vegetation ecological attributes reviewed as below:
International Perspective
Batalha and Martins (2002) prepared Raunkiaer‟s life form spectra of diverse vegetation types in the grasslands of Cerrado, Brazil. Gutkowski et al. (2002) reported 69 plants in Dynow, Poland which has geobotanical importance. Of them, 7 species were non-native (3 archaephytes, 1 apophytes, 1 epeophytes 1 of uncertain status and 1 hemicryptophytes) and 14 mountainous species (6 multizonal mountain species, 1 sub-montane and 7 montane species). Kwiatkowski (2002) documented vascular plant list from the mountains of Kaczawskie and Plateau in Western Sudety, Poland. Among 600 species about 160 were rare endangered taxa, but new taxa were commonly dispersed throughout the area. Luis et al. (2002) described 46 species of vascular plants, in which one surface-floating, five floating-leaved, three submerged, five shrubs and 32 emergent macrophytes. Antje et al. (2003) investigated the physiognomy of 14 stands with their floristic composition of Nama Karoo, southern Africa. Plants act as re-colonization sources in Havens mountains adapted habitats species in their northern parts. Changwe and Balwill (2003) appraised the flora of Dunbar Valley flora, 63 families (254 taxa in 172 genera). Dar and Christenson (2003) reported 6 taxa from India during working on juniperus plants communities. In these Juniperus species Sabina belonged to Juniperus communis var. saxatilis Juniperus Juniperus squmata and Juniperus recurva, Juniperus pseudosabina, Juniperus wallichiana, Juniperus semiglobosa and Juniperus polycarpos. Musila et al. (2003) investigated 60 families with 156 plant species of coastal dune of Kenya, and reported (Papilionaceae, 16 sp) and (Poaceae, 17 sp) were widely distributed. Eilu et al. (2004) reported 53 families of 159 genera and 212 species in which
7 (Euphorbiaceae, 25 sp) was dominant followed by (Meliacaeae & Rubiaceae 16 species each). Gimenez et al. (2004) investigated 516 endemic species from Iberian Peninsula. Major classes were (Chamaeophytes, 46.08 %) and (Hemicryptophytes, 31.37 %). Muthuramkumar et al. (2006) reported 144 trees species, 108 herbaceous species and 60 lianas, which belongs to 103 families. Costa et al. (2007) studied species composition and documented 47 families with 133 plant species. Sarwar et al. (2008) worked on the (BTI) institute of Bangladesh and described 69 families with 199 plant species having 155 genera. Santos et al. (2008) documented 43 families, 130 genera, and 225 species from northeastern Brazil. Francisco et al. (2009) explored the flora of Guinea and documented 12 genera with 46 species in which the maximum species containing genus was Palisota (11 Spp.). Al-Yemeni and Sher (2010) enlisted 74 families with 189 species from Saudi Arabia (Asir Mountains). Malaker et al. (2010) enlisted 60 families with 159 species and 123 genera from Lawachara forest Bangladesh. Tajali and Khazaeipool (2012) documented 205 plant species with 36 families from Kojur (Iran). The richest family was (Poaceae, 37 species.), (Asteraceae, 27 species) and Lamiaceae (20 species). Alsherif et al. (2013) evaluated the floristic configuration of Khulais region and quantified 50 families (251 species and 160 genera), (Poaceae, 42 Spp.), (Papilionaceae, 20 Spp.), (Euphorbiaceae, 18 Spp.) and (Asteraceae, 18 Spp.) respectively. Ravanbakhsh and Amini (2014) worked on the species profile of Talesh forest of Iran and enlisted 76 species (66 genera) belonging to 45 families. Erenso et al. (2014) studied the species composition of 95 species with 76 genera and 58 from dry montane Forest of Ethiopia. Seraj et al. (2014) documented the species, distribution and composition of three major areas of Saudi Arabia. Of the total 40 families 103 species belonged. Family Asteraceae (23%) were the richest family while Papilionaceae (8.7 %) and Poaceae (6.7%) were the co-existing families. Salama et al. (2014) explored the phytodiversity of 22 families (66 species and 53 genera) of Wadi Habib and Wadi Al- Assiuty in the deserts of Egypt. Zhu et al. (2015) investigated the flora of tropical mountains of Yunnan and recorded 146 families (758 genera with 1657 species). Ganji (2016) investigated the species configuration and distribution of West Iran and found 147 species, 116 genera and 36 families. Tadesse et al. (2017) examined the flora of Dirki and Jato sites vegetation in Ilu Gelan, west Shewa zone of Oromia, Addis Ababa. They reported 213 plant species from the sample plots, where Poaceae
8 (24 species), Asteraceae (22 species) and Fabaceae (12 species) were the most prominent families.
National Perspective
Qureshi et al. (2006) worked on the floral distribution of 25 species comprising three monocot families of Nara desert, Sindh. Similarly, Malik et al. (2007) explored the phenology and biological spectra of Bedori Hills and Harbouring Ganga in spring and monsoon seasons. Hussain et al. (2007) explored the phytodiversity and reported 111 species from 46 families containing (Gymnosperms, 2 species), (Monocotyledons, 11 species) and (Dicotyledons, 98 species) from Mastuj valley upper Chitral. Perveen et al. (2008) recorded 74 plant species in 34 families and 62 genera from Gorakh Hill Dadu. Of them 3 families were monocots (Palmae, Liliaceae, Poaceae) and 31 were Dicots. Sher and Khan (2007) investigated the phytodiversity of Chagharzai (Buner), Ajaib et al. (2008) documented phyto-climatic spectrum of the plant resources of Kotli (AJK), Pakistan. Shah and Hussain (2008) on Nowshera, Hussain and Ishtiaq (2009) explored species composition of Samahni valley, Pakistan, Qureshi and Bhatti (2010) worked on Nawab Shah and described 93 plant species. Fazal et al. (2010) organized inventory of flora of Haripur hazara, Pakistan. They recorded 66 families from which 211 species of 170 genera belonging. Saima et al. (2010) worked on Ayubia National park; Khan et al. (2011) recorded the phenology and phyto-climatic spectrum of plant species of Darra Adam Khel, and documented 30 families. Based on FIV the richest famiilies were Asteraceae, Lamiaceae Solanaceae, Mimosaceae, Moraceae and Zygophyllaceae. Rashid et al. (2011) recorded the biodiversity of Swat, Malam Jaba and recorded 75 families with 200 species. Of them, the 200 species were categorized into therophytes, hemicryptophytes and geophytes. Badshah et al. (2013) recorded species abundance of vegetation of Tank, Pakistan and 65 families from which 205 plant species belonged, was investigated in which family Poaceae, Asteraceae and Papilionaceae having more species richness. Life form and laf size classification shows, therophytes and hemicryptophytes were found dominant. Khan et al. (2013) recorded the flora of of Sheikh Maltoon, Mardan in 2008-2009. Total of 38 families in which 91 species and 76 genera were documented. Qureshi et al. (2014) quantified the floral diversity and bio-spetrum and vegetation dynamics of Khanpur Dam, KP and recorded 66
9 families in which 221 species and 169 genera belong. Of them, 39 monocots, 179 dicots, two ferns and one gymnosperm. Phanerophytes and Therophytes were the leading life form classes. Mehmood et al. (2015) explored the phytodiversity and vegetation pattern of Torghar, KP and described 101 families in which 331 species and 246 genera belonged. They documented pteridophytes 12 species, angiosperm 313 species (46 monocots, 267 dicots) and gymnosperms 6 representative species. Shaheen et al. (2015) enlisted the flora of sub-tropical regions of AJK and documented rich diversity of 65 plants; similarly, Amjad et al. (2016) documented floral diversity and life-form and leaf-size spectrum of Nikyal, Kashmir and recorded 51 families (98 genera, 110 species). Hemicryptophytes were representing domiant life-form, while therophytes and Nanophanerophytes was the co-dominant life form. Leaf size spectrum of the communities, represents that microphylls and nanophylls were the prominent leaf size classes. Samreen et al. (2016) surveyed the phytodiversity of Darazinda, and recorded 68 families, 213 species belonging to 46 genra. Among the recorded species (monocot, 46 species) and (dicot, 163species) and 2 were pteridophytes. Ullah et al. (2016) investigated the phytodiversity of Bannu and documented 54 families in which 193 species with 154 genera belonged. Amjad et al. (2017) conducted floristic survey of Kotli (AJK) during 2014-2016. The floristic list composed of 71 families with 176 genera and 202 species belonged. Ali et al. (2017) stuided floristic profile of Sherpao, Charsadda which consists of 104 species of 46 families and 95 genera. Khan et al. (2017a) investigated the flora of Swat Ranizai, District Malakand, KP, Pakistan. They were reported 264 species, 202 genera belonging to 90 families, with one gymnosperm, five ferns, 42 monocots and 216 dicots. Khan et al. (2017b) recorded the pehology and biological spectra of the plant resources of Sathan, Mansehra of KP. Fifty six plant families consist of 105 plant species were recorded. Therophytes (30.35% species) represent leading life form spectrum, while Hemicryptophytes (20.23% species) and Megaphanerophytes (16.66% species). Based on leaf size microphyll were leading class (68, species), mesophylls (45, species), nanophylls (41, species), leptophylls and macrophylls (l7 species each). Zeb et al. (2017) documented 34 families with 89 species and 76 genera in them Asteraceae dominant leading family with 9 species from Mohmand Agency Pakistan. Life form class was nanophanerophytes with 27 species. Leaf size spectra were nanophylls with 36 plant species. Ali et al. 2018 explored species composition of Hazar Nao hills. They enlisted 242 species belonging to 88 families.
10 Life form was leading class Therophytes (99 species, 40.1%), while in leaf size classes Nanophylls (83 species, 34.3%) were the dominant class. Qureshi (2018) worked on the flora of Chotiari Wetland Complex. They reported 39 families in which 120 plant species 84 genera belonging. Of them, the dominant families were Poaceae (17.23%), followed by Fabaceae (7.23%), Solanaceae and Capparidaceae (5% each). Khan et al. (2019) investigated the species composition of Mandan, Bannu KP, during 2015-16. They recorded floristic diversity which composed of 37 families with 99 species. In life form Therophytes was the dominant 54 species and Micro- phanrophytes 16 species respectively, while nanophylls showd the dominant leaf size class and microphylls was recorded as co-domiant leaf size class. Saand et al. (2019) investigated the Desert of Thar with Karoonjhar mountains range Sindh to record floristic composition. They were reported 89 plant species of 26 plant families. Biological spectrum of the flora has phanerophyte (30%), Therophytes (25%) and Chamaephytes (28%) showed the prominent life form class across the region.
2.2 Vegetation structure
Vegetation presents the association of plants due to the reflection of ecological conditions in a geographical area (Salehi et al. 2005).
International Perspective
Oswalt et al. (2006) examined the vegetation relationship to environmental factors of Islands, USA. Data was analyzed by multivariate statistical pakeges, and recognized four plants asssociations. Hirst and Jackson (2007) worked on the ordination techniques and established four plants groups on the basis of gradient analysis, Liu (2008) recorded the vegetation and environment relationship in sub- tropical forests in China, Tsiourlis et al. (2009) investigated the syntaxonomic indication of the Qurcus coccifera plant community in the Mediterranean zones of Greece (Quercetu milicis). Total of 221 releves of 34 mountainous regions were recorded throughout Greece. Q-cocciferae-Pistacietum Lentisci was the maximum wide spread and found in the whole inland of Greece. Anthropogenic pressure and Climatic conditions have been documented which is most significant influences to determine the floristic composition and vegetation structure of Q. coccifera. Tavili et al. (2009) used Canonical correspondence analysis for ordination of vegetation-
11 environment relationship in the grasslands, while; Gui et al. (2010) used ordinations techniques for species and stand distribution about the vegetation of mountains in Kunlu. Zhang and Zhang (2011) investigated the relationship of ecological factors with vegetation dynamics in the LMN Reserve, China applied standard phytosociological tool such as quadrat. TWINSPAN and DCA, were used for data analysis and documented 9 plants associations, which were based on organic matter, altitudinal range and percentage composition of soil contents which were significant factor in scattering of communities in the region. Altay et al. (2012) classified and analyzed the vegetation dynamics of Istanbul, Turkey. The floristic, ecological and syntaxonomic analyses of these plant communities were documented. Soil parameters such as organic matters contents, water holding capacitiy, electrical conductivty, pH,
CaCO3, K2O and P2O5, were examined. Gandhi and Sundarapandian (2014) documented floristic richness and abundance in tropical forests of Ghats, India by quadrat method. Total of 20 stands were adapted randomly. Due to riches of species and IVs value, Tarenna asiatica and Lantana camara were leading shrubs followed by herbs species like Ageratum conyzoides and Sida cardifolia. Srivastava et al. (2016) examined the vegetation structure of thirty ethno-medicinal species in Awarpur and recorded differences in vegetation structure of stands which was vary due to the interaction of both soil factors and climatic conditions of the region.
National Perspective
Ahmed et al. (2006) surveyed different climatic regions of Himalaya and recorded 4 mono-specific forests for analyses of vegetation. Ali et al. (2007) described plants associations and other ecological characteristics of rangelands of Dir. Khan et al. (2010) observed the physiognomy of Monotheca buxifolia forest in Lower Dir with altered elevations and established 6 species associations with Monotheca buxifolia. Rashid et al. (2011) recorded the communities structure of Malam Jabba, swat. Ahmed et al. (2011) investigated forests of Cedrus deodara. in Hindukush Himalaya mountainous ranges. Khan et al. (2012) documented the vegetation pattern of forested regions of Chitral. Khan (2012) explored the vegetation pattern of Quercus species in district Dir. Data were analyzed by Point Centered Quarter method, PC-Ord for cluster analysis and DCA analysis for ordination of edaphic and environmental factors. While the major types of Quercus sp. vegetation associations were also
12 assessed. Khan et al. (2013) explored the vegetation-environment relationship of Chitral applying Point Centerd Qudrate technique. They applied PC-Ord for cluster classification and Dentrended Correspondence analysis (DCA) for ordination of vegetation and described 6 communities. Of them, Cedrus deodara was the leading species of the established community. Shah and Rozina (2013) surveyd the phytodiversity and vegetation-environment relationship of Peer Taab graveyard (Swabi). Muhammad et al. (2015) worked on vegetation structure of Acacia modesta at various elevational points at Malakand agency. Rahman et al. (2016) recorded vegetation composition of Isodon rugosus communitie of Khwaza khela, Swat. Khan et al. (2016) worked on pines‟ forests and their phytosociology in Indus-Kohistan. A total of six groups and four specific plots of Cedrus deodara were enlisted. Irshad et al. (2016) recorded the stress on environment about scatering pattern of different species of Punica granatum community in district Lower Dir. Ali et al. (2018) documented 15 plant communities, 5 for shrubs, 5 for herbs and 5 for trees of Hindukush Range Swat Pakistan. Ilyas et al. (2018) worked on Kabal Valley, Swat Pakistan to describe the vegetation structures of the sub- tropical range. Hussain et al. (2019) quantified mathematicaly different aspects of vegetation in Koh e Safaid range, Kurram valley, Pakistan, and established seven plant associations of herbs, shrubs and trees.
2.3 Proximate and Elemental Analysis
Bio-elements are those substances which are essential for our body for various biological and physiological functions (Bahadur et al. 2011). The association of the nutritious value and minral constituents in plants is directly affect the metabolic functions of living organisms (Newall et al. 1996).
International Perspective
Storeheier et al. (2002) examined minrals composition in members of family Gramenoides. Starks et al. (2004) analyzed contents of Nitrogen, Acid and neutral detergents in forage species, while Dairo and adanlawo (2007) evaluated the nutritious prospective of 3 plants, similarly Gutierrez et al. (2008) examined the minrals profile of 14 weeds species in Mexico. Kumar et al. (2011) worked on the macro-micro contents of some selected medicinal flora of Jaunpur (India).
13 Ragavendran et al. (2012) examined the macro-micro nutrinets composition of Aerva lanata. Yagi et al. (2013) conducted research on the micro-nutrients profile of Sudan medicinal-plants. Andualem and Gessess (2014) reported the macro-nutrients profile of Millettia ferruginea. Kachiguma et al. (2015) analyzed the mineral contents of Amaranthus viridis specie which was collected from central Malawia. Similarly, Hannah and Krishnakumari (2015) worked on the minrals profile and nutritive potential of Citrullus vulgaris. Parab and Vaidya (2016) evaluated the macro-micro elements of Sesbnia bispinosa from India.
National Perspective
Khan et al. (2004) investigated the macro-micro elemental profile of forages of the semiarid zones of Pakistan. Shaheen (2005) recorded the nutritive values of trees and shrubs species from Chiltan, (CNP). Khan et al. (2006a) worked on the seasonal variations of minral composition of fordder plant and defined zinc, selenium and iron of fodder plants due to seasonal variations in their life cycle. Khan et al. (2007) worked on the climate change of macro-micro nutirents constituents of forage plants. Rahim et al. (2008) evaluated the nutrients constituents of grasses of the grassland of Himalaya. Hameed et al. (2008) recorded the nutrients profile of some valued flora from of Pakistan. Abbasi et al. (2009) worked on the minrals profile and nutritional values of legumes of legumionous plants and grasses and examined due to changes in morphology and anatomy that white clover forage had maximum amount of K, P, Mg and Ca as high from grasses. Bano et al. (2009) examined the climatic changes in the nutritional potential of 2 forage plants from the sides regions of Balochistan. Similarly, Zaidi et al. (2010) screened the macro-micro nutrients profile of 6 plants from Quetta, Balochistan. Shirin et al. (2010) recorded minral ingredients of Withania somnifera. Ata et al. (2011) investigated the minral content of tweny four medicinal plants for the investigation of new constitunts. Hussain et al. (2011) evaluated the minrals contents of six vegetable species of District Mardan, Pakistan. Ghani et al. (2012) analyzed the macro-micro nutrients profile of high valued medicinal plants of Soone valley, Khushab. Similar, work was also done by Mushtaq et al. (2012) in Swabi. Similar work was also conduted by Rahim et al. (2013). Khan et al. (2013) described the minrals composition of 10 plants at three phenological stages from Karak. Shad et al. (2014) conducted the phyto-chemical screening of 4
14 local plants from various areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Salman et al. (2015) evaluated the nutrients composition of Mirabilis jalapa. Similarly, Ullah et al. (2015) worked on heavy metals of high valued plants of Karak KP, Pakistan. Ghani et al. (2016) examined the differences in the macro-micro nutriernts composition of Solanum nigrum from Mianwali. Samreen et al. (2016) also worked on selected forage plant species of Darazinda. Abdullah et al. (2017) investigated nutritional and palatability prospective in forage plants of Cholistan desert.
2.4 Ethnobotany
Ethnobotany is the study of past and current interrelationships in their environment between human societies and plants, animals and other species (McClatchy, 2009).
International Perspective
Hanazaki et al. (2006) documented the medicinal values of 248 plants of Carlos, Brazil. Data about the medicinal plants were collected through interviews from 58 inhabitants both genders male and females. Okello and Ssegawa (2007) recorded from Ngai sub-country of APAC and compiled that root part of the plants is used as drugs and affects the restoration pattern of plants particularly medicinal flora in the area. Wyk et al. (2008) worked about ethno-botany of medicinaly important flora in South-eastern parts of South Africa. A total of 86 plants were documented which comprised of Metria medica which have still uses. The folk of the area used it for various therapeutic functions of various diseases such as bladdr, kidney, back and stomach ache. Similarly, Mao et al. (2009) recorded the medicinal value of wild- plants from Northeast India. Amusa et al. (2010) worked on the medicinal importance of selected plants of Kainji Lake, Nigeria. Adhikari et al. (2010) recorded the distribution of medicinal flora in the India and Uttarakh. They enlisted 605 medicinal plants based on extensive survey of the area. These medicinal plants included 55 shrubs, 63 trees, 34 climbers, 208 herbs, 3 ferns and 10 grasses belonged to 94 families. Different parts of these plants were used in different ailement of diseases. They collected 21 plant species from Himalaya region and 101 plant species from Indian oriental region, while remaining species were collected from different parts of the world and also discoursed conservation status of these plants. Similar work was
15 also stated by Rajaei and Mohamadi (2012) from Iran and Nigeria. Mesfin et al. (2013) reported the medicinal usage of local flora from Northern areas of Ethiopia. The informations about medicinal flora were collected by frequently parts used, route of administration, methods of preparation and ailments for those plants which were used commonly. Parul and Vashistha (2015) worked on the ethnobotanical value of 73 plant species of rural areas of India and categorized into different classes on the basis of parts used. Jadhav (2016) recorded the local medicinal knowledge of the flora of Kadegaon (India) and documented the uses of 21 plant species of 15 families. Mengesha (2016) worked on the medicinal uses of important plants for the treatment of various livestock and human diseases in Mandura, Ethiopia.
National Perspective
Wazir et al. (2004) worked on the ethno-medicinal uses of 41 plant species from Chapursan area of Gilgit Baltistan. Ahmad et al. (2006) from Booni (Chitral). Hussain et al. (2006) investigated the ethnobotany of Swat, Ghalegay and documented 126 plants of different commercial uses. Hazrat et al. (2007) woked on the ethnobotany of Ranunculaceae family in Dir and enlisted 14 genera with 39 species. Ibrar et al. (2007) worked on the ethnobotany of 97 plant species from the hills of district Shangla and categorized into various classes based on used values. Jan et al. (2008) documented the traditional values of 43 plants of Kaghan, KP. They selected 43 plant species which are used in herbal remedies, while 15 species have minor module uses. Zahoor et al. (2009) studied the medicinal importance of plants of Darra, Lakki Marwat. They described 30 families (52 species, 45 genera) out of which 47 plants were locally used for the curinng of different ailments. Ali and Qaiser (2009) documented the medicinal uses of flora of district Chitral. A total of 83 plant species were enlisted. They specified that generally the local peoples of the area used roots of the plant as a remedies and taken them orally. Ullah et al. (2009) documented ethno-medicial uses of plants of Jandool, lower Dir and enlisted the therapeutic uses of 60 medicinal plants. Similarly, Akhtar and Begum (2009) worked on the traditional uses of 55 plants from Jalala (Mardan) and recorded the ailments cured from these plants. About 42 different ailments were cured from these local plants. Jan et al. (2010) examined the ethno-medicinal uses of weeds species from Kohistan valley, Dir. Noor and Kalsoom (2011) explored 13 families from which 43 plants
16 species of Ratwal, District Attock through questionnaire. The peoples dependent on these plants for their shelter, food, timber, fuel, shelter and health care. Shinwari et al. (2011) studied the ethnobotany of Kohat Pass, KP and enlisted the traditional uses of 60 medicinal plants from 30 families and 49 genera, while Ahmad et al. (2011) acknowledged the ethnobotanical uses of flora from Kabal Swat, and recorded the common uses of 140 plants. Badshah et al. (2012) explored the plant resources of rangelands in district Tank and enlisted 205 plant species and were categorized them due to usefulness of plants such as medicinal uses (22.4%, Spp.) and (36% fuel wood Spp.). Danish et al. (2012) documented 15 families from which 20 plant species belong, and were utilized for different human and animal‟s ailments. It was studied that 80 plants species were used locally as herbal recipes with water and fodder. Nasrullah et al. (2012) worked on Jandool, Lower Dir and documented the ethno- medicinal informations on 67 medicinal plants. Sher et al. (2014) recorded the ethnobotany informations of Salarzai and Ashezai Valleys, District Buner, Pakistan. A list was made on 73 families with 163 plant species. Local knowledge was collected from different peoples about their local economic uses and the conservation status of plants. Over-grazing and Deforestation was the main cause to affect plants diversity. Ahmad et al. (2014) enlisted information sabot ethnobotanical knowledge of plants of Chail valley; similarly Khan et al. (2015) listed the ethno-medicinal flora of Kabal swat. Shah et al. (2015) evaluated the local uses of medicinal plants of Torghar, Begum et al. (2016) studied the ethno-medicinal uses of plants fro Harichand Charsadda, while Shuaib et al. (2016) worked on the ethno-medicinal flora of Dir. Rahman et al. (2017) document the local informations of therapeutic uses of flora with healing value in Talagang, Punjab. They listed 36 families in which 101 medicinal plants belonged. The highest informant‟s consensus factor values were found for gastro-intestinal disorders while most of the plants were found to have high prospective applications in pharmacological indications. Ali et al. (2018) ethno- medicinal survey was directed and gatherd informations about the local uses of plants species growing as weeds in the fileds of wheat crop Swabi, KP Pakistan. Based on the collected data almost 138 weed species, 35 families and 111 genera were utilized for curing different ailments, like respiratory tract infections, gastro-intestinal problems, skin problems, skelet-muscular and cardiovascular pains. Khan et al. (2018) studied the ethno-botanical uses of local plants in Talash Valley of lower Dir. They reported 50 medicinal flora comprised of 33 families and 17 genera. The
17 collected data shows that Leaves (41%) are the main part of the plants for ethnomedicine, and 32% of drug orally administrated in the form of decoction. Gulzar et al. (2019) recorded the medicinal plants of Thana area, District Malakand, Pakistan. A total of 50 plants in which 46 species were recognized best for medicinal uses, 4 specie for ornamental purpose, 10 plant species as fodder, 12 as firewoods, 8 species for furniture uses, 14 as vegetables and 3 species were recognized as toxic.
2.5 Endemism and Conservation status
Taxa which are restricted in their distribution to a small region are called endemics and this phenomenon of restricted distribution associated with some geographical or ecological factors is called endemism (Pandey and Misra, 2008). The care, protection and maintenance of ecosystem, habitats and populations, within or outside in their natural environment are termed as Conservation (IUCN, 2010).
Some of the work done on Endemism and Conservation is reviewed below:
Inernational Perspective
Allance (2004) reported the different strategies which have been skillful for medicinal flora conservation in different areas. They planned a proposal for Medicinal plants conservation for saving plant diversity by performing regular practices. Bocuk et al. (2009) measured bodiversity and conservation status of north-east Phrygia, and impacts of land fragmentation and desertifications. They recorded 589 plants belonging to 67 families with 314 genera. Of them, 72 were endemic taxa and 56 plants species were at risk of extinction according to (IUCN) categories and criteria of conservation. Bulut and Yilmaz (2010) reported the floral biodiversity and the diversity of endemic taxa in Turkey. They recorded the present richness of endemic taxa of Turkey. A total of 3504 endemic taxa, 12 extinct taxa and 3492 (99 %) are still being threatened in Turkey. Maridass and Raju (2010) worked on the conservation of pteridophytes, dispersed in Himalaya, Eastern Ghats and Western Ghats. They recorded 272 ferns species and fern-allies belonging to 95 genera, 34 families in which most of the pteridophytes were identified as endemic and rare species in the region. Dubova et al. (2010) worked on the conservation of in-vitro growth of seventy plant species under four artificial media in the National Botanic Garden (NBG) of
18 Latvia. Of them, deciduous tree species, dune and meadow, ditch with spring water and humid bank. Rao et al. (2013) enlisted the conservation of flora including different families. They were also investigated the Level of P, K and N in the soil of the area. A total of 105 plants species of 41 families were documented in which Cynodon dactylon native and recommended grass to stop the erosion level in the area. Gurbanov et al. (2019) studied the phytogeography and chorology of Mil Steppe- Azerbaijan. They recognized 91 families from which 926 species and 457 genera belonges, Poaceae was dominated 59 genera (12.83%) followed by Asteraceae 54 genera (11.83%). The life form was investigated in which prominent growth form class was hemicryptophytes with 475 species and 314 species.
National Perspective
Hamayun et al. (2006) recorded the conservation status of medicinal plants uses in the area. They reported 32 families in which 49 medicinal species. It was appraised that 49% of these valued medicinal flora were endangered due to over- exploitation. Abdullah et al. (2009) investigated the conservation status of floral communities Yankari Game Reserve Bauchi-Nigeria through Point center quarter method. They recorded five plants communities from five different habitats. A summed of 40 species belonging 7 families and 33 genera, have been recognized. Poaceae having the highest diversity while Ceasalpiniaceae with fewer members. Ali and Qaiser (2010) conducted research on the conservation stratigies of Astragalus gahiratensis (Papilionaceae) Chitral Pakistan. They linked the individual‟s size in four different sites in the area. They determined that this species have the rank of critically endangered due to loss of habitat, over grazing and deforestation. Alam and Ali (2010) adopted the conservation criterian on different endemic flora of Pakistan ensuing the IUCN conservation criteria. About 19 taxon were at the verge of their extinction due to un-awareness and unfavorable condition. Abbas et al. (2010) recorded the conservation status of Cadaba heterotricha, in Pakistan based on general field studies comprising geo-graphic position, size of population and habitat conditions. They investigated that Cadaba heterotricha was endangered taxon in Pakistan through IUCN redlist catogries and criteria 2001. Faizulhaq (2011) studied the conservation pattern of critical endangered (CR) and endangered (E) taxon through semi-structured questionnaire from different peoples of Nandiar Battagram,
19 Pakistan. A total of 37 plants were documented in which 14 critically endangered taxa and 23 endangered, due to unethical collection, deforestation, loss of Habitat, soil erosion, over-grazing and effect of invasive plant species. Shaheen and Shinwari (2012) investigated endemism and vegetation structure of Karambar Lake Chitral, Hindukush-Himalaya. Twenty seven families with 108 species were recorded in which Dominant family was Asteraceae, Leguminosae, Capprifoliaceae, Rosaceae, Poaceae and Primulaceae respectively. Hussain et al. (2012) studied the conservation patteren of tradable medicinal plants of Kurram agency, KP Pakistan. Among these 37% of the total uses of plants, (35%) were vulnerable, (20%) species endangered and only 8 % were protected. During this study they revealed market prices, local names and quantity of drugs from dealers by questionnaires. Baig et al. (2013) worked on the conservation of plant resources in Pahalgam Valley, Kashmir, by using Quadrat method. Species abundance of six recorded medicinal plants was assessed through IUCN, which shows threatening condition due to local uses in the area. Bano et al. (2013) investigated the conservation assesment of Himalaya region of (AJK) Pakistan. They recorded 33 plant species under the criteria of IUCN. Among 33 species, 4 species endangered 12 species vulnerable, 7 species critically endangered, 2 species were extinct and 8 were rare in the area due to unawareness of local community and its uses for different purposes. Similarly, Khan and Mushraf (2014) reported the conservation assessment of flora of Katlang Mardan, Pakistan. They recorded 45 taxa which belonged to 36 genera from 25 families. Of them, 45 plant species, 3 species rare, 4 species infrequent, 20 species vulnerable and 9 species were endangered. Muhammad et al. (2017) recorded the conservation status of Rhododendron afghanicum species from Parachinar, Kurram Pakistan. They concluded that this species is endangered according to IUCN (2001). Khan et al. (2019) applied IUCN categories and criteria 2010, and recorded conservation status of 120 medicinal plants of chamla valley, Bunir. Due to over-grazing, habitat degradation, un-sustainable harvesting and over-exploitation loss about 49% economical valued species in last 30 years. Majid et al. (2019) documented 38 endemics and belonged to 19 families from Lesser Himalaya areas of Pakistan. They recorded that maximum number of endemics was belonged to family Ranunculaceae (7), Gentianaceae and Rosaceae (4 endemics each).
20 The flora of Terich was documented by Per Wendelbo in 1952, since than; no work has been done on plant resources of the area, therefore the present botanical endeavor will help to provide the baseline for future research. The literature review shows no such recent studies on Plant resources of Terich valley, Chitral. Therefore, it is a dire need to work on the multidimention of plant resources.
Objectives of the study The objective of the study is: To prepare a checklist of vascular flora of the area To establish vegetation structure in relation to soil To investigate the chemical composition of the selected plants To document the ethnobotanical profile of the flora To record endemic and conservation status of the existing flora
21
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Chapter-3 MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.1 Floristic composition and Ecological Attributes
The research area Terich valley was frequently visited for plants collection during 2016-2019. The plant specimens were dried and mounted on standard Herbarium sheets. Plants identification was carried out following Flora of Pakistan (Nasir and Ali, 1970-1989; Ali and Nasir, 1989-1991; Ali and Qaisar, 1993-2019). A comprehensive floristic checklist was prepared and the voucher specimens were appropriately numbered in alphabetical order. It was processed using conventional herbarium techniques and deposited in the (PUP) Herbarium, Department of Botany University of Peshawar.
3.1.1 Biological spectrum a) Life form spectrum
Being an important ecological characteristics life form of a species adopted according to the prevailing climatic conditions of the area. The plants were assigned in to different life form classes based on perennating buds during unfavorable conditions following (Raunkiaer, 1934; Hussain, 1989; Badshah, 2012). i. Therophytes (Th)
These were annual plants which complete their life cycle within one growing season. ii. Geophytes (G)
These were the flora which have more or less tuberous subterranean organs filled with food and able to make a quick growth when favorable conditions return. Perennating buds of geophytes were bulbs, corms, rhizomes and tubers. iii. Hemicryptophytes (H)
Hemicryptophytes were perennial plants with perennating buds and shoots near the soil surface, covered with litter.
22 iv. Chameophytes (Ch)
These were perennial plants in which the perennating buds lay upto 25 cm on an upright stem from the ground. v. Phanerophytes (Ph)
Shrubs and trees bearing perennating buds at least 25 cm from above the soil surface were recognized. These were further classified into the following classes: a. Nanophanerophytes (Np) These were the plants whose perennating buds located on aerial shoots about 0.25-2 m over the surface of ground. b. Microphanerophytes (MicP)
These were shrubby plants with perennating buds located 1.8-7.6 m above the ground. c. Mesophanerophytes (MesP)
Plants in this group were small trees whose perennating buds situated at 7.5-30 m above the surface of ground. d. Megaphanerophytes (MegP)
All trees having perennating buds located at a height of 30 m above the ground surface were grouped as megaphanerophytes.
Life form spectrum was calculated by following formula;
23
Fig 2. Showing five different life-form classes; 1. Phanerophytes 2.Chameophytes 3. Hemicryptophytes 4. Cryptophytes 5. Therophytes b) Leaf size spectrum
Leaf size spectrum is useful for the determination of morpho-physiological processes along with the projection of regional environmental conditions. Plants were grouped into different leaf size classes according to Cain & Castro (1959) procedure adopted by Hussain (1989) as follow:
Table 3.1. Leaf size nomenclature
Leaf class Leaf size (mm2) Leaf class Leaf size (mm2) Leptophyll (L.) up to 25 Mesophyll (Mes.) 2025-18225 Nanophyll (N.) 25-225 Macrophyll (Mac.) 18225-164025 Microphyll (Mic.) 225-2025 Megaphyll (Meg.) Above 164025
The formula used for calculating the spectrum of Raunkiaerian leaf size is given as:
24 3.2 Vegetation Structure
3.2.1 Data collection
The study area was regularly visited for sampling and collection of data during 2016-2019. Based on physiognomy, habitat distinction, species composition and altitudinal variation, the valley was divided into five ecological zones as follow:
Ecological Altitude Slope GPS Vegetation Aspect Soil type Zones (m) (o) Coordinates type 1000- 12 North & South 71°.41' Shagrom Herbaceous 2500 17 slope 35°.54' 1600- 25 North & South 71°.46' Warimon Scrubby 2420 29 slope 35°.53' 1760- 15 North & South Sandy 71°.05' Zondrangam Scrubby 2350 32 slope loam 35°.45' 3440- 16 North & South 71°.41' Rosh Gol Sub-alpine 3650 33 slope 35°.53' 2950- 27 North & South 71°.41' Ghari Alpine 4200 22 slope 35°.41'
3.2.2 Sampling Unit
Phytosociological attributes were measured by Quadrat method. The quadrat size ranged from 10 m2 for trees, 6 m2 for shrubs and 1.5 m2 for herbs layer. A total of 10 number quadrats were adopted for herbs, 5 each for shrubs and trees in all monitoring sites (Badshah, 2011). The field data on density (D1), frequency (F1) and cover (C1) for each species was calculated and all the values were transformed into relative values (Appendix-11). Based on the highest importance values (IVs) different plant communities were established after three leading species (Badshah et al., 2016; Hussain et al., 2019). Plant specimens were identified with the help of Flora of Pakistan (Ali and Qaisar, 1993-2019).
3.2.3 Density (D1)
It refers to the number of individuals plants per unit area. This is calculated as follows:
25
The following ten density classes were developed, using their midpoint values for data analysis:
Table 3.2. Density classes and their mid-point values
Classes Density range Mid-point values 1. Up to 10 individuals 5 % 2. 11-20 individuals 15 % 3. 21-30 individuals 25% 4. 31-40 individuals 35 % 5. 41-50 individuals 45 % 6. 51-60 individuals 55 % 7. 61-70 individuals 65 % 8. 71-80 individuals 75 % 9. 81-90 individuals 85 % 10. 91 -100 individuals 95 %
3.2.4 Frequency (F1)
It is defined as the degree of distribution or occurrence of individuals of a species within an area. Frequency is calculated as follow:
Raunkiaer (1934) classified the frequency (F) of a species in an area, into the following five frequency classes;
A. 1%------20%
B. 21%...... 40%
26 C. 41%...... 60%
D. 61%...... 80%
E. 81%...... 100%
Normal Distribution of frequency percentage, derived from above such classes, is denoted as;
A > B > C D < E 3.2.5 Cover (C1)
Cover is the vertical projection of foliage shoots/crown from a plant to the surface of the ground expressed as a percentage of a surface area, which were calculated following Cox, 1967:
The cover of shrubs and herbs was assessed visually following Daubenmire (1959) cover classes which are as follow;
Table 3.3. Cover classes
Classes Cover Range (%) Mid-point values 1. Up to 5 2.5 2. 5 to 25 15 3. 25 to 50 37.5 4. 50 to 75 62.5 5. 75 to 95 85 6. 95 to 100 97.5
27 3.2.6 Importance value index (IVI)
The ecological importance of a species in relation to the community structure can be obtained by adding the relative values of density, frequency and cover.
The equation used for the calculation of IVI is:
D3+ C3 + F3 Importance value index (IVI) 3
3.2.7 Diversity indices
3.2.7.1 Similarity index
Similarity index is the number of a common species to both the stands or communities. It was calculated by Sorensen‟s index (1948) as modified by Motyka et al., (1950):
2W Ismo = 100 A B
Where:
Is = index of similarity of Motyka
W= Sum of the lowest quantitative value of species common to both the stands A and B
A = Sum of the quantitative value of all species in a stand/community A
B = Sum of the quantitative value of all species in a stand/community B
3.2.7.2 Simpson diversity index
The number of randomly selected pairs of individuals to be drawn from a plant community to receive a pair with both individuals of the same species (Hussain, 1989) and calculated as:
n (n -1) Diversity Index (D) N (N -1)
28 Where D= Simpson index,
N= Number of individuals of all species
n= Number of individuals of a species The obtained value were subtracted from 1 to obtained Diversity Index.
3.2.7.3 Species Richness
Species Richness is characterized as a simple ratio of the total number of species to the square root of all individuals within an area. Species richness was calculated following (Shaheen et al., 2011):
S d N
Where: d = Species richness
S= Total number of species in a stand
N= Total number of individuals in a stands
3.2.7.4 Ecological maturity index
The maturity index of a community was calculated after (Hussain et al., 2019).
Ft Degree of maturity index = N
Where:
Ft = Frequency values of all species in a stand.
N = Total number of species in a stand.
3.2.8 Vegetation Classification and Ordination
Plant ecologists often use vegetation classification and ordination to determine the pattern of distribution and the communities of plant species (Ahmad and Shaukat,
29 2012). Multivariate statistical methodologies were used for this purpose. The goals were to differentiate the associations of plants or habitat types and to reduce the broad information data to a low measurement for better elucidation.
3.2.8.1 Ward’s Cluster analysis
PC-Ord (Window Version 5.10) software was used for the classification of vegetation into different association or habitat types (Gauch and Whittaker, 1981). Quantitative data (importance values) was used for vegetation classification as it gives distinct comparison of different communities as compared to qualitative data. Methodology of Ward‟s cluster analysis was adopted to make the groups in vegetation of the different stands. On Dendrogram at 75% remaining information three groups were adopted at three different levels of ten stands.
3.2.8.2 Ordination
Ordination is a multivariate statistical tool used to compress large data into a space of low dimensions where related species and samples cluster together, while non-identical species and samples diverge and diverge further. The ordination study was carried out using version 5.0 of CANOCO (McCune and Grace, 2002; Jabeen and Ahmad, 2009; Ilyas et al., 2015).
3.2.8.2.1 Principal Component Analysis (PCA)
The Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was conducted through CANOCO version 5.00 to determine the relationship between the distribution of plant species and the environmental variables (Greig-Smith, 2010; Ahmad and Shaukat, 2012; Noor and Khatoon, 2013). Importance values (IVs) of all 195 plant species at 10 different stands along with environmental data were used to perform PCA.
3.2.8.2.2 Canonical Correspondence Analysis (CCA)
Based on a thorough analysis of the literature on ordination techniques, it became clear that CCA is the most reliable and commonly used technique for direct gradient exploration of ordination, and this has therefore been adopted for the present research. Direct gradient analysis (CCA) was conducted in CANOCO version 5.0 that handled floristic and environmental data matrices together (McCune and Grace,
30 2002). Canonical correspondence analysis was found to be the most important one as a technique for direct gradient analysis. Abundance data of all 195 species and all 10 stands were analyzed using CCA along with environmental data matrices.
3.2.9 Edaphology
3.2.9.1 Collection of soil samples
About 1 kg soil sample (upto a depth of 15 cm) was taken from each five localities of Terich valley. The collected samples were then mixed to get a composite sample, kept in polythene bags and tagged appropriately for analyses in the research laboratory (Khan et al., 2013).
3.2.9.2 Laboratory procedure
The soil samples analyses were carried out at Pakistan Tobacco Board, Mardan for determination of physio-chemical properties. Soil Texture triangle was used for the identification of texture classes (Bouyoucos, 1936; Brady, 1990). Soil pH was noted by using 1:5 soil water suspensions (Black, 1965). For quantification of organic matter in soil followed Walkley (1947). Lime % of (CaCO3) was determined by acid base neutralization following Rayan et al., (1997). Nitrogen concentration was estimated with Kjeldahl methodology (1983) and Na Concentration was examined by using flame photometry. Potassium and Phosphorus contents were quantified following Olsen and Sommers (1982). Macro-micro nutrients of soil were investigated by Atomic absorption Spectrometer.
3.2.10 Palatability
The acceptability of plant parts by grazing animals depend on various parameters such as developmental stages, morphological adaptation, chemical constituents and type of plant which may either start a specific response to a grazing animal or may keep away an animal from grazing (Heady, 1964). Palatability was viewed from grazed pastures by grazing animals (Sheep, Cow, goats and other animals). Other related information about palatability of plants was also obtained from the local nomads of the area. Plants was categorized in to different classes on the
31 basis of degree of palatability following (Shaheen et al., 2005; Hussain and Durani, 2009; Amjad et al., 2014)
i. Highly Palatable (HP): Plant species, which were preferred the most by livestock.
ii. Mostly Palatable (MP): Plant species with an average preference by the livestock.
iii. Less Palatable (LP): Plant species with less preference by livestock
vi. Rarely Palatable (RP): Plant species grazed under compulsion in the absence of forage species.
v. Non-Palatable (NP): Plant species, Not grazed by animals at any stage.
3.3 Chemical analysis of selected plants
Six plants with different palatable status were observed at three phenological stages (Pre-reproductive/seedling stage, Reproductive/flowering stage and Post- reproductive/drying stage). The plant specimens were dried, powdered and packed in plastic bags for phytochemical screening at The Agriculture, University Peshawar.
Table 3.4. Plant species selected for chemical analysis
S. No Species Family 1. Fraxinus xanthoxyloides (G. Don) DC. Oleaceae 2. Hippophae rhamnoides L. Elaeagnaceae 3. Ephedra gerardiana L. Ephedraceae 4. Heracleum polyadenum Rech. f. & Riedl Apiaceae 5. Glycyrrhiza glabra var. glandulifera (Waldst. & Kit.) Papilionaceae Boiss. 6. Calamogrostris pseudophragmites (Hall.f.) Koel Poaceae
32 3.3.1 Proximate Analysis
i. Dry Matter (%)
Dry Matter (DM) percentage of the forage plants was determined from oven dried samples at 65oC for 72 hours following AOAC (1984);
Dry Matter ( % ) = Weight of dried sample x 100 Weight of fresh sample
ii. Ash Content (%)
Ash Content was determined using one to two gram of plant sample in Muffle furnace at 550-600oC, kept for eight hours according to AOAC (1984);
Weight of ash Ash contents ( % ) = x 100 Weight of fresh sample
iii. Crude Protein (CP)
Crude Protein percentage was quantified following micro Kjeldahl (AOAC, 1984).
(ml H SO - blank) x N x 6.25 x 14.01 Crude protein (%) = 2 4 Sample weight x 1000
iv. Crude fibers (Cf)
Crude fibers (CF) were evaluated following AOAC (1984).
Loss in weight in ignition Crude fiber (%) = x 100 Weight of Sample v. Crude Fat (CF)
Crude Fats were determined from ether extract by using reflux apparatus (Galyean, 1985).
Weight of extract Ether extract (%) = x 100 Weight of sample
33 vi. Nitrogen Free Extract (NFE)
Nitrogen free extract (NFE) was calculated as Galyean (1985);
NFE = Dry matter % (% Ash + % CF + % Ether extract *+ % CP)
3.3.2 Mineral analysis
For minerals profile of the plants, plant samples were dried in air broiler at 70 oC for 48 hours and crushed through a strainer (0.001 m) and exposed to wet acid digestion (AOAC, 1990). Potassium (K) and Phosphorus (P) were quantified by flame photometer and UV/visible Spectro Photometer respectively (Shimadzu UV-1601PC). Different nutrients like Ca, Fe, Mg, Zn, Mn, Cu and Pb were screened out using Atomic Absorption Spectrometer.
Table 3.5. Reference wavelength range for minerals in soil and plant samples
S.No Elements Symbol Wavelength (nm) 1. Phosphorus P 178.28 2. Potassium K 766.49 3. Calcium Ca 315.88 4. Magnesium Mg 285.21 5. Iron Fe 238.20 6. Manganese Mn 257.61 7. Zinc Zn 213.856 8. Sodium Na 589.592 9. Cadmium Cd 228.802
3.4 Ethnobotany
Ethnobotanical data was obtained by using semi structured questionnaire (Edwards and his co-workers) and oral interviews from local community of the area (Edwards et al., 2005, Appendix-13); Badshah, 2011). The informants of different age groups were selected randomly from different localities of Terich valley for interview about medicinal plants. Hakeems, nomads and elderly people from the area who were well aware of the plants‟ indigenous uses particularly for medicinal purposes were interviewed. The collected plants were categorized into different utilized classes
34 based on their ethno-medicinal uses. The data were analyzed using quantitative indices viz: relative frequency of citations and subsequent family importance values (Rahman et al., 2016)
Relative frequency of citation (RFC) was calculated through formula:
(0 ˂ RFC ˂ 1)
Where RFC stands for relative frequency of citation and its value ranges >1 and < 0.
FC stands for frequency of citation and N is the total number of informants following (Ijaz et al., 2017)
3.5. Endemism and Conservation status
Taxa which are restricted in their distribution to a small region are called endemics and this phenomenon of restricted distribution is called endemism (Pandey and Misra, 2008). The endemic plants were collected, dried in blotting papers. Taxonomic identification of endemic taxa was carried out following Flora of Pakistan (Ali and Qaisar, 1993-2019).
The care, maintenance and protection of plant species from extinction, within or outside of their natural environments are called as Conservation (Shinwari and Qaisar, 2011). Data about conservation status of the flora of Terich valley was examined. A computerized datasheet was generated for the conservation status of endemic plants and incorporated details of ecological attributes, biological spectrum, Phenology and association with other species. Conservation classes of plants such as Endangered, Critically endangered, Extinct, Extinct in the wild, Near threatened, Vulnerable, Data deficient, Not evaluated and Least concern was enumerated following (IUCN Red list Criteria, 2010, Version 8.1, Fig. 3).
35 Calculation of Area of Occupancy (AOO) and Extent of Occurrence (EOO)
In ArcView 9.2 (Google Earth, 2018), Geographical coordinates were plotted on the Google browser's and a geo-referenced map was obtanined. A polygon was sketched by encompassing lines across all the taxon, known locations, excluding the locations within the polygon boundary showing the extent of occurrence (EOO) of endemic taxon. A grid size of 2 km × 2 km (a cell area of 4 km2) was used for the presence of endemics. Similarly, the area of occupancy (AOO) was determined by taxon in a uniform grid covering the entire habitat range and by counting the number of occupied grid cells to that of the individual cell area (IUCN, 2010).
Area of Occupancy (AOO): Area of Occupancy is a scaled metric that reflects the currently acceptable habitat area of a taxon occupied.
Extent of Occurrence (EOO): An area within the shortest continuous imaginary boundary that can be extended to cover all known, inferred or projected taxon occurrence sites, excluding vagrancy cases.
The decrease in the number of mature individuals was also recorded following (Ali and Qaiser, 2010).
Grazing index: The grazing indexes calculated for each endemic species were counted per unit area following (Ali and Qaiser, 2009).
Table 3.6. Grazing index of individuals
Percentage of grazed individuals Symbol Grazing index 1-20 % + Less grazed 21-50 % ++ Moderate grazed 51-80 % +++ Extensively grazed 81-100 % ++++ Critically grazed
36
Fig 3. IUCN Conservation Criteria
37
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
FLORISTIC COMPOSITION AND ECOLOGICAL ATTRIBUTES
Chapter-4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Floristic composition and Ecological Attributes
Flora comprises the total plant species of an area. It differs from vegetation, where it is the distribution, population size and relative significance of plant species (Ali et al., 2018). Flora helps in understanding various vegetation characteristics, edaphic and climatic factors. The flora of Terich valley represents dry-temperate Irano-Turranian elements. Flora of Terich Valley, comprised of 445 plant species belonged to 272 genera and 71 families. Of them, 371 species belonged to dicotyledons, 74 species to monocotyledons, 5 species to pteridophytes and 4 species to coniferous group. The dominant families in terms of species richness were Asteraceae (88 species), Poaceae (49 Species), Papilionaceae (34 Species) and Brassicaceae with (30 Species) respectively. Of the total genera, 29 were monotypic genera, 11 with two species and 10 genera with three species. The other genera had either 4 or more species (Table 4.1). The dominancy of these families was due to vast range of ecological amplitudes of most of the species. Similarly, Taraxacum (12 Species), Astraglus and Cousinia (9 Species each), Artemisia and Silene (8 Species each) and (Bromus 7 Species) were the diverse genera in term of species richness. Asteraceae, Brassicaceae, Papilionaceae and Poaceae have wide ecological amplitude and are therefore distributed in a variety of micro-habitats. The other reason for their diversity is its non-palatable nature, in majority of the species according to the literature. Other workers such as Qureshi (2018), Khan et al. (2019), Saand et al. (2019) have also been reported these families as dominant families in their study areas. Seasonality of flora showed the highest number of species (253 Species, 50%) in summer followed by spring (154 Species, 34.7%), autumn (58 Species, 13%) and winter (10 Species, 2.22%) (Table. 4.2, Fig. 4). The study showed that the sprouting of most of the flora started by the end of March and continued till September. Similarly, various growth events vary with Dry and wet spell during summer. Our findings on seasonality matched with Rocha et al. (2004), Shah et al. (2006), Zhang et al. (2007), Nath et al. (2008), Ali and Qaiser (2009), Durrani et al. (2010), Badshah et al. (2013), Ilyas et al. (2013), Sher et al. (2014), Ali et al. (2018) recorded highest reproductive growth during summer and autumn in their respected areas. They further, the sharp fluctuation in temperature and moisture contents in the soil, due to variation in topography and aspect, is obviously projected in the biodiversity of the
38 area. Floristically, the valley still supported a rich flora however, the anthropogenic influences is a serious threat to the existing flora. The inhabitants rely on the natural forest for various purposes and it‟s obvious from the present study, that extraction of fuel wood, timber wood in particular and other utilization as fodder, medicinal plant extraction in general is on peak. It is revealed that, if the locals are not provided with alterative, the local flora will decline quickly (Guo et al., 2009; Manhas et al., 2010; Badshah et al., 2013 and Hussain et al., 2019). Per Wendelbo (1952) was the first researcher who documented the flora of Terich and recorded Eremostachys speciosa. Since 1952 Eremostachys speciosa was not reported in other research works (Nasir and Ali, 1970-1989; Ali and Nasir, 1989-1991; Ali and Qaisar, 1993-2019; Ali and Haider, 2009) and has not been mentioned in Flora of Pakistan. This species makes its appearance as a reintroduced species from Terich valley during these research studies (Plate. 1). Moreover Alcea nudiflora was first ever record from the Terich valley, which is also a new addition to the Flora of Pakistan (Plate. 2). Remarkable contributions in preparation of floristic lists were made by many workers such as Erenso et al. (2014), Salma et al. (2014), Zhu et al. (2015), Ganji, (2016), Tadesse et al. (2017). Similarly, floristic lists and environmental attributes of various localities in Pakistan were enumerated by Amjad et al. (2012), Badshah et al. (2013), Shaheen et al. (2015), Amjad et al. (2016), Samreen et al. (2016), Ullah et al. (2016), Amjad et al. (2017), Ali et al. (2017), Khan et al. (2017), Zeb et al. (2017). There is no such record was available on floral diversity and physiognomic features of Terich valley, Chitral.
4.1.2 Biological spectrum
The word „biological spectra‟ was first coined by Raunkiaer (1934) for the determination of life form and leaf size of the plants according to their perennating buds and environmental conditions. Biological spectrum explains the species distribution and climatic conditions under which the predominant life form of plant evolved. The knowledge of the biological spectrum also helps to provide information about the plants association and physiological process of individual plant species (Amjad et al., 2012). Life forms are functional types, been used to study plant adaptation (Odland, 2009). The present study revealed that the life form was dominated by therophytes (166 Species, 37.30%) followed by hemicryptophytes (140
39 Species, 31.46%). While, chameophytes with (60 Species, 13.48%) and Nanophanerophytes with (30 Species, 6.74%) were next in abundance. Similarly, geophytes (25 Species, 5.61%), mesophanerophytes (10 Species, 2.01%), megaphanerophytes (9 Species, 2.24 %) and microphanerophytes (5 Species, 1.12 %) were associated life form classes (Fig. 5). The dominancy of therophytic life form agreed with the previous works of Shah et al. (1991), Devi and Sharma (2004), Alelign et al. (2007), Breckle (2007); Guo et al. (2009), Manhas et al. (2010), Badshah et al. (2013) which explain the severity of the environmental condition the area. The life form is the constant characteristic of plant species but it differs from variation in ecological conditions and during their life cycle, plants pass through various phases of life forms (Ahmad et al., 2010). The abundance of therophytes and hemicryptophytes in the area determine the influence of the Mediterranean and cold temperate climate in the region (Naqinezhad and Zarezadeh, 2012; Alsherif et al., 2013; Farag, 2014). It was observed that the valley, due to severe climatic conditions, annual plants appear for short spin of life and complete their life cycle before the onset of dry desiccating season. Hemicryptophytes have been found to reduce their body size because of heavy snowfall and adopt prostrate nature to avoid the stresses of heat waves and overgrazing. During harsh climatic conditions geophytes appear during spring for very short time and remained dormant as underground perennating buds (Ahmad et al., 2010).
Likewise the leaf adaptation is useful for understanding the morpho- physiological characteristics of plants (Ali et al., 2016). Leaf size spectrum revealed that there were 136 Species (30.49%) of nanophylls followed by leptophylls with 107 Species (23.99%). Microphylls with 97 Species (21.74%) and mesophylls with 86 Species (19.28%) were the co-dominating leaf size adaptation. Similarly, macrophylls and megaphylls respectively exhibited 8 Species (1.79 %) and 5 Species (1.12%) representative; while Equisetum ramossimum, Ephedra gerardiana, Ephedra intermedia, Cuscuta lupuliformis, Cuscuta capitata, Cuscuta villosa and Orbanche cernua were found to be without leaves, which clearly indicate the alpine and temperate type of habitat (Table. 4.2, Fig. 6). Adaptation of the leaf size relates to climatic conditions in any geographic region (Batalha and Martins, 2004). Elevation is also influenced by variability between different groups of the leaf type. It was found during this study that the seasonal variability in the classes of leaf size was
40 mainly due to the presence of therophytes and geophytes. Different researchers had reported that differences in leaf size spectra of flora are related to the prevailing micro-macro climates (Al-Yemeni and Sher, 2010; Ilyas et al., 2015; Khan et al., 2016). Similar findings were reported by (Qadir and Tareen, 1987; Amjad et al., 2012) who quantified the richness of nanophylls and leptophylls leaf size classes as the representative of the cold-dry climate and fragmented habitat. However, not only leaf size spectra indicate the climate of an area but along with other physiognomic characteristics interfere and play role in leaf adaptation. Leaf size is an indicator of prevailing climatic and edaphic conditions but cannot be regarded as a criterion for separate leaf zones being sorted. Leaf size classes combined with morpho-anatomic data yield more accurate results in leaf zone or climate determination.
41 Table 4.1. Floristic Inventory and ecological characteristics of flora
Seasonality
Division/Family Botanical Name Voucher Number Life from Leaf Size
Spring
Winter
Autumn Summer A. Pteridophytes 1. Asplenium septentrionale (L.) Hoffm. Zaman Bot. 216 (PUP) G L - + - - 1. Aspleniaceae 2. Asplenium viride Huds. Zaman Bot. 217 (PUP) G L + - - -
3. Cystopteris fragilis (L.) Bernh. 2. Dryopteridaceae Zaman Bot. 218 (PUP) G Mic - + - -
4. Adiantum venustum D. Don 3. Adiantaceae Zaman Bot. 219 (PUP) G L - + - -
5. Equisetum ramossimum Desf. 4. Equisetaceae Zaman Bot. 220 (PUP) G Ap + + - -
B. Gymnosperms 6. Juniperus communis L. Zaman Bot. 221 (PUP) Np L + - - - 5. Cupressaceae 7. Juniperus excelsa M. Bieb Zaman Bot. 222 (PUP) Megp L - + - -
6. Ephedraceae 8. Ephedra gerardiana Wall.ex Zaman Bot. 223 (PUP) Ch Ap + - - -
42 Stapf
9. Ephedra intermedia Schrenk & Meyer Zaman Bot. 224 (PUP) Ch Ap + - - -
C. Angiosperms (I) Monocots
10. Allium chitralicum Wang & Tang Zaman Bot. 225 (PUP) G Mes - - - +
11. Allium barszczewskii Lipsky Zaman Bot. 226 (PUP) G Mes - - - - 7. Alliaceae
12. Allium caroliniannum DC. Zaman Bot. 227 (PUP) G Mes + - - -
13. Eremurus stenophyllus subsp. 8. Asphodelaceae stenophyllus S. I. Ali Zaman Bot. 228 (PUP) H Mac + - - -
14. Polygonatum geminiflorum Decne 9. Convallariaceae Zaman Bot. 229 (PUP) G N - + - -
15. Carex chitralensis Nelmes. Zaman Bot. 230 (PUP) G L - + - -
10. Cyperaceae 16. Carex vulpinaris Nees. Zaman Bot. 231 (PUP) Ch L + - - -
17. Carex stenocarpa Turcz.ex V. Zaman Bot. 232 (PUP) G L - + - -
43 Krecz
18. Carex stenophylla Wahlenb. subsp. stenophylloides (V. Kreez.) Egor. Zaman Bot. 233 (PUP) Ch L + - - -
19. Cyperus nutans subsp. Zaman Bot. 234 (PUP) Th L - + - - eleusinoids (Kunth) T. 20. Fimbristylis bisumbellata (Forssk.) Bubani, Dodecanthia. Zaman Bot. 235 (PUP) H N + - + -
21. Kobresia laxa Nees, Contr. Zaman Bot. 236 (PUP) H L - + - -
22. Kobresia pygmaea (C. B. Clarke) C. B. Clarke Zaman Bot. 237 (PUP) H N - + - -
23. Schoenoplectus lacustris (L.) Palla subsp. tabernaemontani (C. C. Zaman Bot. 238 (PUP) H L - + - - Gmel) A. & D. LÖve.
24. Iris hookeriana Foster. 11. Iridaceae Zaman Bot. 239 (PUP) G Mes - + - -
25. Luzula spicata (L.) DC. 12. Juncaceae Zaman Bot. 240 (PUP) H N - + - -
44 26. Fritillaria imperialis var. Zaman Bot. 241 (PUP) G Mic + - - - chitralensis Hort. 27. Gagea gageoides (Zucc.) Vved. Zaman Bot. 242 (PUP) G L + - - - 13. Liliaceae 28. Gagea alexia Ali. Zaman Bot. 243 (PUP) G L - + - -
29. Gagea chitralensis Dasgupta & Deb. Zaman Bot. 244 (PUP) G L + - - -
30. Dactylorhiza hatagirea (D.Don) Soo Zaman Bot. 245 (PUP) G N - + - -
31. Dactylorhiza kafiriana Renz Marshe Zaman Bot. 246 (PUP) H N - + - -
14. Orchidaceae 32. Dactylorhiza umbrosa (Kar. & Kir.) Nevski Zaman Bot. 247 (PUP) H N - + - -
33. Epipactis gigantea Douglas ex Hook. Zaman Bot. 248 (PUP) Ch Mic + - - -
34. Agrostis nervosa Nees ex Trin. 15. Poaceae Zaman Bot. 249 (PUP) H N - - + -
45 35. Agrostis viridis Gouan, Hort. Zaman Bot. 250 (PUP) H N - + - -
36. Arthraxon prionodes (Steud.) Dandy Zaman Bot. 251 (PUP) H L - - + -
37. Avena sativa Retz. Zaman Bot. 252 (PUP) Th N + - - -
38. Brachypodium distachyon (L.) P. Beauv. Zaman Bot. 253 (PUP) Th N + - - -
39. Brachypodium sylvaticum (Huds.) P. Beauv Zaman Bot. 254 (PUP) H L - + + -
40. Bromus danthoniae Trin. Zaman Bot. 255 (PUP) Th L + - - -
41. Bromus japonicus Thunb. ex Murr., Syst. Zaman Bot. 256 (PUP) Th L - + - -
42. Bromus oxyodon Schrenk. Zaman Bot. 257 (PUP) Ch N - + - -
43. Bromus pectinatus Thunb., Prodr. Zaman Bot. 258 (PUP) Th L + - - -
44. Bromus persicus Boiss. Zaman Bot. 259 (PUP) Th N - + - -
46 45. Bromus ramosus Huds. Zaman Bot. 260 (PUP) Th L - + - -
46. Bromus tectorum L. Zaman Bot. 261 (PUP) Th L + - - -
47. Calamagrostis decora Hook.f. Zaman Bot. 262 (PUP) Ch Mes - + - -
48. Calamagrostis pseudophragmites subsp. pseudophragmites (Hall.f.) Zaman Bot. 263 (PUP) Ch Mic - + - - Koel.
49. Calamagrostis pseudophragmites (Hook. f.) R. R. Stewart Zaman Bot. 264 (PUP) Ch Mes - + - -
50. Cymbopogon commutatus (Steud.) Stapf. Zaman Bot. 265 (PUP) H L - - + -
51. Cynodon dactylon (L.)Pers. Zaman Bot. 266 (PUP) H Mic + - - -
52. Dactylis glomerata L. Zaman Bot. 267 (PUP) H N - + - -
53. Dicanthium annulatum Forssk. Stapf. Zaman Bot. 268 (PUP) H L + - - -
47 54. Elymus repens (L.) Gould. Zaman Bot. 269 (PUP) H L - + - -
55. Elymus dahuricus Turcz.ex. Grieseb. Zaman Bot. 270 (PUP) Ch L - + - -
56. Eragrostis cilianensis (All.) Lut.ex F.T. Hubbard Zaman Bot. 271 (PUP) Th N - - + -
57. Festuca olgae (Regel) Krivot. Zaman Bot. 272 (PUP) H N - + - -
58. Helictotrichon pratense (L.) Pilger Zaman Bot. 273 (PUP) Ch N - + - -
59. Koeleria macrantha (Ledeb.) Schult. Zaman Bot. 274 (PUP) Ch N - - + -
60. Lolium temulentum L. Zaman Bot. 275 (PUP) H N + - - -
61. Melica persica Kunth, Rev. Gram. Zaman Bot. 276 (PUP) Ch L - + - -
62. Pennisetum flaccidum Griseb. Zaman Bot. 277 (PUP) Ch L - - + -
63. Piptatherum gracile Mez. Zaman Bot. 278 (PUP) H L - - - -
64. Piptatherum laterale (Munro ex Zaman Bot. 279 (PUP) H N - + - -
48 Regel) Rozhev
65. Piptatherum hilariae Pazij. Zaman Bot. 280 (PUP) H L + - - -
66. Poa alpina L. Zaman Bot. 281 (PUP) Ch N - - + -
67. Poa versicolor subsp. araratica (Trautv.) Tzvelev Zaman Bot. 282 (PUP) H N - + - -
68. Poa bulbosa L. Zaman Bot. 283 (PUP) G N + - - -
69. Poa pratensis subsp. pratensis Zaman Bot. 284 (PUP) Th N - + - -
70. Polypogon monspeliensis (L.) Desf Zaman Bot. 285 (PUP) H L + - - -
71. Puccinellia minuta Bor. Zaman Bot. 286 (PUP) H N - + - -
72. Setaria gluea (Retz.) Trin ex Steud. Zaman Bot. 287 (PUP) H N + - - -
73. Setaria intermedia Roem & Schult. Zaman Bot. 288 (PUP) H L + - - -
74. Schizachyrium impressum (Hack.) A.Camus Zaman Bot. 289 (PUP) H N - + - -
49 75. Stipa chitralensis Bor. Zaman Bot. 290 (PUP) H L + - - -
76. Stipa capillata L. Zaman Bot. 291 (PUP) H N - - + -
77. Tetrapogon villosus Desf. Zaman Bot. 292 (PUP) H N + - - -
78. Trisetaria loeflingiana (L.) Paunero. Zaman Bot. 293 (PUP) Th L + - - -
79. Trisetum clarkei (Hook.f.) R. R. Zaman Bot. 294 (PUP) H L - - + -
80. Trisetum spicatum (L.) Richt. Zaman Bot. 295 (PUP) H N - + - -
81. Triticum aestivum L. Zaman Bot. 296 (PUP) Th Mic + - - -
82. Zea mays L. Zaman Bot. 297 (PUP) Th Mes + - - -
(II) Dicots 83. Amaranthus viridis L. 16. Amaranthaceae Zaman Bot. 298 (PUP) Th Mic + - - -
84. Pistacia atlantica subsp. 17. Anacardiaceae cabulica Zaman Bot. 299 (PUP) Mesp Mic + - - -
18. Apiaceae 85. Ammi visnega (L.) Lam. Zaman Bot. 300 (PUP) Ch L + - - -
50 86. Anethum gravelons L. Zaman Bot. 301 (PUP) Th L - + - -
87. Bunium persicum (Boiss.) Fedtsch. Rastit Zaman Bot. 302 (PUP) Th N - + - -
88. Bupleurum gilesii Wolf. Zaman Bot. 303 (PUP) H Mic - + - -
89. Bupleurum kohistanicum E. Nasir Zaman Bot. 304 (PUP) H Mic + - - -
90. Coriandrum stivum L. Zaman Bot. 305 (PUP) Th L + - - -
91. Dacus carota L. Zaman Bot. 306 (PUP) G Mes - + - -
92. Ferula hindukushensis Kitamura. Zaman Bot. 307 (PUP) H Meg - + - -
93. Ferula jaeschkeana Vatke. Zaman Bot. 308 (PUP) G Meg + - - -
94. Ferula narthex Boiss. Zaman Bot. 309 (PUP) H Meg + - - -
95. Fonniculum vulgare Miller. Zaman Bot. 310 (PUP) Th N - - -
96. Heracleum polyadenum Rech.f. & Riedl. Zaman Bot. 311 (PUP) H Mic + - - -
97. Pleurospermum stylosum C.B. Zaman Bot. 312 (PUP) Th N + - - -
51 Clarke
98. Pimpinella stewartii Dunn. Nasir Zaman Bot. 313 (PUP) Th Mic - + - -
99. Prangos pabularia Lindl. Zaman Bot. 314 (PUP) H N - + - -
100. Scaligera chitralica Hiroe Zaman Bot. 315 (PUP) Th L - + - -
101. Scandix pecten-veneris L. Zaman Bot. 316 (PUP) Th Mic + - - -
102. Torilis arvensis (Huds.) Link. Zaman Bot. 317 (PUP) Th Mes + - - -
103. Trachydium depressum ssp. Chitralicum Zaman Bot. 318 (PUP) H Mic - + - -
104. Trachyspermum ammi (L.) Spargue. Zaman Bot. 319 (PUP) Th L - - - +
105. Cynanchum acutum L. 19. Asclepiadaceae Zaman Bot. 320 (PUP) H Mes - + - -
106. Achillea millefolium subsp. Zaman Bot. 321 (PUP) H L - - + - 20. Asteraceae Chitralensis 107. Ajania fruticulosa (Ledeb.) Zaman Bot. 322 (PUP) Np Mic - - + -
52 Poljakov
108. Allardia glabra Decne., Voy. Zaman Bot. 323 (PUP) H L - - + -
109. Allardia stoliczkae C.B. Clarke Zaman Bot. 324 (PUP) H N - - + -
110. Allardia tridactylites (Kar. & Kir.) Schultz Zaman Bot. 325 (PUP) H L - + - -
111. Anaphalis chitralensis Qaiser & Rubina Zaman Bot. 326 (PUP) Ch Mes - - + -
112. Anaphalis stantonii Y. Nasir Zaman Bot. 327 (PUP) H L - - + -
113. Anaphalis triplinervis (Sims) C.B Clarke Zaman Bot. 328 (PUP) Ch Mic - - + -
114. Anthemis cotula L. Zaman Bot. 329 (PUP) H N - - + -
115. Artemisia biennis Willd. Zaman Bot. 330 (PUP) Ch Mic - - + -
116. Artemisia brevifolia Wall ex DC. Zaman Bot. 331 (PUP) H N - - + -
53 117. Artemisia rutifolia Spreng., Syst. Zaman Bot. 332 (PUP) Ch L - + - -
118. Artemisia elegantissim Pamp., Nuovo Giorn. Zaman Bot. 333 (PUP) H L - + - -
119. Artemisia parviflora Roxb ex. D. Don Zaman Bot. 334 (PUP) Th Mes - + - -
120. Artemisia persica Boiss, Diagn. Zaman Bot. 335 (PUP) H L + - - -
121. Artemisia scoparia Waldst.& Kit. Zaman Bot. 336 (PUP) Th N - + - -
122. Artemisia sieversiana Ehrh. Zaman Bot. 337 (PUP) Th N + - - -
123. Askellia flexuosa (Ledb.) W.A. Weber Zaman Bot. 338 (PUP) H N - - + -
124. Aster flaccidus Bunge. Zaman Bot. 339 (PUP) H Mes + - - -
125. Bellis perennis L. Zaman Bot. 340 (PUP) Th Mes + - - -
126. Brachyactis roylei (Candolle) Zaman Bot. 341 (PUP) H Mic - - + -
54 Wendelbo. 127. Carthamus tinctorus L. Zaman Bot. 342 (PUP) H Mes - + - -
128. Calendula officinalis L. Zaman Bot. 343 (PUP) Th Mic + - - -
129. Centaurea iberica Trev.ex. Sprengel. Zaman Bot. 344 (PUP) Th N - - + -
130. Cichoriun intybus L. Zaman Bot. 345 (PUP) H Mes - + - -
131. Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. Zaman Bot. 346 (PUP) Th Mic - + - -
132. Cirsium wallichii var. glabratum (Hook. f.) Wendelbo Zaman Bot. 347 (PUP) Th Mic - + - -
133. Cirsium rhizocephalum C. A. Mey. Zaman Bot. 348 (PUP) H Mic - + - -
134. Cirsium griffithii Boiss. Zaman Bot. 349 (PUP) Th Mes - + - -
135. Cnicus benedictus L. Zaman Bot. 350 (PUP) Th Mes + - - -
136. Conyza aegyptiaca (L.) Zaman Bot. 351 (PUP) Th N + - - -
55 Dryand. ex Aiton
137. Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronquist. Zaman Bot. 352 (PUP) Th N + - - -
138. Cousinia buphthalmoides Regel. Zaman Bot. 353 (PUP) H Mes - + - -
139. Cousinia chitralensis Rech. Zaman Bot. 354 (PUP) Th Mic - + - -
140. Cousinia khashensis Rech.f. Zaman Bot. 355 (PUP) Ch Mic - - + -
141. Cousinia chionophila Rech.f. Zaman Bot. 356 (PUP) Ch Mic - + - -
142. Cousinia haeckeliae Bornm. Zaman Bot. 357 (PUP) H Mes + - - -
143. Cousinia oxytoma Rech.f. Zaman Bot. 358 (PUP) Th Mes - + - -
144. Cousinia multiloba DC. Zaman Bot. 359 (PUP) Np Mic - + - -
145. Cousinia pycnoloba Boiss. Zaman Bot. 360 (PUP) Np Mic - + - -
146. Cousinia eriobasis Bunge. Zaman Bot. 361 (PUP) H Mic - + - -
147. Crepis sancta (L.) Babc. ssp. Zaman Bot. 362 (PUP) Th N - + - -
56 Sancta
148. Crepis aitchisonii Boiss. Zaman Bot. 363 (PUP) H N - - + -
149. Crepis multicaulis Ledeb. Zaman Bot. 364 (PUP) Th N - - + - var. congsta 150. Crepis pulchra L. Zaman Bot. 365 (PUP) Th N + - - -
151. Echinops echinatus Roxb. Zaman Bot. 366 (PUP) Th Mic - + - -
152. Echinops chloroleucus Rech.f. Zaman Bot. 367 (PUP) H Mes - + - -
153. Filago germanica (L.) Huds Zaman Bot. 368 (PUP) Th N - + - -
154. Frolovia gilesii (Hemsl.) B.A. Scherip Zaman Bot. 369 (PUP) Ch Mic - + - -
155. Heteracia szovitsii Fisch. & C.A. Mey. Zaman Bot. 370 (PUP) Th Mic - + - -
156. Heteropappus altaicus Zaman Bot. 371 (PUP) Th L - - + - (Willd.) Novopokr. 157. Inula obtusifolia Kerner. Zaman Bot. 372 (PUP) Ch Mes + - - -
57 158. Koelpinia linearis Pall. Var. linearis Zaman Bot. 373 (PUP) Th N + - - -
159. Lactuca serriola L. Zaman Bot. 374 (PUP) Th Mes - + - -
160. Lactuca tatarica (L.) C.A.Mey. Zaman Bot. 375 (PUP) Th Mac - + - -
161. Launaea acanthodes (Boiss.) Kuntze. Zaman Bot. 376 (PUP) Th N - - + -
162. Matricaria chamomilla L. Zaman Bot. 377 (PUP) Th N - + - -
163. Myricatis wallichii Less. Zaman Bot. 378 (PUP) Th Mic - + - -
164. Pseudognaphalium luteo-album (L.), O. M. Hilliard & B. L Burtt Zaman Bot. 379 (PUP) Th Mic + - - -
165. Psychrogeton chitralicus Grierson. Zaman Bot. 380 (PUP) H Mes - + - -
166. Saussurea leptophylla Hemsl. Zaman Bot. 381 (PUP) Ch Mac - - + -
167. Saussurea jacea (Klotzsch) Zaman Bot. 382 (PUP) Th Mac - + - -
58 C.B.Clarke.
168. Saussurea elliptica C. B. Clarke Zaman Bot. 383 (PUP) H Mes - - + -
169. Scorzonera virgata DC. Zaman Bot. 384 (PUP) Th N - + - -
170. Senecio analogus DC. Zaman Bot. 385 (PUP) H N - + - -
171. Senecio chrysanthemoides DC. Zaman Bot. 386 (PUP) Ch L + - - -
172. Seriphidium brevifolium Zaman Bot. 387 (PUP) Ch Mic + - - - (Wall. ex DC.) Ling & Y. R. Ling 173. Seriphidium chitralense Zaman Bot. 388 (PUP) H Mic - + - - (Podlech)Y. R. Ling 174. Sonchus asper (L.) Hill. Zaman Bot. 389 (PUP) Th N + - - -
175. Tanacetum griffithii (C. B. Clarke) Muradyan. Zaman Bot. 390 (PUP) Th N + - - -
176. Tanacetum chitralense (Podlech) K. Zaman Bot. 391 (PUP) H L + - - -
177. Taraxacum brachyglosoides Zaman Bot. 392 (PUP) Th Mes + - - -
59 Soset
178. Taraxacum brevirostre Zaman Bot. 393 (PUP) Th Mes - + - - Hand.-Mazz.var. lanatum 179. Taraxacum elegantiforme Zaman Bot. 394 (PUP) Th Mes - + - - Soest 180. Taraxacum chitralense Soest. Zaman Bot. 395 (PUP) Th Mes - + - -
181. Taraxacum longirostre Schischk var. tirichinse (Soest) Zaman Bot. 396 (PUP) H Mic + - - - S.Abedin
182. Taraxacum polyodon Dahlst. Zaman Bot. 397 (PUP) H Mes - + - -
183. Taraxacum pseudotenebristylum Soest. Zaman Bot. 398 (PUP) Th Mic - + - -
184. Taraxacums quarrosiceps Zaman Bot. 399 (PUP) Th Mes - + - - Soest. 185. Taraxacum tricolor V. S Zaman Bot. 400 (PUP) Th Mic - + - -
186. Taraxacum wendelboanum Zaman Bot. 401 (PUP) Th Mes - + - -
60 Soest.
187. Taraxacum officinale Weber. Zaman Bot. 402 (PUP) Ch Mes - + - -
188. Taraxacum obtusum (Soest) R.Doll Zaman Bot. 403 (PUP) Th Mes - + - -
189. Tragopogon gracilis D.Don. Zaman Bot. 404 (PUP) H L - - + -
190. Tricholepis toppinii Dunn. Zaman Bot. 405 (PUP) Ch Mac - + - -
191. Tussilago farfara L. Zaman Bot. 406 (PUP) Ch Mic + - - -
192. Xanthium strumarium L. Zaman Bot. 407 (PUP) Th Mac + - - -
193. Youngia japonica (L.) DC. Zaman Bot. 408 (PUP) Th L + - - -
194. Berberis calliobotrys Aitch.ex Koehne. Zaman Bot. 409 (PUP) Np N + - - - 21. Berberidaceae 195. Berberis lyceum Royle. Zaman Bot. 410 (PUP) Np Mic - - -
196. Berberis parkeriana Schneid. Zaman Bot. 411 (PUP) Np N + - - -
61 197. Betula chitralica Browicz. Zaman Bot. 412 (PUP) Mesp Mes - + - - 22. Betulaceae 198. Betula utilis D.Don Zaman Bot. 413 (PUP) Mesp Mes - + - -
199. Arnebia euchroma (Royle ex Benth.) I .M. Johnston Zaman Bot. 414 (PUP) Ch N - + - -
200. Arnebia griffithii Boiss., Diagn. Zaman Bot. 415 (PUP) Th N - + - -
201. Arnebia hispidisma (Lehm.) A. DC Zaman Bot. 416 (PUP) Th Mes + - - -
23. Boraginaceae 202. Asperugo procumbens L. Zaman Bot. 417 (PUP) H L - + - -
203. Cynoglossum lanceolatum Wall.ex. Benth. Zaman Bot. 418 (PUP) Ch Mes - + - -
204. Cynoglossum glochidiatum Wall.ex Benth. Zaman Bot. 419 (PUP) H N - + - -
205. Lappula barbata (M. Bieb) Gurke. Zaman Bot. 420 (PUP) H L + - - -
62 206. Lindelofia stylosa (Kar. & Kir.) Brand, Pflanzenr. Zaman Bot. 421 (PUP) Ch L - + - -
207. Lindelofia anchusoides (Lindl.) Lehm. Zaman Bot. 422 (PUP) Ch L - + - -
208. Myosotis avensis (L.) Hill. Zaman Bot. 423 (PUP) H Mic - + - -
209. Onosma chitralicum I. M. Johiston Zaman Bot. 424 (PUP) H N + - - -
210. Pseudomertensia chitralensis (Riedl) Riedl Zaman Bot. 425 (PUP) Ch Mes - - + -
211. Rochelia chitralensis Y. Nasir Zaman Bot. 426 (PUP) Th L - + - -
212. Solenanthus circinnatus Ledeb Zaman Bot. 427 (PUP) H N + - - -
213. Alliaria petiolata (M. Bieb.) Cavara & Grande Zaman Bot. 428 (PUP) H Mes + - - -
24. Brassicaceae 214. Arabidopsis wallichii (Hook. f. & Thoms.) N. Busch Zaman Bot. 429 (PUP) H Mes - + - -
63 215. Brassica campestris L. Zaman Bot. 430 (PUP) Th Mic - - + -
216. Capsella bursa-pestoris L. Zaman Bot. 431 (PUP) Th Mic + - - -
217. Conringia orientalis (L.) Andrz. Zaman Bot. 432 (PUP) H Mes + - - -
218. Coronopus didymus (L.) Sm. Zaman Bot. 433 (PUP) Th L + - - -
219. Descurainia sophia (L.) Webb & Berth. Zaman Bot. 434 (PUP) H N - + - -
220. Draba olgae subsp. chitralensis (O.E. Schultz) Jafri Zaman Bot. 435 (PUP) Ch N - + - -
221. Draba korshinskyi Zaman Bot. 436 (PUP) Ch L - + - - (O.Fedtschenko) Pohle. 222. Draba stenocarpa Hook. Zaman Bot. 437 (PUP) Th N - + - -
223. Draba tibetica var. chitralensis (O. E. Nasir) Jafri Zaman Bot. 438 (PUP) Ch L - + - -
224. Draba pakistanica Jafri Zaman Bot. 439 (PUP) Th N + - - -
64 225. Erysimum erosum O.E Schultz Zaman Bot. 440 (PUP) H Mic - + - -
226. Goldbachia laevigata (M. Bieb.) DC. Zaman Bot. 441 (PUP) H Mes - + - -
227. Graellsia chitralensis O.E. Schulz Zaman Bot. 442 (PUP) H Mes - + - -
228. Isatis tinctoria L. subsp. tinctoria Zaman Bot. 443 (PUP) Th Mic + - - -
229. Cardaria draba (L.) Desv Zaman Bot. 444 (PUP) Th N + - - -
230. Lepidium apetalum H. & T. Zaman Bot. 445 (PUP) Th N + - - -
231. Malcolmia cabulica Zaman Bot. 446 (PUP) Th N + - - - var. topppinii (O.E. Schulz) Nasir 232. Malcolmia intermedia C.A. Mey. Zaman Bot. 447 (PUP) Th L - + - -
233. Matthiola flavida Boiss. Zaman Bot. 448 (PUP) Th Mes - + - -
234. Nasturtium officinale R. Br. Zaman Bot. 449 (PUP) Th N + - - -
65 235. Neslia apiculata Fisch., C.A. Mey. & Ave Zaman Bot. 450 (PUP) Th L + - - -
236. Parrya chitralensis Jafri. Zaman Bot. 451 (PUP) Th Mes + - - -
237. Raphanus raphanistrum L. Zaman Bot. 452 (PUP) Th N - - - +
238. Raphanus sativus L. Zaman Bot. 453 (PUP) Th Mac + - - -
239. Rorippa islandica (Oeder) Borbas Zaman Bot. 454 (PUP) Th N + - - -
240. Sisymbrium brassiciforme C. A. Mey. Zaman Bot. 455 (PUP) Th L - + - -
241. Thlaspi perfoliatum L. Zaman Bot. 456 (PUP) Th Mes + - - -
242. Buxus wallichiana Baill, 25. Buxaceae Monogr. Bux.et Styloc. Zaman Bot. 457 (PUP) Np Mic + - - -
26. Campanulaceae 243. Campanula staintonii Rech.f. & Schimann-Czeike Zaman Bot. 458 (PUP) Th Mes + - - -
66 244. Asyneuma strictum Wendelbo. Zaman Bot. 459 (PUP) Th Mes - + - -
245. Codonopsis clematidea Zaman Bot. 460 (PUP) Th N - + - - (Schrenk) C.B. Clarke 246. Capparis spinosa L. 27. Capparaceae Zaman Bot. 461 (PUP) H Mic - + - -
247. Lonicera asperifolia (Decne.) Hk. f. Zaman Bot. 462 (PUP) Np Mic - + - -
28. Caprifoliaceae 248. Lonicera griffithii Hook.f. & Thoms. Zaman Bot. 463 (PUP) Np Mic - + - -
249. Lonicera myrtillus Hook. f. & Thoms. Zaman Bot. 464 (PUP) Np Mic + - - -
250. Arenaria orbiculata Royle ex Edgew. Zaman Bot. 465 (PUP) Th N - - + -
29.Caryophyllaceae 251. Acanthophylum laxiflorum Boiss. Zaman Bot. 466 (PUP) H N - + - -
252. Cerastium cerastioides (L.) Britton. Zaman Bot. 467 (PUP) Th N - + - -
67 253. Dianthus angulatus Royle ex Benth. Zaman Bot. 468 (PUP) H N - - + -
254. Dianthus orientalis Adams. Zaman Bot. 469 (PUP) Ch L - + - -
255. Lepyrodicalis holosteoides (C.A.M.) Fenzl Zaman Bot. 470 (PUP) Th N - + - -
256. Minuartia hybrida (Vill.) Schischkin. subsp. hybrid Zaman Bot. 471 (PUP) Th N + - - -
257. Silene affghanica Rohrb. Zaman Bot. 472 (PUP) H N + - - -
258. Silene conoidea L. Zaman Bot. 473 (PUP) Th N + - - -
259. Silene gonosperma (Rupr.) Bocquet Zaman Bot. 474 (PUP) Th N - + - -
260. Silene stantonii S. A. Ghazanfar Zaman Bot. 475 (PUP) H L + - - -
261. Silene joerstadii Wendelbo Zaman Bot. 476 (PUP) H L - + - -
68 262. Silene viscosa (L.) Pers. Zaman Bot. 477 (PUP) Th N + - - -
263. Silene vulgaris (Moench) Garcke. Zaman Bot. 478 (PUP) Th L - + - -
264. Silene longisepala E.Nasir Zaman Bot. 479 (PUP) Th N - + - -
265. Stellaria decumbens Edgew Zaman Bot. 480 (PUP) Th L - + - -
266. Stellaria media (L.)Vill. Zaman Bot. 481 (PUP) Th N - + - -
267. Atriplex schugnanica Iljin. Zaman Bot. 482 (PUP) H N + - - -
268. Chenopodium botrys L. Zaman Bot. 483 (PUP) Th L + - - -
269. Chenopodium foliosum (Merrich.) Aschers Zaman Bot. 484 (PUP) Th N - - + - 30. Chenopodiaceae
270. Chenopodium murale L. Zaman Bot. 485 (PUP) Th N - - - +
271. Kochia indica Wight, Icon. Zaman Bot. 486 (PUP) Th L - - + -
272. Haloxlon griffithii subsp.grifthii Moq. Zaman Bot. 487 (PUP) Ch Mic - - + -
69 273. Convulvulus arvensis L. 31. Convolvulaceae Zaman Bot. 488 (PUP) Th Mes + - - -
274. Cuscuta lupuliformis Krocker Zaman Bot. 489 (PUP) Th Ap + - - - 32. Cuscutaceae 275. Cuscuta capitata Roxb. Zaman Bot. 490 (PUP) Th Ap - + - -
276. Cuscuta villosa L. Zaman Bot. 491 (PUP) Th Ap - - + -
277. Citrulus vulgaris L. Zaman Bot. 492 (PUP) Th Mes - + - -
33. Cucurbitaceae 278. Cucurbita maxima Duch ex Lam. Zaman Bot. 493 (PUP) Th Meg - + - -
279. Orostachys thyrsiflora (DC.) Fischer ex Sweets Zaman Bot. 494 (PUP) Th Mes - - + -
280. Rhodiola heterodonta Zaman Bot. 495 (PUP) H Mes - + - - 34. Crassulaceae (Hook.f. & Thomson) Boriss. 281. Rhodiola wallichiana (Hook.)
S.H. Fu Zaman Bot. 496 (PUP) H Mic - - + -
282. Rosularia adenotricha subsp. adenotricha Zaman Bot. 497 (PUP) H Mes + - - -
70 283. Rosularia adenotricha subsp. chitralica Zaman Bot. 498 (PUP) H Mes + - - -
284. Rosularia alpestris (Kar & Kir) Boriss. Zaman Bot. 499 (PUP) H Mic - + - -
285. Hylotelephium ewersii (Ledeb.) H. Ohba Zaman Bot. 500 (PUP) G N - + - -
286. Scabiosa olivieri var. olivieri 35. Dipsacaceae Zaman Bot. 501 (PUP) Th N - + - -
287. Elaeagnus angustifolia var. 36. Elaeagnaceae angustifolia Zaman Bot. 502 (PUP) Micp Mic - - + -
288. Hippophae rhamnoides Rousi. Zaman Bot. 503 (PUP) Np N - + - -
289. Euphorbia wallichii Hk. Zaman Bot. 504 (PUP) Th N + - - - 37. Euphorbiaceae 290. Euphorbia thomsoniana Boiss. Zaman Bot. 505 (PUP) Th N + - - -
291. Euphorbia osyridea Boiss. Zaman Bot. 506 (PUP) Ch N - + - -
38. Fumariaceae 292. Fumaria indica (Hausskn.) Zaman Bot. 507 (PUP) Th L + - - -
71 Pugsley
293. Aloitis smithii Omer Zaman Bot. 508 (PUP) Th L - + - -
294. Gentianodes argentea (Royle 39. Gentianaceae ex D.Don) Omer Zaman Bot. 509 (PUP) Th Mes - + - -
295. Lomatogonium spathulatum (Kern.) Fernald. Zaman Bot. 510 (PUP) Th L + - - -
296. Geranium wallichianum D. 40. Geraniaceae Don ex Sweet Zaman Bot. 511 (PUP) Th Mes + - - -
297. Ribes orientale Desf. 41. Grossulariaceae Zaman Bot. 512 (PUP) Ch Mes - - + -
298. Hypericum scabrum L. 42. Hypericaceae Zaman Bot. 513 (PUP) H L - + - -
299. Hypericum perforatum L. Zaman Bot. 514 (PUP) H Mic - + - -
300. Juglans regia L. 43. Juglandaceae Zaman Bot. 515 (PUP) Mesp Mic + - - -
44. Lamiaceae 301. Alajja rhomboidea (Benth.) Ikonn. Zaman Bot. 516 (PUP) G N + - - -
72 302. Dracocephalum nutans L. Zaman Bot. 517 (PUP) Ch N + - - -
303. Dracocephalum stamineum Zaman Bot. 518 (PUP) Ch L - + - - Kar. & Kir. 304. Eremostachys edelbergii Rech.f. Zaman Bot. 519 (PUP) H Mes - + - -
305. Eremostachys speciosa Rupr. Zaman Bot. 520 (PUP) H Mes - + - -
306. Lagochilus cabulicus Bth. Zaman Bot. 521 (PUP) H L + - - -
307. Mentha longifolia (L.) Huds. Zaman Bot. 522 (PUP) H N - + - -
308. Mrrubium vulgare L. Zaman Bot. 523 (PUP) Ch Mes - + - -
309. Nepeta cataria L. Zaman Bot. 524 (PUP) Ch Mes - - + -
310. Nepeta clarkei Hook.f. Zaman Bot. 525 (PUP) Th N - + - -
311. Nepeta floccosa Benth. Zaman Bot. 526 (PUP) Th Mic - + - -
312. Nepeta podostachys Benth. Zaman Bot. 527 (PUP) Th N - + - -
313. Peroviskia atriplicifolia Benth. Zaman Bot. 528 (PUP) Ch Mic - + - -
73 314. Scutellaria heydei Hook. Zaman Bot. 529 (PUP) H N - + - -
315. Scutellaria multicaulis Boiss. Zaman Bot. 530 (PUP) H L - + - -
316. Thymus linearis Benth. subsp. linearis Jalas. Zaman Bot. 531 (PUP) H L - + - -
317. Ziziphora clinopodioides Lam. Zaman Bot. 532 (PUP) Th L - + - -
318. Alcea nudiflora (Lindl.) Boiss 45. Malvaceae Zaman Bot. 533 (PUP) Th Mac - + - -
319. Melia azedarach L. 46. Meliaceae Zaman Bot. 534 (PUP) Megp Mic + - - -
320. Morus nigra L. Zaman Bot. 535 (PUP) Megp Mes - + - - 47. Moraceae 321. Morus alba L. Zaman Bot. 536 (PUP) Megp Mes + - - -
322. Fraxinus hookerrii Wenzig Zaman Bot. 537 (PUP) Megp Mic + - - - 48. Oleaceae 323. Fraxinus xanthoxyloides (G. Don) DC. Zaman Bot. 538 (PUP) Megp Mic - + - -
49. Onagraceae 324. Epilobium angustifolium L. Zaman Bot. 539 (PUP) Th Mes + - - -
74 325. Epilobium chitralensis Raven. Zaman Bot. 540 (PUP) Th N + - - -
326. Epilobium hirsutum L. Zaman Bot. 541 (PUP) Th N - + - -
327. Epilobium royleanum Zaman Bot. 542 (PUP) Th N - + - - Hausskn, Oesterr. 328. Orobanche cernua Leofl. 50. Orbancaceae Zaman Bot. 543 (PUP) H Ap - + - -
329. Corydalis urosepala Fedde. Zaman Bot. 544 (PUP) Th Mes + - - - 51. Papaveraceae 330. Papaver nudicaule L. Zaman Bot. 545 (PUP) Th Mes + - - -
331. Astragalus affghanus Boiss. Zaman Bot. 546 (PUP) Th N + - - -
332. Astragalus amberstianus Bth.ex. Royle. Zaman Bot. 547 (PUP) H L + - - - 52. Papilionaceae 333. Astragalus coluteocarpus Boiss.ssp. chitralensis Wenninger, Zaman Bot. 548 (PUP) Ch L - + - - Mitt. Bot.
334. Astragalus imitensis Ali Zaman Bot. 549 (PUP) H N - + - -
75 335. Astragalus chitralensis Ali Zaman Bot. 550 (PUP) H N - + - -
336. Astragalus laspurensis Ali Zaman Bot. 551 (PUP) H L - + - -
337. Astragalus minuto-foliolatus Zaman Bot. 552 (PUP) H L + - - - Wendelbo 338. Astragalus toppinianus Ali Zaman Bot. 553 (PUP) H L - + - -
339. Astragalus edelbergianus Sirj & Rech.f. Zaman Bot. 554 (PUP) H N + - - -
340. Chesneya cuneata (Benth.) Ali. Zaman Bot. 555 (PUP) H L - + - -
341. Chesneya depressa (Oliv.) Pop. Zaman Bot. 556 (PUP) H L - + - -
342. Cicer macranthum M. Popov Zaman Bot. 557 (PUP) H L - + - -
343. Cicer nuristanicum Kitamura. Zaman Bot. 558 (PUP) Th N - + - -
344. Colutea paulsenii Freyn.ssp. mesantha, (Shap. ex Ali) Ali. Zaman Bot. 559 (PUP) Np N + - - -
345. Glycyrrhiza glabra var. Zaman Bot. 560 (PUP) G Mes + - - - glandulifera (Waldst. & Kit.)
76 Boiss.
346. Galegia officinales L. Zaman Bot. 561 (PUP) H Mic - + - -
347. Hedysarum folconeri Baker. Zaman Bot. 562 (PUP) Ch Mic - - + -
348. Hedysarum minjanense Rech.f. Zaman Bot. 563 (PUP) H Mic - + - -
349. Hedysarum cachemirianum Benth. ex Baker Zaman Bot. 564 (PUP) Ch Mic - + - -
350. Hedysarum alpinum L. Zaman Bot. 565 (PUP) H Mic - + - -
351. Lotus corniculatus var. tenuifolius L. Zaman Bot. 566 (PUP) Th L + - - -
352. Medicago lupulina L. Zaman Bot. 567 (PUP) Th N + - - -
353. Medicago sativa L. Zaman Bot. 568 (PUP) Th N - - + -
354. Melilotus officinalis (L.) Pall., Reise. Zaman Bot. 569 (PUP) Th N - - + -
355. Melilotus indica (L.) All. Zaman Bot. 570 (PUP) Th L - + - -
77 356. Oxytropis crassiuscula A. Boriss Zaman Bot. 571 (PUP) H L - + - -
357. Oxytropis chitralensis Ali. Zaman Bot. 572 (PUP) H L - + - -
358. Psoralea drupaceae Bunge. Zaman Bot. 573 (PUP) Th Mic + - - -
359. Sophora mollis subsp. duthiei (Prain) Ali Comb Zaman Bot. 574 (PUP) Np N - + - -
360. Trifolium resupinatum L. Zaman Bot. 575 (PUP) Th Mic + - - -
361. Trifolium repens L. Zaman Bot. 576 (PUP) H Mic - - - +
362. Trigonella incisa Benth. Zaman Bot. 577 (PUP) Th N - - - +
363. Vicia bakeri Ali. Zaman Bot. 578 (PUP) Th L - + - -
364. Vicia sativa L. Zaman Bot. 579 (PUP) Th N - - + -
365. Plantago major L. 53. Plantaginaceae Zaman Bot. 580 (PUP) Th Mes + - - -
366. Platanus orientalis L. 54. Platanaceae Zaman Bot. 581 (PUP) Megp Mes - - - +
55. Plumbaginaceae 367. Acantholimon leptostahyum Zaman Bot. 582 (PUP) Ch L - + - -
78 Aitch.
368. Acantholimon longiflorum Boiss. Zaman Bot. 583 (PUP) H L - - + -
369. Acantholimon lycopodioides (Girard.) Boiss. Zaman Bot. 584 (PUP) Np N - - + -
370. Acantholimon polystachyum Boiss. Zaman Bot. 585 (PUP) Ch L - - + -
371. Acantholimon stocksii Boiss. Zaman Bot. 586 (PUP) Ch N - + - -
372. Acantholimon longiscapum Bokhari Zaman Bot. 587 (PUP) H L - + - -
373. Polygala sp. 56. Polygalaceae Zaman Bot. 588 (PUP) Th L + - - -
374. Oxyria digyna (L.) Hill, Hort. Zaman Bot. 589 (PUP) Th N + - - -
375. Polygonum cognatum 57. Polygonaceae subsp. chitralicum (Rech. f. Zaman Bot. 590 (PUP) Th L - - - + Schiman-Czeika) Qaiser 376. Polygonum paronychioides Zaman Bot. 591 (PUP) Th N - - - +
79 C.A. Mey.f
377. Rheum webbianum Royle. Zaman Bot. 592 (PUP) G Meg - + - -
378. Rumex hastatus D. Don Zaman Bot. 593 (PUP) Ch Mes + - - -
379. Androsace harrissii Duthie subsp. harrissii Zaman Bot. 594 (PUP) Np Mic + - - -
58. Primulaceae 380. Androsace mucronifolia Watt. Zaman Bot. 595 (PUP) H Mic + - - -
381. Androsace stantonii Y.Nasir. Zaman Bot. 596 (PUP) Th Mic - + - -
382. Primula macrophylla var. Zaman Bot. 597 (PUP) H Mes - + - - macrophylla D. Don 383. Adonis aestivalis L. Zaman Bot. 598 (PUP) H Mic + - - -
384. Anemone rupicola var. sericea 59. Ranunculaceae Hook.f.& Thomson Zaman Bot. 599 (PUP) H Mic - + - -
385. Aquilegia pubiflora Wall. Ex Royle Zaman Bot. 600 (PUP) H Mic - + - -
386. Clematis alpina var. sibirica Zaman Bot. 601 (PUP) Ch N + - - -
80 (L.) O. Kuntze, Verh.
387. Clematis aspleniifola Schrenk Zaman Bot. 602 (PUP) Ch N + - - -
388. Clematis graveolens Lindl. Zaman Bot. 603 (PUP) Ch Mic + - - -
389. Clematis orientalis L. Zaman Bot. 604 (PUP) Np N - + - -
390. Delphinium chitralense H. Riedl Zaman Bot. 605 (PUP) H Mes - + - -
391. Delphinium nordhagenii Wendelbo. Zaman Bot. 606 (PUP) Ch Mic - + - -
392. Ranunculus laetus Wall.ex Hook.f. & Thoms. Zaman Bot. 607 (PUP) H N + - - -
393. Thalictrum foetideum L. Zaman Bot. 608 (PUP) H N + - - -
394. Thalictrum alpinum L. Zaman Bot. 609 (PUP) H N - + - -
395. Trollius acaulis Lindl. Zaman Bot. 610 (PUP) Th L - + - -
60. Rhamnaceae 396. Rhamnus prostrata Jacq.ex Zaman Bot. 611 (PUP) Np Mic - + - -
81 Parker
397. Cotoneaster affinis var. bacillaris (Lindl.) Schneider. Zaman Bot. 612 (PUP) Mesp Mes + - - -
398. Cotoneaster nummularia Fisch. & Mey. Zaman Bot. 613 (PUP) Np N + - - -
399. Cotoneaster racemiflorus (Desf.) Booth ex Bosse Zaman Bot. 614 (PUP) Np L - + - -
400. Crataegus songarica C. Koch. Zaman Bot. 615 (PUP) Micp Mic + - - - 61. Rosaceae 401. Crataegus wattiana Hemsl. & Lace Zaman Bot. 616 (PUP) Mesp Mic - + - -
402. Duchesnea indica (Andrews) Focke Zaman Bot. 617 (PUP) H Mic - - + -
403. Fragaria nubicola (Hook.f.) Lindl.ex Lacaita Zaman Bot. 618 (PUP) Th Mic - + - -
404. Potentilla desertorum Bunge. Zaman Bot. 619 (PUP) H N - + - -
82 405. Potentilla grisea Juz.var. grisea Zaman Bot. 620 (PUP) H L - + - -
406. Prunus prostrata Labill. Zaman Bot. 621 (PUP) Mesp Mic + - - -
407. Prunus jacquemontii Hook.f. Zaman Bot. 622 (PUP) Mesp Mes + - - -
408. Prunus griffithii (Boiss.) C.K.Schneid Zaman Bot. 623 (PUP) Micp Mic + - - -
409. Prunus kuramica (Korsh.) Kitamura. Zaman Bot. 624 (PUP) Mesp Mic - + - -
410. Pyrus pashia Buch.-Ham. ex D. Don Zaman Bot. 625 (PUP) Micp Mes + - - -
411. Rosa ecae Aitch. Zaman Bot. 626 (PUP) Np N - + - -
412. Rosa beggeriana Schrenk. Zaman Bot. 627 (PUP) Np Mic - + - -
413. Rosa webbiana Wall.ex. Royle. Zaman Bot. 628 (PUP) Np Mic + - - -
414. Rubus sanctus Schreb. Zaman Bot. 629 (PUP) Np Mes - + - -
415. Spiraea pilosa Franch. Zaman Bot. 630 (PUP) Np Mic - + - -
83 416. Sorbaria tomentosa (Lindl.) Rehder var. tomentosa Zaman Bot. 631 (PUP) Np Mic + - - -
417. Asperula oppositifolia Reg. & Schmalh. Zaman Bot. 632 (PUP) Np N - + - -
418. Rubia chitralensis Ehrend. Zaman Bot. 633 (PUP) Ch Mic - + - - 62. Rubiaceae 419. Rubia tibetica Hook.f. Zaman Bot. 634 (PUP) H L - + - -
420. Gaillonia chitralensis Nazim. Zaman Bot. 635 (PUP) Np L - + - -
421. Galium chitralensis Nazim. Zaman Bot. 636 (PUP) Th N - + - -
422. Haplophyllum dubium Korov. 63. Rutaceae Zaman Bot. 637 (PUP) H N - + - -
423. Salix turanica Nasarov. Zaman Bot. 638 (PUP) Megp Mic + - - -
424. Salix pycnostachya 64. Salicaceae Zaman Bot. 639 (PUP) Micp Mic - + - - Andersson. 425. Salix acmophylla Boiss. Zaman Bot. 640 (PUP) Megp Mic - - - +
426. Linaria odora (M.B.) Fisch. 65. Scrophulariaceae Zaman Bot. 641 (PUP) H L - - + -
84 427. Linaria vulgaris Miller, Gard. Zaman Bot. 642 (PUP) Th L - - + -
428. Pedicularis bicornuta Klotzsch. Zaman Bot. 643 (PUP) Ch N + - - -
429. Pedicularis caruleolbescans Wendelbo. Zaman Bot. 644 (PUP) H N - + - -
430. Pedicularis stantonii Y. Nasir Zaman Bot. 645 (PUP) Th Mes - + - -
431. Scrophularia scabiosifolia Benth. Zaman Bot. 646 (PUP) Th N - + - -
432. Scrophularia striata Boiss. Zaman Bot. 647 (PUP) Th N - + - -
433. Verbascum thapsus L. Zaman Bot. 648 (PUP) Th Mac - - + -
434. Veronica anagalis-aquatica L. Zaman Bot. 649 (PUP) Th Mic - + - -
435. Lycopersicum esculentum L. Zaman Bot. 650 (PUP) Th Mic - - + -
436. Solanum nigrum L. 66. Solanaceae Zaman Bot. 651 (PUP) Th Mes - + - -
437. Solanum tuberosum L. Zaman Bot. 652 (PUP) G Mes - + - -
85 438. Myricaria squamosa Desv. Zaman Bot. 653 (PUP) Mesp Mic - + - -
67. Tamaricaceae 439. Tamaricaria elegans (Royle) Qaiser & Ali Zaman Bot. 654 (PUP) Np L - + - -
440. Verbena officinalis L. 68. Verbenaceae Zaman Bot. 655 (PUP) H Mes - - - +
441. Valeriana hardwickii var. 69. Valerianaceae hoffmeisteri (Kl.) Clarke Zaman Bot. 656 (PUP) H Mes + - - -
442. Vitis jacquemontii Parker 70. Vitaceae Zaman Bot. 657 (PUP) Np Mes + - - -
443. Viola rupestris Schm. Zaman Bot. 658 (PUP) Th Mic + - - -
71. Violaceae 444. Valerianella szovitsiana Fisch. & C.A. Mey. Zaman Bot. 659 (PUP) Th Mic + - - -
445. Valerianella dentata (L.) Poll. Zaman Bot. 660 (PUP) Th Mic + - - -
Key to Abbreviations: Life form H= Hemicryptophyte, Th=Therophyte, G=Geophyte, Ch=Chamaephyte, Micp=Microphanerophyte, Np=Nanophanerophyte, Megp=Megaphanerophyte, Mesp= Mesophanerophyte, Leaf size Ap=Aphyllous, N=Nanophyll, L=Leptophyll, Mic=Microphyll, Mac=Macrophyll, Mes=Mesophyll, Meg=Megaphyll
86 Table 4.2. Diversity and Ecological adaptation of flora
S.No Parameters No % age A. Flora 1. Family 71 2. Genera 272 3. Species 445 B. Life form adaptation 1. Chamaephytes 60 13.42 2. Geophytes 25 5.61 3. Hemicryptophytes 140 31.46 4. Megaphanerophytes 9 2.02 5. Mesophanerophytes 10 2.24 6. Microphanerophytes 5 1.12 7. Therophytes 166 37.30 8. Nanophanerophytes 30 6.74 Total 445 100 C. Leaf size adaptation 1. Aphyllous 7 1.57 2. Leptophyll 107 24.04 3. Macrophyll 8 1.79 4. Megaphyll 5 1.12 5. Mesophyll 85 19.10 6. Microphyll 97 21.8 7. Nanophyll 136 30.56 Total 445 100 D. Seasonality 1. Summer 223 50.11 2. Spring 154 34.60 3. Autumn 58 13.03 4. Winter 10 2.24 Total 445 100
87
Fig 4. Seasonality of species
Fig 5. Life form diversity
Fig 6. Leaf size adaptation
88
PHYTOSOCIOLOGICAL ATTRIBUTES OF TERICH VALLEY
4.2 Phytosociological attributes of Terich valley
Phytosociology is a branch of plant ecology that describes how plant species are associated in communities (Ewald, 2003). Phytosociology is the quantitative analysis of vegetation and its primary purpose is to meaningfully define and classify the vegetation pattern. This demonstrates the species diversity that decides the dispersal of individuals between species in a specific habitat (Haq et al., 2011). Vegetation is an ecological concept of plants that grow together in a specific area and the composition of the vegetation depends on the prevailing environmental conditions (Ahmad et al., 2006). Vegetation plays a significant role in the composition of the environment and in the global water balance (Arora, 2002). In addition, vegetation is influenced by atmospheric humidity, soil moisture, aspect and intensity of grazing (Shaheen and Qureshi, 2011; Ahmad et al., 2016). Plant community is the collection of functional units of species both spatially and temporally. The variations in the community composition are due to seasonal variations and the sampling time (Forzieri et al., 2011; Ali et al., 2018; Hussain et al., 2019). The community structure therefore reflects seasonal aspects, and the key environmental factors influencing the community makeup include overgrazing, trampling, deforestation, building construction, soil erosion, chopping and other natural factors (Ali and Malik, 2010). The composition and distribution pattern of plant communities is affected by various environmental factors such as temperature, soil quality, topography, and biotic factors. Soil is the key factor deciding the specific vegetation characteristics in a given region (Khan et al., 2010). The vegetation significantly influences the soil's physio- chemical properties by improving soil structure, retaining capacity of water, electrical conductivity and aeration (Bakkenes et al., 2002).
The present study was carried out during 2016-2019 in the Hindukush range of Terich Valley, Chitral Pakistan. Five monitoring sites were established viz. Shagrom, Warimon, Zondrangam, Rosh Gol and Ghari (Fig. 7). The study area harbor rich flora and display a unique vegetation pattern. A total of 195 species were recorded in sampling sites, 13 species of trees, 16 species of shrubs and 166 species of herbs. Based on IVI 10 communities were established. The quantitative vegetation description and analysis methods implemented in this study not only address methodological shortcomings and literature gaps, i.e., vegetation classification and
88 environmental gradient assessment, but also provide a solid foundation for expanding this approach to the adjacent mountain systems that need up-to -date vegetation mapping (Mucina, 1997, Fosaa, 2004). Some quantitative phytosociological research from different parts of Pakistan has been published such as Shah and Hussain, (2009), Ahmad et al., (2009), Farooq et al., (2010), Rahim et al., (2011), Sharma et al., (2014), Ali et al., (2016), Hussain et al., (2019), and no research has been conducted on the vegetation structure of Terich valley, Chitral. The present study further records and offers recommendations for the protection of biodiversity of mountain plants under a scenario of continuous human exploitation. Being located on the “ecotone zone” this area has unique geographical characteristics and hence a special sort of vegetation pattern. Therefore the valley occupies an individual transitional position within the region. Planning and management of the environment are crucial to maintaining some sort of balance between natural, unmodified and cultural land-use systems (Rasul, 2010; Manandhar and Rasul, 2009; Sharma et al., 2010).
Fig 7. Map of the monitoring sites showing all the sampling spots
89 4.2.1 Shagrom (Site I)
Plant communities were formed at an elevation of 1550-2250 m in the southern and northern parts of this site. The soil of this site was sandy loam, with 5.49% clay, 59% silt and 76.5% sand particles. Soil nitrogen content was measured at 0.15%, 15.28 mg/kg phosphorus, 172.3 mg/kg potassium, 14.1 mg/kg calcium, and 3.4 mg/kg magnesium. Soil sodium absorption ratio was 28.7 mg/kg while lime was 15.50%. At this monitoring site, soil pH was reported as 8.5 which reflected basic character. The texture of the soil has been reported sandy loam. Soil organic matter was estimated 2.05% and electrical conductivity 0.46 dsm-1 (Table 4.14-4.17, Fig 18- 21).
1. Elaeagnus-Prunus-Adiantum community (EPA)
This plant community was established at Shagrom South facing slope at an elevation of 1000-1550 m having 21 species (Appendix-1). Elaeganus angustifolia (IV. 24.31), Prunus jacquemontii (IV. 19.99), and Adiantum venustum (IV. 19.66) were the leading species. Distribution shows clumping rather than a standardized distribution pattern, due to the lavish wood cutting in the area. As the plant produces edible fruits with medicinal values, the Prunus population density was high with a substantially uniform dispersion. Findings of the present study are also backed by the works of Ilyas et al., (2015); Mehmood et al., (2015); Ali et al., (2018) and Hussain et al., (2019). Other prominent members of this community included Berberis lyceum (18.5 IV), Capsella bursa-pestoris (18.4 IV), Brassica campestris (16.9 IV), Conyza aegyptiaca (16.3 IV), Cynodon dactylon (18.1 IV) and Mentha longifolia (14.8 IV) were the associated species in this community. Common herbs growing around this community included Chenopodium murale, Convulvulus arvensis, Coronopus didymus, Rumex hastatus and Lactuca serriola.
2. Heracleum-Artemisia-Capparis community (FAC)
This community was composed of 26 species located at North facing slope at altitude of 1820-2250 m (Appendix-2). Dominant species were Heracleum polyadenum with an IV value of 19.5. Co-dominant species was found to be Artemisia sieveriana with an IV value of 17.11, and Capparis spinosa with IV value of 15.33. Similar communities were reported by Rashid et al., (2011) and Hussain et
90 al., (2016). The rest of plants included Cotoneaster racemiflorus (15.33 IV), Juniperus communis (12.7 IV), Cichorium intybus (11.87 IV), Acantholimon stocksii (14.5 IV) and Astragalus imitensis (13.69 IV). Other members of this community were Aster flaccidus, Askellia flexuosa, Anthemis cotula, Bromus tectorum, Bromus danthoniae and Chenopodium foliosum.
Associated species of Elaeagnus-Prunus-Adiantum and Heracleum-Artemisia- Capparis communiities.
91 4.2.2 Warimon (Site II)
Plant communities established at this monitoring site were found on an elevation of 1200-2420 m. Soil analysis displayed a contrasting picture with reference to adjoining Shagrom. Soil was sandy loam at this site with 4.96% clay particles, 39.6% silt and 73% sand. Soil reaction was mildly basic with a soil pH of 9.8. Organic matter content was estimated as 3.1% which was well within normal range. Nitrogen content was 0.15% followed by phosphorus 33.70 mg/kg, potassium 215.3 mg/kg, calcium 14.1 mg/kg and magnesium 3.4 mg/kg. Sodium absorption ratio of the soil was estimated as 25.3 mg/kg and lime content was recorded as 18.10% with electrical conductivity of 0.16 dsm-1 (Table 4.14-4.17, Fig 18-21).
1. Fraxinus-Rosa-Acanthophylum community (FRA)
This community was established at an altitude of 1200 m on South facing slope comprised of 30 species, in which Fraxinus xanthxyloides was found to be dominant with an IV value of 19.63 (Appendix-3). This was associated with Rosa webbiana having IV value of 17.93. Third dominant was Acanthophylum laxiflorum with an IV value of 17.92 dominated the community. Results presented here are supported by the works of Wahab et al., (2010); Forzieri et al., (2011); Shaheen et al., (2015) and Khan et al., (2016). These were followed by Co-dominant shrub species included Crataegus songarica (14.42 IV), Tamaricaria elegans (13.32 IV), Rhamnus prostrata (11.03 IV), Clematis alpine (13.3 IV) and Cotoneaster affinis (12 IV). Brachypodium distachyon, Conyza Canadensis, Chenopodium botrys, Equisetum ramossimum, Lactuca serriola, Polygonatum geminiflorum were the common herbaceous flora intermingled with trees.
2. Prangos-Ribes-Berberis community (PRB)
Along 2320-2420 m altitude on North Slope facing Prangos-Ribes-Berberis- community was recorded having 22 species (Appendix-4). Prangos pabularia IV value 24.82 dominated this community with uniform distribution throughout the valley. Ribes orientale was recorded as second dominant with an IV value of 21.79. But on low elevation Berberis calliobotrys associated forming randomly dispersed clump with an IV value of 20.74. Forzieri et al., (2011); Ummara et al., (2015) and
92 Khan et al., (2016) who recorded the same conditions and quantified the same community structure. These dominant forms were followed by Tetrapogon villosus (16 IV), Trisetaria loeflingiana (14.37 IV), Thlaspi perfoliatum (13.11 IV) and Cirsium arvensis (15.2 IV). Other members were Anthemis cotula, Agrostis nervosa, Alcea nudiflora, Bromus persicus, Capparis spinosa and Prangos pabularia.
Associated species of Fraxinus-Rosa-Acanthophylum and Prangos-Ribes- Berberis communiities.
93 4.2.3 Zondrangam (Site III)
Plant communities at this site were established at elevation of 1320-2350 m on southern and northern slopes. Soil analysis indicated that soils at this site are sandy loam with 4.96% clay particles, 45.5% silt and 70.7% sand particles. Soil pH was recorded as 12.1 and organic matter was estimated 3%. Basic soils show a high rate of humification which is the reason behind high amount of organic matter in the soil. Nitrogen content was 0.15%, phosphorus 18.28 mg/kg, potassium 253 mg/kg, calcium 13.9 m/kg and magnesium 3.5 mg/kg. Sodium absorption ratio was 25.7 mg/kg and lime content 14.14. While electrical conductivity 0.39 dsm-1 was recorded high than Shagrom and Warimon (Table 4.14-4.17, Fig 18-21).
1. Hippophae-Sophora-Poa community (HSP)
This community was recorded from South facing slope at an altitude of 1320- 1760 m. This community was dominated by Hippophae rhamnoides with an IV value of 17.36, almost uniformly distributed in the locality making strong association with the second dominant Sophora mollis with an IV value of 13.86. Just around the shrubby vegetation Lolium temulentum were forming mixed patches with third dominant Poa pretenses with an IV value of 13.62 (Appendix-5). The other associated species were Carex stenocarpa (13.5 IV) Cirsium willichi (13.5 IV), Cardaria draba (10.2 IV), Coriandrum sativum (10.2 IV) and Tamaricaria elegans (10.77 IV). Results presented here are supported by (Jabeen and Ahmad, (2009): Ali and Malik, (2010); Ilyas et al., (2015); Khan et al., (2016) and Ali et al., (2018). Other members of this community were Brachypodium sylvaticum, Crataegus songarica, Equisetum ramossimum, Elaeagnus angustifolia, Malcolmia cabulica, Lindelofia anchusoides and Matthiola flavida.
2. Astragalus-Astragalus*-Eremurus community (AAE)
Astragalus-Astragalus-Eremurus community was recorded at an elevation of 2260-2350 m on North facing slope in Zondrangam (Appendix-6). Astragalus Sp with an IV value of 23.43 dominated this community with uniform distribution throughout the valley. It had thick patches of Astragalus edelbergianus as second dominant with an IV value of 21.64 which formed association with Eremurus stenophyllus having an
94 IV value of 21.04. These dominants were followed by Acantholimon longiscapum (20.98 IV), Juniperus excelsa (19.69 IV), Astragalus amberstianus (19.6 IV) and Ephedera gerardiana (15.87 IV). Our findings are in agreement with works of Wahab et al., (2010); Ali et al., (2015) and Hussain et al., (2016) who recorded similar composition of community. Some notable herbaceous members found in this community were Asyneuma strictum, Bromus ramosus, Bupleurum kohistanicum, Calamagrostis pseudophragmites, Cirsium arvense, Draba tibetica, Linaria odora and Prangos pabularia.
Associated species of Hippophae-Sophora-Poa and Astragalus-Astragalus*- Eremurus communiities.
95 4.2.4 Rosh Gol (Site IV)
Plant communities at this site were established at an elevation of 3125-3650 m on northern and southern aspects. Soil was sandy loam with 9.66% clay particles, 37.9% silt particles and 62.9% sand particles. Soil pH was recorded as 9.9 and 1.2% organic matter. Lime content of the soil was estimated as 0.76%. Nitrogen content was was recorded as 0.19%. Phosphorus 22 mg/kg, potassium 277.2 mg/kg, calcium 13.2 mg/kg and magnesium 3.5 mg/kg was recorded respectively. Electrical conductivity and sodium absorption ratio was 0.72 dsm-1 and 28.15 mg/kg (Table 4.14-4.17, Fig 18-21).
1. Artemisia-Rhodiola-Rosularia community (ARR)
Artemisia-Rhodiola-Rosularia community was recorded from Rosh Gol at an altitude of 3125-3440 m on South facing slope (Appendix-7). In this community the dominant species was Artemisia parviflora with an IV value of 22.76. Second dominant was Rhodiola wallichiana with an IV value of 22.03, making strong association with Rosularia alpestris with IV value of 22.06. Our results are in line with the works of Siddiqui et al., (2011); Shaheen et al., (2015) and Ali et al., (2018). The other important contributors to this community were Poa bulbosa (18.20 IV), Seriphidium brevifolium (17.79 IV), Artemisia persica (17.4 IV), Rosa ecae (16.18 IV) and Pseudognaphalium luteo-album (14.52 IV). Notable herbaceous elements of this community were Melica persica, Polygonatum geminiflorum, Rhodiola heterodonta, Saussurea leptophylla, Rubia tibetica and Draba tibetica.
2. Betula-Scutellaria-Taraxacum community (BST)
This community was found at an elevation of 3320-3650 m (Appendix-8). Betula chitralica appeared to be the dominant with an IV value of 27.21, followed by Scutellaria multicaulis with an IV value of 20.79 as co-dominant. Taraxacum tricolor with IV value of 15.88 was observed to form randomly dispersed clumps on north facing slope. Similar results are present in the works of Hussain et al., (2004), Khan et al., (2010); Siddiqui et al., (2011) and Ilyas et al., (2015) from Hindukush region of Pakistan. The community also included Tricholepis toppinii (14.90 IV), Arnebia hispidisma (14.77 IV), Taraxacum brevirostre (IV 13.49) and Seriphidium
96 chitralensis (13.17 IV). Other herbaceous members of this community such as Arnebia griffithii, Cuscuta villosa, Myosotis avensis, Cerastium cerastioides, Solenanthus circinnatus, Tragopogon gracilis and Tussilago farfara.
Associated species of Artemisia-Rhodiola-Rosularia and Betula-Scutellaria- Taraxacum communiities.
97 4.2.5 Ghari (Site V)
Plant communities at this sampling site were established at an elevation of 2870-4200 m on southern and northern aspects. Soil in the area were sandy loam in texture like other sampling sites with 4.24% clay particles, 49.3% silt and 57.8% sand particles. Soil pH was 11.5 and organic matter was estimated 1.1%. Nitrogen content was 0.19% which was better than Shagrom, Warimon and Zondrangam areas displaying a healthy rate of saprophytic activity in the soils. Phosphorus content was 19.99 mg/kg, potassium 128.3 mg/kg and magnesium 3.3 mg/kg. Calcium content was recorded as 13.9 mg/kg and electrical conductivity 0.44 dsm-1. Lime content and sodium absorption ratio was recorded 3.94% and 25.3 mg/kg (Table 4.14-4.17, Fig 18-21).
1. Anaphalis-Cousina-Kobresia community (ACK)
This community was established at an elevation of 2870-2950 m on South facing slope (Appendix-9). This community is dominated by Anaphalis stantonii with an IV value of 29.48. Cousinia pycnoloba with an IV value of 25.74 and Kobresia laxa with an IV value of 22.25 were making a strong association; while Puccinellia minuta (20.25 IV), Asplenium septentrionale (18.5 IV), Ferula hindukushensis (17.7 IV), Psychrogeton chitralicus (16.13 IV), Cystopteris fragilis (16.3 IV) and Koelpinia linearis (15.5 IV) were co-dominant species. These results are supported by the works of Khan et al., (2010); Khan et al., (2011); Naveed, (2014) and (Nusser and Dickore, (2002) from Hindukush range. Some other important members of this community included Bromus japonicus, Calamagrostis decora, Myricatis wallichii, Poa alpine, Festuca olgae and Crepis multicaulis.
2. Alajja-Oxyria-Oxytropis community (AOO)
This community was found between elevation ranges of 3620-4200 m. (Appendix-10). Allaja rhomboidea with an IV value of 24.63 was the abundantly growing plant in alpine regions of Hindukush. Oxyria digyna and Oxytropis chitralensis with an IV value of 21.35 and IV 20.96 respectively were the second and third dominants. Community of the similar pattern was also reported by Nusser and Dickore, (2002); Hussain et al., (2019) and Khan et al., (2020) from Hindukush range
98 Pakistan. In addition to these dominant forms other important members of this community included Tanacetum griffithii (19.95 IV), Alotis smithii (18.95 IV), Astragalus coluteocarpus (17.76 IV) and Betula utilis (17.75 IV).
Associated species of Anaphalis-Cousina-Kobresia and Alajja-Oxyria-Oxytropis communiities.
99 Table 4.3. Quantitative values of different communities
S.No Plant Species Site I Site II Site III Site IV Site V A. Trees 1. Betula chitralica Browicz 0 0 0 27.21 0
2. Betula utilis D.Don 0 0 0 0 17.75
3. Cotoneaster affinis var. 0 12.06 8.19 0 0 bacillaris (Lindl.) Schneider 4. Crataegus songarica C. Koch. 0 14.42 7.56 0 0
5. Crataegus wattiana Hemsl. & 0 0 0 0 11.07 Lace, J .L.
6. Elaeagnus angustifolia var. 24.31 7.57 10.93 0 0 angustifolia
7. Fraxinus xanthoxyloides (G. 11.66 19.63 0 0 0 Don) DC. 8. Linaria odora (M.B.) Fisch. 0 0 8.65 0 0
9. Pistacia atlantica subsp. 0 0 0 15.83 0 cabulica
10. Prunus griffithii (Boiss.) 10.16 9.53 0 0 0 C.K.Schneid 11. 19.99 0 0 0 0 Prunus jacquemontii Hook.f. 12. 7.81 0 0 0 0 Prunus prostrata Labill. 13. Salix pycnostachya Andersson. 8.98 0 0 0 0
B. Shrubs
14. Berberis calliobotrys Aitch.ex 0 20.74 0 0 0 Koehne. 15. Berberis lyceum Royle. 18.58 0 0 0 0
100 16. Berberis parkeriana Schneid. 0 11.91 0 0 0
17. Buxus wallichiana Baill, 13.29 0 0 0 0 Monogr. 18. Clematis orientalis L. 8.66 0 0 0 0
19. Cotoneaster racemiflorus 15.3 0 0 0 0 (Desf.) Booth ex Bosse 20. Cousinia pycnoloba Boiss. 0 0 0 0 25.74
21. Hippophae rhamnoides Rousi. 0 0 17.36 0 0
22. Juniperus communis L. 1.71 0 0 0 0
23. Lonicera myrtillus Hook. f. & 0 0 7.44 0 0 Thoms.
24. Rhamnus prostrata Jacq.ex 0 11.03 9.74 0 0 Parker 25. Rosa beggeriana Schrenk. 0 11.81 11.81 0 0
26. Rosa ecae Aitch. 0 0 0 16.10 0
27. Rosa webbiana Wall.ex. Royle. 0 17.93 0 0 0
28. Sophora mollis subsp. duthiei 0 0 13.86 0 0 (Prain) Ali
29. Tamaricaria elegans (Royle) 0 13.32 10.77 0 0 Qaiser & Ali C. Herbs
30. Acantholimon leptostahyum 0 0 0 14.45 0 Aitch.
31. Acantholimon longiflorum 0 0 0 14.73 0 Boiss.
32. Acanthophylum laxiflorum 0 17.91 0 0 0 Boiss.
101 33. Adiantum venustum D. Don 19.66 0 0 0 0
34. Alajja rhomboidea (Benth.) 0 0 0 0 24.63 Ikonn. 35. Allium caroliniannum DC. 0 0 0 10.66 0
36. Allium chitralicum Wang & 12.88 0 0 0 0 Tang 37. Aloitis smithii Omer. 0 0 0 0 18.95
38. Amaranthus viridis L. 0 12.45 0 0 0
39. Anethum gravelons L. 15.61 0 0 0 0
40. Arnebia euchroma (Royle ex 0 0 0 13.53 0 Benth.) I .M. Johnston 41. Arnebia griffithii Boiss., Diagn. 0 0 0 12.12 0
42. Arnebia hispidisma (Lehm.) A. 0 0 0 14.77 0 DC
43. Artemisia parviflora Roxb ex. 0 0 0 22.76 0 D. Don
44. Artemisia persica Boiss, 0 0 0 17.47 0 Diagn. Astragalus coluteocarpus 45. Boiss. ssp. chitralensis 0 0 0 0 17.76 Wenninger, Mitt. Bot.
46. Astragalus minuto-foliolatus 0 0 0 0 11.79 Wendelbo 47. Asyneuma strictum Wendelbo. 0 0 0 10.47 0
48. Acantholimon stocksii Boiss. 14.53 8.87 13.84 0 0
49. Acantholimon longiscapum 0 20.98 0 0 0 Bokhari
102 50. Achillea millefolium 9.47 0 0 0 0 subsp. Chitralensis 51. Adonis aestivalis L. 10.26 0 0 0 0
52. Agrostis nervosa Nees ex Trin. 9.06 13.09 0 0 0
53. Agrostis viridis Gouan, Hort. 0 11.41 0 0 0
54. Alcea nudiflora (Lindl.) Boiss. 11.63 13.60 0 0 0
55. Anemone rupicola var. sericea 10.08 13.14 0 0 0 Hook.f.& Thomson 56. Anthemis cotula L. 9.66 11.81 0 0 0
57. Artemisia scoparia Waldst. & 10.49 0 0 0 0 Kit. 58. Artemisia sieversiana Ehrh. 17.11 0 0 0 0
59. Askellia flexuosa (Ledb.) W.A. 11.46 0 0 0 0 Weber. 60. Aster flaccidus Bunge. 8.047 0 0 0 0
61. Astragalus affghanus Boiss. 0 0 23.43 0 0
62. Astragalus amberstianus 0 0 19.69 0 0 Bth.ex. Royle. 63. Astragalus imitensis Ali. 13.69 0 0 0 0
64. Astragalus edelbergianus Sirj 0 0 21.64 0 0 & Rech.f. 65. Asyneuma strictum Wendelbo. 0 0 11.74 0 0
66. Atriplex schugnanica Iljin. 7.46 0 0 0 0
67. Anaphalis stantonii Y. Nasir. 0 0 0 0 29.48
103 68. Artemisia brevifolia Wall ex 0 0 0 0 16.64 DC.
69. Artemisia elegantissim Pamp. 0 0 0 0 18.44 Nuovo Giorn.
70. Asplenium septentrionale (L.) 0 0 0 0 18.56 Hoffm.
71. Bromus japonicus Thunb. ex 0 0 0 0 10.9 Murr., Syst.
72. Brachypodium distachyon (L.) 0 12.77 0 0 0 P. Beauv.
73. Brachypodium sylvaticum 0 0 9.16 0 0 (Huds.) P. Beauv. 74. Brassica campestris L. 16.95 0 0 0 0
75. Bromus oxyodon Schrenk. 0 0 0 12.93 0
76. Bunium persicum (Boiss.) 0 6.66 0 0 0 Fedtsch. Rastit
77. Brachyactis 0 12.21 0 0 0 roylei (Candolle) Wendelbo. 78. Bromus danthoniae Trin. 11.65 0 0 0 0
79. Bromus persicus Boiss. 0 10.17 0 0 0
80. Bromus ramosus Huds. 0 11.22 9.93 0 0
81. Bromus tectorum L. 10.26 0 0 0 0
82. Bupleurum kohistanicum E. 0 0 11.20 0 0 Nasir 83. Calendula officinalis L. 0 6.84 0 0 0
84. Calamagrostis decora Hook.f. 0 0 0 0 13.66
85. Crepis multicaulis Ledeb.var. 0 0 0 0 12.91
104 congsta 86. Cystopteris fragilis (L.) Bernh. 0 0 0 0 16.33
87. Capsella bursa-pestoris L. 18.44 0 0 0 0
88. Cardaria draba (L.) Desv 0 0 10.20 0 0
89. Carex stenocarpa Turcz.ex V. 0 0 13.50 0 0 Krecz
90. Cerastium cerastioides (L.) 0 0 0 10.76 0 Britton. 91. Chenopodium botrys L. 0 9.17 0 0 0
92. Chenopodium murale L. 16.72 0 0 0 0
93. Chesneya cuneata (Benth.) Ali. 0 0 0 0 9.68
94. Cirsium griffithii Boiss. 0 0 0 11.38 11.93
Cirsium wallichii var. 95. glabratum (Hook. f.) 0 0 13.52 0 0 Wendelbo
96. Clematis alpina var. sibirica 0 13.32 0 0 0 (L.) O. Kuntze, Verh. 97. Convulvulus arvensis L. 9.83 0 0 0 0
98. Conyza aegyptiaca (L.) 16.38 0 0 0 0 Dryand. ex Aiton
99. Conyza canadensis (L.) 0 8.30 7.44 0 0 Cronquist. 100. Coriandrum stivum L. 0 9.57 10.26 0 0
101. Coronopus didymus (L.) Sm. 14.26 0 0 0 0
102. Crepis aitchisonii Boiss. 0 0 0 10.24 0
105 103. Crepis multicaulis Ledeb. var. 0 0 0 0 7.46 congsta 104. Cuscuta villosa L. 0 0 0 9.79 0
105. Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. 18.14 0 0 0 0
Calamagrostis 106. pseudophragmites subsp. 0 0 13.05 0 0 speudophragmites (Hall.f.) Koel. 107. Capparis spinosa L. 15.33 14.4 0 0 0
108. Chenopodium foliosum 8.04 0 0 0 0 (Merrich.) Aschers. 109. Cichoriun intybus L. 11.87 0 0 0 0
110. Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. 8.66 15.23 14.90 0 0
111. Codonopsis clematidea 8.26 0 0 0 0 (Schrenk) C.B. Clarke.
112. Dicanthium annulatum Forssk. 0 0 9.98 0 0 Stapf.
113. Dactylorhiza umbrosa (Kar. & 0 0 0 12.93 0 Kir.) Nevski.
114. Draba tibetica var. chitralensis 0 0 0 10.21 0 (O. E. Nasir) Jafri. 115. Equisetum ramossimum Desf. 0 7.20 8.59 0 0
116. Ephedra gerardiana Wall.ex 0 0 15.87 0 0 Stapf.
117. Eremurus stenophyllus subsp. 0 0 21.04 0 0 stenophyllus S. I. Ali
118. Heracleum polyadenum Rech.f. 19.5 0 0 0 0 & Riedl.
106 119. Ferula jaeschkeana Vatke. 0 0 0 11.29 0
120. Ferula hindukushensis 0 0 0 0 17.71 Kitamura. 121. Festuca olgae (Regel) Krivot. 0 0 0 0 12.16
122. Fragaria nubicola (Hook.f.) 0 0 10.37 0 0 Lindl.ex Lacaita Glycyrrhiza glabra var. 123. glandulifera (Waldst. & Kit.) 0 0 9.68 0 0 Boiss. 124. Ferula narthex Boiss. 0 0 0 0 12.16
125. Juniperus excelsa M. Bieb 0 0 19.69 0 0
126. Kobresia laxa Nees, Contr. 0 0 0 0 22.75
127. Koelpinia linearis Pall. var. 0 0 0 0 15.58 linearis 128. Lactuca serriola L. 11.89 7.57 0 0 0
129. Lagochilus cabulicus Bth. 0 0 0 0 11.26
130. Lindelofia anchusoides (Lindl.) 0 0 8.53 0 0 Lehm. 131. Lolium temulentum L. 0 0 9.6 0 0
132. Malcolmia cabulica var. 0 0 8.5 0 0 topppinii (O.E. Schulz) Nasir 133. Myricatis wallichii Less. 0 0 0 0 7.26
134. Matthiola flavida Boiss. 0 0 8.59 0 0
135. Melica persica Kunth, Rev. 0 0 0 10.04 0 Gram.
107 136. Melilotus officinalis (L.) Pall, 0 9.17 0 0 0 Reise. 137. Mentha longifolia (L.) Huds. 14.88 9.03 0 0 0
138. Myosotis avensis (L.) Hill. 0 0 0 9.39 13.28
139. Oxyria digyna (L.) Hill, Hort. 0 0 0 0 21.35
140. Oxytropis chitralensis Ali. 0 0 0 0 20.96
141. Pennisetum flaccidum Griseb 12.37 6.66 0 0 0
142. Poa bulbosa L. 0 0 0 18.20 0
143. Poa pratensis subsp. pratensis 0 0 13.62 0 0
144. Polygonatum geminiflorum 8.49 7.57 9.34 0 0 Decne.
145. Primula macrophylla var. 0 0 0 11.96 8.25 macrophylla D. Don Pseudognaphalium luteo- 146. album (L.), O. M. Hilliard & 0 0 0 14.52 0 B. L Burtt
147. Pseudomertensia chitralensis 0 0 0 0 13.39 (Riedl) Riedl 148. Psoralea drupaceae Bunge. 0 0 6.76 0 0
149. Prangos pabularia Lindl. 0 24.82 10.58 0 0
150. Piptatherum laterale (Munro 0 0 0 0 13.66 ex Regel) Rozhev 151. Poa alpina L. 0 0 0 0 9.49
152. Psychrogeton chitralicus 0 0 0 0 16.13 Grierson.
108 153. Puccinellia minuta Bor. 0 0 0 0 20.25
154. Ranunculus laetus Wall.ex 0 11.22 12.37 0 0 Hook.f. & Thoms. 155. Ribes orientale Desf. 0 21.79 12.34 0 0
156. Rheum webbianum Royle. 0 0 0 13.67 0
157. Rhodiola heterodonta (Hook.f. 0 0 0 9.47 0 & Thomson) Boriss.
158. Rhodiola wallichiana (Hook.) 0 0 0 22.0 0 S.H. Fu
159. Rorippa islandica (Oeder) 0 0 0 9.20 0 Borbas.
160. Rosularia adenotricha subsp. 0 0 0 9.82 0 adenotricha
161. Rosularia alpestris (Kar & Kir) 0 0 0 22.06 8.06 Boiss. 162. Rubia tibetica Hook.f. 0 0 0 16.34 0
163. Rumex hastatus D. Don 10.37 0 0 0 0
164. Saussurea leptophylla Hemsl. 0 0 0 11.03 0
165. Scandix pecten-veneris L. 0 7.75 0 0 0
166. Scutellaria multicaulis Boiss. 0 0 0 20.79 0
167. Seriphidium brevifolium (Wall. 0 0 0 17.79 0 ex DC.) Ling & Y. R. Ling Seriphidium chitralense 168. 0 0 0 13.17 14.18 (Podlech)Y. R. Ling 169. Silene conoidea L. 0 8.84 0 0 0
109 170. Silene vulgaris (Moench) 0 0 9.22 0 0 Garcke.
171. Sisymbrium brassiciforme C. 0 0 8.53 0 0 A. Mey. 172. Solanum nigrum L. 0 6.84 0 0 0
173. Solenanthus circinnatus Ledeb. 0 0 0 9.11 0
174. Sonchus asper (L.) Hill. 0 0 7.93 0 0
175. Stellaria decumbens Edgew. 0 0 5.2 0 0
176. Stellaria media (L.) Vill. 0 10.67 0 0 0
177. Stipa chitralensis Bor. 0 8.99 0 0 0
178. Tanacetum chitralense 0 9.67 0 0 0 (Podlech) K. 179. Tetrapogon villosus Desf. 0 16.0 0 0 0
180. Thlaspi perfoliatum L. 0 13.1 0 0 0
181. Trisetaria loeflingiana (L.) 0 14.3 0 0 0 Paunero
182. Tanacetum griffithii (C. B. 0 0 0 0 19.95 Clarke) Muradyan.
183. Taraxacum brevirostre Hand.- 0 0 0 13.49 0 Mazz. var. lanatum. 184. Taraxacum chitralense Soest. 0 0 0 0 13.36
185. Taraxacum officinale Weber. 0 9.57 6.13 0 0
186. Taraxacum tricolor V. S 0 0 0 15.88 8.82
187. Taraxacum wendelboanum 0 0 0 0 9.65 Soest.
110 188. Taraxacum obtusum (Soest) R. 0 0 0 0 8.74 Doll 189. Tragopogon gracilis D. Don. 0 0 0 10.08 0
190. Tricholepis toppinii Dunn. 0 0 0 14.90 16.37
191. Tussilago farfara L. 0 0 0 7.75 0
192. Verbascum thapsus L. 0 0 9.06 0 0
193. Verbena officinalis L. 0 8.30 5.5 0 0
194. Xanthium strumarium L. 0 8.627 7.44 0 0
195. Youngia japonica (L.) DC. 0 12.14 0 0 0
4.2.3 Diversity indices
4.2.3.1 Similarity index
A similarity index tests how closely the current community of plants matches with the predicted natural community of an area (Malik, 2005). During the present study, the similarity index was calculated according to (Motyka et al., 1950). The present study revealed that FRA community was found to be 46.1% similar to HSP community. The similarity between PRB community and AAE community was to be found 28.5%. The analysis showed that similarity between EPA community and that of FRA community was 23.52%. Similarly index of HAC and PRB communities was 8.33%. EPA community was 7.54% similar to HSP community. Only 5.12% similarity was observed between AAE community and ACK community. Similarity between ACK, EPA communities and ACK, BST communities was recorded 5% each; followed by similarity of AAE, EPA communities and ACK, PRB communities 4.87% each. Similarity index was observed for EPA, ARR, EPA, BST, ACK, ARR and ACK, AOO 4.76% each respectively. EPA community showed minimum similarity with PRB community i.e. 4.65%, while the remaining communities had less than 4% similarity index among themselves (Table 4.4). Seasonal variation was the main cause of similarity index between communities. Khan et al. (2010) reported that
111 six of the fifteen plant communities showed more than 5% similarity which is in line with the present situation. The high similarity index between the communities is due to the nutrients content, the proximity of stands to each other that had almost similar habitat conditions in terms of N, P, K, pH, soil texture and structure. The present findings are in agreement with those of Mesdaghi, (2001); Wahab et al., (2008); Mehmood et al., (2015); Khan et al., (2016); Urooj et al., (2016) and Ilyas et al., (2018) which recorded that variation in aspect, altitude, soil erosion and biotic factors made the differences among plant communities. During the monsoon and spring seasons, the high similarity index among some plant communities is due to the occurrence of the same shrubs, trees, evergreen perennial herbs and geophytes while the majority of plant communities are dominated by annuals that showed the least similarity between them.
4.2.3.2 Simpson diversity index
It is a quantitative measure representing the number of different plant species in a community (Hussain, 1989). The most acceptable is Simpson‟s diversity index which was used to calculate the species diversity at each site. Species diversity is affected by various biotic and abiotic factors including elevation, climatic conditions, edaphic characteristics, grazing, browsing, and anthropogenic activities. Species diversity is the principal characteristic of vegetation dynamics, representing community structure and productivity. Diversity of species measures the complexity and role of the community (Badshah et al., 2016; Ali et al., 2018; Hussain et al., 2019). In present work, Simpson‟s diversity of communities was found to be 0.11 at Site-I followed by Site-II and Site-III with diversity values of 0.159 and 0.1069 respectively. At Site-IV diversity was 0.10 followed by 0.11 at Site-V. While Site-VI, VII, VIII and X respectively exhibited 0.11, 0.12, 0.11 and 0.17 diversity values. The lowest value of 0.10 was recorded for communities of Site-IX (Table 4.5, Fig. 8). Similar studies in the area have also stated that species diversity is primarily influenced by soil type, elevation; slope and nutrient status (Shah et al., 2006; Khan et al., 2010; Khan et al., 2017); and our findings accept that diversity is mainly influenced by soil composition, elevation and topography.
112 4.2.3.3 Species richness
The species richness of a specific region is the result of various environmental factors such as climate, topography, species pool, area productivity and species competition (Criddle et al., 2003). Species richness is widely used within a single ecological community and ecosystem as a measure of diversity (Shaheen et al., 2011). In the present study the maximum species richness of 0.13 was recorded at Rosh Gol followed by 0.10 at Shagrom. Similarly, at Ghari and Warimon the species richness was recorded 0.18 and 0.16 respectively. The high species richness is directly linked with favorable environmental conditions and soil factors. Badshah et al. (2016) defined that the maximum species richness in any area is due to habitats, favorable environmental and edaphic conditions. The species richness of Shagrom was recorded 0.12. Similarly, Warimon and Ghari contributed some 0.11 species richness, followed by 0.10 species richness each at Zondrangam and Rosh Gol respectively (Table 4.6, Fig. 9). Altitude variability and soil physicochemical properties may also have a profound effect on species diversity (Lomolino, 2001). During spring the species richness was high and decreased during the monsoon season due to the dominance of annuals and geophytes during the spring that disappear at the beginning of the monsoon season (Malik and Malik, 2004). The low species richness was related to lack of water, high temperature, overgrazing and deforestation. Several phytosociological studies revealed a decrease in altitude species richness (Wahab et al., 2010; Ummera et al., 2015). Contrary to this, however, the species richness follows the trend of interpolated resources that is incompatible with (Shaheen, 2012). This differences is in line with the several other related phytosociological investigations from Chitral and elsewhere (Shah et al., 2006; Khan et al., 2010; Saurav and Das, 2014; Urooj et al. 2016) who recorded that species richness depends on the life form, species composition, altitude, topography and aspection.
4.2.3.4 Ecological index of maturity
Development in which plant communities reached from the juvenile stage to their maximum limit of maturity is said to be index of maturity (Hussain, 2019). This is a new index for appraising the vegetation pattern of an area affected by environmental and edaphic factors (Taffetani et al., 2011). The index of maturity of communities ranged from 27.0 to 37.69 in the current situation (Table 4.7, Fig.10).
113 The highest value of maturity of 37.69 index was recorded in the communities established at Shagrom followed by 37.14 index at Rosh Gol south slope and 35.5 at Zondrangam. While the maturity index of Ghari 35.26 and Rosh Gol was 32.60. Maturity index of the communities of Shagrom was 31.42; while in the communities of Warimon were 31.36. The lowest maturity index 27.18 was reported in communities of Ghari and Warimon 27.0. All the stands were immature, due to lesser microclimate adaptation. It has been further influenced by the high anthropogenic pressures that have disrupted and hindered the natural equilibrium of plant habitats from reaching maturity (Shaheen et al., 2011). Low-maturity reflects the variability within plant communities due to poor adaptability to the region's environmental conditions.
Table 4.4 Similarity index for 10 different communities
Communities EPA FRA 23.52 HSP 7.54 46.1 HAC 4.25 3.57 3.44 PRB 4.65 3.84 3.70 8.33 AAE 4.87 4.0 3.84 4.34 28.5 ARR 4.76 3.77 3.63 4.08 4.44 4.65 BST 4.76 3.92 3.77 4.25 4.65 4.87 4.54 ACK 5.0 4.08 3.92 4.44 4.87 5.12 4.76 5.0 AOO 4.54 3.77 3.63 4.08 4.44 4.34 4.37 4.45 4.76 Key to abbreviations EPA: Elaeagnus-Prunus-Adiantum FRA: Fraxinus-Rosa-Acanthophylum HSP: Hippophae-Sophora-Poa HAC: Heracleum-Artemisia-Capparis PRB: Prangos-Ribes-Berberis AAE: Astragalus-Astragalus*-Eremurus ARR: Artemisia- Rhodiola- Rosularia BST: Betula- Scutellaria-Taraxacum ACK: Anaphalis-Cousinia- Kobresia AOO: Alajja- Oxyria-Oxytropis Key to sites in text Site-I Shagrom Site-II Warimon Site-III Zondrangam Site-IV Rosh Gol Site-V Ghari
114 Table 4.5 Simpson’s diversity, among different communities
Sites Communities Simpson‟s diversity index Site-I Elaeagnus-Prunus-Adiantum 0.11 Heracleum-Artemisia-Capparis 0.10 Site-II Fraxinus-Rosa-Acanthophylum 0.15 Prangos-Ribes-Berberis 0.11 Site-III Hippophae-Sophora-Poa 0.10 Astragalus-Astragalus*-Eremurus 0.11 Site-IV Artemisia-Rhodiola-Rosularia 0.12 Betula- Scutellaria-Taraxacum 0.11 Site-V Anaphalis-Cousinia-Kobresia 0.10 Alajja-Oxyria-Oxytropis 0.17
Table 4.6 Species richness among different communities
Sites Communities Species richness Site-I Elaeagnus-Prunus-Adiantum 0.12 Heracleum-Artemisia-Capparis 0.10 Site-II Fraxinus-Rosa-Acanthophylum 0.16 Prangos-Ribes-Berberis 0.11 Site-III Hippophae-Sophora-Poa 0.10 Astragalus-Astragalus*-Eremurus 0.12 Site-IV Artemisia-Rhodiola-Rosularia 0.13 Betula- Scutellaria-Taraxacum 0.10 Site-V Anaphalis-Cousinia-Kobresia 0.11 Alajja-Oxyria-Oxytropis 0.18
Table 4.7 Maturity index among different communities
Sites Communities Maturity index Site-I Elaeagnus-Prunus-Adiantum 31.42 Heracleum-Artemisia-Capparis 37.69 Site-II Fraxinus-Rosa-Acanthophylum 27.00 Prangos-Ribes-Berberis 31.36 Site-III Hippophae-Sophora-Poa 27.18 Astragalus-Astragalus*-Eremurus 35.5 Site-IV Artemisia-Rhodiola-Rosularia 32.60 Betula- Scutellaria-Taraxacum 37.14 Site-V Anaphalis-Cousinia-Kobresia 35.26 Alajja-Oxyria-Oxytropis 31.30
115
Fig 8. Simpson’s diversity, among communities through PAST
Fig 9. Species richness among communities through PAST
Fig 10. Maturity index among communities through PC-Ord
116 4.3 Agglomerative cluster analysis of species (Ward’s method)
Phytosociological studies are essential for understanding temporal variations in the vegetation structure in response to changes in the environment worldwide (Felde et al. 2012). The quantitative values of 195 species were subjected to PC-Ord program (Version 5.10) for cluster analysis. The dendrograms (Fig.11-12) discloses three main groups at a squared Euclidian distance 3.5 × 104 (information remaining 75 %). These associations were grouped on the basis of the leading quantitative values of species.
These groups are discussed as follow:
Group-I. Elaeagnus-Fraxinus-Tricholepis community
Group-I comprised of 4 stands, is characterized by the predominance of Elaeagnus angustifolia (average importance value= 21.41) with Fraxinus xanthoxyloides (average importance value = 15.64) and Tricholepis toppinii (average importance value= 15.63). Bunium persicum and Psoralea drupaceae is also associated with this group with very low average importance value (6.66 & 6.76) respectively. Rosularia alpestris, Seriphidium chitralense, Polygonatum geminiflorum, Taraxacum tricolor, Tamaricaria elegans, Cirsium griffithii, Crataegus songarica, Cotoneaster affinis, and Coriandrum stivum were the other prominent members of this association (Table 4.8).
Group II. Anaphalis-Cousinia-Kobresia community
Group II includes 2 stands is dominated by Anaphalis stantonii (average importance value= 14.74) with Cousinia pycnoloba as second dominant (average importance value= 12.87) and Kobresia laxa (average importance value= 11.37). Myricatis wallichii and Poa alpina were found with very low abundance. Other prominent plant species of this group were Asplenium septentrionale, Artemisia elegantissim, Ferula hindukushensis, Cystopteris fragilis and Psychrogeton chitralicus. Asplenium septentrionale (Grass fern) is an indicator fern of the timberline (Table 4.9).
117 Group-III. Prangos-Ribes-Acantholimon community
Group III comprises of 4 stands is predominated by Prangos pabularia (average importance value = 17.7) with Ribes (average importance value= 17.2) and Acantholimon (average importance value = 12.4). Cirsium arvense is also conspicuous with (average importance value = 12.93). Lineria odora, Chenopodium foliosum and Atriplex schugnanica has low abundance in this group (average importance value = 8.6, 8.04 & 7.4 respectively). Prangos pabularia, Ribes orientale, Capparis spinosa, Alcea nudiflora, Rosa beggeriana, Ranunculus laetus, Anemone rupicola, Agrostis nervosa, Anthemis cotula and Bromus ramosus were the remaining components of this association (Table 4.10).
Four classes of edaphic variables were also constructed on the basis of groups derived from Dendrogram, which showed heterogeneity due to the difference in vegetation composition. Group I is distinguished by the high organic matter, nitrogen, potassium and phosphorus content. Group II is associated with low phosphorus, potassium and Group III is characterized by high organic matter, nitrogen phosphorus and low potassium levels.
The soils of the study area showed significant variability with respect to various sampling sites. Other workers have noted such heterogeneity in the soil (Garcia-Palacios et al., 2012; Tittonell et al., 2013). Based on the vegetation composition, the vegetation of the area under investigation is specifically demarcated into three groups and has been well associated with edaphic variables.
118 Table 4.8. Quantitative values for Group-I
S.No Plant Species Site Site Site Site Site Sum I II III IV V of IV 1. Acantholimon 0 0 0 14.45 0 14.45 leptostahyum Aitch. 2. Acantholimon longiflorum 0 0 0 14.73 0 14.73 Boiss. 3. Acanthophylum laxiflorum 0 17.91 0 0 0 17.91 Boiss. 4. Adiantum venustum D. 19.66 0 0 0 0 19.66 Don 5. Alajja rhomboidea 0 0 0 0 24.63 24.63 (Benth.) Ikonn. 6. Allium caroliniannum DC. 0 0 0 10.66 0 10.66
7. Allium chitralicum Wang 12.88 0 0 0 0 12.88 & Tang 8. Aloitis smithii Omer. 0 0 0 0 18.95 18.95
9. Amaranthus viridis L. 0 12.45 0 0 0 12.45
10. Anethum gravelons L. 15.61 0 0 0 0 15.61
11. Arnebia euchroma (Royle 0 0 0 13.53 0 13.53 ex Benth.) I .M. Johnston 12. Arnebia griffithii Boiss., 0 0 0 12.12 0 12.12 Diagn. 13. Arnebia hispidisma 0 0 0 14.77 0 14.77 (Lehm.) A. DC 14. Artemisia parviflora Roxb 0 0 0 22.76 0 22.76 ex. D. Don 15. Artemisia persica Boiss, 0 0 0 17.47 0 17.47 Diagn.
119 16. Astragalus coluteocarpus Boiss. ssp. chitralensis 0 0 0 0 17.76 17.76 Wenninger, Mitt. Bot. 17. Astragalus minuto- 0 0 0 0 11.79 11.79 foliolatus Wendelbo. 18. Asyneuma 0 0 0 10.47 0 10.47 strictum Wendelbo. 19. Berberis lyceum Royle. 18.58 0 0 0 0 18.58
20. Betula chitralica Browicz. 0 0 0 27.21 0 27.21
21. Betula utilis D.Don 0 0 0 0 17.75 17.75
22. Brachypodium 0 12.77 0 0 0 12.71 distachyon (L.) P. Beauv. 23. Brachypodium sylvaticum 0 0 9.16 0 0 9.16 (Huds.) P. Beauv 24. Brassica campestris L. 16.95 0 0 0 0 16.95
25. Bromus oxyodon Schrenk. 0 0 0 12.93 0 12.93
26. Bunium persicum (Boiss.) 0 6.66 0 0 0 6.66 Fedtsch. Rastit 27. Calendula officinalis L. 0 6.84 0 0 0 6.84
28. Capsella bursa-pestoris L. 18.41 0 0 0 0 18.44
29. 10.2 Cardaria draba (L.) Desv 0 0 0 0 10.20 0 30. Carex stenocarpa 13.5 0 0 0 0 13.50 Turcz.ex V. Krecz 0 31. Cerastium 0 0 0 10.76 0 10.76 cerastioides (L.) Britton. 32. Chenopodium botrys L. 0 9.17 0 0 0 9.17
120 33. Chenopodium murale L. 16.72 0 0 0 0 16.72
34. Chesneya cuneata (Benth.) 0 0 0 0 9.68 9.6867 Ali. 35. Cirsium griffithii Boiss. 0 0 0 11.38 11.93 23.31
36. Cirsium wallichii var. 13.5 glabratum (Hook. f.) 0 0 0 0 13.52 2 Wendelbo 37. Clematis alpina var. sibirica (L.) O. Kuntze, 0 13.32 0 0 0 13.32 Verh. 38. Convulvulus arvensis L. 9.83 0 0 0 0 9.83
39. Conyza aegyptiaca (L.) 16.38 0 0 0 0 16.3 Dryand. ex Aiton 40. Conyza canadensis (L.) 0 8.30 7.44 0 0 15.75 Cronquist. 41. 10.2 Coriandrum stivum L. 0 9.57 0 0 19.83 6 42. Coronopus didymus (L.) 14.26 0 0 0 0 14.26 Sm. 43. Cotoneaster affinis var. bacillaris (Lindl.) 0 12.0 8.19 0 0 20.26 Schneider. 44. Crataegus songarica C. 0 14.42 7.56 0 0 21.98 Koch. 45. Crataegus wattiana 0 0 0 0 11.07 11.07 Hemsl. & Lace, J .L. 46. Crepis aitchisonii Boiss. 0 0 0 10.24 0 10.24
47. Crepis multicaulis Ledeb.var. 0 0 0 0 7.46 7.46 congsta
121 48. Cuscuta villosa L. 0 0 0 9.79 0 9.79
49. Cynodon dactylon (L.) 18.14 0 0 0 0 18.14 Pers. 50. Dactylorhiza umbrosa (Kar. & Kir.) 0 0 0 12.93 0 12.93 Nevski 51. Draba tibetica var. chitralensis (O. E. Nasir) 0 0 13.5 10.21 0 23.74 Jafri 52. Elaeagnus angustifolia 24.31 7.57 10.9 0 0 42.82 var. angustifolia 53. Equisetum ramossimum 0 7.20 8.59 0 0 15.80 Desf. 54. Ferula jaeschkeana Vatke. 0 0 0 11.29 0 11.29
55. Fragaria nubicola (Hook.f.) 0 0 10.3 0 0 10.37 Lindl.ex Lacaita 56. Fraxinus xanthoxyloides 11.66 19.63 0 0 0 31.29 (G. Don) DC. 57. Glycyrrhiza glabra var. glandulifera (Waldst. & 0 0 9.68 0 0 9.68 Kit.) Boiss. 58. Hippophae rhamnoides 0 0 17.3 0 0 17.36 Rousi. 59. Lactuca serriola L. 11.89 7.57 0 0 0 19.46
60. Lagochilus cabulicus Bth. 0 0 0 0 11.26 11.26
61. Lindelofia anchusoides 0 0 8.53 0 0 8.53 (Lindl.) Lehm. 62. Lolium temulentum L. 0 0 9.65 0 0 9.65
122 63. Lonicera myrtillus Hook. 0 0 7.44 0 0 7.44 f. & Thoms. 64. Malcolmia cabulica var. topppinii (O.E. Schulz) 0 0 8.53 0 0 8.53 Nasir 65. Matthiola flavida Boiss. 0 0 8.59 0 0 8.59
66. Melica persica Kunth, 0 0 0 10.04 0 10.04 Rev. Gram. 67. Melilotus officinalis (L.) 0 9.17 0 0 0 9.17 Pall., Reise. 68. Mentha longifolia (L.) 14.8 9.03 0 0 0 23.91 Huds. 69. Myosotis avensis (L.) Hill. 0 0 0 9.39 13.28 22.68
70. Oxyria digyna (L.) Hill, 0 0 0 0 21.35 21.35 Hort. 71. Oxytropis chitralensis Ali. 0 0 0 0 20.96 20.96
72. Pennisetum flaccidum 12.37 6.66 0 0 0 19.04 Griseb 73. Pistacia atlantica subsp. 0 0 0 15.80 0 15.83 cabulica 74. Poa bulbosa L. 0 0 0 18.20 0 18.2
75. Poa pratensis subsp. 0 0 13.6 0 0 13.62 pratensis 76. Polygonatum 8.49 7.57 9.34 0 0 25.40 geminiflorum Decne. 77. Primula macrophylla var. 0 0 0 11.96 8.25 20.22 macrophylla D. Don 78. Prunus griffithii (Boiss.) 10.16 9.53 0 0 0 19.70 C.K.Schneid
123 79. Prunus jacquemontii 19.99 0 0 0 0 19.99 Hook.f. 80. Prunus prostrata Labill. 7.81 0 0 0 0 7.8153
81. Pseudognaphalium luteo- album (L.), O. M. Hilliard 0 0 0 14.52 0 14.52 & B. L Burtt 82. Pseudomertensia 0 0 0 0 13.394 13.39 chitralensis (Riedl) Riedl 83. Psoralea drupaceae 0 0 6.76 0 0 6.762 Bunge. 84. Rhamnus 0 11.03 9.74 0 0 20.78 prostrata Jacq.ex Parker 85. Rheum webbianum Royle. 0 0 0 13.67 0 13.6
86. Rhodiola heterodonta (Hook.f. & 0 0 0 9.47 0 9.47 Thomson) Boriss. 87. Rhodiola wallichiana (Hook.) S.H. 0 0 0 22.09 0 22.03 Fu 88. Rorippa islandica (Oeder) 0 0 0 9.23 0 9.23 Borbas 89. Rosa ecae Aitch. 0 0 0 16.1 0 16.18
90. Rosa webbiana Wall.ex. 0 17.93 0 0 0 17.93 Royle. 91. Rosularia adenotricha subsp. 0 0 0 9.82 0 9.82 adenotricha 92. Rosularia alpestris (Kar & 0 0 0 22.0 8.06 30.13 Kir) Boiss. 93. Rubia tibetica Hook.f. 0 0 0 16.3 0 16.34
124 94. Rumex hastatus D. Don 10.37 0 0 0 0 10.37
95. Salix pycnostachya 8.98 0 0 0 0 8.98 Andersson. 96. Saussurea 0 0 0 11.03 0 11.03 leptophylla Hemsl. 97. Scandix pecten-veneris L. 0 7.756 0 0 0 7.75
98. Scutellaria 0 0 0 20.79 0 20.79 multicaulis Boiss. 99. Seriphidium brevifolium (Wall. ex DC.) 0 0 0 17.79 0 17.79 Ling & Y. R. Ling 100. Seriphidium chitralense 0 0 0 13.17 14.18 27.35 (Podlech)Y. R. Ling 101. Silene conoidea L. 0 8.84 0 0 0 8.84
102. Silene vulgaris (Moench) 0 0 9.22 0 0 9.22 Garcke. 103. Sisymbrium brassiciforme 0 0 8.53 0 0 8.53 C. A. Mey. 104. Solanum nigrum L. 0 6.84 0 0 0 6.84
105. Solenanthus 0 0 0 9.11 0 9.11 circinnatus Ledeb. 106. Sonchus asper (L.) Hill. 0 0 7.93 0 0 7.93
107. Sophora mollis subsp. duthiei (Prain) Ali 0 0 13.8 0 0 13.8 Comb.nov 108. Stellaria decumbens 0 0 5.27 0 0 5.27 Edgew. 109. Stellaria media (L.) Vill. 0 10.67 0 0 0 10.67
125 110. Tamaricaria 10.7 elegans (Royle) Qaiser & 0 13.32 0 0 24.10 7 Ali 111. Tanacetum griffithii (C. B. 0 0 0 0 19.9 19.95 Clarke) Muradyan. 112. Taraxacum 13.491 brevirostre Hand.- 0 0 0 13.49 0 6 Mazz.var. lanatum 113. Taraxacum chitralense 0 0 0 0 13.36 13.3 Soest 114. Taraxacum officinale 0 9.57 6.13 0 0 15.71 Weber. 115. Taraxacum tricolor V. S 0 0 0 15.88 8.82 24.70
116. Taraxacum wendelboanum 0 0 0 0 9.65 9.65 Soest in Nytt Mag. Bot. 117. Taraxacum obtusum (Soes 0 0 0 0 8.74 8.74 t) R.Doll 118. Tragopogon 0 0 0 10.08 0 10.08 gracilis D.Don. 119. Tricholepis toppinii Dunn. 0 0 0 14.90 16.37 31.27
120. Tussilago farfara L. 0 0 0 7.75 0 7.75
121. Verbascum thapsus L. 0 0 9.06 0 0 9.06
122. Verbena officinalis L. 0 8.30 5.5 0 0 13.89
126 Table 4.9. Quantitative values for Group-II
S.No Plant Species Site Site Site Site Site Sum I II III IV V of IV 1. Anaphalis stantonii Y. Nasir 0 0 0 0 29.48 29.48
2. Artemisia brevifolia Wall ex 0 0 0 0 16.64 16.64 DC. 3. Artemisia elegantissim Pamp., 0 0 0 0 18.44 18.44 Nuovo Giorn. 4. Asplenium septentrionale (L.) 0 0 0 0 18.56 18.56 Hoffm. 5. Bromus japonicus Thunb. ex 0 0 0 0 10.99 10.99 Murr., Syst. 6. Calamagrostis decora Hook.f. 0 0 0 0 13.66 13.66
7. Cousinia pycnoloba Boiss. 0 0 0 0 25.7 25.74
8. Crepis multicaulis Ledeb.var. 0 0 0 0 12.91 12.91 congsta 9. Cystopteris fragilis (L.) Bernh. 0 0 0 0 16.33 16.33
10. Ferula hindukushensis 0 0 0 0 17.71 17.7 Kitamura. 11. Festuca olgae (Regel) Krivot. 0 0 0 0 12.16 12.16
12. Heracleum polyadenum Rech.f. 0 0 0 0 12.16 12.16 & Riedl. 13. Kobresia laxa Nees, Contr. 0 0 0 0 22.75 22.75
14. Koelpinia linearis Pall. var. 0 0 0 0 15.58 15.58 linearis 15. Myricatis wallichii Less. 0 0 0 0 7.26 7.26
16. Piptatherum laterale (Munro ex 0 0 0 0 13.66 13.66 Regel) Rozhev
127 17. Poa alpina L. 0 0 0 0 9.49 9.49
18. Psychrogeton chitralicus 0 0 0 0 16.1 16.13 Grierson. 19. Puccinellia minuta Bor. 0 0 0 0 20.2 20.2
Table 4.10. Quantitative values for Group-III
S.No Plant Species Site Site Site Site Site Sum of I II III IV V IV 1. Acantholimon stocksii Boiss. 14.5 8.87 13.84 0 0 37.2
2. Acantholimon longiscapum 0 20.9 0 0 0 20.9 Bokhari 3. Achillea millefolium 9.47 0 0 0 0 9.47 subsp. chitralensis 4. Adonis aestivalis L. 10.2 0 0 0 0 10.26
5. Agrostis nervosa Nees ex Trin. 9.06 13.0 0 0 0 22.16
6. 11.4 Agrostis viridis Gouan, Hort. 0 0 0 0 11.41 1 7. Alcea nudiflora (Lindl.) Boiss 11.6 13.6 0 0 0 25.23
8. Anemone rupicola var. sericea 10.0 13.1 0 0 0 23.22 Hook.f.& Thomson 9. 11.8 Anthemis cotula L. 9.66 0 0 0 21.48 1 10. Artemisia scoparia Waldst.& 10.4 0 0 0 0 10.49 Kit. 11. Artemisia sieversiana Ehrh. 17.1 0 0 0 0 17.11
12. Askellia flexuosa (Ledb.) W.A. 11.4 0 0 0 0 11.46 Weber
128 13. Aster flaccidus Bunge. 8.04 0 0 0 0 8.04
14. Astragalus affghanus Boiss. 0 0 23.43 0 0 23.43
15. Astragalus amberstianus 0 0 19.69 0 0 19.69 Bth.ex. Royle. 16. Astragalus imitensis Ali. 13.6 0 0 0 0 13.69
17. Astragalus edelbergianus Sirj 0 0 21.64 0 0 21.64 & Rech.f. 18. Asyneuma strictum Wendelbo. 0 0 11.74 0 0 11.7
19. Atriplex schugnanica Iljin. 7.46 0 0 0 0 7.46
20. Berberis calliobotrys Aitch.ex 0 20.7 0 0 0 20.7 Koehne. 21. Berberis parkeriana Schneid 0 11.9 0 0 0 11.91
22. Brachyactis 0 12.2 0 0 0 12.21 roylei (Candolle) Wendelbo. 23. Bromus danthoniae Trin. 11.6 0 0 0 0 11.65
24. Bromus persicus Boiss. 0 10.1 0 0 0 10.17
25. Bromus ramosus Huds. 0 11.2 9.93 0 0 21.16
26. 10.2 Bromus tectorum L. 0 0 0 0 10.26 6 27. Bupleurum kohistanicum E. 0 0 11.20 0 0 11.20 Nasir 28. Buxus wallichiana Baill, 13.2 0 0 0 0 13.29 Monogr. 29. Calamagrostis pseudophragmites subsp. 0 0 13.05 0 0 13.05 speudophragmites (Hall.f.) Koel.
129 30. Capparis spinosa L. 15.3 14.4 0 0 0 29.7
31. Chenopodium foliosum 8.04 0 0 0 0 8.04 (Merrich.) Aschers 32. Cichoriun intybus L. 11.8 0 0 0 0 11.87
33. Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. 8.66 15.2 14.90 0 0 38.81
34. Clematis orientalis L. 8.66 0 0 0 0 8.66
35. Codonopsis clematidea 8.26 0 0 0 0 8.26 (Schrenk) C.B. Clarke 36. Cotoneaster racemiflorus 15.3 0 0 0 0 15.33 (Desf.) Booth ex Bosse 37. Dicanthium annulatum Forssk. 0 0 9.98 0 0 9.98 Stapf. 38. Ephedra gerardiana Wall.ex 0 0 15.87 0 0 15.87 Stapf 39. Eremurus stenophyllus subsp. 0 0 21.04 0 0 21.04 stenophyllus S. I. Ali 40. Ferula narthex Boiss. 19.5 0 0 0 0 19.55
41. Juniperus communis L. 1.71 0 0 0 0 1.71
42. Juniperus excelsa M. Bieb 0 0 19.6 0 0 19.69
43. Linaria odora (M.B.) Fisch. 0 0 8.65 0 0 8.65
44. Prangos pabularia Lindl. 0 24.8 10.58 0 0 35.4
45. Ranunculus laetus Wall.ex 0 11.2 12.37 0 0 23.59 Hook.f. & Thoms. 46. Ribes orientale Desf. 0 21.7 12.34 0 0 34.59
47. Rosa beggeriana Schrenk. 0 11.8 11.81 0 0 23.62
130 48. Stipa chitralensis Bor. 0 8.99 0 0 0 8.99
49. Tanacetum chitralense 0 9.67 0 0 0 9.67 (Podlech) K. 50. Tetrapogon villosus Desf. 0 16.0 0 0 0 16.03
51. Thlaspi perfoliatum L 0 13.1 0 0 0 13.11
52. Trisetaria loeflingiana (L.) 0 14.3 0 0 0 14.3 Paunero 53. Youngia japonica (L.) DC 0 12.1 0 0 0 12.1
131
Fig 11. Dendrogram of 10 stands based on Wards method
Fig 12. Dendrogram of the cluster grouping of the study releve´s. Grouping was performed using Wards method.
132 4.4 Ordination
4.4.1 Principal Component Analysis (PCA)
Principal component analysis as an exploratory tool for vegetation data analysis which was applied for the first time by Pearson in vegetation ecology (Mesdaghi, 2001). Several studies have been carried out by PCA in various parts of Pakistan to probe the relationship between soil properties and vegetation (Ali et al., 2018; Hussain et al., 2019). The ordination method aims to analyze spatial variations in vegetation characteristics of Terich valley, Chitral using principal component analysis. PCA was done on CANOCO software version 5.0 which ordinates the vegetation data on 1-2, 1-3 and 2-3 axes based on IVs of plant species. The findings of edaphic data principal component analysis (PCA) are summarized in (Table. 4.11). The first; second, third and fourth axis (components) of PCA clarified 23%, 37%, 30%, and 20% of edaphic data set variance. The first axis of PCA primarily was OM (organic matter) function. The second component was basically regulated by phosphorus (P). The third component is chiefly related to (N) nitrogen, while the fourth component is mainly a function of potassium (K).
Two dimensional Principal component analysis (PCA) ordination (Fig. 13) of the edaphic data set showing the distribution of stands on the right side (axes 1 & 2), species in different directions and edaphic variables are also in different directions, showing significant impact in the vegetation composition of Terich valley. Elaeagnus angustifolia, Prunus jacquemontii, Adiantum venustum, Fraxinus xanthoxyloides, Acanthophylum laxiflorum, Rosa webbiana, Astragalus affghanus, Astragalus edelbergianus, Eremurus stenophyllus were the indicator species of first axis. On the axes (2 & 3) exhibited the distribution of stands and almost similar situation of species distribution and edaphic variables. Ferula narthex, Artemisia sieversiana, Capparis spinosa, Anaphalis stantonii, Cousinia pycnoloba, Kobresia laxa indicates that these are characteristic species of the second axis. While, Artemisia parviflora, Rhodiola wallichiana, Rosularia alpestris, Betula chitralica, Scutellaria multicaulis, Taraxacum tricolor and Alajja rhomboidea, Oxyria digyna, Oxytropis chitralensis were the key species of third axis. Similarly, on Hippophae rhamnoides, Sophora mollis, Poa pratensis, Prangos pabularia, Ribes orientale and
133 Berberis calliobotrys great impact of potassium contents and show a little association to the stand configuration along the gradient (Fig. 14).
Two-dimensional Principal component analysis (PCA) of the vegetation data set (axes 1 & 3) showing the distribution of stands on the left side and the distribution of species in different directions on the right side showing the influence of edaphic variables on the composition of the vegetation (Fig. 15). There were several important similarities between the first four components of PCA ordination axes and the edaphic variables (Table 4.11-12). Axis 1 revealed a very strong association with organic matter (p≥0.05). Axis 2 was recorded non-correlated with phosphorus at p≤0.05. On the other hand, axis 3 & 4 shows non-significant correlation with nitrogen and potassium at p≤0.05. The first component of PCA (vegetation data) appears to be an organic matter which regulates the nutrient availability. Components (Axis) 2 and 3 of the bi-plot of PCA represent the correlation of soil ingredients such as nitrogen and phosphorus on the distribution of plants. The fourth component appears to represent predominantly soil potassium constituents. Siddiqui et al. (2010) found similar form of substantial association with edaphic variables between the DCA ordination axes.
PCA was used to assess the distribution pattern of 195 plant species in 10 stands under the influence of various soil variables (Organic matter, N, P and K). The results clearly showed that the presence of organic matter, phosphorus, potassium, and nitrogen had significant effects on species distribution, diversity and community classification. Organic matter is the key constituent of soil which helps in the increase of biodiversity and provides vital ecological services, increasing crop protection and recycling nutrients (Pimentel et al., 2006). The PCA ordination methods for stands and species indicated that the first component was primarily correlated with organic matter and nitrogen, the second component was correlated with phosphorus and potassium. PCA results showed that both species composition and abundance were the reflection of differences due to soil composition.
The fundamental ecological gradient of these aspects can be identified from the bi plots, concerning key organic matters, N, P, K variables to plant species distribution which confirms each other. The plot data attributes reinforced the characteristic species location of each population. The results shown in ordination diagrams of species endorse the fact that several species accompanied the identical composition to
134 that which was evident for stands. Nevertheless, some species do not follow the sample of the stand distribution indicating that they are essentially uninfluenced by soil variables. Similar effects on species composition hadbeen reported from other dry temperate areas of Pakistan (Nüsser and Dickore, 2002; Khan, 2012; Shaheen et al., 2012; Khan et al., 2020). Our results, based on multivariate ecological approaches, appear to be sufficiently robust in this analysis, and successfully reveal the vegetation-environmental relationship, particularly the distribution pattern of stands, individual plant species, despite the long history of anthropogenic disturbances.
135 Table 4.11. Results of PCA of edaphic characteristics of the 10 stands
Component Eigen value % of Variance Cumulative % of Variance Eigen-vector co-efficient Associated variables 1. 1.959 48.975 48.979 2.083 OM 2. 1.060 26.505 75.481 1.083 P 3. 0.663 16.563 92.044 0.583 N 4. 0.318 7.956 100.0 0.250 K
Table 4.12. Correlation co-efficient between the PCA axes with edaphic variables
S.No. Parameter Axis 1 P value Axis 2 P value Axis 3 P value Axis 4 P value 1. OM 0.5508 p≥0.05 0.4716 p≥0.05 0.2344 p≤0.05 0.6475 p≥0.05 2. N -0.6148 p≥0.05 -0.2881 p≥0.05 -0.0036 p≤0.05 0.7342 p≥0.05 3. P -0.4582 p≥0.05 0.4477 p≥0.05 0.7402 p≥0.05 -0.2043 p≤0.05 4. K 0.3297 p≥0.05 -0.7030 p≥0.05 0.6302 p≥0.05 0.0034 p≤0.05
136 Fig 13. PCA bi-plot showing (a) stands ordination (b) species ordination along the environmental gradient (axis 1 & axis 2)
137 Fig 14. PCA bi-plot showing (a) stands ordination (b) species ordination along the environmental gradient (axis 2 & axis 3)
138 Fig 15. PCA bi-plot showing (a) stands ordination (b) species ordination along the environmental gradient (axis 1 & axis 3)
139 4.4.2 Canonical Correspondence Analysis (CCA)
Direct gradient procedure was conducted for the joint analysis of both species and environmental matrices. The available species and environmental data were assessed on CCA to check whether the group structure was consistent with the calculated environmental variables. The low P-value (P = 0.0162) showed that the results were highly significant in terms of test statistics, as it was believed that the edaphic element was the main driving forces for vegetation variability in the valley. Edaphic data input through CCA identifies the main environmental driving variable for the development of a particular group type. The CCA findings were combined with an indicator species analysis performed using PC-Ord V. 5.0 to check whether a community is being formed under the influence of a specific environmental variable. The regression line of P, K, and OM suggested in the CCA ordination diagram (bi- plot) that these environmental variables have a major impact on the distribution and composition of species. Results indicated that differences in environmental variables i.e., mainly organic matter and potassium reflected both the composition and abundance of plant species of communities (9, 10) and (1, 2 , 6) were distinguishable, since no effect of K and OM was observed while communities 7 and 8 were distinguished by the effect of phosphorus (p ≥ 0.8320). Under the cumulative effect of high amount of organic matter and potassium content, communities (3, 4, 5) were separated. The CCA stand and species ordination procedures suggested that the first axis was predominantly correlated with phosphorus; the second axis was correlated mainly with organic matter and potassium. The highest ecological gradient of the 1st axis can be clearly seen from the CCA diagrams of stands and species (Table 4.14; Fig. 4.19 & 4.20). By developing habitat and community relationships with environmental data, the stands + environmental bi-plots and species + environmental bi-plots validate each other. Pearson's correlations with the CCA plot's ordination axes revealed a major axis association with edaphic variables (i.e. organic matter, phosphorus, and potassium). The correlations between the Pearson and the CCA ordination axis show that the first axis (e = 0.99) was not associated with organic matter, potassium and phosphorus (r = 1). On the second axis phosphorus, potassium and organic matters also have no effect on the plants distribution (e = 0.84); correlated with each other‟s and a strong correlation was exist between (1, 2, 6 stands) (r = 0.99). The third axis (e = -0.1) was correlated with organic matters and potassium which was
140 recorded a strong correlation (r= -0.7) with a total inertia of 7.88. According to Monte Carlo test significance of all axes of CCA bi-plot respresents a P-value of 0.832 which show significance correlation of environmental variables with species distribution.
Table 4.13. Summary of the first four axes of the CCA for the vegetation data using Importance values
All the 195 plant species, all the 10 stands & all of the 3 environmental variables were included in analysis Axes 1 2 3 4 Total inertia Eigenvalues 0.99 0.84 0.7 0.99 Species-environment correlations 1 0.99 1 0 Cumulative percentage variance 12.6 23.2 33 45.2 7.88 of species data Species-environment relation 38.5 71.3 100 0 Summary of Monte Carlo test (499 permutations under reduced model) Test of significance of first canonical axis Test of significance of all canonical axes Eigen value 0.99 Trace 2.570 F-ratio 0.86 F-ratio 0.968 P-value 0.016 P-value 0.832
The CCA ordination of stands and species showed that on the first axis there was no influence of edaphic variables but rather a strong correlation between two stands/species (9, 10); on the second axis there was also a clear correlation between stand species (1, 2, 6); while the third axis was correlated with organic matter and potassium, showing that a high amount of organic matter and potassium increased the association of stand species of (3, 4, 5). The stands (7 and 8) have likewise a strong association with phosphorus on the fourth axis. Two stands (2 and 3) contributed more species and presents strong correlation with axis I as well as with axis IV and lie at the top of ordination space. This indicated that the species of these stands were more diverse as compared to other stands. The stands and ordination diagrams of species used the first two axes (Table 4.13, Fig. 16-17).
141
Fig 16. CCA bi-plot showing distribution of 4 plant communities among 10 stands in relation to environmental variables
Fig 17. CCA bi-plot showing distribution of 195 plant species among 4 plant communities with environmental gradients
142
EDAPHOLOGY
4.5 Edaphology
Soil is the earth's uppermost fertile layer sustaining living organisms. Its structure and texture varies over time with the effects of parent materials, atmosphere, and microorganism. Soil formation takes place through continuous processes of physical, chemical and biological weathering (Sanchaez et al., 2018). Soil has four fundamental components, i.e. organic matter, primary elements, soil air, and water. Soil is not only the abiotic factor, but also a shelter for a number of micro-organisms, such as bacteria, fungi, algae and various small invertebrates (Smith and Smith, 2012). The texture, color, and invariability of soil characteristics play an important role in soil nomenclature (Khan et al., 2010). The relative proportion of particles of various sizes in soil is termed as soil texture. Vegetation pattern is associated with the soil texture, electrical conductivity, pH, organic matter content and total dissolved salts (Noor and Khatoon, 2013). Dense vegetation patches were recorded from the soils with high organic matter content. Wu et al. determined the salinity, moisture and pH of soil. A positive correlation between elevation and vegetation while the soil salinity and moisture were tested for a negative correlation of soil was investigated (Lodhi et al., 2009). Arshad et al. (2011) investigated the connection between the Zn and Cu supply with soil texture. Ahmad et al. (2012) calculated concentration of Zn and Fe, Zn was 1 mg/kg and Fe was 3 mg/kg respectively. Shah et al. (2012) focused on estimating Cu, Zn, Fe, B, Mn in soil and reported Fe, Zn, and Mn deficiency while Cu and B were found to be in an adequate concentration. Fardous et al. (2011) studied the different levels of Co, Mn and Fe in soils at a Sarghoda farm for rural livestock.They also investigated the same minerals contents in forage plants of that area. In another study on seasonal mineral variation, the contents of Cu and Ca were higher during the winter season (Khan et al., 2007). Khan et al. (2005) found that concentrations of Zn, Fe, Se and Co in all soil types were above critical value. Na was found to be deficient in both soil and forage plants during the analysis of Mg, Ca, Na, and K in most of the samples (Khan et al., 2004).
4.5.1 Soil texture
The texture of soil depends on the quality of the soil formation of the parent materials and processes. Based on their relative size, the parent particles are graded into sand, silt, clay and gravel. The present study revealed that the soil was purely
143 sandy loam with variable concentration of sand, silt and clay. Soil of Shagrom display 5.49% clay, 59% silt and 76.5% sand particles. Soil of Warimon was composed of 4.96% clay, 39.6% silt and 73% sand particles. Sand particles dominated with 70.7% while clay and silt were represented with 26.41% and 45.5% at Zondrangam respectively. Soil texture of Rosh Gol represents 9.66% clay, 37.9% silt and 62.9% sand particles. In Ghari soil texture was also sandy loam with 4.24% clay, 49.3% silt and 57.8% sand particles (Table. 4.14, Fig. 18)
4.5.2 Physico-chemical properties
Soil pH is impacted by soil nutrient content, toxic nutrient solubility, and soil cation exchange capability (Noor and Khatoon, 2013). Our study area falls within the dry-temperate region; therefore soil was recorded basic at all sites. Soil of Shagrom had a pH of 11.8. In Warimon soil pH was recorded 9.8 and 12.1 at Zondrangam respectively. Similarly pH value of the soil of Rosh Gol had 9.9. Soil pH was recorded as 11.5 from Ghari area.
Soil organic matter has a strong impact on soil nutrients, soil growth, biological activity and ability to retain water. Organic matter is the key nutrient sources that can help to improve an area biodiversity and provide environmental services (Pimentel et al., 2006).This characterizes the fossils of plants and animals, soil microbial products and various stages of their decomposition and development (Estefan et al., 2013). Soil of Shagrom, Warimon and Zondrangam exhibited maximum organic matter 3.1% to 3%, while Rosh Gol had 1.2% organic matter. The organic matter was estimated lowest 1.1% at Ghari.
In current study, CaCO3 content was recorded the highest 18.10% in Warimon, while its amount was estimated the lowest 0.76% at Rosh Gol. The content of CaCO3 in Shagrom was recorded 15.50% and 14.14% at Zondrangam. CaCO3 contents of the soil of Ghari were 3.94%. Present study is right in line with this principal as Shagrom soil had EC value of 0.46 dsm-1 with 5.49% clay, 59% silt and 76.5% sand elements. The EC value at Warimon was found to be 0.16 dsm-1 with 4.96% clay, 39.6% silt and 73% sand particles, while 0.39 dsm-1 was recorded from Zondrangam having 26.41% clay, 45.5% silt and 70.7 % sand elements. The EC of 0.72 dsm-1 with 9.66% clay, 37.9% silt and 62.9 % sand particles were recorded at
144 Rosh Gol. Soils of Ghari had 0.44 dsm-1 with 4.24% clay, 49.3% silt and 57.8% sand particles (Table 4.15, Fig. 19). Our results are contour with the works of (Khan et al., 2005; Ali et al., 2015; Hussain et al., 2019) who worked on the physico-chemical features of soil in their studies areas.
4.5.3 Macronutrients
Elements that a plant need in large amounts are known as macro-elements and these are the primary constituent of the tissues and organs of living organism. It has also a significant role in reproduction, development and proper functions of animal body (Anon, 2006).
Nitrogen is the key macronutrient, which directly influences the vegetative growth of the plants. Its deficiency in plants lead to stunted growth and low yield. The nitrogen is present in both inorganic and organic forms. The major source of nitrogen 95 % in the soil comes from organic sources (Ilyas et al., 2015; Ali et al., 2018). The inorganic form of nitrogen in the soil is nitrite (NO2), nitrate (NO3) and ammonium
(NO4). Soil of Shagrom, Warimon and Zondrangam had 0.15 % nitrogen, while its concentration increased to 0.19 % at Rosh Gol and Ghari.
Phosphorus is an integral component of nucleic acids and ATP which influences the roots formation, stem elongation, crop maturity and resistance to diseases in plants. Phosphorus is present in high amount than nitrogen in the soil and mostly depends upon the weathering, climatic factors and soil erosion (Hussain et al., 2019). Soil from Shagrom showed of 25.45 mg/kg phosphorus as compared to Warimon which displayed 33.70 mg/kg. Zondrangam, Rosh Gol and Ghari had 18.28 mg/kg, 22 mg/kg and 19.99 mg/kg phosphorus in order.
Potassium is the basic component of the body of plants that works especially in its development. Deficiency of potassium in soils leads to poor root growth, lower cellulose content, chlorosis, decreased enzymatic activity and decreased protein content. There is a well-known role of potassium in the translocation of carbohydrates within plants. Being highly mobile factor potassium quickly moves towards younger parts of the plant. As a result of the deficiency of potassium chlorosis, stunted growth and retard the transport of sugar in plants occur (Fardous et al., 2011). Plants growing
145 on potassium deficient soil show low resistance to drought and pests. Potassium concentration in Shagrom was found to be 172.3 mg/kg. Whereas the Warimon showed 215.3 mg/kg potassium content. Soils of Zondrangam area had 253 mg/kg of potassium. Potassium content was relatively higher in soils of Rosh Gol 277.2 mg/kg while lowest at Ghari 128.3 mg/kg.
Calcium is the main constituent as a calcium pectate of the cell wall of the plants which provides rigidity to the cell against any threats from the environment. Plants with sufficient concentrations of calcium increasing in soils demonstrate diseased resistance. This also increases the absorption by roots of other nutrients and their transport within the plants. It also helps in the nodule formation in leguminous plants (Estefan et al., 2013). During this study 14.1 mg/kg of calcium was recorded in the soil of Shagrom and Warimon, 13.9 mg/kg each from Zondrangam and Ghari. Similarly, soil of Rosh Gol had 13.2 mg/kg calcium content.
Magnesium is the core element of chlorophyll molecule hence it plays a key role in photosynthesis (Kopacek et al., 2006). Magnesium also determines the uptake of phosphorus by plants, and vice versa. The metallic form of magnesium is essential for the joining of ribosomes small and large units. Magnesium acts as an activator for certain enzymes in plants. Soils of Shagrom and Warimon had 3.4 mg/kg, Zondrangam and Rosh Gol contained 2.2 mg/kg magnesium. The average content of magnesium from Ghari was reported as 3.3 mg/kg (Table. 4.16, Fig. 20).
4.5.4 Micronutrients
Elements which are essential in small amount to plants and animals are called microelements. Metals play a significant role in the digestion and development of living organisms. The deficiency or excess amount of trace elements can cause severe physiological disruption and metabolic disorders in human beings (Sobukola et al., 2007).
Copper is the key microelement of all activators which works with enzymes in plants. It also helps in protein synthesis and chlorophyll formation in plants (Kopacek et al., 2006). Some other nutrients such as manganese iron and aluminum interfere with the availability of copper to plants. Results of the present work showed 0.2925
146 mg/kg copper in the soil of Shagrom, 0.3285 mg/kg at Warimon and 0.383 mg/kg at Zondrangam. Similarly, soil of Rosh Gol 0.386 mg/kg and Ghari had 0.4505 mg/kg of copper.
Zinc concentrations are required to plants in a very small quantity and play a dynamic role in the vegetation establishment. Zinc is significant to the growth and protein synthesis in plants. The deficiency of Zinc in plants shows retarding growth of internodes and leaves. Zinc deficiency also delayed maturity in plants. Zinc level was found to be 0.31 mg/kg in Shagrom, while its amount was recorded maximum 1.2445 mg/kg at Warimon. The lowest amount of Zinc 0.247 mg/kg was recorded at Zondrangam, while Rosh Gol 0.6595 mg/kg and Ghari 0.316 mg/kg respectively.
Iron content of the soil was found to be adequate because of their mild acidic and basic nature. Calcareous soils are also iron deficient. Poorly aerated soil is deficient in iron too.Iron have vital role in the deposition of lignin and formation of chlorophyll in the plants. In Shagrom 1.2245 mg/kg iron was recorded while it was 1.4215 mg/kg in soils of Warimon. In Zondrangam, Rosh Gol and Ghari showed 1.4895 mg/kg, 1.216 mg/kg and 1.6595 mg/kg iron content respectively.
Manganese is significant for different physical processes in plants like seed germination and photosynthesis. The plants grow in the deficiency of manganese in the soil will show yellowing of leaf veins and stunted growth (Siddiqui et al., 2014). In acidic soil manganese deficiency is often observed but in present study comparatively higher manganese levels were observed from other micronutrients throughout the study area. The soil of Shagrom possessed 3.187 mg/kg of manganese, followed by 6.32 mg/kg at Warimon, Zondrangam 4.906 mg/kg, Rosh Gol 4.488 mg/kg while Ghari shared 3.22 mg/kg (Table. 4.17, Fig. 21).
Mineral breakdown during soil formation is the principal source of sodium content in soil. In the soil of study area the sodium levels were alarmingly high which leads to stunted growth of plants. The high amount of sodium leads to stunted growth in plants (Khan et al., 2004). During present study, soil samples from Shagrom had 28.7 mg/kg of sodium followed by 25.3 mg/kg in Warimon, 25.7 mg/kg, 28.1 mg/kg and 25.3 mg/kg of sodium at Zondrangam, Rosh Gol and Ghari respectively.
147 Analysis of variance (ANOVA) is a statistical method for testing the hypothesis that the mean of two or more samples is equal. It analyzes the value of one or more parameters by comparing the mean of the response variable at various factor rates. The soil corresponds to various study sites such as (Shagrom, Warimon, Zondrangam, Rosh Gol and Ghari) of Terich valley, were evaluated using one-way ANOVA. The results of physical and chemical parameters of soil in different sites showed a Non-significant variation at p>0.0001 (Table 4.18). While some of the macro-micro elemental contents i.e. N, P, K, Mg, Ca, Mn, Cu, Zn Fe and Na of all sites showed a clear significant variation at p<0.0001. The significant variations in different parameters of all sites were due to change in topography, elevation, slope and differences in communities‟ composition. Our results are contoured with the works of (Shrivastava and Kanungo, 2014) worked out that physio-chemical characteristics of soil such is variation in weathering processes, topography, climate, soil erosion, microbial actions and vegetation cover. Our results were also sustained by (Akbar, 2013; Wani et al., 2014) who carried out a similar research work on physio-chemical properties of soil.
148 Table 4.14. Soil Texture
S.No Locality Clay Silt Sand Texture 1. Shagrom 5.49 59 76.5 sandy loam 2. Warimon 4.96 39.6 73.0 sandy loam 3. Zondrangam 26.41 45.5 70.7 sandy loam 4. Rosh Gol 9.66 37.9 62.9 sandy loam 5. Ghari 4.24 49.3 57.8 sandy loam
Table 4.15 Physicochemical properties
3 -1 S.No Locality pH Organic matter % Lime (CaCO3) Ec x10 dsm 1. Shagrom 11.8 3.1 15.50 0.46 2. Warimon 9.8 3.1 18.10 0.16 3. Zondrangam 12.1 3.0 14.14 0.39 4. Rosh Gol 9.9 1.2 0.76 0.72 5. Ghari 11.5 1.1 3.94 0.44
Table 4.16 Macronutrients in soil
S.No Locality N % P mg/kg K mg/kg Ca mg/kg Mg mg/kg 1. Shagrom 0.15 25.47 172.3 14.1 3.4 2. Warimon 0.15 33.70 215.3 14.1 3.4 3. Zondrangam 0.15 18.28 253 13.9 3.5 4. Rosh Gol 0.19 22.00 277.2 13.2 3.5 5. Ghari 0.19 19.99 128.3 13.9 3.3
Table 4.17 Micronutrients in soil
S.No Locality Cu mg/kg Zn mg/kg Fe mg/kg Mn mg/kg Na mg/kg 1. Shagrom 0.2925 0.31 1.2245 3.187 28.7 2. Warimon 0.3285 1.2445 1.4215 6.32 25.3 3. Zondrangam 0.383 0.247 1.4895 4.906 25.7 4. Rosh Gol 0.386 0.6595 1.216 4.488 28.15 5. Ghari 0.4505 0.316 1.6595 3.22 25.3
149 Table 4.18. Summary of ANOVA for edaphic variables
S.No Source of variation SS DF MS F p-value Between 107.3319 9 11.92576 2082.46 p>0.0001 Sites 1. Clay Within Site 0.114535 20 0.005727 Total 107.4464 29 Between 3243.722 9 360.4135 634.676 p>0.0001 Sites 2. Silt Within Site 11.3574 20 0.56787 Total 3255.079 29 Between 8031.356 9 892.3729 2232.569 p>0.0001 Sites 3. Sand Within Site 7.994135 20 0.399707 Total 8039.35 29 Between 155.8232 9 17.31369 1291.424 p>0.0001 Sites 4. pH Within Site 0.268133 20 0.013407 Total 156.0913 29 Between 14.08679 9 1.565199 917.0553 p>0.0001 Sites 5. O.M Within Site 0.034135 20 0.001707 Total 14.12093 29 Between 920.939 9 102.3266 680.7701 p>0.0001 Sites 6. Lime Within Site 3.0062 20 0.15031 Total 923.9452 29 Between 0.292953 9 0.03255 805.6625 p>0.0001 Sites 7. Ec x Within Site 0.000808 20 4.04E-05 3 10 Total 0.293761 29 Between 0.025872 9 0.002875 91.74276 p>0.0001 Sites 8. N Within Site 0.000627 20 3.13E-05 Total 0.026499 29 Between 717.2177 9 79.69085 346.4465 p>0.0001 Sites 9. P Within Site 4.600471 20 0.230024 Total 721.8182 29 Between 21898.49843 9 2433.166 2514.337 p>0.0001 Sites 10. K Within Site 19.35433533 20 0.967717 Total 21917.85276 29
150 Between 0.04168 5 0.008375 7.922 p<0.0001 Sites 11. Cu Within Site 0.01237 12 0.991075 Total 0.05455 17 Between 2.194 5 0.4388 1646 p<0.0001 Sites 12. Zn Within Site 0.003199 12 0.000267 Total 2.197 17 Between 1.317 5 0.2634 188.5 p<0.0001 Sites 13. Fe Within Site 0.01677 12 0.001398 Total 1.334 17 Between 63.04 5 8.371 8708 p<0.0001 Sites 14. Mn Within Site 0.01738 12 0.001448 Total 63.06 17 Between 1.261 5 0.2522 5043003 p<0.0001 Sites 15. Ca Within Site 0.006 12 0.001323 Total 1.261 17 Between 0.1564 5 0.03129 18.26 p<0.0001 Sites 16. Mg Within Site 0.02058 12 0.001715 Total 0.177 17 Between 30.78 5 6.155 86.62 p<0.0001 Sites 17. Na Within Site 0.8527 12 0.07106 Total 31.63 17
151 Ghari
Rosh Gol
Zondrangam
Warimon
Shagrom
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Shagrom Warimon Zondrangam Rosh Gol Ghari Clay 5.495 4.965 26.41 9.66 4.245 Silt 59 39.665 45.51 37.96 49.3 Sand 76.525 73.06 70.7 62.93 57.875
Fig 18. Soil texture
Ghari
Rosh Gol
Zondrangam
Warimon
Shagrom
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Shagrom Warimon Zondrangam Rosh Gol Ghari pH 11.835 9.825 12.15 9.9 11.55 Organic matter 3.1 3.095 3.055 1.23 1.14 Lime (CaCo3) 15.505 18.995 14.145 0.765 3.945 EC 0.46 0.16 0.395 0.72 0.44
Fig 19. Physicochemical properties of soil
152 Ghari
Rosh Gol
Zondrangam
Warimon
Shagrom
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Shagrom Warimon Zondrangam Rosh Gol Ghari N 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.19 0.195 P 25.475 33.705 18.28 22.005 19.995 K 172.3 215.33 253 277.2 128.3 Ca 14.135 14.125 13.935 13.2 13.91 Mg 3.4 3.44 3.5 3.595 3.375
Fig 20. Micronutrients of soil
Ghari
Rosh Gol
Zondrangam
Warimon
Shagrom
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Shagrom Warimon Zondrangam Rosh Gol Ghari Cu 0.2925 0.3285 0.383 0.386 0.4505 Zn 0.31 1.2445 0.247 0.6595 0.316 Fe 1.2245 1.4215 1.4895 1.216 1.6595 Mn 3.187 6.32 4.906 4.488 3.22 Na 28.7 25.3 25.7 28.15 25.3
Fig 21. Macronutrients of soil
153
PROXIMATE COMPOSITION AND ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS
4.6 Proximate analysis
Proximate analysis is the partitioning of compounds in a plant extract into various components based on the chemical properties of the compounds. These components are moisture, crude protein, crude fibers, crude lipid, ash contents, and nitrogen-free extracts. In the present study six plants were selected to screen their chemical for various components as mentioned above. Proximate analysis of forage plants plays a key role in the assessment of their nutritional value (Pandey et al., 2006). Proximate composition and elemental contents of plants help to understand the nutritional value and palatability status (Akinleye et al., 1996). Plants have high quantities of vitamins, nutrients, fatty acids, minerals and fibers (Gafar et al., 2011). Grazing pressure reduces the nutritional value and abundance of forage plants in any ecosystem (Hussain and Durrani, 2008). The nutritional requirement of grazing animals varies due to grazing and browsing that directly enhance the body physiological functions. In ruminants, the amount of fibers which supplies energy is significant as hemi-cellulose which is easily digestible and consumable.The phenolic compounds such as lignin are almost indigestible, which delay the assimilation of carbohydrates in animals. The proximatecomposition of some forage plants has been carried out to see its possible role in theproductivity of range lands in the investigated area (Table. 4.19).
1. Organic matter (OM)
In the present study the quantity of organic matter in the tree Fraxinus xanthoxyloides ranged from 88.84% at pre-reproductive stage followed by 89.21% at reproductive stage and 92.25% at post-reproductive stage. Organic matter in shrubs Ephedra gerardiana from 88.26% to 91.97% in Hippophae rhamnoides at reproductive and post-reproductive stage.The mean values showed that Hippophae rhamnoides had the highest organic matter (90.60%), followed by Ephedra gerardiana (90.09 %). The amount of organic matter increased towards maturity of Hippophae rhamnoides and Ephedra gerardiana at post-reproductive stage. The total amount of organic matter in herbs ranged from 90.56% in Heracleum polyadenum to 91.22% in Glycyrrhiza glabra. On the contrary, the organic matter in Heracleum polyadenum decreased during pre-reproductive stage while its amount in Glycyrrhiza glabra increased during pre-reproductive stage. In Calamogrostris pseudophragmites
154 grass the organic matter fluctuates from 88.21% to 88.45% at pre-reproductive stage and post-reproductive stage. The mean value of organic matter in Calamogrostris pseudophragmites was recorded as 88.33% due to maturity (Fig. 22). The general trend was observed that the organic matter of herbaceous and woody plants increased with advancing ages. Sultan et al. (2007) stated that typically organic matter concentration was high in herbaceous than trees and shrubs which are in line with our present work. Other studies (Storecheier et al., 2002; Kramberger and Klemmencic, 2003) support the present findings and the results are being scaled to the present study.
2. Moisture contents
In Fraxinus xanthoxyloides, the moisture content ranged from 11.16% to 9.77% at pre-reproductive and reproductive stage and 7.25% at post-reproductive stage respectively. Moisture content in shrubs ranged from 6.92% to 10.21% in Ephedra gerardiana and Hippophae rhamnoides at pre-reproductive stage. In Hippophae rhamnoides, the moisture content decreased with maturity and increased steadily towards in maturity of Ephedra gerardiana. The moisture content of herbs ranged from 6.04% to 11.73% in Glycyrrhiza glaberaand Heracleum polyadenum at pre-reproductive stage. The mean values showed that moisture content was recorded with maximum 9.73% to 7.33% in Heracleum polyadenum and Glycyrrhiza glabera respectively. Due to maturity the moisture content increased in Heracleum polyadenum and decreased in Glycyrrhiza glabera. The moisture content in Calamogrostris pseudophragmites grass ranged from 4.70% to 4.22% at pre- reproductive and reproductive stage respectively (Fig. 23). Our current findings are confirmed by (Iheanacho and ubebani, 2009), who estimated that high moisture content increases the activity of water-soluble co-enzymes and soluble enzymes required for plant metabolic activities.
3. Ash contents
In Fraxinus xanthoxyloides, ash content ranged from 5.89 % to 6.31% at pre- reproductive and post-reproductive stage. At the pre-reproductive stage, Fraxinus xanthoxyloides displayed minimum ash content and maximum at the post- reproductive stage. Ash content fluctuated from 4.25% in Hippophae rhamnoides at
155 reproductive stageto 9.64% in Ephedra gerardiana at post-reproductive stage respectively. Ephedra gerardiana had the highest ash content 8.12%, while 5.17% in Hippophae rhamnoides had the lowest ash content.Ash content in herbs ranged from Glycyrrhiza glabera 7.76% to 14.89 % in Ferula narthexat pre-reproductive and post- reproductive stage. The mean values showed that Heracleum polyadenum contained 13.07% of the highest ash content and 9.58% of Glycyrrhiza glabera respectively. The ash content in Heracleum polyadenum and Glycyrrhiza glabera increases towards maturity. Calamogrostris pseudophragmites had 14.20% to 14.40% ash content at post-reproductive and pre-reproductive stage. At pre-reproductive stage, Calamogrostris pseudophragmites had highest amount of ash content and lowest at the post-reproductive stage (Fig. 24). Our results of ash analysis confined to (Akindahunsi and Salawu, 2005) which show that plants are rich in mineral elements and produced more ash content.
4. Crude Protein (CP)
The amount of crude protein content in Fraxinus xanthoxyloides fluctuates from 7.426% to 9.49% at pre-reproductive and reproductive stage. Due to physiological processes, the crude protein decreased in juvenile stage while reaching maximum in reproductive stage. In shrubs, the crude protein content fluctuated from 3.05% to 9.05% in Hippophae rhamnoidesat pre-reproductive and post-reproductive stage while in Ephedra gerardiana its amount was estimated from 7.45% to 10.14% at reproductive and pre-reproductive stage. The amount of crude protein in Hippophae rhamnoides was recorded low at pre-reproductive stage, while Ephedra gerardiana showed high levels of crude protein in the pre-reproductive stage due to their altitudinal variability. Crude proteins in herbs ranged from 6.18% to 8.37% in Heracleum polyadenum at pre-reproductive and post-reproductive stage and 22.60% to 30.21% in Glycyrrhiza glabra at post-reproductive and pre-reproductive stage respectively. Mean values of crude proteins in Glycyrrhiza glabra showed the highest ratio 26.86%, followed by Heracleum polyadenum 7.39%. Crude proteins in Glycyrrhiza glabra decreased with age from pre-reproductive stage to post- reproductive stage, while in Heracleum polyadenum crude protein content increases from pre-reproductive to post-reproductive stage. The protein contents in Calamogrostris pseudophragmitesranged from 3.45% to 7.32% at post-reproductive
156 to pre-reproductive stage. In pre-reproductive stage, the protein content was recorded maximum, which fluctuates during dry environmental conditions. The protein content in grasses usually decreased with increasing age (Fig. 25). Erukainure et al. (2011) have studied that the high crude protein of plants suggests their nutritional significance which is in accordance with our findings.
5. Crude fats (Cf)
The amount of crude fats was recorded 15.09 % to 17.16 % in Fraxinus xanthoxyloides at post-reproductive to pre-reproductive stage. In Hippophae rhamnoides crude fats ranged from 14.40% to 17.33% at pre-reproductive and reproductive stage, while its quantity from 12.02 % to 16.34 % in Ephedra gerardiana at pre-reproductive and reproductive stage. Hippophae rhamnoides had the highest crude fats ratio on average 16.07% at maturity and gradually decreased with seasonal variations. Crude fats content ranged from 10.14% to 18.25% in Heracleum polyadenum at post-reproductive and pre-reproductive stage and 20.55% to 28.34% in Glycyrrhiza glabra at pre-reproductive and reproductive stage respectively. The mean values showed that Glycyrrhiza glabra had 23.5% of the highest crude fats content as compared to 15.31% in Heracleum polyadenum. Crude fats content decreased due to phenological development of Calamogrostris pseudophragmites which showing a maximum level of 3.56% at pre-reproductive stage and a minimum crude fats level of 1.34% at reproductive stage (Fig. 26). The utilization of crude fats in large quantity is a healthy diet and suggested to individuals suffering from obesity (Sodipo et al., 2000; Erukainure et al., 2011) which are in line with our findings.
6. Crude fibers (Cf)
The quantity of crude fibres ranged from 12.87% to 18.39% in Fraxinus xanthoxyloides at pre-reproductive and post-reproductive stage. In shrubs crude fibres ranged from 8.66% to 13.2% in Hippophae rhamnoides at pre-reproductive and post- reproductive stage, while its quantity was recorded 12.22% to 15.39% in Ephedra gerardianaat reproductive and pre-reproductive stage. The amount of crude fibres was recorded maximum at reproductive stage of both Ephedra gerardiana and Hippophae rhamnoides. Quantity of crude fibres ranged from 13.36% to 18.12% in
157 Heracleum polyadenum. Crude fibres quantity in Heracleum polyadenum and Glycyrrhiza glabera typically enhanced with age of the plant. The crude fibres content in grass Calamogrostris pseudophragmites ranged from 23.81% to 28.32%. The crude fibres were recorded maximum 28.32% at post-reproductive stage in Calamogrostris pseudophragmites due to maturity (Fig. 27). Our findings are also confirmed by (Sodipo et al. 2000) who examined that Cf are important for assimilation and actual waste eradication, reduce cholesterol, coronary heart diseases, constipation, hypertension, diabetes, colon and breast cancer.
7. Nitrogen Free Extract (NFE)
The quantity of Nitrogen free extract ranged from 36.02% to 45.90% in Fraxinus xanthoxyloides and decreased with age at post-reproductive and pre- reproductive stage. During pre-reproductive stage nitrogen free extract was recorded maximum. In shrubs, nitrogen free extract ranged from 49.67% to 55.71% in Hippophae rhamnoides at post-reproductive and reproductive stage, while in Ephedra gerardiana nitrogen free extract ranged from 40.27% to 45.14% at pre-reproductive to post-reproductive stages respectively. Mean values showed that Hippophae rhamnoides 52.26% had the highest amountof nitrogen free extract followed by 42.7 % in Ephedra gerardiana. Nitrogen free extract ranged from 30.35% to 42.25% in grass Calamogrostris pseudophragmites at pre-reproductive and reproductive stage (Fig. 28).
Foguekem et al. (2011) examined that crude protein content in fodder plants varied from 2.97% to 12.76 %, nitrogen free extract 41.58% to 7.93% while nitrogen free extract contents ranged from 32.26% to 56.27% which in line with our results. Hussain and Durrani (2009) investigated some forage species for proximate analysis and cell wall constituents from Harboi range lands, Kalat, Baluchistan. Grasses had more nitrogen organic matter, crude fibres, crude proteins, crude fats, nitrogen free extract, hemicelluloses and carbohydrates than shrubs, while, shrubs were generally high in ash, organic matter, crude fats, crude fibres, moisture content and nitrogen free extract contents than grasses which agreed our results. Adnan et al. (2010) examined five plants for proximate analysis and mineral substances from the northwest areas of Pakistan. Azim et al. (2011) analyzed fifteen tree leaves and shrubs for proximate composition and then compared to fodder trees, grasses, herbs, and
158 shrubs, in them shrubs relatively higher concentration of crude proteins, nitrogen free extract, minerals, while their average concentration in nitrogen free extract and dry matter were lower which confirm our results. Foguekem et al. (2011) investigated that crude protein contents in forage plants varied from 2.97 to 12.76%, nitrogen free extract 41.58 to 7.93% and nitrogen free extract contents ranged from 32.26 to 56.27 % which are in line with our results. It was concluded that there is a great variation in the proximate composition of six investigated plants and that this variation is dependent upon species, phenological stages and developmental stages of plants. Grasses contains high quantity of silicates and potash due to which it is non-palatable to cattle‟s. Leaves contain more ether concentration and crude protein than stems, and lower in lignin, cellulose, and rough fiber. As grasses and wide leaved herbs develop, they decline in crude proteins and increase in rough fibers, lignin, cellulose, and carbohydrates level. It is assumed that similar changes would occur because of repeated and occasional grazing and that the relative amounts of certain chemical substances influence palatability (Heady, 1964; Shaheen et al., 2005; Amjad et al., 2014).
159 Table 4.19. Proximate composition (%) of selected plants
Organic matter Moisture Ash Crude Crude Crude NFE Plant species Phenological stages % % % protein % fats % fiber % % Pre-reproductive stage 88.84 11.16 5.899 7.426 16.74 12.87 45.90 A. Tree Reproductive stage 89.21 9.77 6.05 9.49 15.09 15.30 40.28 Post-reproductive stage 92.25 7.25 6.31 8.61 17.16 18.39 36.02 Fraxinus xanthoxyloides (G. Don) DC. Mean 90.1 9.393 6.08 8.508 16.33 15.52 40.73 Pre-reproductive stage 89.79 10.21 4.780 3.059 17.33 13.2 51.42 B. Shrubs Reproductive stage 90.88 8.02 4.25 6.13 14.40 11.50 55.71 Post-reproductive stage 91.14 7.67 6.48 9.05 16.48 8.66 49.67 Hippophae rhamnoides L. Mean 90.60 8.633 5.17 6.07 16.07 11.12 52.26 Pre-reproductive stage 90.05 6.92 9.64 10.14 12.02 15.39 40.27 Reproductive stage 88.26 6.86 7.31 7.45 16.34 12.22 42.69 Ephedra gerardiana L. Post-reproductive stage 91.97 8.08 7.43 8.84 14.23 14.38 45.14 Mean 90.093 7.286 8.12 8.81 14.19 13.99 42.7
C. Herbs Pre-reproductive stage 88.27 11.73 11.81 6.18 18.25 13.36 38.65 Reproductive stage 90.90 8.29 12.52 7.64 15.37 14.46 36.48 Heracleum polyadenum Rech. f. & Post-reproductive stage 92.53 9.19 14.89 8.37 10.14 18.12 32.33 Riedl. Mean 90.56 9.736 13.07 7.396 14.58 15.3133 35.82 Glycyrrhiza glabra var. glandulifera Pre-reproductive stage 92.08 6.04 7.76 30.21 20.55 12.45 16.76
160 (Waldst. & Kit.) Boiss. Reproductive stage 90.30 8.39 9.49 27.78 28.34 13.76 9.09 Post-reproductive stage 91.30 7.56 11.50 22.60 21.61 9.10 22.59 Mean 91.22 7.33 9.583 26.86 23.5 11.77 16.14
D. Grass Pre-reproductive stage 88.21 4.70 14.40 7.32 3.56 26.35 30.35 Reproductive stage 88.34 4.20 14.23 4.24 1.34 23.81 42.20 Calamogrostris pseudophragmites Hall. Post-reproductive stage 88.45 4.22 14.20 3.45 2.23 28.32 40.23 f.Koeler Mean 88.33 4.373 14.27 5.003 2.376 26.16 37.59
161 93
92 91 Pre-reproductive stage 90 89 Reprodcuctive stage 88 Post-reproductive stage
Organic Matters Matters Organic % 87 86 Tree Shrubs Herbs Grass
Fig 22. Concentration of OM in plants at three phenological stages
12
10
8 Pre-reproductive stage 6 Reprodcuctive stage
Moisture % Moisture 4 Post-reproductive stage 2
0 Tree Shrubs Herbs Grass
Fig 23. % age of Moisture in plants at three phenological stages
14 12 10
Pre-reproductive stage 8
6 Reprodcuctive stage Ash % Ash 4 Post-reproductive stage 2 0 Tree Shrubs Herbs Grass
Fig 24. % age of Ash in plants at three phenological stages
162
20
15 Pre-reproductive stage
10 Reprodcuctive stage
Post-reproductive 5
Crude Proteins % Proteins Crude stage
0 Tree Shrubs Herbs Grass
Fig 25. % age of CP in plants at three phenological stages
25
20 Pre-reproductive stage 15 Reprodcuctive stage 10 Post-reproductive
Fats contents % Fats 5 stage 0 Tree Shrubs Herbs Grass
Fig 26. % age of CF in plants at three phenological stages
30
25
Pre-reproductive stage 20
15 Reprodcuctive stage 10
Crude fiber % fiber Crude Post-reproductive 5 stage 0 Tree Shrubs Herbs Grass
Fig 27. % age of Cf in plants at three phenological stages
163
60
50
40
Pre-reproductive stage
30
Reprodcuctive stage NFE % NFE 20 Post-reproductive stage 10
0 Tree Shrubs Herbs Grass
Fig 28. % age of NFE in plants at three phenological stages
4.7 Elemental analysis
Plants are the rich source of macro and microelements which play important role in the various metabolic activities of animals. The deficiency or excess of trace elements lead to various complications and metabolic disorders in animals and therefore a strong association is always present in elemental contents and nutritional value of plants (Khan et al., 2005). In the present study six plant species were selected for elemental analysis in three Phenological stages (Table 4.20, Fig. 29). These plants were analyzed for various macroelements viz: P, K, Ca, Mg and microelements viz: Fe, Mn, Na and Cd with the help of Atomic Absorption Spectrometer following (Hussain et al., 2009). The results are presented as follow:
4.7.1 Fraxinus xanthoxyloides (G. Don) DC.
A palatable tree common to Shagrom, Warimon and Zondrangam; It is mainly consumed by goat, cow and sheep. In Fraxinus xanthoxyloides, Phosphorus contents were found to be 22.11 mg/kg at reproductive stage, while its concentration slightly decreased to 21.21 mg/kg and 20.24 mg/kg respectively at post and pre-reproductive stages. While high potassium concentration of 23.71 mg/kg was recorded at post- reproductive stage, which significantly decreased to 23.70 mg/kg and 23.68 mg/kg in pre-reproductive stage. The concentration of calcium contents 118.2 mg/kg was high
164 at post-reproductive stage, 61.41 mg/kg at post-reproductive stage and 53.89 mg/kg at reproductive stage. At post-reproductive stage the magnesium content was recorded 13.29 mg/kg which gradually decreased to 12.37 mg/kg and 11.63 mg/kg at pre- reproductive and reproductive stage. Similarly, iron was estimated as 9.755 mg/kg at reproductive stage, which is significantly decreased in pre-reproductive stage 5.164 mg/kg to 3.634 mg/kg at post-reproductive stage. Similarly, Manganese level was high 1275 mg/kg at reproductive stage followed by 979 mg/kg at pre-reproductive stage and 457.0 mg/kg at post-reproductive stage. The maximum level of Zn was recorded 0.072 mg/kg, 0.042 mg/kg at pre-reproductive stage and reproductive stage, and 0.023 mg/kg at post-reproductive stage respectively. The trace element, cadmium was found to be the same 0.067 mg/kgin pre-reproductive followed by 0.066 mg/kgat post-reproductive which decreased to 0.061 mg/kg at reproductive stage (Fig. 30).
4.4.2 Hippophae rhamnoides L.
Usually the livestock consume its foliage, especially the young leaves. Results revealed that phosphorus was significantly increased during post-reproductive stage 25.13 mg/kg, reproductive 24.89 mg/kg and 23.20 mg/kg at pre-reproductive stage. Potassium levels were 26.13 mg/kg in post-reproductive stage, 25.89 mg/kg in reproductive stage and 25.88 mg/kg in pre-reproductive stage respectively. An increase in Calcium content was recorded with the age of the plant, 108.6 mg/kg in post-reproductive stage, 31.38 mg/kg in pre-reproductive stage and reproductive stage 17.94 mg/kg. Magnesium contents were recorded 9.24 mg/kg in post-reproductive stage, 8.08 mg/kg in pre-reproductive stage and reproductive stage 7.77 mg/kg respectively. Micronutrients showed a slight increase with age of the plant as iron was investigated as 3.83 mg/kg in post-reproductive stage which increased significantly to 3.014 mg/kg in pre-reproductive stage and decreased to 2.45 mg/kg at reproductive stage. Manganese content was 714.6 mg/kg in post-reproductive stage, 430.5 mg/kg in pre-reproductive stage and 210.3 mg/kg in reproductive stage respectively. Marked zinc concentration was observed 0.043 mg/kg in pre-reproductive stage increased to 0.052 mg/kg in reproductive stage; while drastically decrease to 0.025 mg/kg in post- reproductive stage. Similarly, cadmium content was decreased at a level of 0.067 mg/kg in pre-reproductive stage, reaching to reproductive stage its level become
165 decreased to 0.061 mg/kg in reproductive stage which increased to maximum level of 0.066 mg/kg in post-reproductive stage (Fig. 31).
4.4.3 Ephedra gerardiana L.
Ephedra gerardiana exhibited phosphorus as 22.30 mg/kg in pre-reproductive stage, 23.25 mg/kg in reproductive stage to 25.10 mg/kg in post-reproductive stage due to maturity. Potassium was recorded as 25.89 mg/kg in pre-reproductive stage which slightly decreased to 25.86 at both in reproductive stage and post-reproductive stage. Calcium content increased with age of the plant, as it was 110.2 mg/kg in pre- reproductive stage, 130 mg/kg in reproductive stage and 133.8 mg/kg in post- reproductive stage. Magnesium levels showed a significant decrease with age of the plant from, 14.35 mg/kg in pre-reproductive stage, 14.28 mg/kg in reproductive stage and 12.74 mg/kg in post-reproductive stage respectively. Among micronutrients, iron levels were raised from 4.029 mg/kg to 4.234 mg/kg in pre-reproductive stage, reproductive stage and 5.454 mg/kg in post-reproductive respectively. Manganese content showed a clear concentration difference, from 221.7 mg/kg in pre- reproductive stage to 256.2 mg/kg in reproductive stage and 321.6 mg/kg in post- reproductive stage. No trace of cadmium was found in Ephedra gerardiana which is due to the heavy deposition of siliceous substances. Significant decrease with age of the plant zinc was recorded 0.139 mg/kg to 0.076 mg/kg at pre-reproductive stage and reproductive stage and 0.055 mg/kg at post-reproductive stage (Fig. 32).
4.4.4 Heracleum polyadenum Rech. f. & Riedl.
Heracleum polyadenum being a less palatable herb having concentration of phosphorus from 24.36 mg/kg to 23.13 mg/kg at pre-reproductive stage and reproductive stage with maturity this level raised to 25.10 mg/kg in post-reproductive stage. Significant increase in potassium content was recorded 25.68 mg/kg at pre- reproductive stage, 25.70 mg/kg in reproductive stage and 25.72 mg/kg in post- reproductive stage respectively. Calcium content was 95.63 mg/kg at pre-reproductive stage, 214 mg/kg at reproductive stage and gradually decreased to 114.7 mg/kg in post-reproductive stage. In pre-reproductive stage the level of Magnesium was recorded 11.17 mg/kg, 11.68 mg/kg at reproductive stage and 10.07 mg/kg at post- reproductive stage. The micronutrients showed that maximum level of iron contents
166 were recorded 7.621 mg/kg to 4.144 mg/kg at reproductive stage and pre-reproductive stage while lowest level 3.52 mg/kg was noted at post-reproductive stage. Manganese contents were found to be 966.7 mg/kg in pre-reproductive stage, 126.8 mg/kg in reproductive stage and 465 mg/kg at post-reproductive stage. Cadmium was recorded 0.083 mg/kg at pre-reproductive stage, while with age its amount 0.085 mg/kg at reproductive stage and 0.086 mg/kg at post-reproductive stage. Zinc concentration was in range from 0.074 mg/kg to 0.041 mg/kg at pre-reproductive stage and reproductive stage, 0.029 mg/kg in post-reproductive stage respectively (Fig. 33).
4.4.5 Glycyrrhiza glabra var. glandulifera (Waldst. & Kit.) Boiss.
It is a most palatable herb common to Shagrom and Warimon. Phosphorus content was 25.34 mg/kg in pre-reproductive stage, while its concentration slightly increased in reproductive stage to 24.56 mg/kg and 24.34 mg/kg at post-reproductive stage. Potassium concentration was very high in pre-reproductive stage 26.05 mg/kg, while decreased slightlyto 25.86 mg/kg at reproductive stage and post-reproductive stage 25.88 mg/kg. Calcium contents were recorded 170.2 mg/kg to 62.45 mg/kg at post-reproductive and pre-reproductive stage and 50.90 mg/kg at reproductive stage. Magnesium level was increased with maturity, in pre-reproductive stage 10.12 mg/kg, in reproductive stage and 11.53 mg/kg at post-reproductive stage. Similarly, iron was estimated as 2.98 mg/kg at pre-reproductive stage, 2.63 mg/kg at reproductive stage to 4.54 mg/kg at post-reproductive stage. Manganese level was high 473.8 mg/kg at pre- reproductive stage followed by 276.4 mg/kg at reproductive stage and 432 mg/kg at post-reproductive stage. The maximum level of Zn was recorded at pre-reproductive stage 0.077 mg/kg, 0.064 mg/kg at reproductive stage and 0.035 mg/kg at post- reproductive stage. The trace element, cadmium amount was recorded 0.054 mg/kgin pre-reproductive followed by 0.057 mg/kg at reproductive which increased to 0.064 mg/kg at post-reproductive stage respectively (Fig. 34).
4.4.6 Calamogrostris pseudophragmites (Hall.f.) Koel
Calamogrostris pseudophragmites is a tufted perennial grass with creeping rhizome. It is non-palatable and mostly found in Shagrom and Warimon near river bank sides. The mean value of Phosphorus contents was low which do not satisfy the nutritional requirements of grazing animals. Its contents were 23.28 mg/kg to 24.86
167 mg/kg at pre-reproductive and reproductive stage and 14.10 mg/kg in post- reproductive stage respectively. Potassium concentrationwas recorded 26.88 mg/kg to 26.95 mg/kg at pre-reproductive and reproductive stage and 15.13 mg/kg in post- reproductive stage. Calcium contents were 94.85 mg/kg at pre-reproductive stage which decreased drastically to 28.47 mg/kg at reproductive stage and 34.31 mg/kg in post-reproductive stage respectively. In pre-reproductive stage amount of magnesium was recorded 9.874 mg/kg to 8.535 mg/kg at reproductive stage and 9.19 mg/kg at post-reproductive stage. Micronutrients showed a slight increase with growing age of the plant as iron was observed 3.632 mg/kg to 4.32 mg/kg at pre-reproductive and reproductive stage and 6.56 mg/kg at post-reproductive stage respectively. Manganese content was recorded maximum from 825.3 mg/kg to 756.1 mg/kg at pre-reproductive and reproductive stage while its concentration was decreased to 623.4 mg/kg at the post-reproductive stage. Cadmium levels were found to be 0.082 mg/kg in pre- reproductive stage, 0.081 mg/kg in reproductive stage and 0.090 mg/kg in post- reproductive stage. Similarly, zinc also showed a slight increase with maturity of the plant and ranged from 0.052 mg/kg to 0.062 mg/kg at pre-reproductive stage and reproductive stage, whereas this level of zinc was found to be 0.063 mg/kg at post- reproductive stage (Fig. 35).
Potential intake rates as well as relative preference of plants to grazing animals are determined by chemical profile of a plant (Sultan et al., 2008). As the plants grow they increase in tenderness which in turn affects their potential intake by grazing animals while their relative preference is determined by their chemical constituents. Findings of this study are in agreement with work of (Rahim et al., 2008; Bano et al., 2009; Sultan et al., 2010 and Sher et al., 2012), who reported an increase in P, K, Mg, Ca, Cu, Mn and Co levels with increasing age of plants. The highest mean value for P was recorded in Glycyrrhiza glabra 37.12 mg/kg followed by Hippophae rhamnoides 36.61 mg/kg, Heracleum polyadenum 36.29 mg/kg, Ephedra gerardiana 35.45 mg/kg and Fraxinus xanthoxyloides 31.78 mg/kg while the lowest P levels were estimated in Calamogrostris pseudophragmites 31.12 mg/kg. Similarly, highest K levels were recorded in Hippophae rhamnoides 38.95 mg/kg followed by Glycyrrhiza glabra 38.89 mg/kg, Ephedra gerardiana 38.80 mg/kg, Ferula narthex 38.55 mg/kg and Fraxinus xanthoxyloides 35.45 mg/kg. Whereas Calamogrostris pseudophragmites 34.48 mg/kg showed the lowest concentration. Ca was abundantly
168 found in Heracleum polyadenum 212.31 mg/kg, Ephedra gerardiana 187 mg/kg, Glycyrrhiza glabra 141.70 mg/kg, Fraxinus xanthoxyloides 116.7 mg/kg and Hippophae rhamnoides 78.96 mg/kg, while lowest in Calamogrostris pseudophragmites 78.81 mg/kg. Mg levels were highest in Ephedra gerardiana 38.80 mg/kg, followed by Fraxinus xanthoxyloides 18.64 mg/kg, Glycyrrhiza glabra 17.11 mg/kg, Heracleum polyadenum 16.46 mg/kg, Calamogrostris pseudophragmites 13.80 mg/kg and lowest in Hippophae rhamnoides 12.54 mg/kg.
The highest mean value for Fe was recorded in Fraxinus xanthoxyloides 9.27 mg/kg followed by Heracleum polyadenum 7.64 mg/kg, Calamogrostris pseudophragmites 7.26 mg/kg, Ephedra gerardiana 6.85 mg/kg and Glycyrrhiza glabra 5.08 mg/kg while the lowest Fe levels were estimated in Hippophae rhamnoides 4.65 mg/kg. Similarly, highest Mn levels were recorded in Fraxinus xanthoxyloides 1355.8 mg/kgfollowed by Calamogrostris pseudophragmites 1102.4 mg/kg, Heracleum polyadenum 799.25 mg/kg, Hippophae rhamnoides4.65 mg/kg and Glycyrrhiza glabra 595.1 mg/kg whereas Ephedra gerardiana 399.7 mg/kg showed lowest concentration. The maximum amount of Cd was found in Heracleum polyadenum 0.127 mg/kg, Calamogrostris pseudophragmites 0.126 mg/kg, Glycyrrhiza glabra 0.087 mg/kg and Fraxinus xanthoxyloides 0.09 mg/kg, while in Ephedra gerardiana Cd is absent. Zn levels were highest in Ephedra gerardiana 0.135 mg/kg, followed by Glycyrrhiza glabra and Calamogrostris pseudophragmites 0.088 mg/kg each.and lowest in Fraxinus xanthoxyloides and Hippophae rhamnoides 0.06 mg/kg each (Fig. 36). Studies of similar work was conducted for P, K, Ca, Mg, Fe, Mn, Cd and Zn (White and Broadley, 2003; Ahmad et al., 2008; Rahim et al., 2008; Bano et al., 2009; Cheema et al., 2010; Sultan et al., 2010; Sher et al., 2012). The fodder grasses had high amount of microelements which is the vital constituents of nourishment for animals (Shaheen, 2005). Some of the problems related to animal growth and reproduction are linked to low mineral content in soils as well as in forage plants (Tiffany et al., 2000). Variation in concentrations of macro-micro nutrients are reported by Hameed et al., (2008). This supports findings of this study which reports a variation in concentration of macro-micro nutrients in forage plants at different phenological stages. There are around 22 elements which assume active regulatory functions for the development of living organism including fifteen macroelements and seven microelements, which perform four functions in the
169 body of living organisms: structural, physiological, regulatory and catalytic by (Radwinska and Zarczynska, 2014). Mineral constituents influence the palatability of species as well as diminish health growth, productivity and regenerative limit of browsing and grazing animals. The mineral contents of fodder plants commonly expanded/diminished conflictingly with the advancing phenological development stages in many plants (Hussain and Durrani, 2008). Gjorgieva et al. (2011) evaluated 9 trace components in four plant species in which Mg, Ca and K were in high quantity. The minerals are typically required in less quantity for the development of the plants. Over up-take of trace elements influences the metabolic activities of plants and animals (Sharma et al., 2011). It is presumed that poor domesticated animal‟s productivity in Terich Valley is somewhat because of inadequate measure of minerals contents in forages. It is recommended that treatment of soil will not only improve the general vegetation cover but additionally it improve the health and efficiency of livestock‟s on this rangeland.
170 Table 4.20. Mineral profile of selected plants
Habit/Plant species Phenological stages Macroelements (mg/kg) Microelements (mg/kg) P K Ca Mg Fe Mn Cd Zn Pre-reproductive stage 20.24 23.68 61.41 12.37 5.164 979.7 0.060 0.072 A. Tree Reproductive stage 22.11 23.70 53.89 11.63 9.755 1275 0.066 0.042 Post-reproductive stage 21.21 23.71 118.2 13.29 3.634 457.0 0.056 0.023 Fraxinus xanthoxyloides (G. Don) DC. Mean 31.78 35.545 116.75 18.645 9.2765 1355.8 0.091 0.0685 Pre-reproductive stage 23.20 25.88 31.38 8.08 3.014 430.5 0.067 0.043 B. Shrubs Reproductive stage 24.89 25.89 17.94 7.77 2.454 210.3 0.061 0.052 Post-reproductive stage 25.13 26.13 108.6 9.24 3.836 714.6 0.066 0.025 Hippophae rhamnoides L. Mean 36.61 38.95 78.96 12.545 4.652 677.7 0.097 0.06 Ephedra gerardiana L. Pre-reproductive stage 22.30 25.89 110.2 14.28 4.029 221.7 0.00 0.139 Reproductive stage 23.25 25.86 130.0 12.74 4.234 256.2 0.00 0.076
Post-reproductive stage 25.36 25.86 133.8 14.35 5.452 321.6 0.00 0.055 Mean 35.45 38.805 187 20.685 6.8575 399.75 0 0.135 C. Herbs Pre-reproductive stage 24.36 25.68 95.63 11.17 4.144 966.7 0.083 0.074 Reproductive stage 23.13 25.70 214.3 11.68 7.621 126.8 0.085 0.041 Heracleum polyadenum Rech. f. & Riedl. Post-reproductive stage 25.10 25.72 114.7 10.07 3.524 465.0 0.086 0.029 Mean 36.29 38.55 212.315 16.46 7.644 779.25 0.127 0.072 Glycyrrhiza glabra var. glandulifera (Waldst & Pre-reproductive stage 25.34 26.05 62.45 10.12 2.980 473.8 0.054 0.077
171 Kit.) Boiss. Reproductive stage 24.56 25.86 50.90 11.53 2.639 276.4 0.057 0.064 Post-reproductive stage 24.34 25.88 170.06 12.58 4.544 432.0 0.064 0.035 Mean 37.12 38.895 141.705 17.115 5.0815 591.1 0.0875 0.088 Pre-reproductive stage 23.28 26.88 94.85 9.874 3.632 825.3 0.082 0.052 D. Grass Reproductive stage 24.86 26.95 28.47 8.535 4.324 756.1 0.081 0.062 Post-reproductive stage 14.10 15.13 34.31 9.193 6.564 623.4 0.090 0.063 Calamogrostris pseudophragmites (Hall.f.) Koel Mean 31.12 34.48 78.815 13.801 7.26 1102.4 0.1265 0.0885
172
Figs 29. Plants for Proximate and Elemental analysis 1. Heracleum polyadenum 2. Hippophae rhamnoides 3. Ephedra gerardiana 4. Fraxinus xanthoxyloides 5.Glycyrrhiza glabra 6. Calamogrostris pseudophragmites
173
3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 P K Ca Mg Fe Mn Cd Zn
Post-reproductive 21.21 23.71 118.2 13.29 3.634 457 0.056 0.023 stage
Reproductive stage 22.11 23.7 53.89 11.63 9.755 1275 0.066 0.042 Pre-reproductive 20.24 23.68 61.41 12.37 5.164 979.7 0.06 0.072 stage
Fig 30. Elemental analysis of Fraxinus xanthoxyloides
1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 P K Ca Mg Fe Mn Cd Zn Post-reproductive 25.13 26.13 108.6 9.24 3.836 714.6 0.066 0.025 stage Reproductive stage 24.89 25.89 17.94 7.77 2.454 210.3 0.061 0.052 Pre-reproductive 23.2 25.88 31.38 8.08 3.014 430.5 0.067 0.043 stage
Fig 31. Elemental analysis of Hippophae rhamnoides
1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 P K Ca Mg Fe Mn Cd Zn Post-reproductive 25.1 25.72 114.7 10.07 3.524 465 0.086 0.029 stage Reproductive stage 23.13 25.7 214.3 11.68 7.621 126.8 0.085 0.041 Pre-reproductive 24.36 25.68 95.63 11.17 4.144 966.7 0.083 0.074 stage
Fig 32. Elemental analysis of Ephedra gerardiana
174 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 P K Ca Mg Fe Mn Cd Zn Post-reproductive 25.3625.86133.814.355.452321.6 0 0.055 stage Reproductive stage 23.2525.86 130 12.744.234256.2 0 0.076
Pre-reproductive 22.3 25.89110.214.284.029221.7 0 0.139 stage
Fig 33. Elemental analysis of Heracleum polyadenum
1400 . 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 P K Ca Mg Fe Mn Cd Zn Post-reproductive 24.3425.88170.0612.584.544 432 0.0640.035 stage Reproductive stage 24.5625.86 50.9 11.532.639276.40.0570.064 Pre-reproductive 25.3426.0562.4510.12 2.98 473.80.0540.077 stage
Fig 34. Elemental analysis of Glycyrrhiza glabra
2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 P K Ca Mg Fe Mn Cd Zn
Post-reproductive 14.1 15.1334.319.1936.564623.4 0.09 0.063 stage Reproductive stage 24.8626.9528.478.5354.324756.10.0810.062 Pre-reproductive 23.2826.8894.859.8743.632825.30.0820.052 stage
Fig 35. Elemental analysis of Calamogrostris pseudophragmites
175
Fig 36. Mean values for various minerals
176
PALATABILITY
4.8 Palatability
Palatability is the acceptability of plant species by the taste buds of grazing animals. Different morphological features of plants, growth stages, chemical nature and external structures affect the acceptability that either stimulates the selective response of animals or prevents them from grazing (Ekblom and Gillson, 2010). Grazing is one of the main factors that reduce the species occurrence in rangeland vegetation and also affects the distribution of flora in the area (Hussain and Durrani, 2009). Palatability is positively correlated with the water contents of leaves, amount of nitrogen and negatively correlated with carbon contents as well as nitrogen/carbon ratio in the aerial parts of the plant body (Rahim et al., 2008). According to the palatability of Heady (1964), associated species, habitat and climatic factor, the type of animal and physiological status of a plant determines herbivory selection of a plant. Different factors comprised phenology, minerals contents, morphology and secondary metabolites contents in a plant also influence the palatability behavior of animals (Ibrar et al., 2015). Phenological aspects may affect the palatability of plants by animals due to the accumulation and concentration of certain elements (Neal and Miller, 2007; Akram et al., 2009). Grazing animals prefer to utilize a plant in its fresh form while others in dry form due to the presence of different chemical constituents and morphological adaptation (Peters, 2007). It was confirmed that the concentration of elements, increases or decreases with phenological stages of the species.
4.8.1 Palatability and related features
The plants of Terich valley, Chitral is openly grazed by goat, sheep, and cattle. A total of 384 species were observed for its palatability status in the present study (Appendix-XII). Of them, 19 (5.20%) species were highly palatable and 55 (14.32%) species were reported as mostly palatable. Similarly, huge bulks of 106 (27.60%) species were observed as less palatable and 66 (17.18%) species were rarely palatable. Some of the highly palatable species were Avena sativa, Berberis lyceum, Conringia orientalis, Citrulus vulgaris, Cynodon dactylon, Epilobium hirsutum, Nasturtium officinale, Silene conoidea, Fumaria indica, Morus nigra, Morus alba, Vicia sativa and Valerianella dentata. Non-palatable species contributed 138 (35.67 %) species such as Asplenium septentrionale, Asplenium viride, Cystopteris fragilis, Adiantum venustu, Eremurus stenophyllus subsp. stenophyllus, Juniperus excelsa,
177 Artemisia sieversiana, Askellia flexuosa, Aster flaccidus and Bellis perennis. Only 106 (27.60%) plants were found to be less palatable which included Ephedra gerardiana, Kobresia laxa, Luzula spicata, Dactylorhiza hatagirea, Brachypodium distachyon, Bromus danthniae, Cymbopogon commutatus, Dicanthium annulatum, Poa bulbosa, Ferula narthex and Anthemis cotula. Likewise 66 (17.18%) plants were rarely palatable, such as Allium caroliniannum, Kobresia pygmaea, Dactylorhiza kafiriana, Epipactus gigantean, Agrostis nervosa, Bromus pectinatus, Festuca olgae, Lolium tomulentum, Amaranthus viridis, Artemisia parviflora and Cousinia chinophila (Fig. 37). Among the palatable species, 122 (31.77%) species were used by goat; sheep preferred 118 (30.12 %) species and cow used 24 (6.25%) species (Fig. 38). Maximum palatable plant parts were leaves (31.51%) and minimum palatable parts was shoots (3.38%), while 29.94% plants were used as a whole (Fig. 39). Previous research also supports this study's results as grazing animals favor floral parts (Pfister and Malaecheck, 1986; Hussain and Mustafa, 2007). Nature of the plant part consumed is usually related to its nutrients contents. Present study is in line with the works of Heady (1964) that livestock prefer young foliage and stem to fruits. Results for animal preferences with similar nature are reported by Angasa and Baars 2001; Hussain and Durrani, 2009; Badshah, 2012 who stated that goats and sheep favored forbs and grasses. Grazing and browsing change the morpho-anatomical features in plants hence promoting stoloniferious, prostrate and rosette habit (Hardison et al., 1954; Diaz et al., 2006). Grazing pressure encourages the species abundance of non-palatable species in a locality where there will be large numbers of non-palatable species in areas under extreme grazing stress than palatable ones (Gorde and Datar, 2014). The non-palatability of plant species is also due to the unpleasant odor, chemicals constituents and physical appearance as reported by (Amjad et al., 2014; Abdullah et al., 2017). Our results agreed with them that morphological appearance and chemical constituents of the plants affect palatability. Climatic conditions, feed processing technologies, agronomic practices and genetic variations ultimately affect the nutritive value of feed for livestock. Grazing is the most productive way of using grasses from the rangelands. Grazing animals causes over-grazing to decrease the vegetation cover of herbage plants. Karki et al. (2000) stated that intense grazing obstructs the capacity of ecosystem structure and efficiency. Our findings are consistent with (Malik, 2005) who reported that intense grazing and browsing lead to the substitution of non-palatable species by palatable.
178 160 138 140 120 106 100 80 66 55 60 35.67 40 27.66 Species 19 14.17 17.18 20 5.23 % age 0
Fig 37. Palatability classes of plants
9% 45% Cow 46% Goat Sheep
Fig 38. Preference of plant species by livestock
5% 46% Whole Plant 49% Leaves Shoots
Fig 39. Plant parts preferred by animals
179
ETHNOBOTANY
4.9 Ethnobotany
Ethnobotany is the traditional knowledge regarding plants-peoples including animals interaction (Mesfin et al., 2013). Flora is the major sources of medicines and nutrition in the world (Ajaib et al., 2016). Medicinal plants play a vital role in primary health care, drugs synthesis and socio-economic development (Bekalo et al., 2009). Traditional healing system is given preference by a majority of people because it is safe, effective, cheap, natural and easily available. Millions of peoples even in developing countries of the world commonly derive their income from different wild plants products (Maroyi, 2017). It has been estimated that there are 422,000 plant species world wide and about 20,000 plant species are documented to have medicinal values which makes 12.5% of the total plants species in the world. According to the World Health Organisation, 80% of the world‟s population is using medicinal plants to cure diseases through their traditional knowledge and experience, particularly in developing countries. About 25% allopathic drugs are synthesized from plants. It is reported that 25 hundred plants species are traded worldwide (Calixto, 2005). Global demand of herbal medicines is more as well as increasing day by day (Srivastava, 2000).
4.9.1 Plant parts used in Preparation of remedies
A total of 64 plant species were recorded as medicinally important (Table 4.21, Fig. 40). Almost all parts were observed to be used in the preparation of remedies. Of them, 20 species were noted where leaves were used followed fruits of 17 species and roots of 10 species, seeds of 9 species, flowers of 7 species and stem of 5 species were used for remedies preparation (Fig. 41).
4.9.2 Preparation mode and Rout of administration
Five methods regarding preparation of remedies were shared by the inhabitants that are important. It included decoction from 31 (47%) of the species; infusion and juice from 11 (16.8%) species each. Similarly the paste of 8 (12.30%) was prepared and applied on wounds directly, 4 (6.13%) species were observed whose powdered drug was effective in ailment (Fig. 42). As far as administration was concerned, majority of the drugs from 49 (76%) was taken orally followed 8 species
180 (12%) as remedies as topically, and 7 (10%) species both as orally and topically (Fig. 43).
4.9.3 Quantitative appraisal of Ethnomedicinal use
In view of the quantitative indices the analyzed information showed that few plants were referred by majority of the informants for their medicinal value.
4.9.3.1 Relative Frequency of Citation (RFC)
Relative frequency of citation (RFC) was calculated as per following formula:
(0 ˂ RFC ˂ 1)
Where RFC stands for relative frequency of citation and its value is less than one and greater than zero, FC is the number of informants who listed the plant species and N is the total number of informants (Ijaz et al., 2017). RFC index reflects the local importance of each species.
The relative frequency of 6 plant species was highlighted (Fig. 44). The highest relative frequency of citation of 0.151 was recorded for Berberis lycium followed by Pistacia chinensis with 0.117, similarly RFC of Glycyrrhiza glabra, Polygonum cognatum, Solanum nigrum, Morus alba, Mentha longifolia exhibited 0.124 RFC each, while Astragalus amberstianus, Sophora mollis, Saxifraga sibirica,
Juglans regia and Mentha spicata obtained least RFC of 0.110 each. Ali et al. (2018) conducted an analysis of the Chail Valley ethno flora in Swat and found the highest RFC values for Rosa beggriana, Cratagus sangarica and Mentha spicata which is consisted to others, decrease of availability of the species and traditional uses vary region to region. Such species were used for various ailments such as emetic, scorpion bite, expectorant, purgative, laxative, jaundice, carminative, and hepatitis. Various researchers from different regions of the world have also documented the uses of this present medicinal plant (Ali and Qaiser, 2009; Ahmad et al., 2011; Khan et al., 2013; Hussain et al., 2014; Begum et al., 2016 and Ali et al., 2016) for the treatment of various ailments however, a little difference was found in the mode of administration and preparation of recipes.
181 4.9.3.2 Family Importance Value (FIV)
Family importance value (FIV) was calculated according to the following formula.
FC is frequency of citation of the family while N is the total number of informants.
The most common family of medicinal plant species, based on the number of species and FIV index, Cupperaceae with FIV 11.03 from Gymnosperms followed by Poaceae with FIV 15.86 of Monocotyledons, while Asteraceae with FIV 74.28, Apiaceae with FIV of 66.20, Chenopodiaceae with FIV 25.5 and Elegniaceae had the highest FIV of 24.8 from Dicotyledons (Fig. 45). The outcomes of our study revealed that the importance value of families based on number of species was Asteraceae with (8 Spp., 12.5%), Apiaceae (7 Spp., 10.93%), Rosaceae with (6 Spp., 9.7%), Lamiaceae (4 Spp., 6.25%), Papilionaceae and Chenopodiaceae with (3 Spp., 4.68%) each. Our results agreed with (Ali and Qaiser, 2009) that Asteraceae, Apiaceae, Rosaceae, Lamiaceae, Chenopodiaceae and Papilionaceae are the most important families in terms of uses in Chitral. Our results were also consistent with earlier studies on ethno-medicinal flora (Giday et al., 2003; Guarrera et al., 2005; Hong et al., 2015) from different parts of the world.
4.9.3.3 Therapeutic uses
The inhabitants of Terich valley used medicinal plants in treatment of 48 health ailments. Most of these ailments were abdominal pain, fever, intestinal worms expelling, cough, toothache, asthma and stomach ache. Among the ailments most plants were used for treatment of abdominal pain (11 species), fever (10 species), intestinal worms (7 species), asthma and stomach ache (6 species each), cough, diarrhea, toothache (5 species each), dyspepsia, eye problems, backache, blood purifier, urinary tract infection, pimples (4 species each), dysentery, bronchitis, typhoid, malaria, jaundice (3 species each), stomach burning, sting of scorpion, blood pressure, diuretic, stabbing pain, headache, eczema, constipation, digestive disorders (2 species each) and lips cracking tuberculosis, sex suppressant, obesity, flue, nappy rash, face patches, gastric problems, ulcer, stop bleeding, bloody stool, tonsillitis, gum
182 disease, pain killer, swellings, wounds, dandruff, freckles, cardiotonic and hypertensiveness 1 species each (Fig. 46). Our findings are in agreement with (Hussain et al., 2000; Jain, 2001; Mahishi et al., 2005; Qureshi et al., 2006; Ibrar et al., 2007; Jeruto et al., 2008) who worked on the ethnobotanical uses of plants at national and international level. Similar, study was conducted by different researchers from Chitral such as, Khan et al. (2010) from Birir, Bumburate, Shehekuh, Rumbur, Golin Gol, Shah and Hussain, (2012) from Mastuj valley. Due to increase in population of Terich valley, the anthropogenic stresses on medicinal flora increases, this declines its rate rapidly day by day. Diversity of medicinal plants should be managed appropriately to satisfy the needs of present and future generations. Various organizations such as: WHO, IUCN, WWF, TRAFFIC, government departments, NGOs, and research institutes are working to protect and preserve indigenous medicinal plants around the world. In Pakistan WWF, Agha Khan Rural Support Program, European Union and German Aid Agency (GIZ) working for the conservation of environment (Oladele et al., 2011). This is the first study that presents a quantitative estimation of medicinal plants utilized in Terich valley, Chitral and suggests measures/recommendations for future conservation and management approaches for medicinal plants.
183 Table 4.21. Ethnomedicinal uses of plants
Plant species Khowar Name Part FR ROA Medicinal Uses FC RFC FIV used Abdominal pain (Ishkma Juniperus exelsa M.B. Sarooz L P O 16 0.110 11.0 Chomique) Lips cracking 12 0.082 8.27 Stomach ache Ephedra intermedia Schrenk & Meyer Somani S*, Fr J O/T Asthma Tuberculosis Allium barszczewskii Lipsky. Kach L J O Stomach ache 8 0.055 5.51 14.8 Abdominal pain (Ishkma Zea mays L. Juwari S P O 23 0.148 Chomique)
Pistacia atlantica subsp. cabulica Kakkar G p O Diarrhea 17 0.117 11.7 Dysentery Constipation Bunium persicum (Boiss.) Fedtsch. Hojoj S P O Dyspepsia (Zehch) 12 0.082
Abdominal pain (Ishkma 66.2 Chomique) Stomach ache Coriandrum sativum L. Danu L, Fr, D O Sex suppressant 16 0.110
184 S Stomach ache Daucus carota L. Khesgoom R J O Abdominal pain (Ishkma 14 0.096 Chomique)
Eye problems Foeniculum vulgare Mill. Bodiyong L, S J O Obesity 18 0.124 Abdominal pain (Ishkma Chomique) Stomach burning Backache Flue Bronchitis (Bukchomique) Ferula narthex Boiss. Rau WP J O Cough 10 0.068 Asthma
Toothache Prangos pabularia Lindl. Moshain L, S P O Stomach burning 12 0.082 Sting of Scorpion Trachydium depressum ssp. chitralicum Mushyn L p O/T Sting of Scorpion 14 0.096
Artemisia parviflora Roxb ex. D. Don Kharkhalij L, S* J/p O/T Abdominal pain (Ishkma 18 0.124 74.4 Chomique)
Blood pressure
185 Stomach ache Nappy rash Artemisia scoparia Waldst. & Kit. Dron L, S* J O Intestinal worms 12 0.082 (Ishkamogogh)
Face patches Abdominal pain (Ishkma Chomique) Anthemis cotula L. Sherisht F D O Intestinal worms 16 0.110 (Ishkamogogh) Cichoriun intybus L. Kasti R D O Typhoid (Niskamishti) 14 0.096 Malaria Carthamus tinctorus L. Poam F I O Cough 8 0.055 Helianthus annus L. Yorotmokhnokorak S J T Jaundice 18 0.124 Matricaria chamomilla L. Shirisht F D O Intestinal disorders 12 0.082 Seriphidium brevifolium Shashgeen Sh D O Gastric problems 10 0.068 (Wall. ex DC.) Ling & Y. R. Ling Berberis lycium Royle. Chowenj L, R, D O Ulcer 22 0.151
Fr Backache (Zahdan) 27.5 Blood purifier Abdominal pain (Ishkma Chomique)
186 Fever Urinary tract infection Berberis calliobotrys Aitch. Ex Koehne. Chowenj L, R D O Fever 18 0.124 Dyspepsia
Typhoid Bronchitis (Bukchomique) Betula utilis D. Don. Bulli B* p T Stop bleeding 14 0.096 9.65 Arnebia hispidisma (Lehm.) A. DC Phusuk R I O Toothache 10 0.068 6.8 Capsella bursa-pestoris L. Jalajali S I O Diuretic 15 0.103 Sisymbrium brassiciforme C. A. Mey. Khelikheli S D O Bloody stool (Khuni 13 0.089 Pechis)
Stabbing pain (Verenz) 19.3 Bronchitis (Bukchomique) Diarrhea (Khodur) Codonopsis clematidea (Schrenk) C.B. Gundostak L, S* D O Malaria 16 0.110 Clarke Urinary tract infection 11.0
Capparis spinosa L. Kaveer F D O Malaria 12 0.082 8.27 Typhoid (Niskamishti)
187 Abdominal pain (Ishkma Chomique) Chenopodium botrys L. Kunakh WP D O Intestinal disorders 6 0.041 Chenopodium foliosum Asch. Darkunakh Fr D O/T Tonsillitis (Buk 14 0.096 Chomiique) Abdominal pain (Ishkma 25.5 Chomique) Diuretic
Eye problems Pimples Intestinal disorders Chenopodium murale L. Pelileo march Fr I T Eye problems 17 0.117 Elaeagnus angustifolia L. Shinjoor Fr D O Asthma 14 0.096 24.8 Hippophae rhamnoides Rousi. Mirghiz Fr I O/T Abdominal pain (Ishkma 22 0.151 Chomique)
Eye problems
Hypericum perforatum L. Zerbali F D O Blood purifier 14 0.096 9.6 Abdominal pain (Ishkma Chomique)
Juglans regia L. Birmogh Fr, p T Toothache 16 0.110 11.0 B* Gum diseases
188
Mentha longifolia L. Bhen R J O Fever 18 0.124 Dyspepsia (Zehch) Mentha spicata L. Podina L D O Diarrhea 16 0.110 Blood pressure
Cough 36.5 Stomach ache Asthma
Headache Nepeta cataria L. Mutrich L J O Fever 14 0.096 Back ache (Zahdan) Toothache Thymus linearis Benth. subsp. linearis Jalas. Sewa Sh D O Fever 5 0.034 Morus alba L. March Fr I O Jaundice (Zehchpayeni) 18 0.124 Stabbing pain (Verenz) 22.0 Urinary tract infection Morus nigra L. Giltikan Fr I O/T Jaundice (Zehchpayeni) 14 0.096
Dyspepsia (Zehch) Blood purifier Fraxinus xanthoxyloides (G. Don) Wall.ex. Toor B* D O Fever 8 0.055 5.51 DC
189 Papaver nudicaule L. Afyoun Fr D O Pain killer 12 0.082 8.2 Astragalus amberstianus Bth. ex. Royle. Garmenzu R p T Toothache 16 0.110 Glycyrrhiza glabra var. glandulifera (Waldst. Moyo R D O Cough 18 0.124 & Kit.) Boiss. Intestinal worms 34.4 Sophora mollis Royle. Beshu B, L I O/T Swellings 16 0.110 Wounds Eczema Plantago major L. Boiyekolegini S D O Diarrhea (Ishkamabik) 14 0.096 Dysentery 9.6 Fever Polygonum cognatum subsp. chitralicum (Rech. f. Schiman- Najukjoshu L D O Digestive disorders 18 0.124 Czeika) Qaiser 30.3 Rheum webbianum Royle. Ishpar R, S* D O Constipation 14 0.096 Rumex hastatus D. Don Sirkonzu L D O Digestive disorders 12 0.082 Delphinium nordhagenii Wendelbo. Jaghjoshu F, R p T Dandruff 10 0.068 Clematis graveolens Lindl. Chuntruk F,Fr D O Dysentery 10.3 Eczema 5 0.034 Diarrhea (Ishkamabik) Prunus prostrata Labill. Girvalogh L D O Intestinal worms 16 0.110 44.8 Pyrus pashia Buch.-Ham. ex D.Don Tong S*, L D O Fever 14 0.096
190 Malus pumilla L. Palogh Fr D O Abdominal pain(Ishkma 10 0.068 Chomique) Crataegus songarica C.Koch. Goni Fr D Asthma Cough 12 0.082 Cardiotonic Hypertensiveness Cotoneaster nummularia Fish. & Mey Mikeen Fr D O Blood purifier 5 0.034 Rosa beggeriana Wall.ex.Royle Throni Fr D O Asthma 8 0.055 Galium chitralensis Nazim. Mattar WP J O Urinary tract infection 10 0.068 6.89 Bergenia stracheyi (Hook.f & Thorns.) Engl. Bisabur L* p T Pimples 11 0.075 18.6 Saxifraga sibirica L. Dromosoru F, L I O Backache 16 0.110
Solanum nigrum L. Pirmilik Fr I O Fever 18 0.124 12.4 Pimples
Daphne mucronata Royle. Lovomekin Fr I T Pimples 12 0.082 8.27 Freckles
Viola rupestris Schm. Milkhon L D O Fever 10 0.068 6.89 Headache
191 Key for Abbreviations
KN: Khowar name/Local name
FC: Number of respondents citing the plant, RFC: Relative Frequency of citation, FIV: Family importance value
PU: Part used: B: Braches, B*: Bark, L: Leaves, L*: Latex, R: Roots, S*: Stem, S: Seeds, Sh: Shoot, F: Flowers, G: Galls, Fr: Fruits
FR: Formulation of recipe: D: Decoction, I: Infusion, J: Juice, P: Powder, p: Paste
ROA: Route of administration: O: Orally, T: Topically
192
Cupperaceae Ephedraceae Alliaceae Poaceae Anacardiaceae Apiaceae Asteraceae Berberidaceae Betulaceae 1 1 1 Boraginiaceae 1 4 2 2 1 Brassicaceae 1 3 3 2 1 Campanulaceae 1 3 1 2 Capparidaceae 2 22 6 Chenopodiaceae 1 Eleagnaceae 8 2 1 Hypericeaceae 1 7 Juglandaceae 1 1 1 1 Lamiaceae 1 Moraceae Oleaceae Papavaraceae Papilionaceae Plantaginaceae Polygonaceae Ranunculaceae Rosaceae Rubiaceae Saxifragaceae
Fig 40. No of medicinal species per family
193
30 25 20 15 10 5
0 Nof of plants & Percentage of& plants Nof
Part used
Fig 41. Classification of medicinal plants by part used
12%
17% 48% Decoction Powder Juice 17% Infusion 6% Past
Fig 42. Different modes of drug formulation
11% 12% Orally Topically 77% Orally, Topically
Fig 43. Mode of administration of drugs
194 0.18 0.151 0.16 0.152 0.158 0.14 0.117 0.124 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0
Fig 44. Highest RFC values
74.4 66.2
44.8
36.5 34.4 30.3 27.5 25.5 24.8 22
Fig 45. FIV of the leading families
195
Head ache Dandruff 2% Cardiotonic Abdominal pain Wounds 1% 1% (Ishkma 1% Eczema Chomique) Hypertensivene Tonsillitis 2% 8% (Buk ss 1% Chomiique) Constipation 1% Pain killer Stomach 1% 2% Lips craking burning Gum Digestive 1% diseases 2% disorders Freckles Stomach Stabbing 1% Bloody Sweelings 2% 1% ache pain Asthma stool 1% 5% 5% (Khuni(Verenz) Pimples Pechis)2% 3% Tuberculosis 1% 1% Diuretic Diarrhea 2% 4% Urinary Dysentery Fever tract 2% 8% infection 3% Dyspepsia Blood (Zehch) purifier 3% Stop3% bleeding 1% Ulcer Sex 1% supressant Jaundice 1% Cough Flue 2% Face Nappy 4% Gastric rash 1% Eye problems patches Tooth ache problems Malaria 1% 3% 1% 4% 1% 2% Bronchitis Intestinal (Bukchomique) worms 2% (Ishkamogogh) 5% Obesity Typhoid Sting of 1% (Niskamishti) Blood pressure Scorpian 2% Back ache 2% 2% (Zahdan) 3%
Fig 46. % age of each ailment
196
ENDEMISM AND CONSERVATION STATUS
4.10 Endemism
Endemism is the restriction of the natural range of a taxon to a defined geographical area (Pandey and Misra, 2008). The total flora of Pakistan is about 6000 of which 405 species are endemic (Shinwari et al., 2002). Most of the uniregional endemics per unit area fall in Sino Japanese, Irano-Turranian and Saharo-Sindian regions. About 78.22% endemics are confined to mountains regions of Pakistan. Three Phytogeographical regions i.e. Sino-Japanese region of Kashmir (10.21%, endemics), Irano-Turranian elements of North Baluchistan (9.4% endemics) and Chitral (9.1% endemics) which were recognized as centers of radiations (Ali and Qaiser, 1986).The taxonomic relationships of most endemic species show that the origin of flora of Terich valley is mostly Irano-Turranian. A total of 61 (13.70%) endemic taxa belonging to 23 families were reported from Terich valley during 3 years of extensive field studies. The existence of these endemic species in Terich valley, Chitral is probably due to climax, temperate climate and geographical topography of the mountains. The richest families having endemic taxa were Asteraceae (11 endemics), Papilionaceae (10 endemics) followed by Brassicaceae (6 endemics) and other families each with less than 5 endemics respectively (Table 4.22, Fig. 47). High mountainous ranges do not only act as a barrier but also provide excellent niches to endemic taxa which are endangered to be extinct in near future (White and Léonard, 1991; Pauli et al., 2003). In Hindukush range; where endemism decreases with increase in elevation (Breckle, 2004). The same trend has been observed in alpine and sub-alpine belts of Terich valley. Ali and Qaiser, 1986 documented that about 90% of endemics are confined to the northern and western mountainous regions. The alpine zones in Terich valley have been less influenced by peoples rather than the lowland ecosystems. Unfavorable conditions and physical impediments restrict human settlements and intensive agricultural activities. Numerous threats like flooding, avalanches, and overgrazing from ongoing years which proofs that maximum temperature could compel alpine plants to move upwards until they arouse at the most highest elevations. The overgrazing prompts the devastation of vegetation, loss of biodiversity and disintegration of soil. Therefore, many mountain ranges which have countless endemic plants are probably going to be endangered (Theurillat and Guisan, 2001; Pauli et al., 2003). The information about endemic flora of Pakistan is little including the percentage of taxonomic diversity,
197 species loss, genetic diversity and species threats. Thus, the aim of this work is to provide baseline information, documentation and conservation of endemic taxa in Terich valley, Chitral.
Table 4.22. Exclusively endemic taxa of Terich valley
S. No Division/Family Taxon A. Monocotyledons
1. Alliaceae Allium chitralicum Wang & Tang.
2. Carex chitralensis Nelmes. Cyperaceae 3. Carex vulpinaris Nees.
4. Fritillaria imperialis var. chitralensis Hort. Liliaceae 5. Gagea chitralensis Dasgupta & Deb.
6. Calamogrostis decora Hook.f. Poaceae 7. Stipa chitrlensis Bor.
8. Schizachyrium impressum (Hack.) A.Camus
Dicotyledons 9. Scaligera chitralica Hiroe. Apiaceae 10. Trachydium depressum ssp. chitralicum
11. Anaphalis chitralensis Qaisr & Rubina
12. Asteraceae Achillea millefolium subsp. chitralensis
13. Anaphalis stantonii Y. Nasir.
14. Cousinia chitralensis Rech.
198 15. Psychrogeton chitralicus Grierson.
16. Seriphidium chitralense (Podlech)Y. R. Ling.
17. Tanacetum chitralense (Podlech) K.
18. Taraxacum chitralense Soest.
19. Taraxacum obtusum (Soset) R.Doll
20. Tricholepis toppinii Dunn.
21. Taraxacum wendelboanum Soset.
22. Betulaceae Betula chitralica Browicz.
23. Draba pakistanica Jafri.
24. Draba olgae subsp. chitralensis (O.E. Schultz) Jafri
25. Draba tibetica var. chitralensis (O. E. Nasir) Jafri. Brassicaceae 26. Erysimum erosum O.E Schultz.
27. Graellsia chitralensis O.E. Schulz.
28. Parrya chitralensis Jafri.
29. Pseudomertensia chitralensis (Riedl) Riedl Boraginaceae 30. Onosma chitralicum I. M.
31. Rochelia chitralensis Y. Nasir
32. Silene longisepala E.Nasir Caryophyllaceae 33. Silene joerstadii Wendelbo.
199 34. Silene stantonii S. A. Ghazanfar
35. Crassulaceae Rosularia adenotricha subsp. chitralica
36. Cuscutaceae Cuscuta villosa L.
37. Campanulaceae Campanula staintonii Rech.f. & Schimann-Czeike
38. Gentianaceae Aloitis smithii Omer.
39. Lamiaceae Eremostachys speciosa Rupr.
40. Onagraceae Epilobium chitralensis Raven.
41. Papaveraceae Corydalis urosepala Fedde.
42. Androsac stantonii Y. Nasir Primulaceae 43. Androsace harrissii Duthie subsp. harrissii
44. Astragalus chitralensis Ali.
45. Astragalus coluteocarpus Boiss. ssp. chitralensis Wenninger 46. Astragalus imitensis Ali.
47. Astragalus minute-foliolatus Wendelbo.
48. Papilionaceae Astragaluss affghnus Boiss.
49. Astragalus laspurensis Ali.
50. Astragalus toppinianus Ali.
51. Astragalus edelbergianus Sirj & Rech.f.
52. Oxytropis chitralensis Ali.
200 53. Sophora mollis (Royle) Graham ex Baker
54. Polygonum cognatum subsp. chitralicum (Rech. f. Polygonaceae Schiman-Czeika) Qaiser 55. Dalphinium nordhagenii Wedelbo. Ranunculaceae 56. Delphinium chitralensis H. Riedl
57. Gaillonia chitralensis Nazim. Rubiaceae 58. Galium chitralensis Nazim.
59. Rubia chitralensis Ehrend.
60. Pedicularis stantonii Y. Nasir Scrophulariaceae 61. Pedicularis caruleolbescans Wendelbo.
201 Alliaceae Cyperaceae Liliaceae 2% 3% Poaceae 3% 3% 5% 3% Apiaceae 2% 5% 3% Asteraceae Betulaceae Brassicaceae 15% Boraginaceae Caryophyllaceae 18% Crassulaceae
3% Cuscutaceae Campanulaceae 2% 2% Gentianaceae 2% 2% Lamiaceae 10% 2% Onagraceae 2% 5% 5% 2% Papaveraceae 2% Primulaceae Papilionaceae Polygonaceae
Fig 47. Family wise distribution of endemic flora based on their respective family
202 4.11 Conservation
Diversity of wild plants is rapidly declining due to the remarkable increase in the human population explosion, urbanization and habitat degradation (Western, 2001). In Pakistan 31% people are poor and living in rural areas which directly dependent on plant resources for their health and income resources (GOP, 2017). Due to anthropogenic stresses plants become extinct with the rate of one species per day which is 1000-10000 more than the rate of naturally occurring extinction (Hilton- Taylor, 2000). If this rate remained constant, 60,000 to 100,000 plant species would disappear in coming 50 years (Lopez-Pujol et al., 2006; Yu Ya et al., 2014; Soelberg and jager, 2016). A total of 33,798 vascular plants (12.5% of the world flora) are recorded as threatened at the universal level (Ali, 2000; Eberhart et al., 2006; Schickhooff, 2006). Forests and mountainous regions of Pakistan are under anthropogenic stresses of deforestation and commercial consumption which are declining at a rate of 1.5% annually (Shinwari and Qaisar, 2011). The IUCN Red List of Threatened species aspires to assess the extinction risk of the world‟s species and to serve as a „barometer of life‟ of the state of nature. IUCN Red List categories and criteria are only applicable to wild plants population of a taxon inside their natural range of ecological occurrence. Unfortunately, no work has been done on threatened plants of Pakistan and very little information is available on this aspect (Jan and Ali, 2009; Haq, 2011; Malik et al., 2011).
4.11.1 Conservation of Endemic Taxa
Terich Valley harbors a rich diversity of plants. Following Botany of the Chitral Relief Expedition (Duthie, 1898) the available written records of the floristic studies in Terich Valley dated back to 1952 as Per Wendelbo collected plants from this valley. Nonetheless, over the decades a large number of species have become threatened due to various anthropogenic activities such as habitat loss (especially deforestation and urbanization), over-exploitation of economically valuable plants, invasion of alien species, uncontrolled farming, unplanned development and tourist inflows (Dar, 2008). Moreover, most plant species are restricted to sub-alpine and alpine habitats with limited range of distribution and occasional occurrence which, coupled with the different types of threatening factors in the wild and urgent work required to assess their threat status. The endemic taxa of an area is most important
203 from a threat perspective as these plants are restricted to a specific region and are not present anywhere else in the world (Ali, 2010). Limited populations of these plants also inhabit small geographical ranges and special environments (Rabinowitz, 1981; Mills and Schwartz, 2005; Ricketts et al., 2005). It could trigger extinction because of its low population size and a single small scale distribution, an endangered species thus needs immediate attention (Alam and Ali, 2010). The present study is an attempt to evaluate conservation status of 9 endemics of the valley in accordance with IUCN regionalguidelines 2003 version 3.1 following IUCN categories and criteria 2010 version 8.1.
4.11.2 Distribution of endemics
In the present study, 9 taxa were assessed following IUCN Red Data List categories and criteria (IUCN, 2010) version 8.1, out of which 5 taxa were categorized as critically endangered whereas, the remaining 4 taxa as endangered. The present study revealed that the reported endemics are distributed in sub-alpine and alpine areas of Terich valley, Chitral. Allium chitralicum is narrow endemic taxa that grows in temperate and sub-alpine areas and inhabits habitats of moderately humid, shady and stony undulating crevices of Shagrom at an altitudinal range of 1480-1900 m (Fig. 48). Anaphalis chitralensis is distributed between 1975-3471 m (Ghari, Rosh Gol, Warimon, and Zondrangam) in the foothills, sub-alpine and alpine regions. This plant grows with junipers, on steep and open places, rock crevices, and in sunny meadows (Fig. 49). Astragalus chitralensis grows in the Warimon, Shagrom, Rosh Gol and Zondrangam between 2300-3200 m and is found in moderately-humid, less shady spots in or between rocks (Fig. 50). Whereas Astragalus imitensis inhabits damp areas in open or shady loose soiled patches, or sometimes even grows with junipers. The species is distributed in typical sub-alpine zone between 2200-2590 m at Zondrangam and Rosh Gol (Fig. 51). Cuscuta villosa occurs in very steep, least stable, moist shady or open slopes at an altitude of 2400-3350 m (Rosh Gol) as small populations among the rocks or in rock crevices (Fig. 52). Delphinium chitralense grows in the valley's Warimon, Rosh Gol and Zondrangam and occurs in wet places between 2000-3300 m in open or shady areas, rock crevices, loose soiled and less pebbly patches (Fig. 53). Delphinium nordhagenii is distributed at altitudes of 3657 m (Rosh Gol, Ghari) in the sub-alpine and alpine regions (Fig. 54). Pedicularis stantonii
204 is also narrow endemic taxa that grows in alpine areas and inhabits moderately humid, shady and sandy slopes at an altitude of 3000-4300 m (Ghari) above sea level (Fig. 55). Similarly, Tanacetum chitralense was reported from the valley's Rosh Gol, Ghari and Zondrangam and occurs in wet places in open or shady areas, with stony crevices between 2620-3700 m altitudes (Fig. 56).
4.11.3 Assessment of threat status
During the present investigation the endemics were surveyed in the Terich valley and the total number of mature individuals, subpopulations, extent of occurrence, occupancy area and decrease/fluctuations in the number of mature individuals were reported (Table. 4.24, Fig. 57-59). In the case of Allium chitralicum, the total number of subpopulations was recorded one and the total number of mature individuals was reported 39, which turned out to be 17 in 2016, 12 in 2017 and 10 individuals in 2018, while the number of mature individuals decreased to 12 and the index of grazing was reported as low. The EOO and AOO measured for this species were 7 km2 and 4 km2, respectively (Fig. 60). Anaphalis chitralensis has been reported in the Terich valley from 4 separate subpopulations. This species' AOO and EOO have been measured as 430 km2 and 22 km2, respectively (Fig. 61). A total of 619 mature individual plants were recorded of which 264 plants were placed as extensively grazed of 2016, 233 in 2017 and 122 in 2018 with an average of 206 mature individual plants per year. Astragalus chitralensis occurs at 4 different sub- populations in the valley. The EOO and AOO for this species were recorded 80 km2 and 7 km2 respectively (Fig. 62). The total number of mature individual plants in these sub-populations was 99 in 2016, 60 in 2017 and only 34 mature individuals with an average of 64 individuals per year were located and grazing index was recorded as extensively grazed. Astragalus imitensis occurs at 2 different sub-populations in Terich valley. In 2016, the total number of mature individual plants in these sub- populations was 57, in 2017 40 and in 2018 there were only 13 mature individuals with an average of 37 individuals per year, with a moderate grazing index (Fig. 6). The Area of Occupancy (AOO) and the Extent of Occurrence (EOO) of the species were 6 km2 and 5 km2 recorded respectively (Fig. 63). During the present study, one sub-population of Cuscuta villosa was recorded which show narrow endemic nature. The total number of mature individuals was 56 in 2016, 42 in 2017 and only 36
205 mature individuals were recorded in 2018 with an average of 44 individuals per year and grazing index was calculated which show less grazed pattern of grazing for this endemic taxa . The calculated EOO and AOO turned out to be 3 km2 each for Cuscuta villosa, respectively (Fig. 64). Of three different sub-populations, delphinium chitralense has been identified. The species EOO and AOO were 460 km2 and 36 km2, respectively (Fig. 65). In 2016, the total number of mature individuals was 99, in 2017 54 and in 2018 the total number of mature individuals was 183, with an average of 61 mature single plants each year. 2 sub-populations of the Delphinium nordhagenii were located in Terich valley. A total of 101 mature individual plants with an average of 72 mature individual plants per year were observed in 2016, 68 in 2017 and 47 in 2018. This species' AOO and EOO have been measured as 5 km2 and 11 km2, respectively (Fig. 66). In case of Pedicularis stantonii the total number of sub-populations was recorded one which presents narrow endemic pattern and the total number of mature individuals was recorded 103 which is turned out to be 46 in year 2016, 33 in 2017 and 24 in 2018 respectively, while grazing index was recorded as moderate. This species had a measured EOO and AOO of 3 km2 and 7 km2, respectively (Fig. 67). Similarly, Tanacetum chitralensis has been reported in the Terich valley from 3 different sub-populations. This species' AOO and EOO have been estimated as 443 km2 and 32 km2, respectively (Fig. 68). A total of 300 mature individual plants were recorded in which 133 in 2016, 105 in 2017 and 62 in 2018 with an average of 100 mature individual plants per year and grazing index was recorded as also moderate.
Of the 9 evaluated taxa, Anaphalis chitralensis, Cuscuta reflexa, Delphinium chitralense and Tanacetum chitralense are endangered (EN) while as Allium chitralicum, Astragalus chitralensis, Astragalus imitensis, Delphinium chitralense and Pedicularis stantonii classify as Critically Endangered (CR) threat category (Table. 4.25). Assigning a suitable category of threat to a species is of critical importance for its conservation, but only seldom have these categories been applied to endangered species in compliance with IUCN guidelines in the Terich valley, Hindukush range, Chitral.
206 4.11.4 Operative threats to endemics
The present study sheds light on the various threats which affects the selected endemics in their natural habitats and are responsible for their extinction. Unregulated grazing, over-exploitation for local use, habitat degradation, deforestation, landslides and unregulated tourist flow were the major threats to the population of these endemics in their natural habitats (Table 4.25). The natural habitat of these taxa fall under the extensively grazed alpine pastures (Ganie and Tali, 2013) such as Anaphalis chitralensis and Astragalus chitralensis which were mostly consumed during overgrazing. These species were recorded from only two sites (Rosh Gol and Ghari) because they were not able to set their seeds due to grazing animals. Plant species reduced in an area due to overgrazing and trampling (Landsbery et al., 2001; Watkinson and Ormerod, 2000; Vergeer et al., 2003). Sher et al. (2005) stated that overgrazing is the principal threat to vegetation degradation and reduces species distribution through direct utilization as well as through really changing their natural habitat. The quantity of endangered species is expanding because of natural degradation and overgrazing (Vesk and Westoby, 2000). Over-grazing also caused land erosion due to which reduction in phytodiversity occursin the area. The indirect effects of over-grazing include mechanical injuries to seedlings, soil composition and soil microorganisms. These practices increase the susceptibility of soil to erosion condition. Landslide was another threat to the natural habitat of Anaphalis chitralensis and Astragalus chitralensis in Rosh Gol and Ghari. Anaphalis chitralensis prefers moist slopes which are prone to landslids phenomenon. The landslides not just influence the portion of the population size but also cause the fragmentation of habitat. A major part of the vegetation in Terich valley was exposed to landslids. Lapcha et al. (2011) assumed that landslids push plants of an area towards vulnerability. The inhabitants of Terich valley mostly depend on the plant resources for their various domestic uses and in this way many plants were near to extinction. Conservation and sustainable use of plant resources in the valley need to be initiated. In outlook of the above-stated situations, it was felt essential to carry out extensive field studies throughout the Terich valley in order to get the complete picture of the plant wealth and to enlist the threatened plants and propose strategies for their conservation.
207 Table 4.24. Conservation status of endemics
Taxa Sub- Population size Grazed AOO EOO Altitudinal populations individuals/year (sq.km) (sq.km) range (m) 2016 2017 2018 2016 2017 2018 Allium chitralicum Shagrom 17 12 10 7 5 - Wang & Tang. Total 39 12 4 7 1480-1900 Grazing index Moderate grazed Anaphalis chitralensis Ghari 146 86 62 22 17 9 Qaiser & Rubina. Rosh Gol 87 56 - 12 - - Warimon - 68 45 - 13 6 22 430 1975-3471 Zondrangam 31 23 15 16 9 - Total 264 233 122 50 39 15 Grazing index Extensively grazed Astragalus chitralensis Ali. Shagrom 34 24 16 14 10 - Warimon 27 12 9 7 4 3 Zondrangam 20 14 9 9 5 - 7 80 2300-3200 Rosh Gol 18 10 - 8 4 - Total 99 60 34 38 23 3 Grazing index Extensively grazed Astragalus imitensis Zondrangam 23 16 9 10 4 4 Ali. Rosh Gol 34 24 5 9 5 - 5 6 2200-2590 Total 57 40 13 19 9 4
208 Grazing index Moderate grazed Cuscuta villosa L. Rosh Gol 56 42 36 12 10 6 Total 134 28 3 3 2400-3350 Grazing index Less grazed Delphinium chitralense H. Rosh Gol 37 22 16 11 4 3 Riedl. Warimon 40 18 8 8 6 5 Zondrangam 22 14 6 10 5 - 36 460 2000-3300 Total 99 54 30 29 15 8 Grazing index Moderate grazed Delphinium nordhagenii Rosh Gol 45 36 23 14 6 - Wendelbo. Ghari 56 32 24 - 9 6 5 11 3657 Total 101 68 47 14 15 6 Grazing index Less grazed Pedicularis stantonii Y. Ghari 46 33 24 14 9 6 Nasir. Total 103 29 3 7 3000-4300 Grazing index Moderate grazed Tanacetum chitralense Ghari 56 45 26 8 - 5 (Podlech) K. Rosh Gol 45 39 22 6 3 - Zondrangam 32 21 14 12 8 7 32 443 2620-3700 Total 133 105 62 26 11 12 Grazing index Less grazed
209 Table 4.25. IUCN threat categories to selected endemics
Total no of Total no of Extent of Area of Category Species evaluated mature sub- Occurrence Occupancy Major threats Criteria met assigned individuals populations (km)2 (km)2 B 1 a b (v) 2 a b Allium chitralicum Critically 39 1 7 4 Overgrazing, Landslides (v); C 1 2 a (i) (ii); Wang & Tang. Endangered D Overgrazing, Landslides, A 2 a; B 1 a b (v) c Anaphalis chitralensis 619 4 430 22 overexploitation for local (iii) (iv) 2 a b (v) c Endangered Qaiser & Rubina. use (iii) (iv); C 2 b Astragalus chitralensis C1 2 a (i) b Critically 193 4 80 7 Overgrazing, Landslides Ali. Endangered Astragalus B 1 a c (i) (ii) (iv); Critically 110 2 6 5 Overgrazing, Landslides imitensis Ali. C 2 b Endangered B 1 a c (i) (ii) (iii) Cuscuta villosa L. 134 1 3 3 Overgrazing, Landslides (iv) 2 a c (i) (ii) Endangered (iii) (iv); C 2 a (i) b Delphinium chitralense B 2 a c (i) (ii) (iii) 183 3 460 36 Overgrazing, Landslides Endangered H.Riedl. (iv) C 2 a (i) b
Delphinium Overgrazing, Landslides, C 1 2 b Critically 276 2 11 5 nordhagenii Wendelbo. overexploitation for local Endangered
210 use B 1 a b (v) c (iv) 2 Pedicularis stantonii Critically 103 1 7 3 Overgrazing, Landslides a b (v); C 1 2 a (i) Y. Nasir. Endangered (ii) b; D A 2 a; B 1 a b (v) c Tanacetum chitralense 300 3 443 32 Overgrazing, Landslides (iii) (iv) 2 a b (v) c Endangered (Podlech) K. (iii) (iv); C 2 b
211
Fig 48. Allium chitralicum: A, Habitat; B, Inflorescence.
Fig 49. Anaphalis chitralensis: A, Habitat; B, Inflorescence
212
Fig 50. Astragalus chitralensis: A, Habitat; B, Inflorescence
Fig 51. Astragalus imitensis: A, Habitat; B, inflorescence
213
Fig 52. Cuscuta villosa: A, Habitat; B, Inflorescence
Fig 53. Delphinium chitralense: A, Habitat; B, Inflorescence
214
Fig 54. Delphinium nordhagenii: A, Habitat; B, Flower
Fig 55. Pedicularis stantonii: A, Habitat; B, Inflorescence
215
Fig 56. Tanacetum chitralense: A, Habitat; B, Flower
216
4.5 4 4 3.5 3 3 3 3 2.5 2 2
populations 2 - 1.5 1 1 1 1 0.5 0
No. of Sub of No.
Fig 57. No. of sub-populations of endemics 500 430 460 443 400 300 200 80 100 7 4 22 7 6 5 3 3 36 11 5 7 3 32 0
EOO (Sq. km) AOO (Sq. km)
Fig 58. EOO and AOO of endemics 619
276 300 193 183 110 134 103 39
Fig 59. Total no of mature individuals during 2016-2018
217
a. 2016
b. 2017
c. 2018
Fig 60. AOO and EOO of Allium chitralicum during 2016-2018
218
a. 2016
b. 2017
c. 2018
Fig 61. AOO and EOO of Anaphalis chitralensis during 2016-2018
219
a. 2016
b. 2017
c. 2018
Fig 62. AOO and EOO of Astragalus chitralensis during 2016-2018
220
a. 2016
b. 2017
c. 2018
Fig 63. AOO and EOO of Astragalus imitensis during 2016-2018
221
a. 2016
b. 2017
c. 2018
Fig 64. AOO and EOO of Cuscuta villosa during 2016-2018
222
a. 2016
b. 2017
c. 2018 Fig 65. AOO and EOO of Delphinium chitralense during 2016-2018
223
a. 2016
b.. 2017
c. 2018
Fig 66. AOO and EOO of Delphinium nordhagenii during 2016-2018
224
a. 2016
b. 2017
c. 2018
Fig 67. AOO and EOO of Pedicularis stantonii during 2016-2018
225
a. 2016
b. 2017
c. 2018 Fig 68. AOO and EOO of Tanacetum chitralense during 2016-2018
226 4.12 Chorology
Chorology is the study of classification and distribution pattern of the flora of an area (Fattorini, 2015). According to Campbell (1926), the main theme of plant geography is to discover the similarities and diversities in the flora of the present and past found in widely separated parts of the earth. The phytogeography, distribution of plant species reflects the prevailing climatic conditions (Azizi and Keshavarzi, 2014). Chorological study revealed that IT elements with 226 species dominated the valley, followed by enough number endemics (61 Species) of uniregional distribution. Similarly, biregional distribution also showed 59 species from (IT, SJ), 14 species (IT, SS), 20 species (IT, ES) and 11 species from (IT, Med). While 19 species were contributed as Pluri-regional in distribution from (IT, SJ, Med) 2 species, (IT, SS, Med) 3 species, (IT, ES, Med) 8 species and (IT, SS, SJ) 6 species respectively. However, 18 species were cosmopolitan in distribution (Table 4.26, Fig. 69). Based on bulk contribution of 226 species the area is declared as Irano-Turranian Phytogeographical region. Because of the vicinity to Euro-Siberian and Mediterranean elements, there were elements with distribution limited to this region. The presence of high endemic richness of species, in the valley is due to the climax and temperate climate. Therefore, many high mountainous ranges host a large number of endemic taxa, which are likely to suffer critical species losses (Pauli et al., 2003). Our results support the assumption that the percentage of endemic plants increases with increasing altitude (Odland, 2009; Vediya and Kharadi, 2011). The systematic linkage of most endemic species shows that the origin of alpine flora of Terich valley is Irano-Turranian. In compare to the Hindukush mountains where endemism declines with increasing altitude in the alpine belts, a maximum of endemism found in sub- alpine belts and higher montanes (Breckle, 2004). It would be remarkable to look for the distribution range of the very high altitude species. The geographical distribution of plant species recorded in different areas and relative data of lowland flora was designated after (Hedge and Wendelbo, 1978; Zohary, 1973; Takhtajan, 1986; Akhani, 2007), we should investigate that, in spite some species variations and similarities, there is agreement on various patterns of distribution of sub-alpine and alpine species in the valley. The chorology of alpine, sub-alpine and lowland species of Terich valley, Chitral is given in (Table 4.27).
227 Table 4.26. Chorological analysis of flora
Distribution of taxa No of taxa % age a. Uniregional elements Irano-Turanian Species 226 52.92% Endemic Species 61 13.70% b. Biregional elements
Irano-Turanian, Sino-Japanese Species 59 13.81% Irano-Turanian, Saharo-Sindian Species 14 3.27% Irano-Turanian, Euro-Siberian Species 20 4.68% Irano-Turanian, Mediterranean Species 11 2.57% c. Plurriregional elements Irano-Turanian, Sino-Japanese, Mediterranean 2 0.46% Irano-Turanian, Saharo-Sindian, Mediterranean 3 0.70% Irano-Turanian, Euro-Siberian, Mediterranean 8 1.87% Irano-Turanian, Saharo-Sindian, Sino-Japanese 6 1.40% Cosmopolitan Species 18 4.21%
226 IT IT,ES,Med IT,SJ
IT,SS,SJ IT,SS 59 8 6 14 2 61 IT,SJ,Med 3 18 END 11 20
IT,SS,Med COS
IT,Med IT,ES
Fig 69. Phytochoria of Terich valley
228 Table 4.27. Chorology of Terich valley, Chitral
Chorological Division/ Family Plant Species classes A. Pteridophytes 1. Asplenium septentrionale (L.) Hoffm. IT, SJ 1. Aspleniaceae 2. Asplenium viride Huds. IT 3. Cystopteris fragilis (L.) Bernh. 2. Dryopteridaceae IT, SJ 4. Adiantum venustum D. Don 3. Adiantaceae IT, SJ 5. Equisetum ramossimum Desf. 4. Equisetaceae IT, SJ B. Gymnosperms 6. Juniperus communis L. IT, SJ 5. Cupressaceae 7. Juniperus excelsa M. Bieb IT, SS 8. Ephedra gerardiana Wall.ex Stapf IT 6. Ephedraceae 9. Ephedra intermedia Schrenk & Meyer IT C. Angiosperms I. Monocots
10. Allium chitralicum Wang & Tang END 11. Allium barszczewskii Lipsky 7. Alliaceae IT 12. Allium caroliniannum DC. IT 13. Eremurus stenophyllus subsp. 8. Asphodelaceae stenophyllus S. I. Ali IT
14. Polygonatum geminiflorum Decne 9. Convallariaceae IT, SJ 15. Carex chitralensis Nelmes. END 16. Carex vulpinaris Nees. END 17. Carex stenocarpa Turcz.ex V. Krecz 10. Cyperaceae IT 18. Carex stenophylla Wahlenb. subsp. stenophylloides (V. Kreez.) Egor. IT
19. Cyperus nutans subsp. eleusinoids IT
229 (Kunth) T.
20. Fimbristylis bisumbellata (Forssk.) Bubani, Dodecanthia. IT, SJ
21. Kobresia laxa Nees, Contr. IT 22. Kobresia pygmaea (C. B. Clarke) C. B. Clarke IT
23. Schoenoplectus lacustris (L.) Palla subsp. tabernaemontani (C. C. Gmel) A. & D. IT LÖve.
24. Iris hookeriana Foster. 11. Iridaceae IT, SJ 25. Luzula spicata (L.) DC. 12. Juncaceae IT 26. Fritillaria imperialis var. END chitralensis Hort. 27. Gagea gageoides (Zucc.) Vved. 13. Liliaceae IT 28. Gagea alexia Ali. IT 29. Gagea chitralensis Dasgupta & Deb. END 30. Dactylorhiza hatagirea (D.Don) Soo IT, SJ 31. Dactylorhiza kafiriana Renz Marshe IT 14. Orchidaceae 32. Dactylorhiza umbrosa (Kar. & Kir.) Nevski IT, SJ
33. Epipactis gigantea Douglas ex Hook. IT 34. Agrostis nervosa Nees ex Trin. COS 35. Agrostis viridis Gouan, Hort. COS 36. Arthraxon prionodes (Steud.) Dandy IT 37. Avena sativa Retz. 15. Poaceae COS 38. Brachypodium distachyon (L.) P. Beauv. IT
39. Brachypodium sylvaticum (Huds.) P. Beauv IT
230 40. Bromus danthoniae Trin. IT 41. Bromus japonicus Thunb. ex Murr., Syst. COS
42. Bromus oxyodon Schrenk. IT 43. Bromus pectinatus Thunb. IT 44. Bromus persicus Boiss. IT 45. Bromus ramosus Huds. IT 46. Bromus tectorum L. IT, Med 47. Calamagrostis decora Hook.f. END 48. Calamagrostis pseudophragmites subsp. speudophragmites (Hall.f.) Koel. IT, ES
49. Calamagrostis pseudophragmites (Hook. f.) R. R. Stewart IT, ES
50. Cymbopogon commutatus (Steud.) Stapf IT, ES
51. Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. COS 52. Dactylis glomerata L. COS 53. Dicanthium annulatum Forssk. Stapf. IT, SJ 54. Elymus repens (L.) Gould. COS 55. Elymus dahuricus Turcz.ex. Grieseb. IT 56. Eragrostis cilianensis (All.) Lut.ex F.T. Hubbard IT, SS
57. Festuca olgae (Regel) Krivot. IT, Med 58. Helictotrichon pratense (L.) Pilger IT, SJ 59. Koeleria macrantha (Ledeb.) Schult. IT, SS 60. Lolium temulentum L. IT, SS 61. Melica persica Kunth. IT
231 62. Pennisetum flaccidum Griseb. IT, SS 63. Piptatherum gracile Mez. IT, SJ 64. Piptatherum laterale (Munro ex Regel) Rozhev. IT
65. Piptatherum hilariae Pazij IT, SS, SJ 66. Poa alpina L. IT 67. Poa versicolor subsp. araratica (Trautv.) Tzvelev IT, SJ
68. Poa bulbosa L. IT, Med 69. Poa pratensis subsp. pratensis COS 70. Polypogon monspeliensis (L.) Desf IT, SS, SJ 71. Puccinellia minuta Bor. IT 72. Setaria gluea (Retz.) Trin ex Steud. IT, SJ 73. Setaria intermedia Roem & Schult. IT 74. Schizachyrium impressum (Hack.) A.Camus END
75. Stipa chitralensis Bor. END 76. Stipa capillata L. IT 77. Tetrapogon villosus Desf. IT, SS, SJ 78. Trisetaria loeflingiana (L.) Paunero IT, SJ 79. Trisetum clarkei (Hook.f.) R. R. IT 80. Trisetum spicatum (L.) Richt. COS II Dicots 81. Amaranthus viridis L. 16. Amaranthaceae IT, SJ 82. Pistacia atlantica subsp. cabulica 17. Anacardiaceae IT 18. Apiaceae 83. Ammi visnega (L.) Lam. IT, SJ
232 84. Anethum gravelons L. IT, SJ 85. Bunium persicum (Boiss.) Fedtsch. Rastit IT
86. Bupleurum gilesii Wolf. IT 87. Bupleurum kohistanicum E. Nasir IT, Med 88. Ferula hindukushensis Kitamura. IT 89. Ferula jaeschkeana Vatke. IT, SJ 90. Ferula narthex Boiss. IT 91. Heracleum polyadenum Rech.f. & Riedl. IT
92. Pleurospermum stylosum C.B. Clarke IT 93. Pimpinella stewartii Dunn. Nasir IT, SJ 94. Prangos pabularia Lindl. IT 95. Scaligera chitralica Hiroe. END 96. Scandix pecten-veneris L. IT, SJ 97. Torilis arvensis (Huds.) Link. IT, SJ 98. Trachydium depressum ssp. chitralicum END
99. Trachyspermum ammi (L.) Spargue. IT, SS 100. Cynanchum acutum L. 19. Asclepiadaceae IT, Med 101. Achillea millefolium subsp. END chitralensis 102. Ajania fruticulosa (Ledeb.) Poljakov IT 103. Allardia glabra Decne., Voy. IT 20. Asteraceae 104. Allardia stoliczkae C.B. Clarke IT 105. Allardia tridactylites (Kar. & Kir.) Schultz IT, SJ
106. Anaphalis chitralensis Qaiser & END
233 Rubina
107. Anaphalis stantonii Y. Nasir END 108. Anaphalis triplinervis (Sims) C.B Clarke IT
109. Anthemis cotula L. IT, SJ 110. Artemisia biennis Willd. IT, ES 111. Artemisia brevifolia Wall ex DC. IT 112. Artemisia rutifolia Spreng. IT, ES 113. Artemisia elegantissim Pamp. IT, ES 114. Artemisia parviflora Roxb ex. D. Don IT, ES 115. Artemisia persica Boiss, Diagn. IT, ES 116. Artemisia scoparia Waldst. & Kit. IT, ES 117. Artemisia sieversiana Ehrh. IT 118. Askellia flexuosa (Ledb.) W.A. Weber IT, SJ 119. Aster flaccidus Bunge. IT, SJ 120. Bellis perennis L. IT, Med 121. Brachyactis roylei (Candolle) IT, SJ Wendelbo. 122. Carthamus tinctorus L. IT 123. Centaurea iberica Trev.ex. Sprengel. COS 124. Cichoriun intybus L. IT 125. Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. IT 126. Cirsium wallichii var. glabratum (Hook. f.) Wendelbo IT
127. Cirsium rhizocephalum C. A. Mey IT 128. Cirsium griffithii Boiss. IT
234 129. Cnicus benedictus L. IT, SJ 130. Conyza aegyptiaca (L.) Dryand. ex Aiton COS
131. Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronquist. COS 132. Cousinia buphthalmoides Regel. IT 133. Cousinia chitralensis Rech. END 134. Cousinia khashensis Rech.f. IT 135. Cousinia chionophila Rech.f. IT 136. Cousinia haeckeliae Bornm. IT 137. Cousinia oxytoma Rech.f. IT 138. Cousinia multiloba DC. IT 139. Cousinia pycnoloba Boiss. IT 140. Cousinia eriobasis Bunge. IT 141. Crepis sancta (L.) Babc. ssp. sancta IT 142. Crepis aitchisonii Boiss. IT 143. Crepis multicaulis Ledeb. var. congsta IT
144. Crepis pulchra L. IT 145. Echinops echinatus Roxb. IT 146. Echinops chloroleucus Rech.f. IT 147. Filago germanica (L.) Huds IT 148. Frolovia gilesii (Hemsl.) B.A. Scherip IT 149. Heteracia szovitsii Fisch. & C.A. Mey. IT
150. Heteropappus altaicus (Willd.) Novopokr. IT
235 151. Inula obtusifolia Kerner. IT, SJ 152. Koelpinia linearis Pall. var. linearis IT, SJ 153. Lactuca serriola L. IT, ES 154. Lactuca tatarica (L.) C.A. Mey. IT 155. Launaea acanthodes (Boiss.) Kuntze. IT, SS 156. Matricaria chamomilla L. IT, SJ 157. Myricatis wallichii Less. IT 158. Pseudognaphalium luteo-album (L.), O. M. Hilliard & B. L Burtt IT, SJ
159. Psychrogeton chitralicus Grierson. END 160. Saussurea leptophylla Hemsl. IT 161. Saussurea jacea (Klotzsch) C.B.Clarke. IT
162. Saussurea elliptica C. B. Clarke IT 163. Scorzonera virgata DC. IT 164. Senecio analogus DC. IT 165. Senecio chrysanthemoides DC. IT 166. Seriphidium brevifolium IT (Wall. ex DC.) Ling & Y. R. Ling 167. Seriphidium chitralense END (Podlech) Y. R. Ling 168. Sonchus asper (L.) Hill. IT 169. Tanacetum griffithii (C. B. Clarke) Muradyan. IT, Med
170. Tanacetum chitralense (Podlech) K. END 171. Taraxacum brachyglosoides Soset IT 172. Taraxacum brevirostre Hand. - Mazz.var. lanatum IT
236 173. Taraxacum elegantiforme Soest IT 174. Taraxacum chitralense Soest END 175. Taraxacum longirostre Schischk var. tirichinse (Soest) S. Abed IT
176. Taraxacum polyodon Dahlst. IT 177. Taraxacum pseudotenebristylum IT Soest 178. Taraxacums quarrosiceps Soest IT 179. Taraxacum tricolor V. S IT 180. Taraxacum wendelboanum Soest END 181. Taraxacum officinale Weber. IT 182. Taraxacum obtusum (Soest) R.Doll END 183. Tragopogon gracilis D.Don. IT 184. Tricholepis toppinii Dunn. END 185. Tussilago farfara L. IT, SJ, Med 186. Xanthium strumarium L. COS 187. Youngia japonica (L.) DC IT, SJ 188. Berberis calliobotrys Aitch.ex Koehne. IT 21. Berberidaceae 189. Berberis lyceum Royle. IT, SJ
190. Berberis parkeriana Schneid IT 191. Betula chitralica Browicz END 22. Betulaceae 192. Betula utilis D.Don IT 193. Arnebia euchroma (Royle ex Benth.) I . M. Johnston IT 23. Boraginaceae 194. Arnebia griffithii Boiss., Diagn. IT
195. Arnebia hispidisma (Lehm.) A. DC IT
237 196. Asperugo procumbens L. IT, ES 197. Cynoglossum lanceolatum Wall.ex. Benth. IT
198. Cynoglossum glochidiatum Wall.ex Benth. IT
199. Lappula barbata (M. Bieb) Gurke. IT 200. Lindelofia stylosa (Kar. & Kir.) Brand, Pflanzenr. IT
201. Lindelofia anchusoides (Lindl.) Lehm. IT 202. Myosotis avensis (L.) Hill. IT 203. Onosma chitralicum I. M. Johiston END 204. Pseudomertensia chitralensis (Riedl) Riedl END
205. Rochelia chitralensis Y. Nasir END 206. Solenanthus circinnatus Ledeb IT, Med 207. Alliaria petiolata (M. Bieb.) Cavara & Grande IT, ES, Med
208. Arabidopsis wallichii (Hook. f. & Thoms.) N. Busch IT
209. Capsella bursa-pestoris L. COS 210. Conringia orientalis (L.) Andrz. Syst. Nat. IT
24. Brassicaceae 211. Coronopus didymus (L.) Sm. IT, SS, Med 212. Descurainia sophia (L.) Webb & IT, ES, Med Berth.
213. Draba olgae subsp. chitralensis (O.E. Schultz) Jafri END
214. Draba korshinskyi IT, ES (O. Fedtschenko) Pohle. 215. Draba stenocarpa Hook. IT, ES
238 216. Draba tibetica var. chitralensis (O. E. Nasir) Jafri END
217. Draba pakistanica Jafri END 218. Erysimum erosum O. E Schultz END 219. Goldbachia laevigata (M. Bieb.) DC. IT, SS 220. Graellsia chitralensis O.E. Schulz END 221. Isatis tinctoria L. subsp. tinctoria IT, ES, Med 222. Cardaria draba (L.) Desv IT, SJ 223. Lepidium apetalum H. & T. IT, SJ, Med 224. Malcolmia cabulica IT, SJ var. topppinii (O.E. Schulz) Nasir 225. Malcolmia intermedia C.A. Mey. IT, SJ 226. Matthiola flavida Boiss. IT 227. Nasturtium officinale R. Br. IT, SS, Med 228. Neslia apiculata Fisch., C.A. Mey. & Ave IT, SS
229. Parrya chitralensis Jafri. END 230. Raphanus raphanistrum L. IT, SS 231. Rorippa islandica (Oeder) Borbas IT 232. Sisymbrium brassiciforme C. A. Mey. IT 233. Thlaspi perfoliatum L. IT 234. Buxus wallichiana Baill, Monogr. 25. Buxaceae Bux.et Styloc. IT
235. Campanula staintonii Rech.f. & Schimann-Czeike END 26. Campanulaceae 236. Asyneuma strictum Wendelbo. IT
237. Codonopsis clematidea (Schrenk) IT C.B. Clarke
239 238. Capparis spinosa L. 27. Capparaceae IT, SS, Med 239. Lonicera asperifolia (Decne.) Hk. f. IT 28. Caprifoliaceae 240. Lonicera griffithii Hook.f. & Thoms. IT
241. Lonicera myrtillus Hook. f. & Thoms. IT, SJ 242. Arenaria orbiculata Royle ex Edgew. IT 243. Acanthophylum laxiflorum Boiss. IT 244. Cerastium cerastioides (L.) Britton. IT 245. Dianthus angulatus Royle ex Benth. IT 246. Dianthus orientalis Adams. IT 247. Lepyrodicalis holosteoides (C. A. M.) Fenzl IT
248. Minuartia hybrida (Vill.) Schischkin. subsp. hybrida IT
249. Silene affghanica Rohrb. 29.Caryophyllaceae IT 250. Silene conoidea L. IT 251. Silene gonosperma (Rupr.) Bocquet IT 252. Silene stantonii S. A. Ghazanfar END 253. Silene joerstadii Wendelbo END 254. Silene viscosa (L.) Pers. IT 255. Silene vulgaris (Moench) Garcke. IT 256. Silene longisepala E.Nasir END 257. Stellaria decumbens Edgew. IT 258. Stellaria media (L.) Vill. IT 259. Atriplex schugnanica Iljin. 30. IT, SS Chenopodiaceae 260. Chenopodium botrys L. IT, SS, SJ
261. Chenopodium foliosum (Merrich.) IT, SS, SJ
240 Aschers
262. Chenopodium murale L. IT, ES 263. Kochia indica Wight, Icon. IT, SS 264. Haloxlon griffithii subsp.grifthii Moq. IT, SS 265. Convulvulus arvensis L. 31. Convolvulaceae COS 266. Cuscuta lupuliformis Krocker IT 32. Cuscutaceae 267. Cuscuta capitata Roxb. IT
268. Cuscuta villosa L. END 269. Orostachys thyrsiflora (DC.) Fischer ex Sweets IT
270. Rhodiola heterodonta (Hook.f. & Thomson) Boriss. IT
271. Rhodiola wallichiana (Hook.) S.H. Fu IT 272. Rosularia adenotricha subsp. 33. Crassulaceae adenotricha IT
273. Rosularia adenotricha subsp. chitralica END
274. Rosularia alpestris (Kar & Kir) Boriss. IT
275. Hylotelephium ewersii (Ledeb.) H. Ohba IT
276. Scabiosa olivieri var. olivieri 34. Dipsacaceae IT, ES, Med 277. Elaeagnus angustifolia var. 35. Elaeagnaceae angustifolia IT, ES
278. Hippophae rhamnoides Rousi. IT 279. Euphorbia wallichii Hk. IT 36. Euphorbiaceae 280. Euphorbia thomsoniana Boiss. IT
281. Euphorbia osyridea Boiss. IT
241 282. Fumaria indica (Hausskn.) Pugsley 37. Fumariaceae COS 283. Aloitis smithii Omer END 284. Gentianodes argentea (Royle ex 38. Gentianaceae D.Don) Omer IT
285. Lomatogonium spathulatum (Kern.) Fernald. IT
286. Geranium wallichianum D. Don ex S 39. Geraniaceae weet IT, ES
287. Ribes orientale Desf. 40. Grossulariaceae IT 288. Hypericum scabrum L. 41. Hypericaceae IT 289. Hypericum perforatum L. IT 290. Alajja rhomboidea (Benth.) Ikonn. IT 291. Dracocephalum nutans L. IT 292. Dracocephalum stamineum Kar. & Kir. IT
293. Eremostachys edelbergii Rech.f. IT 294. Eremostachys speciosa Rupr. END 295. Lagochilus cabulicus Bth. IT 42. Lamiaceae 296. Mentha longifolia (L.) Huds. IT, SS, SJ 297. Mrrubium vulgare L. IT 298. Nepeta cataria L. IT 299. Nepeta clarkei Hook.f. IT 300. Nepeta floccosa Benth. IT 301. Nepeta podostachys Benth. IT 302. Peroviskia atriplicifolia Benth. IT 303. Scutellaria heydei Hook. IT
242 304. Scutellaria multicaulis Boiss. IT 305. Thymus linearis Benth. subsp. linearis Jalas. IT
306. Ziziphora clinopodioides Lam. IT 307. Alcea nudiflora (Lindl.) Boiss 43. Malvaceae IT 308. Fraxinus hookerrii Wenzig. 44. Oleaceae IT 309. Fraxinus xanthoxyloides (G. Don) DC IT 310. Epilobium angustifolium L. IT 311. Epilobium chitralensis Raven. END 45. Onagraceae 312. Epilobium hirsutum L. IT,SJ,Med
313. Epilobium royleanum Hausskn, Oesterr. IT
314. Orobanche cernua Leofl. 46. Orbancaceae IT 315. Corydalis urosepala Fedde. 47. Papaveraceae END 316. Papaver nudicaule L. IT 317. Astragalus affghanus Boiss. END 318. Astragalus amberstianus Bth.ex. Royle. IT
319. Astragalus coluteocarpus END Boiss.ssp. chitralensis Wenninger, Mitt. Bot.
320. Astragalus imitensis Ali END 48. Papilionaceae 321. Astragalus chitralensis Ali END
322. Astragalus laspurensis Ali END 323. Astragalus minuto-foliolatus END Wendelbo 324. Astragalus toppinianus Ali END 325. Astragalus edelbergianus Sirj & Rech.f. END
243 326. Chesneya cuneata (Benth.) Ali. IT 327. Chesneya depressa (Oliv.) Pop. IT 328. Cicer macranthum M. Popov IT 329. Cicer nuristanicum Kitamura. IT 330. Colutea paulsenii Freyn.ssp. mesantha, (Shap. ex Ali) Ali. IT
331. Glycyrrhiza glabra var. glandulifera (Waldst. & Kit.) Boiss. IT
332. Galegia officinales L. IT 333. Hedysarum folconeri Baker. IT 334. Hedysarum minjanense Rech.f. IT 335. Hedysarum cachemirianum Benth. ex Baker IT
336. Hedysarum alpinum L. IT 337. Lotus corniculatus var. tenuifolius L. IT, SJ 338. Medicago lupulina L. IT, ES, Med 339. Medicago sativa L. IT, ES, Med 340. Melilotus officinalis (L.) Pall., Reise. IT, ES, Med 341. Melilotus indica (L.) All. IT 342. Oxytropis crassiuscula A. Boriss IT 343. Oxytropis chitralensis Ali. END 344. Psoralea drupaceae Bunge. IT 345. Sophora mollis subsp. duthiei (Prain) Ali Comb END
346. Trifolium repens L. IT, ES 347. Trigonella incisa Benth. IT, SJ
244 348. Vicia bakeri Ali. IT 349. Vicia sativa L. COS 350. Plantago major L. 49. Plantaginaceae IT, Med 351. Acantholimon leptostahyum Aitch. IT 352. Acantholimon longiflorum Boiss. IT 353. Acantholimon lycopodioides (Girard.) 50. Boiss. IT Plumbaginaceae 354. Acantholimon polystachyum Boiss. IT 355. Acantholimon stocksii Boiss. IT 356. Acantholimon longiscapum Bokhari IT 357. Polygala sp. 51. Polygalaceae IT 358. Oxyria digyna (L.) Hill, Hort. IT, ES 359. Polygonum cognatum subsp. chitralicum (Rech. f. Schiman-Czeika) END Qaiser 360. Polygonum paronychioides C.A. 52. Polygonaceae Mey.f IT
361. Rheum webbianum Royle. IT 362. Rumex hastatus D. Don IT, SS 363. Androsace harrissii Duthie subsp. harrissii END
364. Androsace mucronifolia Watt. 53. Primulaceae IT 365. Androsace stantonii Y.Nasir. END 366. Primula macrophylla var. IT macrophylla D. Don 367. Adonis aestivalis L. IT, SJ 54. Ranunculaceae 368. Anemone rupicola var. sericea Hook.f.& Thomson IT
245 369. Aquilegia pubiflora Wall. ex Royle IT 370. Clematis alpina var. sibirica (L.) O. Kuntze, Verh. IT, SJ
371. Clematis aspleniifola Schrenk IT 372. Clematis graveolens Lindl. IT 373. Clematis orientalis L. IT, Med 374. Delphinium chitralense H. Riedl END 375. Delphinium nordhagenii Wendelbo. END 376. Ranunculus laetus Wall.ex Hook.f. & IT, ES Thoms.
377. Thalictrum foetideum L. IT 378. Thalictrum alpinum L. IT, SJ 379. Trollius acaulis Lindl. IT 380. Rhamnus prostrata Jacq.ex Parker 55. Rhamnaceae IT, ES, Med 381. Cotoneaster affinis var. bacillaris (Lindl.) Schneider. IT, SJ
382. Cotoneaster nummularia Fisch. & Mey. IT
383. Cotoneaster racemiflorus (Desf.) Booth ex Bosse IT
384. Crataegus songarica C. Koch. IT 56. Rosaceae 385. Crataegus wattiana Hemsl. & Lace, J .L. IT
386. Duchesnea indica (Andrews) Focke IT, SJ 387. Fragaria nubicola (Hook.f.) Lindl.ex Lacaita IT, SJ
388. Potentilla desertorum Bunge. IT 389. Potentilla grisea Juz.var. grisea IT
246 390. Prunus prostrata Labill. Icon. IT, ES 391. Prunus jacquemontii Hook.f. IT 392. Prunus griffithii (Boiss.) C. K. Schneid IT
393. Prunus kuramica (Korsh.) Kitamura. IT, SJ 394. Pyrus pashia Buch.-Ham. ex D.Don IT, SJ 395. Rosa ecae Aitch. IT 396. Rosa beggeriana Schrenk. IT 397. Rosa webbiana Wall.ex. Royle. IT, SJ 398. Rubus sanctus Schreb. IT, SJ 399. Spiraea pilosa Franch. IT 400. Sorbaria tomentosa (Lindl.) Rehder var. tomentosa IT, SJ
401. Asperula oppositifolia Reg. & Schmalh. IT
402. Rubia chitralensis Ehrend. END 57. Rubiaceae 403. Rubia tibetica Hook.f. IT, Med
404. Gaillonia chitralensis Nazim. END 405. Galium chitralensis Nazim. END 406. Haplophyllum dubium Korov. 58. Rutaceae IT, SJ 407. Salix turanica Nasarov. IT 408. Salix pycnostachya Andersson. 59. Salicaceae IT 409. Salix acmophylla Boiss. IT 410. Linaria odora (M.B.) Fisch. IT 60. 411. Linaria vulgaris Miller, Gard. IT Scrophulariaceae 412. Pedicularis bicornuta Klotzsch. IT
247 413. Pedicularis caruleolbescans Wendelbo END
414. Pedicularis stantonii Y. Nasir END 415. Scrophularia scabiosifolia Benth. IT 416. Scrophularia striata Boiss. IT 417. Verbascum thapsus L. IT, SJ 418. Veronica anagalis-aquatica L. IT, SJ 419. Solanum nigrum L. 61. Solanaceae COS 420. Myricaria squamosa Desv. IT 62. Tamaricaceae 421. Tamaricaria elegans (Royle) Qaiser & Ali IT, SJ
422. Verbena officinalis L. 63. Verbenaceae IT 423. Valeriana hardwickii var. hoffmeisteri 64. Valerianaceae (Kl.) Clarke IT
424. Vitis jacquemontii Parker 65. Vitaceae IT 425. Viola rupestris Schm. IT 66. Violaceae 426. Valerianella szovitsiana Fisch. & C. A. Mey. IT, SJ
427. Valerianella dentata (L.) Poll. IT, SJ
Key to Abbreviations:
Chorological classes:
SS=Saharo-Sindian, SJ=Sino-Japanese, Med=Mediterranean, ES=Euro-Siberian,
IT=Irano-Turanian, COS=Cosmopolitan, End=Endemic
248 PLATES
1. Eremostachys speciosa (Reintroduced species)
2. Alcea nudiflora (New record)
249
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
CONCLUSION
1. This study presents the first ever ecological data on plant resources in terms of floristic diversity, phytosociological classification, distribution, ordination, ethnobotany, endemism and conservation status in Terich valley, Chitral Hindukush range, Pakistan. 2. The study revealed that flora is composed of 71 families, 272 genera and 445 species of vascular plants. Out of these 371 were dicots, 74 monocots, 5 pteridophytes and 4 gymnosperms. 3. Asteraceae, Poaceae, Papilionaceae and Brassicaceae were the species riched families. 4. Therophytes dominated the landscape followed by hemicryptophytes, chaemophytes, nanophanerophytes, geophytes, mesophanerophytes, megaphanerophytes and microphanerophytes. Based on leaf size spectra nanophylls were dominant followed by leptophylls, microphylls, mesophylls, macrophylls and megaphylls. 5. Ten plant communities were established based on IVs which were classified into three clusters (communities) by using PC-Ord software, Ward‟s cluster analysis. The results obtained from ordination of species and stands by CANOCO software, proved that vegetation structure and its productivity were governed by soil texture and its chemical profile. 6. The valley has been turned out to be the most ideal location for vegetation in the midst of the world‟s largest mountain ranges because it posses third highest peak of Pakistan. 7. The presence of proximate constituents and micro-macronutrients revealed in this study implies that plants were palatable. These plants were consumed in sufficient amounts, contributed greatly towards meeting animal nutritional requirement. One grass species was phosphorus deficient and non-palatable to grazing animals. 8. Ethnobotanical study revealed that a total of 64 plant species were used in the treatment of 48 different ailments. Based on FIV the most important family was Asteraceae followed by Apiaceae while the highest RFC was recorded for Berberis lyceum and Hippophae rhamnoides.
250 9. The valley hosts endemics, endangered and critically endangered species of the Himalayas, Hindukush and Karakorum mountain ranges. During these botanical studies 61 endemic plants were recorded. Among them 9 were narrow endemic or habitat-specifics and were selected for further conservation studies. Various threats i.e., over-grazing, landslides, flooding, habitat degredation and over- exploitation had challenged the existance of these endemics. 10. Based on IUCN conservation criteria (2010, version 8.1) in total of 9 endemics 4 were found to be endangered and 5 species were declared as critically endangered.
251 RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Being a remote area Terich valley must be made accessible via road to assist the local community. 2. In addition to the scientific explorations, facilitation, social mobilization and education are required immediately for the people of these remote areas. 3. The area is rich in herbaceous endemic flora, which is under severe biotic and abiotic pressures in terms of heavy grazing, landslides, flooding, habitat fragmentation and over-exploitation. 4. Poor and insufficient health facilities have compeld the people to depend on medicinal plants for the cure of their various health ailments. The local people should be trained to know the exact methodology of harvesting and post- harvesting techniques of crude drugs. 5. A comprehensive program must be designed through involving local masses, conservationists, Governmental and Non-Governmental Organizations to take useful measures for threatened plants and their conservation with special focus on endemic species to mitigate their extinction risk. 6. Government projects like, BTAP must take initiative in plantation and securing this valley from any disaster. Through plantation, soil erosion and evalanched can be stopped in the valley to make sure the conservation of plants. 7. To check the erosion due to landslides and flood, fast-growing plant species must be cultivated to rehabilitate the degraded and fragmented habitat.
252
REFERENCES
REFERENCES
Abbas, H., M. Qaiser and J. Alam. 2010. Conservation status of Cadaba heterotricha stocks (Capparaceae): An endangerd species in Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 42(1): 35- 46.
Abbasi, M. K., M. M. Tahir, A. H. Shah and F. T. Batool. 2009. Mineral nutrient compositin of different ecotypes of white clover and their nutrient credit to soil at Rawalakot Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Pak. J. Bot., 41(1): 41-51.
Abdullah, B., S. S. Sanusi, S. D. Abdul and F. B. Sawa. 2009. An Assessment of the Herbaceous Species Vegetation of Yankari Game Reserve, Bauchi, Nigeria. American-Eurasian J. Agric. & Environ. Sci, 6(1): 20-25.
Abdullah, M., M. Rafay, T. Hussain, H. Ahmad, U. Tahir, F. Rasheed, T. Ruby and S. Khalil. 2017. Nutritive potential and palatability preference of browse foliage by livestock in arid rangelands of Cholistan desert Pakistan. J. Anim. Plant Sci., 27(5):1656-1664.
Adhikari, B. S., M. Babu, P. L. Saklani and G.S. Rawat. 2010. Medicinal plant diversity and their conservation status in wildlife institute of India (Wii) campus Dehradam. Ethnobotanical Leaflets, 14: 46-83.
Adnan, M., J. Hussain, M. T. Shah, Z. K. Shinwari, F. Ullah, A. Bahader, N. Khan, A. L. Khan and T. Watanabe. 2010. Proximate and nutrient composition of medicinal plants of humid and sub-humid regions in Northwest Pakistan. J. Med. Pl. Res., 4(4): 339-345.
Ahmad, I., M. Ibrar, Barkatullah and N. Ali. 2011. Ethno-botanical study of tehsil Kabal, Swat district, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. J. Bot., Vol. 2011. ID 368572. 9 pages. https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/368572
Ahmad, K., Z. I. Khan, M. Ashraf, M. Hussain, M. Ibrahim and E. E. Valeen. 2016. Status of plant diversity at Kufri (soone) Punjab, Pakistan and prevailing threats in. Pak. J. Bot., 40(3): 993-997.
Ahmad, M. and S.S. Shaukat. 2012. A text book of vegetation ecology. Abrar sons Karachi, Pakistan. pp. 302-305.
Ahmad, M., S. Sultana, S. F. I. Hadi, T. B. Hadda, S. Rashid, M. Zafar, M. A. Khan, M. P. Z. Khan and G. Yaseen. 2014. An ethno-botanical study of medicinal plants in high mountainous region of Chail valley district Swat, Pakistan. J. Ethnobiol. Ethnomed., 10(36):01-18.
253 Ahmad, M., A. U. Rajapaksha. J. E. Lim, M. Zhang, N. Bolan, D. Mohanand M. Vithanage. 2012. Biochar as a sorbent for contaminant management in soil and water. Chemosphere, 99(2): 19-33.
Ahmad, S. S. 2009. Ordination and classification of herbaceous vegetation in Margalla Hills National Park Islamabad Pakistan. Biodivers. Conserv., 2(2): 38-44.
Ahmad, S., A. Ali, H. Beg, A. A. Dasti and Z. K. Shinwari. 2006. Ethno-botanical studies on some medicinal plants of Booni valley, district Chitral, Pakistan. Pak. J. Weed. Sci. Res., 12(3): 183-190.
Ahmed, M., S. S. Shaukat and M. F. Saddiqui. 2011. A multivariate analysis of the vegetation of Cedrus deodara forests in Hindukush and Himalayan ranges of Pakistan: evaluating the structure and dynamics. Turk. J. Bot., 35(4): 419-438.
Ahmed, M., T. Hussain, A. H. Sheikh, S. S. Hussain and M. F. Siddiqui. 2006. Phytosociology and structure of Himalayan forests from different climatic zones of Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 38(2): 361-383.
Ajaib, M., A. Islam and M. F. Siddiqui. 2016. A contribution to ethno-botanical study of wild plants of tehsil Jatlan Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Fuuast. J. Biol., 6(2): 247-256.
Ajaib, M., Z. Khan, S. Muhammad and R. Mahmood. 2008. Biological spectra of Saney Baney hills district Kotli Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Pak. J. Sci., 60(2): 53-58.
Akbar, M. 2013. Forest vegetation and dendrochronology of Gilgit, Astore and Skardu districts of Northern areas (Galgit-Baltistan), Pakistan. Ph.D. thesis Federal Urdu university of Arts, Sciences and Technology. Karachi, Pakistan.
Akhani, H. 2007. Diversity, biogeography and photosynthetic pathways of Argusia and Heliotropium (Boraginaceae) in South-West Asia with an analysis of phytogeographical units. Bot. J. Linn. Soc., 155(3):401-425
Akhtar, N. and S. Begum. 2009. Ethnopharmacological important plants of Jalala, district Mardan, Pakistan. Pak. J. Pl. Sci., 15(2): 95-100.
Akindahunsi, A. A. and S.O. Salawu. 2005. Phytochemical Screening and Nutrient- Anti Nutrient Composition of Selected Tropical Green Leafy Vegetables. Afr. J. Biotechnol., 4, 497-501.
254 Akinleye, O. B., O. E. Adu and I. A. Ayeni. 1996. Studies of some biological and chemical characteristics of Mexican sunflower (Tithonia diversifolia). Consultation Research Journal, 1, 35-38.
Akram, M., M. A. Kahlown and Z. A. Soomro. 2009. Desertification control for sustainable land use in the Cholistan Desert, Pakistan. Earth and Envm. Science, 6: 483-492.
Alam, J. and S. I. Ali. 2010. Contribution to the red list of the plants of Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 42(5): 2967-2971
Alelign, A., D. Teketay, Y. Yemshaw and S. Edwards. 2007. Diversity and status of regeneration of woody plants on the peninsula of Zegie, northwestern Ethiopia. Tropical Ecol., 48(1): 37-49.
Ali, A., L. Badshah and F. Hussain. 2018. Vegetation structure and threats to Montane Temperate Ecosystems in Hindukush Range, Swat, Pakistan. Appl. Ecol. Env. Res., 16(4): 4789-4811.
Ali, A., L. Badshah, F. Hussain and Z. K. Shinwari. 2016. Floristic composition and ecological characteristics of plants of Chail Valley, District Swat, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 48(3): 1013-1026.
Ali, A., N. Ahmad, G. Habib and M. Amjed. 2007. Study the vegetation capacity and physical characteristics of protected and open rangeland in district Dir (Lower). Sarhad J. Agric., 23(1): 17-24.
Ali, H. and M. Qaiser. 2009. The ethnobotany of Chitral valley, Pakistan with particular reference to medicinal plants. Pak. J. Bot., 41(4): 2009-2041.
Ali, H. and M. Qaiser. 2010. Contribution to the Red List of Pakistan. A case study of (Astragalus gahiratensis) Ali (Fabaceae-Papilionoideae). Pak. J. Bot., 42(3): 1523-1528.
Ali, M. 2000. Atlas of Northern areas, Map-1. Geography Department, Government Postgraduate College, Gilgit.
Ali, S. I. and M. Qaiser (Eds.) Flora of Pakistan; Department of Botany, University of Karachi: Karachi, 1993-2019; Vol. 194-222.
Ali, S. I. and M. Qaiser. 1986. A phytogeographical analysis of phanerogams of Pakistan and Kashmir. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb., 89B: 89-101.
Ali, S. M. and R. N. Malik. 2010. Vegetation communities of urban open spaces: green belts and parks in Islamabad city. Pak. J. Bot., 42(2): 1031-1039.
255 Ali, S., M. Shuaib, H. Ali, S. Ullah, K. Ali, S. Hussain, N. Hassan, U. Zeb, W. M. Khan and F. Hussain. 2017. Floristic list and their ecological characteristics, of plants at village Sherpao District Charsadda, KP-Pakistan. J. Med. Plants Stud., 5(5): 295-299.
Ali, S. I. and Y. J. Nasir (Eds.) Flora of Pakistan; Department of Botany, University of Karachi: Karachi, 1989-1991; Vol. 191-193.
Ali, H., Z. Muhammad, W. M. Khan, G. Jelani, A. Majeed and R. Ullah. 2018. Floristic Inventory and Ecological Attributes of Plant Resources of Hazar Nao Hills, District Malakand Pakistan. Pak. J. Weed Sci. Res., 24(3): 241-255.
Allance, H. 2004. Medicinal plants conservation and livelihoods. Biodivers. Conserv., 13, 1477-1517.
Alsherif, E. A., A. M. Ayesha and S. M. Rawi. 2013. Floristic composition, life form and chorology of plant life at Khulais Region, Western Saudi Arabia. Pak. J. Bot., 45(1): 29-38.
Altay, V., I. I. Ozyigit and C. Yarc. 2012. Plant Communities in Urban Habitats of Istanbul Turkey. Pak. J. Bot., 44:177-186.
Al-Yemeni, M. and H. Sher. 2010. Biological spectrum with some other ecological attributes of the flora and vegetation of the Asir Mountain of South West, Saudi Arabia. Afr. J. Biotechnol., 9(34): 5550-5559.
Amjad, M. S. 2012. Life form and leaf size spectra of vegetation in Kotli hills, Azad Jammu and Kashmir (Pakistan). Greener. J. Agric. Sci., 2(7): 345-350.
Amjad, M. S. 2016. Floristic composition, biological spectrum and conservation status of the vegetation in Nikyal valley, Azad Jammu and Kashmi. Asian Pac. J. Trop. Dis., 6(1): 63-69.
Amjad, M. S., M. Arshad, S. Fatima and N. Mumtaz. 2014. Palatability and animals preferences of plants in tehsil Nikyal, district Kotli, Azad Jammu and Kashmir Pakistan. Annu. res. rev., 4(6): 953-961.
Amjad, S. M., M. Arshad, S. R. Qureshi and S. N. Mirza. 2017. Floristic composition, biological spectrum and phenological pattern of vegetation in the subtropical forest of Kotli District, AJK, Pakistan. Pure appl. Biol., 6(2): 426-447.
Amusa, T. O., S. O. Jimoh, P. Aridanzi and M. Haruna. 2010. Ethnobotany and conservation of plant resources of Kainji Lake National Park, Nigeria. Ethnobot. Res. Appl., 8(1): 181-194.
256 Andualem, B. and A. Gessesse. 2014. Proximate composition, mineral content and antioxidant factors of Brebra (Milletia ferruginea) seed as well as physicochemical characterization of its seed oil. SpringerPlus., 3(1): 298.
Angassa, A. and R. M. T. Baars. 2001. Ecological condition of encroached and non- encroached rangelands in Borana, Ethiopia. Afr. J. Ecol., 38(4): 321-328.
Anon. 2006. Microwave digestion applications Manual, CEM, USA.
Antje, B., J. K. Esler, P. Eugene and B. Phoebe. 2003. Species richness and floristic relationships between Mesas and their surroundings in southern African Nama Karoo. J. Biogeogr, 9(1): 43-53.
AOAC. 1984. Official Methods of Analysis. (14thEd.) Associaition of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, D.C.
AOAC. 1990. Official Methods of Analysis (15th Ed.) Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC, USA. 5: 03-10.
Armah,Y. S., B. J. B. Nyarko, E. H. K. Akaho, A.W. K. Kyere, S. Osae, K. Oppong and Boachie. 2002. Multielemental analysis of some traditional plant medicines used in Ghana. J. Trace Microprobe Tech., 20(3): 419-427.
Arora, V. 2002. Modeling vegetation as a dynamic component in soil‐ vegetation‐ atmosphere transfer schemes and hydrological models. Rev. Geophys., 40(2): 3-1.
Arshad, M., G. Murtaza, M. A. Ali, M. Shafiq, C. Dumat and N. Ahmed. 2011. Wheat growth and phytoavailibility of copper and zinc as affected by soil texture in saline-sodic conditions. Pak. J. Bot., 43(5): 2433-2439.
Ata, S., F. Faooq and S. Javed. 2011. Elemental profile of 24 common medicinal plants of Pakistan and its direct link with traditional uses. J. Med. Plant Res., 5(26): 6164-6168.
Azim, A., S. Ghazanfer, A, Latif and M.A. Nadeem. 2011. Nutritional evaluation of some top fodder trees leaves and shrubs of District Chakwal, Paklistan in relation to ruminants requirements. Pak. J. Nutr., 10 (1): 54-59.
Azizi, H. and M. Keshavarzi . 2014. The Study of Flora life form and Chorotypes of the Homel Mountain, Sardasht, West Azarbaijan Province, NW Iran. Bull. Env. Pharmacol. Life Sci., 4(1): 109-116
257 Badshah, L. 2011. Ecological evaluation of plant resources and vegetation structure of district Tank, Pakistan. Ph. D. Thesis Department of Botany, University of Peshawar.
Badshah, L., F. Hussain and Z. Sher. 2012. An over view of people plant interaction in the rangeland of district Tank, Pakistan. J. Med. Plant Res., 6 (14): 2820- 2826.
Badshah, L., F. Hussain and Z. Sher. 2013. Floristic inventory, ecological characteristics and biological spectrum of rangeland, district Tank, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 45(4): 1159-1168.
Badshah, L., F. Hussain and Z. Sher. 2016. Floristic inventory, ecological characteristics and biological spectrum of plants of Parachinar, Kurrum agency, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 48(4): 1547-1558.
Bahadur, A., Z. Chaudhry, G. Jan, M. Danish, A. U. Rehman, R. Ahmad, A. Khan, S. Khalid, I. Ullah, Z. Shah, F. Ali, T. Mushtaq and F. G. Jan. 2011. Nutritional and elemental analysis of some selected fodder species used in traditional medicine. Afr. J. Pharm. Pharmacol., 5(8): 1157-1161.
Baig, A. B., D. Ramamoorthy and T. A. Bhat. 2013. Threatened medicinal plants of menwarsar Pahalgam, Kashmir Himalayas: distribution pattern and current conservation status. Appl Ecol Environ Sci., 3(1): 25-35.
Bakkenes, M., J. R. M. Alkemade, F. Ihle, R. Leemans and J. B. Latour. 2002. Assessing effects of forecasted climate change on the diversityand distribution of European higher plants for 2050. Glob Chang Biol., 8(4): 390-407.
Bano, A., M. Ayub, S. Rashid, S. Sultana and H. Sadia. 2013. Ethnobotany and conservation status of Floral Diversity of Himalyan Range of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 45(SI): 243-251.
Bano, G., M. Islam, S. Ahmad, S. Aslam and S. Koukab. 2009. Seasonal variation in nutritive value of Chrysopogon aucheri and Cymbopogon jwarancusa in highland Balochistan, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 41(2): 511-517.
Batalha, M. A. and F. R. Martins. 2002. Life-form spectra of Brazilian Cerrado sites. Flora, Morphology, Distribution, Functional Ecology of Plants, 197(6): 452- 460.
Begum, H. A., F. Asad and T. Yassen. 2016. Ethno-medicinal study of medicinal plants of village Harichand, district Charsadda Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Int. J. Agric. Environ. Res., 2(2): 188-199.
258 Behera, M. D., P. S. Kushwaha and P.S. Roy. 2002. High plant endemism in an Indian hotspot - Eastern Himalaya. Biodivers. Conserv., 11 (4): 669-682.
Bekalo, T., S. Woodmatas and A. Woldemariamz. 2009: an ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants used by local people in the lowlands of konta special woreda, southern nations, nationalities and peoples regional state, ethiopia. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed., 5(1): pp 26.
Black, C. A. 1965. Methods of Soil Analysis. Agron Inc. Madison Wisconsin, USA.
Bocuk, H., C. Ture and O. Ketenoglu. 2009. Plant diversity and conservation of the north-east Phrygia region under the impact of land degradation and desertification (central anatoha, Turkey). Pak. J. Bot., 41(5): 2305-2321.
Bouyoucos, G. J. 1936. Directions for making mechanical analysis of soils by the Hydrometer Method. Soil. Sci., 42(3): 225-230.
Brady, N. C. 1990. The nature and properties of soil (10th Ed). Macmillan Publishing Co. New York, NY, pp. 621.
Breckle, S. W. 2004. Flora, vegetation and O¨ kologie der alpine-nivalen Stufe des Hindukusch (Afghanistan). In: Breckle S-W, Schweizer B, Fangmeier A (eds) Proceed. 2nd symposium AFW Schimper-Foundation: results of worldwide ecological studies. Stuttgart-Hohenheim, Vol. 97
Brinkman, K., A. Patzelt, U. Dickhoefer, F. Schlecht and A. Buerkert. 2009. Vegetation pattern and diversity along an altitudinal and a grazing gradient in the Jabal al Akhdar Mountain range of northern Oman. J. Arid Environ., 73(11): 1035-1045
Bulut, Z. and H. Yilmaz. 2010. The current situation of threatened endemic flora in Turkey: kemaliya (erzincan) case. Pak. J. Bot., 42(2): 711-719.
Cain, S. A. and G. M. D. Castro.1959. Manual of vegetation analysis. Harper hand Brothers, Publication New york, pp. 55.
Calixto, J. B. 2005. Twenty five years of research on medicinal plants in latin America: a personal view. J. Ethnopharmacol., 100(1): 131-134.
Casazza, G., P. Benesperi, R. Foggi, B. Viciani, D. Filigheddu, R. Farris, E. Bagella, S. Pisanu and S. Mariotti. 2014. Climate change hastens the urgency of conservation for range-restricted plant species in the central-northern Mediterranean region. Biol. Conserv., 179, 129-138.
259 Changwe, K. and K. Balkwill. 2003. Floristics of the Dunbar Valley serpentinite site, Songimvelo Game Reserve, South Africa. Bot. J. Linn. Soc., 143(3): 271-285.
Cheema, U. B., J. I. Sultan, A. Javaid, P. Akhtar and M. Shahid. 2011. Chemical composition, mineral profile and in situ digestion kinetics of fodder leaves of four native trees. Pak. J. Bot., 43(1): 397-404.
Costa, R. C., F. S. Araujo and L. W. Verde. 2007. Flora and life-form spectrum in an area of deciduous thorn woodland (Caatinga) in northeastern, Brazil. J. Arid. Environ., 68(2): 237-247.
Cox, G. W. 1967. Laboratory Mannual of General Ecology W. M. C. Brown Co. Pub. Dubugue Lowa, U.S.A. 165pp.
Criddle, R. S., J. N. Church, B. N. Smith and L. D. Hansen. 2003. Fundamental causes of the global patterns of species range and richness. Russ. J. Plant Physiol., 50(2): 192-199.
Dairo, F. A. S. and I. G. Adanlawo. 2007. Nutritional quality of Crassocephalum crepidioides and Senecio biafrae. Pak. J. Nutr., 6(1): 35-39.
Danish, M., Z. Chaudhry, A. Majid, A. Khan, A. Bahader and A. waheed. 2012. Ehno-Verterinary Medicinal plants species of Salim khan District Swabi, Khyber pukhtoon khwa, Pakistan. Life sci. leafl., 6(2): 54-57.
Dar, G. H. and K. I. Christensen. 2003. Gymnosperms of the western Himalaya. Pak. J. Bot., 35(3): 283-311.
Daubenmire, R. F. 1959. Plants and Environment. John Willey & Sons, New York.
Devi, N. B. and B. M. Sharma. 2004. Life-form analysis of the macrophytes of the Loktak Lake, Manipur, India. J. Appl. Ecol., 38(2): 897-909.
Diaz, S., S. Lavorel, S. Mclntyre, V. Falczuk, F. Casanovess, D. G. Milchunas, C. Skarpe, G. Rusch, M. Sternberg, I. Noy-Meir, J. Landsberg, W. Zhang, H. Clarkss and B. D. Campbell. 2006. Plant trait responses to grazing –a global synthesis. Glob Change Bio., 13(2): 313-341.
Dubova, I., D. Smite, D. Kļaviņa and R. Rila. 2010. First results of ex situ conservation of endangered wild plants of Lativa in the National Botanic Garden. Environ. Exp. Bot., 8, 75-80.
Durrani, M. J. and F. Hussain. 2005. Ethnoecological profile of plant of Harboi rangeland, Kalat, Pakistan. Int. J. Biotechnol., 2(1): 15-22.
260 Durrani, M. J., A. Razaq, S. G. Muhammad and F. Hussain. 2010. Floristic diversity, ecological characteristics and ethnobotanical profile of plants of Aghberg rangelands, Balochistan, Pakistan. Pak. J. Pl. Sci., 16(1): 29-36.
Berhardt, E., W. B. Dickore and G. Miehe. 2006. Vegetation of Hunza Valley: diversity, altitudinal distribution and human impact. In Karakorum in Transition: Culture, Development and Ecology in the Hunza Valley (ed. H. Kreutzmann). Oxford University Press, Karachi, Pakistan. pp. 109-122.
Edwards, S., S. Nebel and M. Heinrich. 2005. Questionnaire surveys: methodological and epistemological problems for field-based ethnophar-macologists. J. Ethnopharmacol., 100(1-2): 30-36.
Eilu, G., L. N. H. David and J. M. Kasenene. 2004. Tree species distribution in forests of the Albertine Rift, Western Uganda. Afr. J. Ecol., 42(2): 100-110.
Ekblom, A. and L. Gillson. 2010. Hierarchy and scale: testing the long term role of water, grazing and nitrogen in savanna landscape of Limpopo National Park (Mozambique). J. Landsc. Ecol., 25(10): 1529-1546.
Erenso, F., M. Maryo and W. Abebe. 2014. Floristic composition, diversity and vegetation structure of woody plants communities in Boda dry evergreen Montane Forest, West Showa, Ethiopia. Int. J. Biodivers. Conserv., 6(5): 382- 391.
Erukainure, O. L., O. V. Oke, A. J. Ajiboye and O.Y. Okafor. 2011. Nutritional qualities and phytochemical constituents of Clerodendrum volubile, a tropical non-conventional vegetable. Int. Food. Res. J., 18(4): 1393-1399.
Estefan, G., R. Sommer and J. Ryan. 2013. Methods of Soil, Plant, and Water Analysis: A manual for the West Asia and North Africa region. 3rd International Center for Agricultural Research in Dry Areas (ICARDA) Box. 114/505, Beirut. Lebanon.
Ewald, J. 2003. A critique for phytosociology. J. Veg. Sci., 14, 291-296
Faizulhaq. 2011. Conservation status of the critically endangered and endangered species in the Nandiar Khuwar catchment District Battagram, Pakistan. Int. J. Biodivers. Conserv., 3(2): 27-35.
Farag, El-M. 2014. Floristic composition and traditional uses of plant species at Wadi Alkuf, Al-Jabal Al-Akhder, Libya. Am-Euras. J. Agric. Environ. Sci., 14(8): 685-697.
261 Fardous, A., K. Ahmad, S. Gondal, Z.I. Khan, A. Ejaz and E. E.Valeem. 2011. Assement of iron, cobalt and manganesin soil and forage: A case study at rurual livestock farm in Sorgodha, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 43(3): 1463-1465.
Farooq, S., A. Z. Khan, M. Yousaf and H. Fazal. 2010. Phytosociological study of Push Ziarat area (Shawal) in the South Wazirstan, Pakistan. Pak. J. Weed. Sci. Res., 16(1): 47-55.
Fattorini, S. 2015. On the concept of Chorotype. Journal of Biogeography, 42, 2246- 2251.
Fazal, H., N. Ahmad, A. Rashid and S. Farooq. 2010. A checklist of phanerogamic flora of Haripur Hazara, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 42 (3): 1511-1522.
Felde, V. A., S. M. Peglar, A. E. Bjune, J. A. Grytnes and H. J. B. Birks. 2012. The relationship between vegetation composition, vegetation zones and modern pollen assemblages in Setesdal, southern Norway. Holocene, 24(8) 985-1001.
Foguekem, D., M. N. Tchamba, L. N. Gonwouo, P. Ngassam and M. Loomis. 2011. Nutritional status of forage plants and their use by elephants in Waza National Park, Cameroon. Sci. Res. Essays, 6(17): 3577-3583.
Forzieri, G., M. Degetto, M. Righetti, F. Castelli and F. Preti. 2011. Satellite multispectral data for improved floodplain roughness modelling. J. hydrol., 407(1-4): 41-57.
Fosaa, A. M. 2004. Biodiversity patterns of vascular plant species in mountain vegetation in the Faroe Islands. Divers. Distrib., 10(3): 217-223.
Francisco, J. C., M. D. L. Estrella, C. Aedo and M. Velayos. 2009. Checklist of Commelinaceae of Equatorial Guinea (Annobón, Bioko and Río Muni). Bot. J. Linn. Soc., 159(1): 106-122.
Gafar, M. K. A. U. Itodo, F. A. Atiku, A. M. Hassan and I. J. Peni. 2011. Proximate and Mineral Composition of the Leaves of Hairy Indigo (Indigofera astragalina). Pak. J. Nutr., 10(2): 168-175.
Galyean, M. 1985. Teachniques and procedures in animal nutrition research. New Mexico State University, Deptt. Animals and Range conditions.
Gandhi, D. S. and S. M. Sundarapandian. 2014. Diversity and distribution pattern of understory vegetation in tropical dry forests of Sathanur reserve forest in Eastren Ghats, India. Int. J. Nat. Sci., 5(3): 452-461.
262 Ganie, A. H. and B. A. Tali. 2013. Vanishing medicinal plants of Kashmir Himalaya. (online) www. greaterkashmir. com/news/gk
Ganji, E. 2016. Flora, life form and vegetation structure geographical distribution of plants in mining in the West of Iran. J. Appl. Environ. Biol. Sci., 6(2): 141- 146.
Gauch, H. G. and R. H. Whittaker. 1981. Hierarchical classification of community data. J. Eco., 69(2): 537-557.
Ghani, A., M. Nadeem, M. M. Ahmed, M. Hussain, M. Ikram and M. Imran. 2016. Spatial variations in nutritional and elemental profile of Mako (Solanum nigrum) collected from different tehsils of district Mianwali, Punjab, Pakistan. Sci. Int., 28(6): 5251-5255.
Ghani, A., Z. Ali, M. Ishtiaq, M. Maqbool and S. Parveen. 2012. Estimation of macro and micro nutrients in some important medicinal plants of Soon valley, district Khushab, Pakistan. Afr. J. Biotechnol., 11(78): 14386-14391.
Giday, M., Z. Asfaw, T. Elmqvist and Z. Woldu. 2003. An ethno-botanical study of medicinal plants used by the Zay people in Ethiopia. J. Ethnopharmacol., 85 (1): 43–52.
Gimenez, E., M. Melendo, F. Valle, F. G. Mercado and E. Cano. 2004. Endemic flora biodiversity in the south of the Iberian Peninsula: altitudinal distribution, life forms and dispersal modes. Biodivers. Conserv., 13(14): 2641-2660.
Gjorgieva, D., T. K. Panovska, K. Baeva and T. Stafilov. 2011. Metalic trace elements in medicinal plants from Macedonia. Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 7(1): 109-114.
GOP. District Census report of Chitral; Population Census Organization Statistics Division, Government of Pakistan: Islamabad, 2017.
Gorade, P. D. and M. N. Datar. 2014. Checklist of palatable grass species from Peninsular India. Not. Sci. Biol, 6(4): 441-447.
Greig-Smith, P. 1983. Quantitative Plant Ecology, 3rd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific press, pp. 01-359.
Guarrera, P. M., G. Forti and S. Marignoli. 2005. Ethno-botanical and ethnomedicinal uses of plants in the district of Acquapendente (Latium, Central Italy). J. Ethnopharmacol., 96(3): 429-444.
263 Gui, D., J. Lie, F. Zeng, M. Runge, G. Mu, F. Yang and J. Zhu. 2010. Ordination as a tool to characterize soil particle size distribution, applied to an elevation gradient at the north slope of the Middle Kunlun Mountains. Geoderma., 3(4): 352-358.
Gulzar, H., A. Hazrat, K. Gulzar, F. Ali, N. Khan, M. Nisar, I. Khan and A. Ullah. 2019. Medicinal plants and their traditional uses in Thana Village, District Malakand, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Int. J. endorsing health sci. res., 7 (1): 2310-3841.
Guo, Q. S., X. F. Wang, G. Bar, Y. Kang, M. Hong, S. X. Pei and F. J. Zhang. 2009. Life form spectra, leaf character, and hierarchical-synusia structure of vascular plants in Thuja sutchuehensis community. Pub Med., 20(9): 2057-2062.
Gurbanov, E. M., Y. N. Abdallah, Z. J. Mammadova, K. A. Asadova and A. Elkordy. 2019. Floristic Diversity and Phytogeography of Mil steppe Azerbaijan. J. Environ. Health. Sci. Eng., 7(1): 21-30.
Gutierrez, D., S. Mendoza, V. Serrano, M. Bah, R. Pelz, P. Balderas and F. Leon. 2008. Proximate composition, mineral content and antioxidant properties of fourteen Mixican weeds used as fodder. Weed. Biol. Manag., 8(4): 291-296
Gutkowski, B., M. Krowiak, J. Niedzwiecka and I. K. Oklejewicz. 2002. Floristic notes from the Dynow foothills (Western Carpathians). Fragm. F. Geobot. Polonica, 9: 43-47.
Sher, H., Z. D. Khan, A.U. Khan and F. Hussain. 2005. In situ conservation of some selected medicinal plants of Upper Swat, Pakistan. Acta Botanica Yunnanica, 27, 27-36.
Hamayun, M., S. A. Khan, E. Y. Sohn and I. Lee. 2006. Folk medicinal knowledge and conservation status of some economically valued medicinal plants of District Swat, Pakistan. Lyonia., 11(2): 101-113.
Hameed, I., G. Dastagir and F. Hussain. 2008. Nutritional and elemental ananlyses of some selected medicinal plants of the family Polygonaceae. Pak. J. Bot., 40 (6): 2493-2502.
Hanazaki, N., V. C. Souza and R. R. Rodrigues. 2006. Ethnobotany of rural people from the boundaries of Carlos Botelho State Park, Sao Paulo State, Brazil. Acta. bot. bras., 20(4): 899-909.
Hannah, M. and S. Krishnakumari. 2015. Analysis of mineral elements, proximate and nutritive value in Citrullus vulgaris (Watermelon) seed extracts. J. Pharm. Innov., 4(8): 07-11.
264 Haq, S. M. A. 2011. Urban green spaces and an integrative approach to sustainable environment. J. Environ. Prot., 2(5): 601.
Harsdison, W. A., J. T. Reid, C. M. Martin and P. G. Woolfolk. 1954. Degree of herbage selection by grazing cattel. Int. J. Dairy. Sci., 37(1): 89-102.
Hazrat, A., J. Shah, M. Ali and I. Iqbal. 2007. Medicinal value of Ranunculaceae of Dir valley. Pak. J. Bot., 39(4): 1037-1044.
Heady, H. F. 1964. Palatability of herbage and animal preference. J. Range. Manage., 17(2): 76-82.
Hedge, I. C and P. Wendelbo. 1978. Patterns of distribution and endemism in Iran. Notes from the Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh, 36(2): 441-464
Hilton-Taylor, C. (Compiler) (2000). 2000 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. 61 pp.
Hirst, C. N. and D. A. Jackson. 2007. Reconstructing community relationships, the impact of sampling error, ordination approach and gradient length. Divers. Distrib., 13(4): 361-371.
Hong, L., Z. Guo, K. Huang, S. Wei, B. Liu, S. Meng and C. Long. 2015. Ethno- botanical study on medicinal plants used by Maonan people in China. J. Ethnobiol. Ethnomed., 11(32): 01-34.
Hussain, F. and A. Murad. 2004. Weed communities in the Potato fields of Mastuj disst. Chitral. Sci. Khyber., 17(2): 201-206
Hussain, F. and G. Mustafa. 2007. Ecological studies on some pasture plant in relation to animal use found in Nasirabad, Hunza, Pakistan. Pak. J. Pl. Sci., 1(1): 255-262.
Hussain, F. and I. Ilahi. 1991. Ecology and vegetation of Lesser Himalayas, Pakistan Jadoon Printing Press Peshawar.
Hussain, F. and M. J. Durrani. 2007. Forage productivity of arid temperate Harboi rangeland, Kalat, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 39(5): 1455-1470.
Hussain, F. 1989. Field & Laboratory Manual of Plant Ecology. UGC. Islamabad.
Hussain, F. and M. J. Durrani. 2008. Mineral composition of some range grasses and shrubs from Harboi rangeland Kalat, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 40(6): 2513-2523.
265 Hussain, F., I. Iqbal and M. J. Durrani. 2006. Ethnobotany of Ghalegay, district Swat, Pakistan. Acta. Bot. Yunnan., 28(3): 305-314.
Hussain, F., I. Iqbal and M. J. Durrani. 2000. Vegetation studies of Ghalegay Hills, District Swat, Pakistan. Pak. J. Pl. Sci., 6(1-2): 1-10.
Hussain, T., A. Hussain and M. Ahmed. 2009. Studies of vegetative behavior and climatic effects on some pasture grasses growing wild in Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot. 41 (5): 2379-2386.
Hussain, W., A. Ullah, J. Hussain, S. Hussain, Z. K. Shinwari and M. Ibrar. 2014. Ethnomedicinal plants of Tehsil Barawal Bandi Dir Upper KPK, Pakistan. J. Appl. Pharm. Sci., 4(7): 94.
Hussain, W., L. Badshah and A. Ali. 2019. Quantitative aspects of the Koh-e-Safaid range vegatation across the altitudinal gradient in upper Kurram valley, Pakistan. Appl. ecol. environ. res., 17(4): 9905-9924.
Ibrar, M., A. Rauf, T. B. Hadda, M. S. Mubarak and S. Patel. 2015. Quantitative ethnobotanical survey of medicinal flora thriving in Malakand Pass Hills, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. J. Ethnopharmacol., 169, 335-346.
Ibrar, M., F. Hussain and A. Sultan. 2007. Ethno-botanical studies of plant resources of Ranyal hills, district Shangla, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 39(2): 329-337.
Iheanacho, K. and A. C. Ubebani. 2009. Nutritional composition of some leafy vegetable consumed in ImoState, Nigeria. J. Appl. Sci. Environ. Manage., 13 (3): 35-38.
Ijaz, F., Z. Iqbal, I. U. Rahman, N. Ali, G. Qadir, A. Khan, A. Din, A. H. Shah, I. Ali, S. Hussain, A. Khan, M. Shah and W. Sadiq. 2017. The role of plants in human welfare. J. Tradit. Med. Clin. Natur, 6, 214.
Ilyas, M., R. Qureshi, M. Arshad and S. N. Mirza. 2013. A preliminary checklist of vascular flora of Kabal valley, Swat, Pak. J. Bot., 45(2): 605-615.
Ilyas, M., R. Qureshi, N. Akhtar, M. Munir and Z. U. Haq. 2018. Vegetation analysis of Kabal valley, district Swat, Pakistan using multivariate approach. Pak. J. Bot., 47(SI): 77-86.
Irshad, M., N. Khan, K. Ali and Z. Muhammad. 2016. The influence of environmental variables on Punica granatum assemblages in subtropical dry temperate woodland in the district of Dir Lower, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Turk. J. Bot., 40(6): 610-622.
266 IUCN (World Conservation Union). 2010. IUCN Red List categories and criteria: version 8.1. Species Survival Commission, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, and Cambridge, United Kingdom
Jabeen, T. and S.S. Ahmad. 2009. Multivariate analysis of environmental and vegetation data of Ayubia National Park Rawalpindi. Soil & Environ. 28(2): 106-112
Jadhav, R. R. 2016. Ethno-botanical and ethnomedicinal survey of Kadegaon tahsil, Sangli (Maharashtra) India. J. Med. Plants. Stud., 4(1): 11-14.
Jain, S. K. 2001. Ethnobotany in modern India. Phytomorphology, 51(4): 39-54.
Jan, A. and S. I. Ali. 2009. Conservation status of Astragalus gilgitensis Ali (Fabaceae): a critically endangered species in the Gilgit District, Pakistan. Phyton (Horn), 48(2): 211-223.
Jan, G., M. A. Khan, F. Gul, M. Ahmad, M. Jan and M. Zafar. 2010. Ethno-botanical study of common weeds of Dir Kohistan valley, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Pak. J. Weed. Sci. Res., 16(1): 81-88.
Jan, S., M. A. Khan, S. U. Din, W. Murad, M. Hussain and A. Ghani. 2008. Herbal recipes used for gastrointestinal disorders in Kaghan valley, N.W.F.P, Pakistan. Pak. J. Weed Sci. Res., 14(4): 169-200.
Jeruto, P., C. Lukhoba, G. Ouma, D. Otieno and C. Mutia. 2008. An ethno-botanical study of medicinal plants used by the Nandi people in Kenya. J. Ethnopharmacol, 116(2-5): 370-376.
Kachiguma, N. A., W. Mwase, M. Maliro and A. Damaliphetsa. 2015. Chemical and mineral composition of Amaranth (Amaranthus) species collected from Central Malawi. J. Food. Res., 4(4): 92-102.
Karki, J. B., Y. V. Jhala and P.P. Khanna. 2000. Grazing lawns in Terai Grasslands, Royal Bardia National Park, Nepal. Biotropica, 32(3): 423-429.
Khan, M. and S. Musharaf. 2014. Conservation Position of Plant Species in Tehsil Katlang, District Mardan, Pakistan. J. Med. Plant. Res., 4(7): 55-60
Khan, N., M. Ahmed, M. Wahab and M. Ajaib. 2010. Phytosociology, structure and Physiochemical analysis of soil in Quercus baloot Griff, District Chitral Paksitan. Pak. J. Bot., 42(4): 2429-2441.
267 Khan, A., M. Ahmed, F. M. Saddiqui, J. Iqbal and M. Wahab. 2016. Phytosociological analysis of Pine forest at Indus Kohistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 48(2): 575-580.
Khan, A., M. Ahmed, M. F. Siddiqi, M. Shah, E. S. Calixto, A. Khan, P. Shah, J. Iqbal and M. Azeem. 2020. Vegetation-environment relationship in conifer dominating forests of the mountainous range of Indus Kohistan in northern Pakistan. J. Mt. Sci., 1(7): 2-12
Khan, A., N. Khan, K. Ali and I. Rahman. 2017. An Assessment of the Floristic Diversity, Life-Forms and Biological Spectrum of Vegetation in Swat Ranizai, District Malakand, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Sci. Technol. Dev., 36 (2): 61-78.
Khan, K., I. U. Rahman, E. S. Calixto, N. Ali and F. Ijaz. 2019. Ethnoveterinary therapeutic practices and conservation status of the medicinal flora of Chamla valley, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Front. Vet. Sci., 6, 122
Khan, M. A., Qureshi, R. A., Gillani, S. A., Ghufran, M. A., Batool, A. and K. N. Sultana. 2010. Invasive species of federal capital area Islamabad, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 42(3): 1529-1534.
Khan, M. A., Qureshi, R. A., Gillani, S. A., Ghufran, M. A., Batool, A. and K. N. Sultana. 2010. Invasive species of federal capital area Islamabad, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 42(3): 1529-1534.
Khan, M. T., L. Ahmad and W. Rashid. 2018. Ethnobotanical documentation of traditional knowledge about medicinal plants used by indigenous people in the Talash Valley of Dir Lower, northern Pakistan. J. Intercult. Ethnopharmacol., 7(1): 8-24.
Khan, M., F. Hussain and S. Musharaf. 2013. Macro-mineral contents in ten species at three phenological stages in tehsil Takht-e-Nasrati, district Karak, Pakistan. Afr. J. Agric. Res., 8(44): 5475-5484.
Khan, M., F. Hussain, and S. Musharaf. 2013. Floristic Composition and Biological characteristics of the vegetation of Sheikh Maltoon Town District Mardan, Pakistan.www.science domain. org., 3(1): 31-41.
Khan, N., M. Ahmed, M. Wahab, M. Ajaib and S. S. Hussain. 2010. Studies along an altitudinal gradient in Monotheca buxifolia forest, district Dir Lower, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 42(5): 3029-3038.
268 Khan, S. M. 2012. Plant communities and vegetation ecosystem services in the Naran valley, Western Himalaya. (Unpublished) PhD thesis, Department of Biological sciences, University of Leicester. 271 pp.
Khan, S. M., D. Harper, S. Page and H. Ahmad. 2011. Species and community diversity of vascular flora along environmental gradients in Naran Valley. A Multivariate approach through indicator species Aana. Pak. J. Bot., 43(5): 2337-2346.
Khan, S. M., N. U. Din, M. Ilyas, Sohail, I. U. Rahman, F. Ijaz, Z. Iqbal and Z. Ali. 2015. Ethno-botanical study of some medicinal plants of tehsil Kabal, district Swat Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. J. Med. Aromat. Plants., 4(3): 01-04.
Khan, T. Y., L. Badshah, S. Ullah and A. Ali. 2019. Floristic evaluation and ecological attributes of plants resources of Mandan, district Bannu, Pakistan. Int. J. Bot. Studies., 4 (3): 185-190.
Khan, W., S. M. Khan, H. Ahmad, Z. Ahmad and S. Page. 2016. Vegetation mapping and multivariate approach to indicator species of a forest ecosystem: A case study from the Thandiani sub Forests Division (TsFD) in the Western Himalayas. Ecol. Indic., 71, 336-351.
Khan, Z. I., A. Hussain, M. Ashraf and L. R. Mcdowell. 2006. Mineral status of soils and forages in Southwestern Punjab, Pakistan: Micro-minerals. Asian-aust. J. Anim. Sci., 19(8): 1139-1147.
Khan, Z. I., A. Hussain, M. Ashraf, E. E. Valeem and I. Javed. 2005. Evaluation of variation in soil and forage micro-mineral concentrations in a semiarid region of Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 37(4): 921-931.
Khan, Z. I., A. Hussain, M. Ashraf, E. E. Valeem, M. Y. Ashraf and M. S. Akhtar. 2004. Seasonal variation in soil and forage mineral concentrations in a semiarid region of Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 36(3): 635-640.
Khan, Z. I., M. Ashraf and A. Hussain. 2007. Evaluation of Macro mineral contents of forages: Influence of pasture and seasonal variation. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci., 20(6): 908-913.
Kjeldahl, J. 1883. A new method for the estimation of nitrogen in organic compounds. Z. Anal. Chem., 22(1): 366-382.
Kopacek, J., J. Kana, H. Santruckova, P. Porcal, J. Hejzlar, T. Picek, J. Vesely. 2002. Physical, chemical, and biochemical characteristics of soils in watersheds of the Bohemian Forest Lakes: I. Plesne Lake. Silva Gabreta, 8,43-62.
269 Kramberger, B. and S. Klemencic. 2003. Effect of harvest date on the chemical composition and nutritive value of Cerastium holosteoides. Grass and Forage Sci., 58(1): 12-16.
Kumar, A., R. P. Singh and N. P. Singh. 2011. Analysis of macro and micro nutrients in some Indian medicinal herbs grown in Jaunpur soil. J. Nat. Sci. Res., 3(7): 551-555.
Kwiatkowski, P. 2002. Floristic notes from the Kaczawskie Mts and Kaczawskie Plateau (Western Sudety Mts, Poland) Part 2. Fragmenta Floristica et Geobotanica/Polonica, (9) 55-65.
Landsbery, J., C. D. James, J. Maconochie and A.O. Nicholls. 2001. The relationship between species density and community biomass in grazed and ungrazed coastal meadows. J. Appl. Ecol., 39, 427-444.
Lapcha, L., S. Guha, A. Roy, B. C. Sarkar and M. L. Arrawatia. 2011. Documentation of medicinally important plants from the landslide prone areas of East Sikkim, India: A survey report. Journal of Phytology.
Linder, M. C. and H. Azam. 1996. Copper biochemistry and molecular biology. Am. J. Clin. Nutr., 63(5): 7975S-8115S.
Liu, H. Y. 2008. Studies of vegetation-environment relationships and vegetation dynamics in Chinese subtropical forests. Ph.D. Thesis University of Oslo, Department of Botany and Natural History Museum Facualty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences.
Lodhi, A., Arshad, M., Azam, F. and Sajjad, M. H. 2009. Changes in mineral and mineralizable N of soil incubated at varying salinity, moisture and temperature regimes. Pak. J. Bot., 41(2): 967-80.
Lomolino, M. V. 2001. Elevation gradients of species-density: historical and prospective views. Global Ecol. Biogeogr., 10(1): 3-13.
LópezPujol, M.C. Martinell, S. Massó, A.M. Rovira, M. Bosch, J. Molero, J. Simon, C. Blanché. 2006. Conservation genetics of Dichoropetalum schottii (Apiaceae): is the legal protection of edge populations consistent with the genetic data.
Lovett, J. C., A. R. Marshall and J. Carr. 2006. Changes in tropical forest vegetation along an altitudinal gradient in the Udzungwa Mountains National Park, Tanzania. Afr. J. Ecol., 44(4): 478-490.
270 Luis, C., M. Eurico and D. M. Adelia. 2002. Vegetation structure and ecology of the Cufada Lagoon (Guinea-Bissau). Afr. J. Eco, 40(3): 252-259.
Ma, C., R. K. Moseley, W. Chen and Z. Zhou. 2007. Plant diversity and priority conservation areas of Northwestern Yunnan, China. Biodivers. Conserv., 16 (3): 757-774.
Mahishi, P., B. H. Srinivasa and M. B. Shivanna. 2005. Medicinal plant wealth of local communities in some villages in Shimoga district of Karnataka, India. J. Ethnopharmacol., 98(3): 307-312.
Majid, A., H. Ahmad, Z. Saqib, I. U. Rahman, U. Khan, J. Alam, A. H. Shah, S. A. Jan and N. Ali. 2019. Exploring threatened traditional knowledge; ethnomedicinal studies of rare endemic flora from Lesser Himalayan region of Pakistan. Rev. Bras. Farmacogn., 29(1): 785-792
Malaker, J. C., M. M. Rahman, S. K. Malaker and M. A. H. Khan. 2010. Floristic composition of Lawachara forest in Bangladesh. Int. J. Expt. Agric., 1(2): 01- 09.
Malik, A. R., M. A. A. Siddique, P. Sofi and S.J. Butola. 2011. Ethnomedicinal practices and conservation status of medicinal plants of North Kashmir Himalayas. J. Med. Plant Res., 5(5): 515-530.
Malik, N. Z. and Z. H. Malik. 2004. Present status of subtropical chir pine vegetation of Kotli Hills, Azad Kashmir. J. Res. Sci., 15(1): 85-90.
Malik, N. Z., M. Arshad and S. N. Mirza. 2007. Phytosociological attributes of different plant communities of Pir Chinasi hills of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Int. J. Agri. Biol., 9(4): 569-574.
Malik, Z. H. 2005. Comparative study of the vegetation of Ganga Chotti and Bedori Hill Dist. Bagh Azad Jammu and Kashmir. (Unpublished) Ph.D. thesis, University of Peshawar. 227 pp.
Manandhar, P. and G. Rasul. 2009. The role of the Hindukush-himalayan (HKH) mountain system in the context of a changing climate: A panel discussion. Mt. Res. Dev., 29(2): 184-187.
Manhas, R. K., L. Singh, H. B. Vasistha and M. Negi. 2010. Floristic diversity of protected ecosystems of Kandi Region of Punjab, India. Ann. Ny. Acad. Sci., 3(4): 96-103.
Mao, A. A., T. M. Hynniewta and M. Sanjappa. 2009. Plant wealth of Northeast India with reference to ethnobotany. Indian. J. Tradit. Know., 8(1): 96-103.
271 Maridass, M. and G. Raju. 2010. Conservation status of Pteridophytes, Western Ghats, South India. Int. J. Bitechnol., 1, 42-57.
Maroyi, A. 2017. Diversity of use and local knowledge of wild and cultivated plants in the Eastern Cape province, South Africa. J. Ethnobiol. Ethnomed., 13(1): 43.
McClatchey, W. C., G. B. Mahady, B. C. Bennett, L. Shiels and V. Savo. 2009. Ethnobotany as a pharmacological research tool and recent developments in CNS-active natural products from ethnobotanical sources. Pharmacol. Ther., 123(2): 239-254.
McCune, B. and M. J. Mefford. 2005. PC. ORD, Multivariate ananlysis of ecological data, Version 5.0. 5th Ed. Gleneden Beach, OR: MjM Software Design.
McCune, B. and J. B. Grace. 2002. Analysis of ecological communities (Vol. 28). Gleneden Beach, OR: MjM software design.
Mehmood, A., S. M. Khan, A. H. Shah, A. H. Shah and H. Ahmad. 2015. First floristic exploration of the district Torghar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 47(SI): 57-70.
Mengesha, G. G. 2016. Ethno-botanical survey of medicinal plants used in treating human and livestock health problems in Mandura Woreda of Benishangul Gumuz, Ethiopia. Adv. Med. Plant. Res., 4(1): 11-26.
Mesdaghi, M. 2001. Vegetation description and analysis: A practical approach Jehad Daneshghi of Mashhad, Mashhad, pp: 161-179 (In Persian).
Mesfin, K., G. Tekle and T. Tesfay. 2013. Ethnobotanical Study of Traditional Medicinal Plants Used by Indigenous People of Gemad District, Northern Ethiopia. J. Med. Pl. Stu., 1(4): 32-37
Mills, M. H. and M.W. Schwartz. 2005. Rare plants at extremes of distributions: Broadly and narrowly distributed rare species. Biodivers. Conserv., 14, 141- 142.
Moinuddin, A., T. Hussain, A. H. Sheikh, S. S. Hussain and M. F. Siddiqui. 2006. Phytosociology and structure of Himalayan forests from different climatic zones of Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 38(2): 361-383.
Motyka, J., B. Dobrzanski and S. Zawadski. 1950. Wstepne badania and lakami polundnlo wowscho dneij Lubeiszczyzny. Ann. Univ. M. Curie-Jklodowska, 13, 367-447 (Sec. E. 5).
272 Mucina, L., 1997. Classification of vegetation: Past, present and future, Journal of Vegetation Science; Meeting of the Societa-Italiana-di-Fitosociologia, 1994; DEC 1997, pp. 751-760.
Muhammad, S., J. Alam, F. Ijaz and Z. Iqbal. 2017. Evaluation of the conservation status of Rhododendron afghanicum Aitch. & Hemsl.: A narrow Endemic species for Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 49(4): 1387-1394.
Muhammad, Z., N. Khan and A. Ullah. 2015. Temporal trends in phenology and demographic status of Acacia modesta population in Malakand division, Pakistan. J. Bio. Env. Sci., 6(2): 8-15.
Mushtaq, T., A. Bahadur, Z. Shah, M. Danish and S. Khalid. 2012. Elemental and nutritional analysis and ethnomedicinal study of selected wild plants species of district Swabi, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. J. Pharm. Res., 5(9): 4910- 4913.
Musila, W. M., J. I. Kinyamario and P.D. Jungerius. 2003. Vegetation dynamics of coastal sand dunes near Malindi, Kenya. Afr. J. Ecol., 39(2): 170-177.
Muthuramkumar, S., N. Ayyappan, N. Parthasarathy, M. Divya, S. T. Raman, S. M. Arthur and P. L. Arul. 2006. Plant community structure in tropical rain forest fragments of the Western Ghats, India. Biotropica, 38(2): 143-160.
Naqinezhad, A. and S. Zarezadeh. 2012. A contribution to flora, life form and chorology of plants in Noor and Sisangan lowland forests. Eur. J. Taxon., 13(4): 31-44.
Nasir, E. and S. I. Ali. 1970-1989. Flora of Pakistan. Nos 1-190. National Herbarium, PARC, Islamabad and Department of Botany, University of Karachi.
Nasrullah, M. Nisar, F. Suliman and Z. Ali. 2012. Ethno-botanical wealth of Jandool valley, Dir Lower, Khber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Int. J. Phytomed., 4(3): 351- 354.
Nath, A. J., G. Das and A. K. Das. 2008. Vegetative phenology of three bamboo species in subtropical humid climate of Assam. J. Trop. Ecol., 49(1): 85-89.
Naveed, A. Exploring Patterns of Phytodiversity, Ethnobotany, Plant Geography and Vegetation In the Mountains of Miandam, Swat, Northern Pakistan. Ph.D Thesis, Göttingen, 2014
Neal, J. E. and B. P. Miller. 2007. Livestock grazing impacts on desert vegetation, Khirthar National Park, Pakistan. Rangel. Ecol. Manag, 60(6): 680- 684.
273 Newall, C. A., L. A. Anderson and J. D. Phillipson. 1996. Herbal medicines: A guide for health care professionals. London, the Pharmaceuticals Press.
Noor, A. and S. Khatoon. 2013. Analysis of vegetation pattern and soil charcteristics of Astore valley Gilgit-Baltistan. Pak. J. Bot., 45(5): 1663-1667.
Noor, M. J. and U. Kalsoom. 2011. Ethnobotanical studies of selected plant species of Ratwal Village, District Attock, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 43(2): 781-786.
Nüsser, M. and W. B. Dickoré. 2002. A Tangle in the Triangle: Vegetation Map of the eastern hindukush (Chitral, Northern Pakistan). Erkendi, 37-59.
Odland, A. 2009. Interpretation of altitudinal gradient in south Central Norway based on vascular plants as environmental indicators. Ecol. Indic., 9(3): 409-421
Okello, J. and P. Sesgawa. 2007. Medicinal plants used by communities of Ngai Subcounty, Apac district, Northern Uganda. Afr. J. Ecol., 45(1): 76-83.
Oladele, A. T., G. O. Alade and O. R. Omobuwajo. 2011. Medicinal plants conservation and cultivation by traditional medicine practitioners (TMPs) in Aiyedaade local government area of Osun State, Nigeria. Am. J. Agric. Biol. Sci., 2(3): 476-487.
Olsen, S. R. and L. E. Sommers. 1982. Phosphorus. In: Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2 (2nd Ed.), Medison, WI, USA, pp. 406-407.
Oosting, H. J. 1956. The Study of Plant Communities, 2nd edition, pp: 440. W.H. Freeman and company, San-Francisco, California, USA.
Oswalt, S. N., T. J. Brandies and B. P. Dimick. 2006. Phytosociology of vascular plants on an international biosphere reserve: Virgin Islands National Park, St. John, US Virgin Islands. Caribb. J. Sci., 42(1): 53-66.
Pandey, M., A. B. Abidi, S. Singh and R. P. Singh. 2006. Nutritional evaluation of leafy vegetable Paratha. J. Hum. Ecol., 19(2): 155-156.
Pandey, S. N. and Misra, S. P. Taxonomy of Angiosperms; ANE Books: New Delhi, 2008.
Parul. and B. D. Vashistha. 2015. An ethno-botanical study of Plains of Yamuna Nagar district, Haryana, India. Int. J. Innov. Res. Sci. Eng. Technol., 4(1): 18600-18607.
Pauli H., M. Gottfried and Dirnbock. 2003. Assessing the long-term dynamics of endemic plants at summit habitats. In: Nagy L, Grabherr G, Ko¨rner C (eds)
274 Alpine biodiversity in Europe-a Europewide assessment of biological richness and change. Ecological Studies, vol 167. Springer, pp 195–207
Pei, S. 1992. Mountain Culture and Forest Resource Management in Himalayan Ecosystem. Edited by D.W. Tewari. Intel Book Distribution, Dehra Dun, India. pp. 114-120
Perveen, A., G. R. Sarwar and I. Hussain. 2008. Plant biodiversity and phytosociological attributes of Dureji (Khirthar Range). Pak. J. Bot., 40(1): 17-24.
Peters, H. A. 2007. The significance of small herbivores in structuring annual grassland. J. Veg. Sci., 18(2): 175-182
Pfister, J. A. and J. C. Malechek. 1986. Dietery selction by goats and sheep in deciduous woodland of North Eastern Brazil. J. Range. Mang., 39(1): 24-28.
Pimentel, D., J. Blesh, A. Bonnifield, X. Garcia, O. Gregory, J. Grufferman, C. Horan, E. Lambert, E. Rochon, J. Schlenker, M. Schneider and E. Walling. 2006. Environmental conservation for the individual. In manuscript.
Qadir, S. A and R. B. Tareen. 1987. Life form and leaf size spectra of the flora of Quetta district. Mod. Trends Pl. Sci. Res. Pak., pp. 59-62.
Qureshi, R. 2018. Preliminary Floristic List of Chotiari Wetland Complex, Nawab Shah, Sindh, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 40(6): 2281-2288.
Qureshi, R. A., I. Ahmad and M. Ishtiaq. 2006. Ethno-botanical amd phytosociological studies of tehsil Gujar Khan, district Rawalpindi. Asian. J. Plant. Sci., 5(5): 890-893.
Qureshi, R.., H. Shaheen, M. Ilyas, W. Ahmed and M. Munir. 2014. Phytodiversity and plant life of Khanpur Dam Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 46(3): 841-849.
Rabinowitz, D. 1981. The biological aspects of rare plant conservation, Wiley, New York. pp. 205-217
Radwinska, J. and K. Zarczynska. 2014. Effects of mineral deficiency on the health of young Ruminants. J. Elem., 19(3): 915-928.
Ragavendran, P., A. Raj, D. Sophia, T. Starlin and V. K. Gopalakrishnan. 2012. Elemental analysis of Aerva lanata by EDX Method. Int. Res. J. Pharm., 3(7): 218-220.
275 Rahim, I. U., J. I. Sultan, M. Yaqoob, H. Nawaz, I. Javed and M. Hameed. 2008. Mineral profile, palatability and digestibility of marginal land grasses of Trans-Himalayan grasslands of Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 40(1): 237-248.
Rahim, S. M. A., S. Hasnain, R. A. Shamsi and F. Jabeen. 2011. The phytosociological analysis of saline area of Tehsil Ferozewala, district Sheikhupura (Punjab), Pakistan. Afr. J. Env. Sci. Tech., 5(4): 316-326.
Rahman, I. U., F. Ijaz, Z. Iqbal, A. Afzal, N. Ali, M. Afzal, M. A. Khan, S. Muhammad, G. Qadir and M. Asif. 2017. A novel survey of the ethnomedicinal knowledge of dental problems in Manoor Valley (Northern Himalaya), Pakistan. J. Ethnopharmacol. 194C, 877-894.
Rahman, K., A. Khan, M. Nisar, T. Hameed, M. S. Khan, A. U. Jan, Shariatullah, A. Ahmad, A. Iqbal and I. A. Khan. 2016. Phytosociological study on Isodon rugosus dominated communities in Khwazakhela district Swat, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Int. J. Biosci., 9(6): 292-302.
Rajaei, P. and N. Mohamadi. 2012. Ethno-botanical study of medicinal plants of Hezar mountain allocated in South East of Iran. Iran. J. Pharm. Res., 11(4): 1153-1167.
Rao, P. S., B. Sujatha, K. Lakshminarayana and S.V. Ratnam. 2013. A study on phytosociology, soil conservation and socio-economic aspects in red sand dunes near Bhimili of Visakhapatnam. Arch. Appl. Sci. Res., 5(1): 45-56.
Rashid, A., M. F. Swati, H. Sher and M. N. Al-Yemeni. 2011. Phytoecological evaluation with detail floristic appraisal of the vegetation around Malam Jabba, Swat, Pakistan. Asian. Pac. J. Trop. Biomed., 1(6): 461-467.
Rasul, G. 2010. The Role of the Himalayan Mountain Systems in Food Security and Agricultural Sustainability in South Asia. Int. J. Rural. Manag., 6(1): 95-116.
Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life-form of plant and statistical plant geography. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Ravanbakhsh, M. and T. Amini. 2014. A study on floristic composition, chorology and ecological structure: A case study from a small-scale forest reserve, Talesh, Iran. Iufs. J. Biol., 73(1): 43-51.
Rayan, J. N., R. W. Harvey, D. W. Metge and J. E. Larson. 1997. Transport of bacteriopage PRDI and silica colloids in a sewage contaminated aquifer. Eos, Transaction of the American Geophysical Union 86, F 231. Presented at the Fall Meeting of the American Geophysical Union.
276 Ricketts,T.H., E. Dinerstein, T. Boucher, T.M. Brook, S.H.M. Butchart, M. Hoffman. 2005. Pinpointing and preserving imminent extinctions Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(51): 18497-18501
Rocha, P. L., L. P. Queiroz and J. R. Pirani. 2004. Plant species and habitat structure in a sand dune field in the Brazilian Caatinga: a homogeneous habitat harboring an endemic biota. Revista. Brasil. Bot., 27(4): 739-755.
Saand, M. A., A. A. Mirbahar, N. K. Khaskheli, K. A. Ansari, S. A. Khaskheli, M. M. R. Jamro and M. H. Sirohi. 2019. Post monsoon floristic inventory of Nagarparkar, District Tharparkar, Sindh, Pakistan. Pure Appl. Biol., 8(1): 968- 976.
Safidkon, F., R. Kalvandi., M. Atri and M. M. Barazandeh. 2003. Contribution for the characterization of Thymus eriocalyx Chemotypes.The International Magazine for Cosmetics and Fragrances.
Saima, S., A. Dasti, Q. Abbas and F. Hussain. 2010. Floristic diversity during monsoon in Ayubia National Park, District Abbottabad, Pakistan. Pak. J. Pl. Sci., 16 (1): 43-50.
Salama, F. M., S. A. Sayed and A. El-Gelil. 2014. Plant communities and floristic composition of the vegetation of Wadi Al-Assiuty and Wadi Habib in the Eastern desert, Egypt. Not. Sci. Biol., 6(2): 196-206.
Salehi, A., M. Zarinkafsh, G. H. Zahedi and M. R. Marvi. 2005. A study of soil physical and chemical properties in relation tree ecological groups in Nam- Khaneh district of Kheirod-Kenar forest. Iran. J. Nat. Res., 5(8): 567-577.
Salman, S. M., I. U. Din, G. Lutfullah, D. E. Shahwar, Z. Shah, A. W. Kamran, S. Nawaz and S. Ali. 2015. Antimicrobial activities, essential element analysis and preliminary phytochemical analysis of ethanolic extract of Mirabilis jalapa. Int. J. Biosci., 7(4): 186-195.
Samreen, U., M. Ibrar and L. Badshah. 2016. Floristic composition, ecological characters and biological characters of Darazinda, F. R. D. I. Khan, Pakistan. Int. Inv. J. Agric. Soil. Sci., 4(1): 9-21.
Sanchez, M., O. Sanchez and L. Guimarães. 2014. Modeling 3D desiccation soil crack networks using a mesh fragmentation technique Computers and Geotechnics, 62, 27-39.
277 Santos, J. P., E. L. Araujo and U. P. Albuquerque. 2008. Richness and distribution of useful woody plants in the semi-arid region of northeastern Brazil. J. Arid. Environ., 72(5): 652-663.
Sarwar, A., J. C. Malaker and M. J. Dutta. 2008. Floristic composition in the campus of Bangladesh Tea Research Institute-I. Angiosperms. Journal of agroforestry and environment, 2pp.
Saurav, M. and A. P. Das. 2014. Plant species richness and phytosociological attributes of the vegetation in the cold temperate zone of Darjilling Himalaya, India. Int. Res. J. Env. Sci., 3(10): 47-57.
Schickhoff, U. 2006. The Forest of Hunza Valley: Scarce resources under threat In: Karakorum In Transition: Culture, Development, and Ecology in the Hunza Valley. (Ed.): H. Kreutzmann. Oxford University Press: 123-144.
Scott, R. G. The Kafirs of the Hindukush; Oxford University Press: London, 1986.
Seraj, S. S., R. N. Jrais and S. K. Ayyad. 2014. Floristic composition, life form and chorology of plant life at Al-Saoda, Asir Region, South-Western Saudi Arabia. J. Biol. Agric. Healthc., 4(26): 60-65.
Shad, A. A., S. Ahmad, R. Ullah, N. M. A. Salam, H. Fouad, N. U. Rehman, H. Hussain and W. Saeed. 2014. Phytochemical and biological activities of four wild medicinal plants. Sci. World. J, pp. 07
Shah, M. and F. Hussain. 2009. Phytosociological study of the vegetation of Hayatabad Peshawar, Pakistan. Pak. J. Pl. Sci., 15(2): 123-128.
Shah, A. H., S. M. Khan, A. H. Shah, A. Mehmood, I. U. Rahman and H. Ahmad. 2015. Cultural uses of plants among Basikhel Tribe of district Torghar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 47(SI): 23-41.
Shah, A., S. Ayaz and F. Hussain. 1991. Similarity indices, biological spectrum and phenology of plant communities of Docut Hills, District Swat, during winter. J. Sci. & Technol., 15(3): 15-21.
Shah, M. and Rozina. 2013. Phytosociological attributes and phytodiversity of Dheri baba hills and Peer Taab Graveyard district Swabi, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Pakhtunkhwa. J. Life. Sci., 1(1): 01-16.
Shah, S. M. and F. Hussain. 2012. Ethnomedicinal plant wealth of Mastuj valley, Hindukush range, District Chitral, Pakistan. J. Med. Pl. Res., 6(26): 4328- 4337.
278 Shah, S. M. and F. Hussain, 2008. Ecology of wetlands of Akbarpura, district Nowshera, Pakistan. Pak. J. Pl. Sci., 14(1): 47-57.
Shah, S.M., F. Hussain and M. Ibrar. 2006. Floristic composition, Life form and Leaf size spectra of summer plants of Mastuj, District Chitral. PUTAJ Science, 13: 167-179.
Shaheen, G. 2005. Seasonal variation in nutritional and anti-nutritional components of native shrubs and trees grown in Hazargangi Chiltan National Park, Karkhasa and Zarghoon. Ph.D. thesis Department of Botany, University of Balochistan, Quetta, Pakistan.
Shaheen, H. and Z. K. Shinwari. 2012. Phytodiversity and endemic richness of Karambar lake vegetation from Chitral, Hindukush-Himalayas. Pak. J. Bot., 44(1): 15-20.
Shaheen, H., N. Ahmad., N. Alam., K. Ahmed and Z. Ullah. 2011. Phytodiversity and endemic richness in high altitude Rama Valley, Western Himalayas, Northern Pakistan. J. Med. Pl. Res, 5(8): 1489-1493.
Shaheen, H., N. M. Malik and M. E. Dar. 2015. Species composition and community structure of subtropical forest stands in Western Himalayan foothills of Kashmir. Pak. J. Bot., 47(6): 2151-2160.
Sharma, D. K., S. Rai, S.S. Arora, P. M. Gupta, R. Sharma and A. K. Chopra. 2011. Study of trace elements in Aloe vera L. (Aloe barbandensis Miller) viz. Liliaceae and its biological and environmental importance. J. Chem. Pharm. Res., 3(3): 64-68.
Sharma, E., N. Chettri and K. P. Oli. 2010. Mountain biodiversity conservation and management: A paradigm shift in policies and practices in the Hindu Kush- Himalayas. Ecol. Res., 25(5): 909-923.
Sharma, P., J. C. Rana, U. Devi, S. S. Randhawa and R. Kumar. 2014. Floristic diversity and distribution pattern of plant communities along altitudinal gradient in Sangla valley, Northwest Himalaya. Sci. World. J. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/264878
Sher, Z. and Z. U. Khan. 2007. Floristic composition, life form and leaf spectra of the vegetation of Chagharzai valley, district Buner. Pak. J. Pl. Sci., 13(1): 57-66.
Sher, Z., F. Hussain and M. Ibrar. 2014. Traditional knowledge on plant resources Ashezai and salarzai Valleys, District Buner, Pakistan. Afr. J. Pl. Sci, 8(1): 42 53.
279 Sher, Z., F. Hussain and M. Saleem. 2012. Macro-mineral status at three phonological stages of some forage shrubs of Gadoon hills, District Swabi, Khyber Pukhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 44(2): 711-716.
Shimwell, D. W. 1971. Description and Classification of Vegetation. Sidgwoick and Jackson, p: 322. London.
Shinwari, K. Z. and M. Qaiser. 2011. Efforts on conservation and sustainable use of Medicinal plants of Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 43(1): 5-10.
Shinwari, Z. K. 2010. Medicinal plants research in Pakistan. J. Med. Pl. Res., 4(3): 161-176.
Shinwari, Z. K., S. S. Gilani and M. Shoukat. 2002. Ethnobotanical resources and implications for curriculum, In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Curriculum Development in Applied Ethnobotany, May 2-4, Nathiagali, Abbotabad, Pakistan. pp. 21-34.
Shirin, K., S. Imad, S. Shafiq and K. Fatima. 2010. Determination of major and trace elements in the indigenous medicinal plant Withania somnifera and their possible correlation with therapeutic activity. J. Saudi. Chem. Soc., 14(1): 97- 100.
Shrivastava, S. and V. K. Kanungo. 2014. Physicochemical analysis of soils in Surguja district Chattishgarh, India. Int. J. Herbal. Med., 1(5): 15-18.
Shuaib, M., N. Jang, S. Ayub, S. U. Rahman, M. T. Khan, M. Fazil and Z. Ali. 2016. Export of important medicinal plants to local and international market from district Dir, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Amer-Eur. J. Agric. Environ. Sci., 16(1): 99-103.
Siddiqui M. H., M. H. Al-Whaibi, M. Faisal and A. A. Sahli. 2014. Nano-silicon dioxide mitigates the adverse effects of salt stress on Cucurbita pepo L. Environ. Toxicol. Chem., 33(11): 2429-2437.
Siddiqui, M. F., M. Ahmed, S. S. Hussain, S. S. Shaukat and N. Khan. 2011. Vegetation description and current status of moist temperate coniferous forests of Himalayan and Hindukush region of Pakistan. Fuuast. J. Biol., 1(2): 99- 114.
Siddiqui, M. F., M. Ahmed, S. S. Shaukat and N. Khan. 2010. Advanced multivariate techniques to investigate vegetation-environmental complex of pine forests of moist temperate areas of Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 42(SI): 267-293.
280 Smith, A. T., L. Boitani, C. Bibby, D. Brackett, F. Corsi, G. A. da Fonseca and R. A. Mittermeier. 2000. Databases tailored for biodiversity conservation. Science, 290(5499): 2073-2074.
Sobukola, O. P. and O. U. Dairo. 2007. Modeling drying kinetics of fever leaves (Ocimum viride) in a convective hot air dryer. Niger. Food. J., 25(1): 145-153.
Sodipo, O. A., J. A. Akiniyi and J. U. Ogunbamosu. 2000. Studies on certain characteristics of extracts of bark of Pausinystalia johimbe and Pausinystalia macroceras (KSchum) Pierre ex Beille. Global. J. Pure. Appl. Sci., 6(1): 83- 87.
Soelberg, J. and A. K. Jäger. 2016. Comparative ethnobotany of the Wakhi agropastoralist and the Kyrgyz nomads of Afghanistan. J. ethnobio. ethnomed, 12(1): 2.
Sorensen, T. 1948. A method of establishing group‟s ofequal amplitudes in plant sociology based on similarity of species content and its application to analyze the vegetation of Darnish commons. Biol. Skr., 5: 1-34.
Srivastava, R., R. M. Mishra and A. Awasthi. 2016. Phytosociological studies on certain plants of Awarpur (M.S). Int. J. Pharm. Life. Sci., 7(3): 4930-4936.
Starks, P. J., S. W. Coleman and W. A. Phillips. 2004. Determination of forage chemical composition using remote sensing. J. Range. Manage., 57(6): 635- 640.
Storeheier, P. V., S. D. Mathiesen, N. J. C. Tyler, N. I. Schjelderup and M. A. Olsen. 2002. Utilization of nitrogen- and mineral-rich vascular forage plants by reindeer in winter. J. Agric. Sci., 139(2): 151-160.
Sultan, J. I., I. Rahim, A. Javaid, M. Q. Bilal, P. Akhtar and S. Ali. 2010. Chemical composition, mineral profile, palatability and in vitro digestibility of shrubs. Pak. J. Bot., 42(4): 2453-2459.
Tadesse G., T. Bekele and S. Demissew. 2017. Floristic composition and plant community analysis of vegetation in Ilu Gelan district, West Shewa Zone of Oromia region, Central Ethiopia. SINET: Ethiop. J. Health. Sci,, 4(2): 335- 350.
Taffetani, F., M. Rismondo and A. Lancioni. 2011. Environmental Evaluation and Monitoring of Agro-Ecosystems Biodiversity. Ecosystems Biodiversity, O. Grillo and G. Venora (Ed.), InTech: 333-370.
281 Tajali, A. and M. Khazaeipool. 2012. Studying the floristic composition of Kojur area in North of Iran. Int. J. Agri. Crop. Sci., 4(22): 1672-1675.
Takhtajan, A. 1986. Floristic regions of the world. University of California Press, California (English translation from Russian)
Tavili, A., M. Rostampour, M. A. Z. Chahouki and J. Farzadmehr. 2009. CCA application for vegetation-environment relationships evaluation in arid environments Southern Khorasan rangelands. Pp. 101-111
Theurillat J. P. and A. Guisan. 2001. Potential impacts of climate change on vegetation in the European Alps: a review. Clim. Change., 50(1-2): 77-109
Tiffany, M. E., L. R. McDowell, G. A. O'Connor, F. G. Martin, N. S. Wilkinson, E. C. Cardoso, S. S. Percival and P. A. Rabiansky. 2000. Effects of pasture applied bio solids on performance and mineral status of grazing beef heifers. J. Anim. Sci. 78(5): 1331-1337.
Tomescu, A., C. Rus, G. Pop, E. Alexa, L. Radulov, L. M. Lmbrea and M. Negrea. 2015. Researches regarding Proximate and selected elements composition of some medicinal plants belonging to the Lamiaceae family. Lucrări Ştiinţifice, 58(2): 175-187.
Tsiourlis, G., P. Konstantinids and P. Xofis. 2009. Syntaxonomy and Synecology of Quercus coccifera Mediterranean Shrublands in Greece. J. Plant. Biol., 52(5): 433-447.
Ullah, A., A. Rashid and S. U. Din. 2009. Ethno-botanical studies of vascular biodiversity of Jandool valley, district Dir Lower. Int. J. Biol. Biotech., 6(3): 117-127.
Ullah, I., S. U. Din, F. Ullah, S. U. Khan, A. Khan, R. A. Khan, M. S. Shah and Zulqarnain.2016. Floristic composition, ecological characteristics and biological spectrum of district Bannu, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. J. Hum. Ecol., 54(1): 01-11.
Ullah, N., A. Shah, A. Rehman, H. U. Rehman, Z. Nawaz, B. Nawab, S. Shuhab, Asmatullah and I. Ullah. 2015. Heavy metals determination in some selected medicinal plants collected from district Karark, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. World. Appl. Sci. J., 33(10): 1655-1658.
Ummara, U., T. Z. Bokhari, F. M. Siddiqui, A. A. Dasti, U. Younis, M. H. R. Shah and Arsalan. 2015. Quantitative description of understory vegetation of Shogran valley, Pakistan. Fuuast J. Biol., 5(1): 63-70.
282 Urooj, R., S. S. Ahmad and M. Nauman. 2016. Ordination study of vegetation analysis around wetland area: A case study of Mangla dam, Azad Kashmir, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 48(1): 115-119.
Vediya, S. D. and H. D. Kharadi. 2011. Floristic diversity of Isari zone, Megharj range forest District Sabarkantha, Gujarat, India. Int. J. of Pharm. & Life Sci. 2 (9): 1033-1034.
Vergeer, P., R. Rengelink, A. Copal and J. Ouborg. 2003. The interacting effects of genetic variation, habitat quality and population size on performance of Succisa pratensis. J. Ecol., 91, pp. 18-26.
Wahab, M., M. Ahmed and N. Khan. 2008. Photosociology and dynamics of some pine forests of Afghanistan. Pak. J. Bot., 40(3): 1071-1079.
Wahab, M., M. Ahmed, N. Khan and A. M. Sarangzai. 2010. A phytosociological study of pine forests from district Dir, Pakistan. Int. J. Biol. Biotechnol., 7(3): 219-226.
Walkley, A. 1947. A critical examination of a rapid method for determining organic carbon in soils: Effect of variation in digestion conditions and of inorganic soil constituents. Soil. Sci., 63(4): 251-264.
Wani, K. A., R. Yadav, S. Singh and K. K. Upadhyay. 2014. Comparative study of physicochemical properties and fertility of soils in Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, World. J. Agric. Sci., 10(2): 48-56.
Watkinson, A. R. and S. J. Ormerod. 2013. Grasslands, grazing and population dynamics. Ann. Bot. Fenn., 50, pp. 269-283
Wazir, S. M., A. A. Dasti and J. Shah. 2004. Common medicinal plants of Chapursan valley, Gojall II, Gilgit-Pakistan. J. Res. Sci., 15(1): 41-43.
Wendelbo, Per. 1952. Plants from Tirich Mir. A Contribution to the Flora of Hindukush. Nyt Magasin for Botanikk Vol. 1.
Western, D. 2001. Taking the broad view of conservation: a empirical study from Nepal. Environmental Conservation, 28, response to Adams and Hulme. Oryx, 35, 201-203.
White, F. and J. Léonard. 1991. Phytogeographical links between Africa and Southwest Asia. Flora et Vegetatio Mundi 9, 229-246.
White, P.J. and M. R. Broadley. 2003. Calcium in Plants. Ann. Bot., 92: 487-511.
283 Williamson, S. and D. K. Balkwill. 2015. Plant census and floristic analysis of selected serpentine outcrops of the Barbberton Greenstone Belt, Mpumalanga, and South Africa. S. Afr. J. Bot., 9(7): 133-142.
Wu, J. W., L. R. Zhao, J.S. Huang, Z. J. Yang, B. Vincent, S. Bouarfa and A. Vidal. 2009. On the effectiveness of dry drainage in soil salinity control. Science in China (Series E: Technological Sciences), 52, 3328–3334.
Wyk, B., H. D. Wet and F. R. V. Heerden. 2008. An ethno-botanical survey of medicinal plants in the Southeastern Karoo, South Africa. S. Afr. J. Bot., 74 (4): 696-704.
Yagi, S., A. E. A. Rahman, G. O. M. Elhassan and A. M. A. Mohammad. 2013. Elemental analysis of ten Sudanese medicinal plants using X-ray Fluorescence. J. Appl. Ind. Sci., 1(1): 49-53.
Zahoor, M., S. M. Wazir, A. Muhammad and S. F. Muhammad. 2009. Ethnobotany of some plants from Darra‟e Pezo, District Lakki Marwat, Pakistan. Pak. J. Pl. Sci., 15(1): 75-80.
Zaidi, M. A., G. Shaheen, N. Jehan, A. Mansoor and A. Yousafzai. 2010. Elemental composition of some arid environment fodder and medicinal plants of Quetta, Balochistan. J. Chem. Soc. Pak., 32(1): 71-77.
Zeb, U., S. Ali, Z. Hu Li, H. Khan, K. Shahzad, M. Shuaib and M. Ihsan. 2017. Floristic diversity and ecological characteristics of weeds at Atto Khel Mohmand Agency, KPK, Pakistan. Acta. Ecol. Sinica., 37(6): 363-367.
Zhang, J. T. and F. Zhang. 2011. Ecological relations between forest communities and environmental variables in the Lishan mountain nature reserve, China. Afr. J. Agric. Res., 6(2): 248-259.
Zhang, X., D. Tarpley and J. T. Sullivan. 2007. Diverse responses of vegetation phenology to a warming climate. Geophys. Res. Lett., 34(2): 1940-45.
Zhu, H., C. Yong, S. Zhou, H. Wang and L. Yan. 2015. Vegetation, floristic composition and species diversity in a tropical mountain nature reserve in southern Yunnan, SW China, with implications for conservation. Trop. Conserv. Sci., 8(2): 528-546.
Zohary, M. 1973. Geobotanical foundations of the Middle East, vol 2, Fischer, Stuttgart.
284
APPENDICES
Site I Shagrom
Appendix 1. Phytosociological attributes of Elaeagnus-Prunus-Adiantum (EPA) Community
S.No Plant species D C F RD RCC RF IV A. Trees layers 1. Elaeagnus angustifolia var. angustifolia 1.4 6.5 60 8 7.22 9.09 24.31.a 2. Fraxinus xanthoxyloides (G. Don) DC. 0.5 5.2 20 2.85 5.77 3.03 11.66 3. Prunus griffithii (Boiss.) C.K.Schneid 0.4 3 30 2.28 3.33 4.54 10.16 4. Prunus jacquemontii Hook.f. 0.5 2.8 20 2.85 3.11 3.0 19.99.b 5. Prunus prostrata Labill. 0.3 1.4 30 1.71 1.55 4.5 7.81 6. Salix pycnostachya Andersson. 0.4 3.3 20 2.28 3.66 3.0 8.98 B. Shrubs layers 7. Berberis lyceum Royle. 1 3.4 60 5.71 3.77 9.09 18.5 C. Herbs layers 8. Adiantum venustum D. Don 0.8 5.4 60 4.57 6 9.09 19.66.c 9. Allium chitralicum Wang & Tang 0.5 6.3 20 2.85 7 3.03 12.88 10. Anethum gravelons L. 0.7 5 40 4 5.55 6.06 15.61 11. Brassica campestris L. 1.2 5 30 6.85 5.55 4.54 16.95 12. Capsella bursa-pestoris L. 1 6 40 5.71 6.66 6.06 18.44 13. Chenopodium murale L. 1.4 2.4 40 8 2.66 6.06 16.72 14. Convulvulus arvensis L. 0.9 1.5 20 5.14 1.66 3.03 9.83 15. Conyza aegyptiaca (L.) Dryand. ex Aiton 1.1 5 30 6.28 5.55 4.54 16.38 17. Coronopus didymus (L.) Sm. 0.8 6 20 4.57 6.66 3.0 14.26 16. Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. 1 8 30 5.71 8.88 4.54 18.14 18. Lactuca serriola L. 0.8 2.5 30 4.57 2.77 4.54 11.89 19. Mentha longifolia (L.) Huds. 1.2 4.5 20 6.85 5 3.03 14.88 20. Pennisetum flaccidum Griseb 0.8 4.3 20 4.57 4.77 3.03 12.37 21. Rumex hastatus D. Don 0.8 2.5 20 4.57 2.77 3.0 10.3 Total 17.5 100 660 100 100 100 300 Key: D= Density; C= Cover; F= Frequency; RD= Relative density; RC= Relative cover; RF= Relative frequency; IV= Importance value
285 Appendix 2. Phytosociological Attributes of Heracleum-Artemisia-Capparis (HAC) Community
S.No Plant species D C F RD RCC RF IV A. Trees layers (Absent) B. Shrubs layers 1. Berberis parkeriana Schneid 0.8 4.5 50 3.2 3.60 5.10 11.9 2. Buxus wallichiana Baill, Monogr. 1.2 5.5 40 4.8 4.41 4.08 13.29 3. Clematis orientalis L. 0.6 4 30 2.4 3.20 3.06 8.66 4. Cotoneaster racemiflorus (Desf.) Booth ex Bosse 1 6.5 60 4 5.21 6.12 15.33 5. Juniperus communis L. 0.7 6 50 2.8 4.81 5.10 12.7 C. Herbs layers 6. Acantholimon stocksii Boiss. 1.2 7 60 4.8 5.61 6.12 14.5 7. Achillea millefolium subsp. chitralensis 0.6 5 30 2.4 4.00 3.06 9.47 8. Adonis aestivalis L. 0.9 4.5 30 3.6 3.60 3.06 10.26 9. Agrostis nervosa Nees ex Trin. 1 2.5 30 4 2.00 3.06 9.06 10. Heracleum polyadenum Rech. f. & Riedl. 0.8 6.7 30 3.2 5.37 3.06 19.63 11. Anemone rupicola var. sericea Hook.f.& 1 2.5 40 4 2.00 4.08 10.08 Thomson 12. Anthemis cotula L. 0.9 3 30 3.6 2.40 3.06 9.06 13. Artemisia scoparia Waldst. & Kit. 0.6 5 40 2.4 4.00 4.08 10.4 14. Artemisia sieversiana Ehrh. 1.3 8.5 50 5.2 6.81 5.10 17.11.b 15. Askellia flexuosa (Ledb.) W.A. Weber 1.2 4.5 30 4.8 3.60 3.06 11.46 16. Aster flaccidus Bunge. 0.8 3.5 20 3.2 2.80 2.04 8.04 17. Astragalus imitensis Ali 1.2 6 40 4.8 4.81 4.08 13.69 18. Atriplex schugnanica Iljin. 1 0.5 30 4 0.40 3.06 7.46 19. Bromus danthoniae Trin. 1.2 6 20 4.8 4.81 2.04 11.65 20. Bromus tectorum L. 1 4 30 4 3.20 3.06 10.26 21. Capparis spinosa L. 1.4 4.5 60 5.6 3.60 6.12 15.3.c 22. Chenopodium foliosum (Merrich.) Aschers 0.8 3.5 20 3.2 2.80 2.04 8.04 23. Cichoriun intybus L. 1 6 30 4 4.81 3.06 11.87 24. Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. 0.8 3 30 3.2 2.40 3.06 8.66 25. Codonopsis clematidea (Schrenk) C.B. Clarke 0.5 4 30 2 3.20 3.06 8.26 Total 17.5 100 660 100 100 100 300 Key: D= Density; C= Cover; F= Frequency; RD= Relative density; RC= Relative cover; RF= Relative frequency; IV= Importance value
286
Site II Warimon
Appendix 3. Phytosociological Attributes of Fraxinus-Rosa-Acanthophylum (FRA)
Community S.No. Plant species D C F RD RCC RF IV A. Trees layer 1. Cotoneaster affinis var. bacillaris 1 10.5 40 5.46 7.66 4.93 12.0 (Lindl.) Schneider. 2. Crataegus songarica C. Koch. 0.6 8.5 40 3.27 6.20 4.93 14.42 3. Elaeagnus angustifolia var. 0.6 2.5 20 3.27 1.82 2.46 7.57 angustifolia 4. Fraxinus xanthoxyloides (G. Don) 3.5 DC. 0.8 30 4.37 2.55 3.70 19.63.a 5. Prunus griffithii (Boiss.) 3.5 C.K.Schneid 0.6 30 3.27 2.55 3.70 9.53 B. Shrubs layer 6. Rhamnus prostrata Jacq.ex Parker 0.9 5 20 4.91 3.64 2.46 11.03 7. Rosa webbiana Wall.ex. Royle. 0.8 8.5 40 4.37 6.20 4.93 17.9.b 8. Tamaricaria elegans (Royle) Qaiser 0.4 8.5 40 2.18 6.20 4.93 13.32 & Ali C. Herbs layer 9. Acanthophylum laxiflorum Boiss. 0.5 5.5 50 2.73 4.01 6.17 17.91.c 10. Amaranthus viridis L. 0.8 6 30 4.37 4.37 3.70 12.45 11. Brachypodium distachyon (L.) P. 0.9 4 40 4.91 2.91 4.93 12.77 Beauv. 12. Bunium persicum (Boiss.) Fedtsch. 0.3 3.5 20 1.63 2.55 2.46 6.66 Rastit 13. Calendula officinalis L. 0.4 3 20 2.18 2.18 2.46 6.84 14. Chenopodium botrys L. 0.6 3 30 3.27 2.18 3.70 9.17 15. Clematis alpina var. sibirica (L.) O. 0.8 5.5 40 4.37 4.01 4.93 13.3 Kuntze, Verh. 16. Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronquist. 0.6 3.5 20 3.27 2.55 2.46 8.30 17. Coriandrum stivum L. 0.9 3 20 4.91 2.18 2.46 9.57 18. Equisetum ramossimum Desf. 0.4 3.5 20 2.18 2.55 2.46 7.20 19. Lactuca serriola L. 0.4 4 20 2.18 2.91 2.46 7.57 20. Melilotus officinalis (L.) Pall. 0.6 3 30 3.27 2.18 3.70 9.17 21. Mentha longifolia (L.) Huds. 0.6 4.5 20 3.27 3.28 2.46 9.03 22. Pennisetum flaccidum Griseb 0.3 3.5 20 1.63 2.55 2.46 6.66 23. Polygonatum geminiflorum Decne 0.4 4 20 2.18 2.91 2.46 7.57 24. Scandix pecten-veneris L. 0.5 3.5 20 2.73 2.55 2.46 7.75
287 25. Silene conoidea L. 0.7 3.5 20 3.82 2.55 2.46 8.84 26. Solanum nigrum L. 0.4 3 20 2.18 2.18 2.46 6.84 27. Stellaria media (L.) Vill. 0.9 4.5 20 4.91 3.28 2.46 10.67 28. Taraxacum officinale Weber. 0.7 4.5 20 3.82 3.28 2.46 9.57 29. Verbena officinalis L. 0.6 3.5 20 3.27 2.55 2.46 8.30 30. Xanthium strumarium L. 0.3 4.5 30 1.63 3.28 3.70 8.62 Total 18.3 100 810 100 100 100 300 Key: D= Density; C= Cover; F= Frequency; RD= Relative density; RC= Relative cover; RF= Relative frequency; IV= Importance value
288 Appendix 4. Phytosociological Attributes of Prangos-Ribes-Berberis (PRB) Community
S.No Plant species D C F RD RCC RF IV A. Trees layer (Absent) B. Shrubs layer 1. Berberis calliobotrys Aitch.ex Koehne. 1 7 50 5.26 8.23 7.24 20.7.c 2. Rosa beggeriana Schrenk. 0.8 4 20 4.21 4.70 2.89 11.81 C. Herbs layer 3. Acantholimon stocksii Boiss. 0.8 1.5 20 4.21 1.76 2.89 8.87 4. Agrostis nervosa Nees ex Trin. 1 0.5 50 5.26 0.58 7.24 13.09 5. Agrostis viridis Gouan, Hort. 0.5 5 20 2.63 5.88 2.89 11.41 6. Alcea nudiflora (Lindl.) Boiss 1.2 2.5 30 6.31 2.94 4.34 13.60 Anemone rupicola var. sericea Hook.f.& 7. 1 3 30 5.26 3.52 4.34 13.1 Thomson 8. Anthemis cotula L. 0.8 4 20 4.21 4.70 2.89 11.81 9. Brachyactis roylei (Candolle) Wendelbo. 0.6 4 30 3.15 4.70 4.34 12.2 10. Bromus persicus Boiss. 0.6 3.5 20 3.15 4.11 2.89 10.17 11. Bromus ramosus Huds. 0.8 3.5 20 4.21 4.11 2.89 11.22 12. Capparis spinosa L. 0.8 5 30 4.21 5.88 4.34 14.44 13. Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. 0.9 4 40 4.73 4.70 5.79 15.2 14. Prangos pabularia Lindl. 1.5 7 60 7.89 8.23 8.69 24.8.a Ranunculus laetus Wall.ex Hook.f. & 15. 0.8 3.5 20 4.21 4.11 2.89 11.22 Thoms. 16. Ribes orientale Desf. 1.2 7 50 6.31 8.23 7.24 21.8.b 17. Stipa chitralensis Bor. 0.6 2.5 20 3.15 2.94 2.89 8.99 18. Tanacetum chitralense (Podlech) K. 0.9 0.5 30 4.73 0.58 4.34 9.67 19. Tetrapogon villosus Desf. 1 3 50 5.26 3.52 7.24 16.0 20. Thlaspi perfoliatum L. 0.6 6 20 3.15 7.05 2.89 13.11 21. Trisetaria loeflingiana (L.) Paunero 0.9 4.5 30 4.73 5.29 4.34 14.37 22. Youngia japonica (L.) DC 0.7 3.5 30 3.68 4.11 4.34 12.14 Total 19 100 690 100 100 100 300 Key: D= Density; C= Cover; F= Frequency; RD= Relative density; RC= Relative cover; RF= Relative frequency; IV= Importance value
289 Site III Zondrangam
Appendix 5. Phytosociological Attributes of Hippophae-Sophora-Poa (HSP) Community
S.No. Plant species D C F RD RCC RF IV A. Trees layer Cotoneaster affinis var. bacillaris 1. 0.9 3.5 20 3.09 2.80 2.29 8.19 (Lindl.) Schneider. 2. Crataegus songarica C. Koch. 0.5 3 30 1.71 2.40 3.44 7.56 Elaeagnus angustifolia var. 3. 1 6.5 20 3.43 5.20 2.29 10.9 angustifolia B. Shrubs layer 4. Hippophae rhamnoides Rousi. 1.4 8.5 50 4.81 6.80 5.74 17.36.a 5. Lonicera myrtillus Hook. f. & Thoms. 0.8 3 20 2.74 2.40 2.29 7.44 6. Rhamnus prostrata Jacq.ex Parker 0.9 4 30 3.09 3.20 3.44 9.74 Sophora mollis subsp. duthiei (Prain) 7. 1.3 6 40 4.46 4.80 4.59 13.86.b Ali Tamaricaria elegans (Royle) Qaiser & 8. 1.2 4 30 4.12 3.20 3.44 10.77 Ali C. Herbs layer Brachypodium sylvaticum (Huds.) P. 9. 0.6 6 20 2.06 4.80 2.29 9.16 Beauv 10. Cardaria draba (L.) Desv 0.8 5 30 2.74 4.0 3.44 10.2 11. Carex stenocarpa Turcz.ex V. Krecz 1 5.4 50 3.43 4.32 5.74 13.5 Cirsium wallichii var. glabratum 12. 1.2 6 40 4.12 4.80 4.59 13.5 (Hook. f.) Wendelbo 13. Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronquist. 0.8 3 20 2.74 2.40 2.29 7.4 14. Coriandrum stivum L. 0.6 4.5 40 2.06 3.60 4.59 10.2 15. Equisetum ramossimum Desf. 0.9 4 20 3.09 3.20 2.29 8.5 Fragaria nubicola (Hook.f.) Lindl.ex 16. 1.2 6 30 4.12 4.80 3.44 10.3 Lacaita Glycyrrhiza glabra var. glandulifera 17. 1 3.5 30 3.43 2.80 3.44 9.68 (Waldst. & Kit.) Boiss. 18. Lindelofia anchusoides (Lindl.) Lehm. 1 3.5 20 3.43 2.80 2.29 8.53 19. Lolium temulentum L. 1.2 2.6 30 4.12 2.08 3.44 9.65 Malcolmia cabulica var. topppinii 20. 1 3.5 20 3.43 2.80 2.29 8.53 (O.E. Schulz) Nasir 21. Matthiola flavida Boiss. 0.8 3 30 2.74 2.40 3.44 8.59 22. Poa pratensis subsp. pratensis 1.2 3.5 20 4.12 2.80 2.29 13.6.c 23. Polygonatum geminiflorum Decne 0.9 3.5 30 3.09 2.80 3.44 9.34 24. Psoralea drupaceae Bunge. 0.6 3 20 2.06 2.40 2.29 6.76 25. Silene vulgaris (Moench) Garcke. 1.2 3.5 20 4.12 2.80 2.29 9.22 26. Sisymbrium brassiciforme C. A. Mey. 1 3.5 20 3.43 2.80 2.29 8.53 27. Sonchus asper (L.) Hill. 0.9 2.5 20 3.09 2.001 2.29 7.39 28. Stellaria decumbens Edgew 0.4 2 20 1.37 1.60 2.29 5.27 29. Taraxacum officinale Weber. 1 0.5 20 3.43 0.40 2.29 6.13 30. Verbascum thapsus L. 0.6 3 40 2.06 2.40 4.59 9.06
290 31. Verbena officinalis L. 0.4 2.4 20 1.37 1.92 2.29 5.59 32. Xanthium strumarium L. 0.8 3 20 2.74 2.40 2.29 7.44 Total 29.1 100 870 100 100 100 300 Key: D= Density; C= Cover; F= Frequency; RD= Relative density; RC= Relative cover; RF= Relative frequency; IV= Importance value
291 Appendix 6. Phytosociological Attributes of Astragalus-Astragalus*-Eremurus (AAE) Community
S.No. Plant species D C F RD RCC RF IV A. Trees layer 1. Linaria odora (M.B.) Fisch. 0.6 2 20 3.70 2.42 2.53 8.65 B. Shrubs layer 2. Rosa beggeriana Schrenk. 0.8 4.5 40 4.93 5.45 5.06 15.45 C. Herbs layer 3. Acantholimon stocksii Boiss. 1 3.2 30 6.17 3.87 3.79 13.84 4. Acantholimon longiscapum Bokhari 1 7 50 6.17 8.48 6.32 20.98 5. Astragalus affghanus Boiss. 1.2 8 50 7.40 9.6 6.32 23.43.a 6. Astragalus amberstianus Bth.ex. Royle. 0.8 8 40 4.93 9.69 5.06 19.6 7. Astragalus edelbergianus Sirj & Rech.f. 1 6.5 60 6.17 7.87 7.59 21.6.b 8. Asyneuma strictum Wendelbo. 0.6 3.5 30 3.70 4.24 3.79 11.7 9. Bromus ramosus Huds. 0.7 1.5 30 4.32 1.81 3.79 9.93 10. Bupleurum kohistanicum E. Nasir 0.7 1.5 40 4.3 1.81 5.06 11.20 11. Calamagrostis pseudophragmites subsp. 1 1.5 40 6.17 1.81 5.06 13.05 pseudophragmites (Hall.f.) Koel. 12. Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. 0.8 3 50 4.93 3.63 6.32 14.90 13. Dicanthium annulatum Forssk. Stapf. 0.8 1 30 4.93 1.21 3.79 9.947 14. Draba tibetica var. chitralensis (O. E. 0.6 5 30 3.70 6.06 3.79 13.56 Nasir) Jafri 15. Ephedra gerardiana Wall.ex Stapf 0.8 3.8 50 4.93 4.60 6.32 15.87 16. Eremurus stenophyllus subsp. stenophyllus 1 6 60 6.17 7.27 7.59 21.04.c S. I. Ali 17. Juniperus excelsa M. Bieb 0.8 8 40 4.93 9.69 5.06 19.69 18. Prangos pabularia Lindl. 0.6 1.5 40 3.70 1.81 5.06 10.58 19. Ranunculus laetus Wall.ex Hook.f. & 0.8 3 30 4.93 3.63 3.79 12.3 Thoms. 20. Ribes orientale Desf. 0.6 4 30 3.70 4.84 3.7 12.34 Total 16.2 100 790 100 100 100 300 Key: D= Density; C= Cover; F= Frequency; RD= Relative density; RC= Relative cover; RF= Relative frequency; IV= Importance value
292 Site IV Rosh Gol
Appendix 7. Phytosociological Attributes of Artemisia-Rhodiola-Rosularia (ARR) Community
S.No. Plant Species D C F RD RCC RF IV A. Trees layer 1. Pistacia atlantica subsp. cabulica 0.8 6 40 4.59 5.89 5.33 15.83 B. Shrubs layer 2. Rosa ecae Aitch. 0.8 5 50 4.59 4.91 6.66 16.18 C. Herbs layer 3. Allium caroliniannum DC. 0.5 2.5 40 2.87 2.45 5.33 10.66 4. Artemisia parviflora Roxb ex. D. Don 1.2 8 60 6.89 7.86 8 22.7.a 5. Artemisia persica Boiss, Diagn. 1 6.5 40 5.74 6.39 5.33 17.4 6. Bromus oxyodon Schrenk. 0.7 5 30 4.02 4.91 4 12.93 7. Cirsium griffithii Boiss. 0.6 4 30 3.44 3.93 4 11.3 8. Crepis aitchisonii Boiss. 0.6 4.2 20 3.44 4.12 2.66 10.24 9. Dactylorhiza umbrosa (Kar. & Kir.) Nevski 0.7 5 30 4.02 4.91 4 12.93 10. Draba tibetica var. chitralensis (O. E. 0.8 3 20 4.59 2.94 2.66 10.21 Nasir) Jafri 11. Ferula jaeschkeana Vatke. 0.5 4.5 30 2.87 4.42 4 11.29 12. Melica persica Kunth, Rev. Gram. 0.6 4 20 3.44 3.93 2.66 10.04 13. Poa bulbosa L. 1.5 5 50 8.62 4.91 6.66 18.20 14. Polygonatum geminiflorum Decne. 0.5 3 20 2.87 2.94 2.66 8.49 15. Pseudognaphalium luteo-album (L.), O. M. 1 3.5 40 5.74 3.44 5.33 14.52 Hilliard & B. L Burtt 16. Rhodiola heterodonta (Hook.f. & Thomson) 0.5 4 20 2.87 3.37 2.66 9.47 Boriss. 17. Rhodiola wallichiana (Hook.) S.H. Fu 0.8 3.5 30 4.59 3.44 4 22.03.b 18. Rorippa islandica (Oeder) Borbas 0.8 2 20 4.59 1.96 2.66 9.23 19. Rosularia adenotricha subsp. adenotricha 0.5 3 30 2.87 2.94 4 9.82 20. Rosularia alpestris (Kar & Kir) Boiss. 0.6 3 20 3.44 2.94 2.66 22.06.c 21. Rubia tibetica Hook.f. 1 4 50 5.74 3.93 6.66 16.34 22. Saussurea leptophylla Hemsl. 0.6 5 20 3.44 4.91 2.66 11.03 23. Seriphidium brevifolium (Wall. ex DC.) 0.8 8 40 4.59 7.86 5.33 17.79 Ling & Y. R. Ling Total 17.4 100 750 100 100 100 300 Key: D= Density; C= Cover; F= Frequency; RD= Relative density; RC= Relative cover; RF= Relative frequency; IV= Importance value
293 Appendix 8. Phytosociological Attributes of Betula- Scutellaria-Taraxacum (BST) Community
S.No. Plant species D C F RD RCC RF IV A. Trees layer 1. Betula chitralica Browicz 1.4 8 70 7.32 10.91 8.97 27.21.a B. Shrubs layer (Absent) C. Herbs layer 2. Acantholimon leptostahyum Aitch. 0.6 6 40 3.14 8.18 5.12 14.4 3. Acantholimon longiflorum Boiss. 0.8 4.5 50 4.18 6.13 6.41 14.7 4. Arnebia euchroma (Royle ex Benth.) I . M. 1.2 2.5 30 6.28 3.41 3.84 13.53 Johnston 5. Arnebia griffithii Boiss., Diagn. 0.8 3 30 4.18 4.09 3.84 12.12 6. Arnebia hispidisma (Lehm.) A. DC 0.8 4 40 4.18 5.45 5.12 14.77 7. Asyneuma strictum Wendelbo. 0.5 2 40 2.61 2.72 5.12 10.47 8. Cerastium cerastioides (L.) Britton. 0.8 2 30 4.18 2.72 3.84 10.76 9. Cuscuta villosa L. 0.6 3 20 3.14 4.09 2.56 9.79 10. Myosotis avensis (L.) Hill. 0.8 1 30 4.18 1.36 3.84 9.39 11. Primula macrophylla var. macrophylla D. 0.9 2.5 30 4.7 3.41 3.84 11.96 Don 12. Rheum webbianum Royle. 1.3 4 50 6.80 5.45 6.41 13.67 13. Saussurea leptophylla Hemsl. 0.6 4 30 3.14 5.45 3.84 11.03 14. Scutellaria multicaulis Boiss. 1.2 5 60 6.28 6.82 7.69 20.7.b 15. Seriphidium chitralense (Podlech)Y. R. 1 3 30 5.23 4.09 3.84 13.17 Ling 16. Solenanthus circinnatus Ledeb. 0.6 2.5 20 3.14 3.41 2.56 9.11 17. Taraxacum brevirostre Hand.-Mazz.var. 0.8 4 30 4.18 5.45 3.84 13.49 lanatum 18. Taraxacum tricolor V. S 1 2.8 40 5.23 3.81 5.12 15.8.c 19. Tragopogon gracilis D.Don. 0.8 1.5 30 4.18 2.04 3.84 10.08 20. Tricholepis toppinii Dunn. 1.2 3.5 30 6.28 4.77 3.84 14.90 21. Tussilago farfara L. 0.6 1.5 20 3.14 2.04 2.56 7.75 Total 19.1 100 780 100 100 100 300 Key: D= Density; C= Cover; F= Frequency; RD= Relative density; RC= Relative cover; RF= Relative frequency; IV= Importance value
294 Site V Ghari
Appendix 9. Phytosociological Attributes of Anaphalis-Cousinia-Kobresia (ACK) Community
S.No. Plant species D C F RD RCC RF IV A. Trees layer (Absent) B. Shrubs layer 1. Cousinia pycnoloba Boiss. 0.9 3 40 5.29 4.47 5.97 25.7.b C. Herbs layer 2. Anaphalis stantonii Y. Nasir 0.6 3 40 3.52 3.47 4.47 29.48.a 3. Artemisia brevifolia Wall ex DC. 0.8 3 40 4.70 7.47 7.46 16.64 4. Artemisia elegantissim Pamp., Nuovo Giorn. 1.2 8 70 7.05 11.9 10.4 18.4 5. Asplenium septentrionale (L.) Hoffm. 1 4.5 40 5.88 6.71 5.97 18.5 6. Bromus japonicus Thunb. ex Murr., Syst. 0.6 2 50 3.52 4.98 4.47 10.9 7. Calamagrostis decora Hook.f. 0.8 3 20 4.70 4.4 4.47 13.6 8. Crepis multicaulis Ledeb.var. congsta 0.8 2.5 30 4.70 3.7 4.47 12.9 9. Cystopteris fragilis (L.) Bernh. 1 4 10 5.88 5.97 4.47 16.3 10. Ferula hindukushensis Kitamura. 1.5 8 20 8.82 11.9 8.95 17.7 11. Festuca olgae (Regel) Krivot. 0.8 2 20 4.70 4.98 4.47 12.1 12. Heracleum polyadenum Rech.f. & Riedl. 0.8 2 30 4.70 7.98 4.47 12.1 13. Kobresia laxa Nees, Contr. 0.9 3 30 5.29 4.47 2.98 22.7.c 14. Koelpinia linearis Pall. var. linearis 1 3.5 10 5.88 5.22 4.47 15.5 15. Myricatis wallichii Less. 0.6 0.5 10 3.52 9.74 2.98 7.26 16. Piptatherum laterale (Munro ex Regel) Rozhev. 0.8 3 10 4.70 5.47 4.47 13.6 17. Poa alpina L. 0.6 2 10 3.52 6.98 2.98 9.49 18. Psychrogeton chitralicus Grierson. 0.8 5 40 4.70 7.46 5.97 16.13 19. Puccinellia minuta Bor. 1.5 5 10 8.82 7.46 5.97 20.25 Total 17 100 670 100 100 100 300 Key: D= Density; C= Cover; F= Frequency; RD= Relative density; RC= Relative cover; RF= Relative frequency; IV= Importance value
295
Appendix 10. Phytosociological Attributes of Alajja- Oxyria-Oxytropis (AOO) Community
S.No. Plant species D C F RD RCC RF IV A. Trees layer 1. Betula utilis D.Don 0.8 3 50 6.29 6.51 6.94 17.75 2. Crataegus wattiana Hemsl. & Lace, J .L. 0.4 2.5 30 3.14 3.75 4.16 11.07 B. Shrubs layer (Absent) C. Herbs layer 3. Alajja rhomboidea (Benth.) Ikonn. 0.8 8.5 40 6.29 12.78 5.55 24.6.a 4. Aloitis smithii Omer. 0.7 7.5 30 5.51 11.2 8.16 18.95 5. Astragalus coluteocarpus Boiss. ssp. 0.5 5.5 40 3.93 8.27 5.55 17.76 chitralensis Wenninger, Mitt. Bot. 6. Astragalus minuto-foliolatus Wendelbo 0.3 3.5 30 2.36 6.26 4.16 11.79 7. Chesneya cuneata (Benth.) Ali. 0.4 2.5 20 3.14 5.75 7.77 9.68 8. Cirsium griffithii Boiss. 0.7 1.5 30 5.51 4.25 4.16 11.93 9. Crepis multicaulis Ledeb.var. congsta 0.5 0.5 20 3.93 4.75 7.77 7.46 10. Lagochilus cabulicus Bth. 0.6 2.5 20 4.72 3.75 8.77 11.26 11. Myosotis avensis (L.) Hill. 0.6 2 40 4.72 4.00 5.55 13.28 12. Oxyria digyna (L.) Hill, Hort. 0.5 1.5 30 3.93 5.25 7.16 21.3.b 13. Rosularia alpestris (Kar & Kir) Boiss. 0.4 0.5 30 3.14 5.75 4.16 8.06 14. Taraxacum tricolor V. S 0.4 1 30 3.14 4.50 6.16 8.82 15. Tricholepis toppinii Dunn. 0.5 5.5 30 3.93 8.27 8.16 16.37 16. Oxytropis chitralensis Ali. 0.4 1 40 3.14 4.50 5.55 20.9.c 17. Primula macrophylla var. macrophylla D. Don 0.6 0.5 20 4.72 4.75 8.77 8.25 18. Pseudomertensia chitralensis (Riedl) Riedl 0.9 0.5 40 7.08 7.75 5.55 13.39 19. Seriphidium chitralense (Podlech)Y. R. Ling 1 0.5 40 7.87 4.75 5.55 14.18 20. Tanacetum griffithii (C. B. Clarke) Muradyan. 0.7 7.5 30 5.51 11.2 4.16 19.95 21. Taraxacum chitralense Soest 0.5 3.5 30 3.93 5.26 8.16 13.36 22. Taraxacum wendelboanum Soest 0.3 3 20 2.36 7.51 8.77 9.65 23. Taraxacum obtusum (Soest) R. Doll 0.2 2 30 1.57 7.00 4.16 8.74 Total 12.7 100 720 100 100 100 300 Key: D= Density; C= Cover; F= Frequency; RD= Relative density; RC= Relative cover; RF= Relative frequency; IV= Importance value
296 Appendix-11 Profarma used for Quantitative Data
297
Appendix 12. Palatability and animal preference of forage plants
Species Palatability class Plant part Grazing animals NP HP MP RP LP WP L S C G S 1. Asplenium septentrionale (L.) Hoffm. + ------
2. Asplenium viride Huds. + ------
3. Cystopteris fragilis (L.) Bernh. + ------
4. Adiantum venustum D. Don + ------
5. Equisetum ramossimum Desf. + - - - - + - - + - -
6. Juniperus communis L. + ------
7. Juniperus excelsa M. Bieb + ------
8. Ephedra gerardiana Wall.ex Stapf - - - - + - - + + - -
9. Ephedra intermedia Schrenk & Meyer + ------
10. Allium barszczewskii Lipsky + ------
11. Allium caroliniannum DC. - - - + - - + - - - +
12. Eremurus stenophyllus subsp. stenophyllus S. I. Ali + ------
298 13. Polygonatum geminiflorum Decne - - - - + + - - - - +
14. Carex stenocarpa Turcz.ex V. Krecz + ------
15. Carex stenophylla Wahlenb. subsp. stenophylloides (V. + ------Kreez.) Egor.
16. Cyperus nutans subsp. eleusinoids (Kunth) T. - - - + - - + - - - +
17. Fimbristylis bisumbellata (Forssk.) Bubani, Dodecanthia. + ------
18. Kobresia laxa Nees, Contr. - - - - + - + - - + -
19. Kobresia pygmaea (C. B. Clarke) C. B. Clarke - - - + - - + - - - +
20. Schoenoplectus lacustris (L.) Palla subsp. tabernaemontani (C. + ------C. Gmel) A. & D. LÖve.
21. Iris hookeriana Foster. + ------
22. Luzula spicata (L.) DC. - - - - + - + - - + -
23. Gagea gageoides (Zucc.) Vved. - - - - + - + - - + -
24. Gagea alexia Ali. - - - - + - + - - + -
25. Dactylorhiza hatagirea (D. Don) Soo - - - - + - + - - - +
26. Dactylorhiza kafiriana Renz Marshe - - - + - - + - - - +
299 27. Dactylorhiza umbrosa (Kar. & Kir.) Nevski - - - - + - + - - + -
28. Epipactis gigantea Douglas ex Hook. - - - + + + - - - - +
29. Agrostis nervosa Nees ex Trin. - - - + - - + - - - +
30. Agrostis viridis Gouan, Hort. - - - - + - + - - - +
31. Arthraxon prionodes (Steud.) Dandy - - - - + + - - - - +
32. Avena sativa Retz. - + - - - + - - + - -
33. Brachypodium distachyon (L.) P. Beauv. - - - - + + - - - - +
34. Brachypodium sylvaticum (Huds.) P. Beauv - - - - + + - - - + -
35. Bromus danthoniae Trin. - - - + - + - - - + -
36. Bromus japonicus Thunb. ex Murr., Syst. - - + - - + - - - + +
37. Bromus oxyodon Schrenk. - - + - - + - - - + +
38. Bromus pectinatus Thunb. - - - + - + - - - + -
39. Bromus persicus Boiss. - - - + - + - - - - +
40. Bromus ramosus Huds. - - + - - + - - - + +
41. Bromus tectorum L. - - + - - + - - - + -
42. Calamagrostis pseudophragmites subsp. speudophragmites + ------
300 (Hall.f.) Koel.
43. Calamagrostis pseudophragmites (Hook. f.) R. R. Stewart + ------
44. Cymbopogon commutatus (Steud.) Stapf - - - - + - + - - + -
45. Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. - + - - - + - - - + -
46. Dactylis glomerata L. - - - - + - + - - - +
47. Dicanthium annulatum Forssk. Stapf. - - - + - + - - - - +
48. Elymus repens (L.) Gould. - - - - + - - - - + -
49. Elymus dahuricus Turcz.ex. Grieseb. - - - + - + - - - + -
50. Eragrostis cilianensis (All.) Lut.ex F.T. Hubbard - - - - + + - - - + -
51. Festuca olgae (Regel) Krivot. - - - + - - + - - - +
52. Helictotrichon pratense (L.) Pilger + ------
53. Koeleria macrantha (Ledeb.) Schult. - - - + - + - - - - +
54. Lolium temulentum L. - - - + - + - - - - +
55. Melica persica Kunth, Rev. Gram. - - + - - + - - - - +
56. Pennisetum flaccidum Griseb - - + - - + - - - + -
301 57. Piptatherum gracile Mez. - - - + - - + - - + -
58. Piptatherum laterale (Munro ex Regel) Rozhev - - - - + + - - - - +
59. Piptatherum hilariae Pazij - - - + - + - - - - +
60. Poa alpina L. - - - - + - + - - + -
61. Poa versicolor subsp. araratica (Trautv.) Tzvelev - - - - + - + - - + -
62. Poa bulbosa L. - - - + - - + - - - +
63. Poa pratensis subsp. pratensis - - - + - - - + - + -
64. Polypogon monspeliensis (L.) Desf - - - - + - - + - + -
65. Puccinellia minuta Bor. + - - - - - + - - - -
66. Setaria gluea (Retz.) Trin ex Steud. + ------
67. Setaria intermedia Roem & Schult. + ------
68. Stipa capillata L. - - - - + + - - - + -
69. Tetrapogon villosus Desf. - - - + - - + - - + -
70. Trisetaria loeflingiana (L.) Paunero. - - - - + - + - - - +
71. Trisetum clarkei (Hook.f.) R. R. - - - + - - + - - + -
302 72. Trisetum spicatum (L.) Richt. - - - - + - + - - + -
73. Triticum aestivum L. - + - - - + - - + - -
74. Zea mays L. - + - - - + - - + - -
75. Amaranthus viridis L. - - - + - + - - - + -
76. Pistacia atlantica subsp. cabulica - - + - - - - + + - -
77. Ammi visnega (L.) Lam. + ------
78. Anethum gravelons L. - - - - + - + - - - +
79. Bunium persicum (Boiss.) Fedtsch. Rastit - - - - + + - - - + -
80. Bupleurum gilesii Wolf. - - - - + + - - - - +
81. Bupleurum kohistanicum E. Nasir - - - - + + - - - + -
82. Coriandrum stivum L. - - + - - - + - - + -
83. Dacus carota L. - + - - - + - - - + -
84. Ferula hindukushensis Kitamura. + ------
85. Ferula jaeschkeana Vatke. + ------
86. Ferula narthex Boiss. - - - - + - + - - - +
303 87. Fonniculum vulgare Miller. - - + - - + - - - + -
88. Heracleum polyadenum Rech.f. & Riedl. + ------
89. Pleurospermum stylosum C.B. Clarke + ------
90. Pimpinella stewartii Dunn. Nasir - - - - + - - + - - +
91. Prangos pabularia Lindl. - - - - - + + - - - +
92. Scandix pecten-veneris L. ------+ - - - +
93. Torilis arvensis (Huds.) Link. + ------
94. Trachyspermum ammi (L.) Spargue. + ------
95. Cynanchum acutum L. + ------
96. Ajania fruticulosa (Ledeb.) Poljakov + ------
97. Allardia glabra Decne., Voy. + ------
98. Allardia stoliczkae C.B. Clarke + ------
99. Allardia tridactylites (Kar. & Kir.) Schultz + ------
100. Anaphalis triplinervis (Sims) C.B Clarke - - - - + - + - - - +
101. Anthemis cotula L. - - - - + - - + - + -
304 102. Artemisia biennis Willd. + ------
103. Artemisia brevifolia Wall ex DC. - - + - - - + - - + +
104. Artemisia rutifolia Spreng. + ------
105. Artemisia elegantissim Pamp., Nuovo Giorn. - - - + - - + - - + -
106. Artemisia parviflora Roxb ex. D. Don - - - - + - + - - + +
107. Artemisia persica Boiss, Diagn. - - - + - + - - - + -
108. Artemisia scoparia Waldst. & Kit. - - + - - - + - - + +
109. Artemisia sieversiana Ehrh. + ------
110. Askellia flexuosa (Ledb.) W.A. Weber + ------
111. Aster flaccidus Bunge. + ------
112. Bellis perennis L. + ------
113. Brachyactis roylei (Candolle) Wendelbo. - - - + - + - - - + -
114. Carthamus tinctorus L. - - + - - + - - - + +
115. Calendula officinalis L. + ------
116. Centaurea iberica Trev.ex. Sprengel. - - + - - + - - - + +
305 117. Cichoriun intybus L. - - + - - + - - - + +
118. Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. - - - - + - + - - - +
119. Cirsium wallichii var. glabratum (Hook. f.) Wendelbo. + ------
120. Cirsium rhizocephalum C. A. Mey + ------
121. Cirsium griffithii Boiss. + ------
122. Cnicus benedictus L. - - - - + - + - - - +
123. Conyza aegyptiaca (L.) Dryand. ex Aiton + ------
124. Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronquist. + ------
125. Cousinia buphthalmoides Regel. - - - - + - + - - - +
126. Cousinia khashensis Rech.f. - - - - + - - - - + -
127. Cousinia chionophila Rech.f. - - - + - - + - - - +
128. Cousinia haeckeliae Bornm. + ------
129. Cousinia oxytoma Rech.f. + ------
130. Cousinia multiloba DC. - - - - + - + - - - +
131. Cousinia pycnoloba Boiss. - - - - + + - - + -
306 132. Cousinia eriobasis Bunge. - - - - + - + - - - +
133. Crepis sancta (L.) Babc. ssp. sancta - - - + - + + - - + -
134. Crepis aitchisonii Boiss. - - - - + - + - - - +
135. Crepis multicaulis Ledeb. var. congsta - - - + - + - - - + -
136. Crepis pulchra L. - - - - + - + - - - +
137. Echinops echinatus Roxb. - - - + - + - - - - +
138. Echinops chloroleucus Rech.f. + ------
139. Filago germanica (L.) Huds - - - - + + - - - - +
140. Frolovia gilesii (Hemsl.) B.A. Scherip + ------
141. Heteracia szovitsii Fisch. & C.A. Mey. - - - - + + - - - - +
142. Heteropappus altaicus (Willd.) Novopokr. - - - + - - + - - - +
143. Inula obtusifolia Kerner. - - - - + + - - - + -
144. Koelpinia linearis Pall. Var. linearis + ------
145. Lactuca serriola L. - - - + - + - - - + -
146. Lactuca tatarica (L.) C.A. Mey. - - - - + - + - - - +
307 147. Launaea acanthodes (Boiss.) Kuntze. - - - + - + - - - + -
148. Matricaria chamomilla L. + ------
149. Myricatis wallichii Less. - - - - - + - - - + -
150. Pseudognaphalium luteo-album (L.), O. M. Hilliard & B. - - - - - + - - - + - L Burtt
151. Saussurea leptophylla Hemsl. - - - + - + - - - + -
152. Saussurea jacea (Klotzsch) C.B.Clarke. - - - - + - + - - - +
153. Saussurea elliptica C. B. Clarke - - - + - + - - - + -
154. Scorzonera virgata DC. + ------
155. Senecio analogus DC. + ------
156. Senecio chrysanthemoides DC. + ------
157. Seriphidium brevifolium (Wall. ex DC.) Ling & Y. R. Ling - - + - - + - - - + -
158. Sonchus asper (L.) Hill. - - + - - + - - - - +-
159. Tanacetum griffithii (C. B. Clarke) Muradyan + ------
160. Taraxacum brachyglosoides Soset. + ------
161. Taraxacum brevirostre Hand.-Mazz.var. lanatum - - - - + + - - - + -
308 162. Taraxacum elegantiforme Soest + ------
163. Taraxacum longirostre Schischk var. tirichinse (Soest) - - - - + - + - - - + S.Abedin
164. Taraxacum polyodon Dahlst. - - + - - + - - - + -
165. Taraxacum pseudotenebristylum Soest - - - - + - + - - - +
166. Taraxacums quarrosiceps Soest - - - - + + - - - + -
167. Taraxacum tricolor V. S - - + - - + - - - - +
168. Taraxacum officinale Weber. - - + - - + - - - - +
169. Tragopogon gracilis D.Don. - - - - + + - - - + -
170. Tussilago farfara L. - - + - - + - - - + -
171. Xanthium strumarium L. + ------
172. Youngia japonica (L.) DC - - - - + + - - - + -
173. Berberis calliobotrys Aitch.ex Koehne. - - + - - + - - - + -
174. Berberis lyceum Royle. - + - - - - + - + - +
175. Berberis parkeriana Schneid - - - + - + - - - - +
176. Betula utilis D. Don - - + - - - + - - - +
309 177. Arnebia euchroma (Royle ex Benth.) I .M. Johnston + ------
178. Arnebia griffithii Boiss., Diagn. + ------
179. Arnebia hispidisma (Lehm.) A. DC + ------
180. Asperugo procumbens L. - - - - + + - - - + -
181. Cynoglossum lanceolatum Wall.ex. Benth. - - - + - + - - - - +
182. Cynoglossum glochidiatum Wall.ex Benth. - - - + - + - - - - +
183. Lappula barbata (M. Bieb) Gurke. + ------
184. Lindelofia stylosa (Kar. & Kir.) Brand, Pflanzenr. - - + - - + - - - + -
185. Lindelofia anchusoides (Lindl.) Lehm. - - + - - + - - - + -
186. Myosotis avensis (L.) Hill. + ------
187. Solenanthus circinnatus Ledeb - - - - + + - - - + -
188. Alliaria petiolata (M. Bieb.) Cavara & Grande. + ------
189. Arabidopsis wallichii (Hook. f. & Thoms.) N. Busch - - + - - - + - - + -
190. Brassica campestris L. - + - - - + - - - + -
191. Capsella bursa-pestoris L. - - + - - + - - - + -
310 192. Conringia orientalis (L.) Andrz. Syst.Nat. + ------
193. Coronopus didymus (L.) Sm. + ------
194. Descurainia sophia (L.) Webb & Berth. - - - - + - + - - - +
195. Draba korshinskyi (O.Fedtschenko) Pohle. - - - + - - + - - + -
196. Draba stenocarpa Hook. - - - + - + - - - +
197. Goldbachia laevigata (M. Bieb.) DC. - - - - + + - - - + -
198. Isatis tinctoria L. subsp. tinctoria + ------
199. Cardaria draba (L.) Desv - - - - + - + - - - +
200. Lepidium apetalum H. & T. - - - - + - + - - + -
201. Malcolmia cabulica var. topppinii (O.E. Schulz) Nasir - - - + - - + - - + -
202. Malcolmia intermedia C.A. Mey. - - - - + - + - - + -
203. Matthiola flavida Boiss. + ------
204. Nasturtium officinale R. Br. - + - - - + - - - + -
205. Neslia apiculata Fisch., C.A. Mey. & Ave - - - - + - + - - - +
206. Raphanus raphanistrum L. - - + - - + - - - + -
311 207. Raphanus sativus L. - - + - - + - - - + -
208. Rorippa islandica (Oeder) Borbas + ------
209. Sisymbrium brassiciforme C. A. Mey. - - - - + - + - - - +
210. Thlaspi perfoliatum L. + ------
211. Buxus wallichiana Baill, Monogr. Bux.et Styloc. - - + - - - - + - + -
212. Asyneuma strictum Wendelbo. + ------
213. Codonopsis clematidea (Schrenk) C.B.Clarke + ------
214. Capparis spinosa L. - - - + - - + - - - +
215. Lonicera asperifolia (Decne.) Hk. f. + ------
216. Lonicera griffithii Hook.f. & Thoms. + ------
217. Lonicera myrtillus Hook. f. &Thoms. + ------
218. Arenaria orbiculata Royle ex Edgew. + ------
219. Acanthophylum laxiflorum Boiss. - - - - + - + - - - +
220. Cerastium cerastioides (L.) Britton. + ------
221. Dianthus angulatus Royle ex Benth. + ------
312 222. Dianthus orientalis Adams. - - - - + - + - - - +
223. Lepyrodicalis holosteoides (C.A.M.) Fenzl - - - + - + - - - + -
224. Minuartia hybrida (Vill.) Schischkin. subsp. hybrida - - - - + - + - - - +
225. Silene affghanica Rohrb. + ------
226. Silene conoidea L. - + - - - + - - - + -
227. Silene gonosperma (Rupr.) Bocquet - - - - + + - - - + -
228. Silene viscosa (L.) Pers. + ------
229. Silene vulgaris (Moench) Garcke. - - - - + - + - - - +
230. Stellaria decumbens Edgew. - - - - + - + - - - +
231. Stellaria media (L.)Vill. + ------
232. Atriplex schugnanica Iljin. + ------
233. Chenopodium botrys L. - - + - - - + - - + -
234. Chenopodium foliosum (Merrich.) Aschers - - + - - - + - - + -
235. Chenopodium murale L. - - - - + - + - - - +
236. Kochia indica Wight, Icon. - - - - + + - - - - +
313 237. Haloxlon griffithii subsp.grifthii Moq. - - - + - - + - - - +
238. Convulvulus arvensis L. - - - - + - + - - - +
239. Cuscuta lupuliformis Krocker. + ------
240. Cuscuta capitata Roxb. + ------
241. Citrulus vulgaris L. - + - - - - + - - + -
242. Cucurbita maxima Duch ex Lam. - - - + - - + - - + -
243. Orostachys thyrsiflora (DC.) Fischer ex Sweets + ------
244. Rhodiola heterodonta (Hook.f. & Thomson) Boriss. + ------
245. Rhodiola wallichiana (Hook.) S.H. Fu + ------
246. Rosularia adenotricha subsp. adenotricha - - - - + - + - - - +
247. Rosularia alpestris (Kar & Kir) Boriss. - - - - + + - - - - +
248. Hylotelephium ewersii (Ledeb.) H. Ohba + ------
249. Scabiosa olivieri var. olivieri + ------
250. Elaeagnus angustifolia var. angustifolia - + - - - - + + + - -
251. Hippophae rhamnoides Rousi. - - + - - - + - + - -
314 252. Euphorbia wallichii Hk. + ------
253. Euphorbia thomsoniana Boiss. + ------
254. Euphorbia osyridea Boiss. + ------
255. Fumaria indica (Hausskn.) Pugsley - + - - - + - - - + -
256. Gentianodes argentea (Royle ex D.Don) Omer - - - - + + - - - - +
257. Lomatogonium spathulatum (Kern.) Fernald. + ------
258. Geranium wallichianum D. Don ex S weet + ------
259. Ribes orientale Desf. - - - - + - + - - - +
260. Hypericum scabrum L. - - - - + + - - - - +
261. Hypericum perforatum L. - - + - - - + - - + -
262. Juglans regia L. - - + - - - + - - - +
263. Alajja rhomboidea (Benth.) Ikonn. + ------
264. Dracocephalum nutans L. - - - - + + - - - - +
265. Dracocephalum stamineum Kar. & Kir. - - - - + + - - - - +
266. Eremostachys edelbergii Rech.f. + ------
315 267. Lagochilus cabulicus Bth. + ------
268. Mentha longifolia (L.) Huds. - - + - - - + - - + -
269. Mrrubium vulgare L. - - - - + + - - - - +
270. Nepeta cataria L. - - - - + + - - - - +
271. Nepeta clarkei Hook.f. + ------
272. Nepeta floccosa Benth. + ------
273. Nepeta podostachys Benth. - - - - + + - - - - +
274. Peroviskia atriplicifolia Benth. - - - - + + - - - - +
275. Scutellaria heydei Hook. - - - - + + - - - + -
276. Scutellaria multicaulis Boiss. - - - - + + - - - - +
277. Thymus linearis Benth. subsp. linearis Jalas. - - - + - + - - - + -
278. Ziziphora clinopodioides Lam. + ------
279. Alcea nudiflora (Lindl.) Boiss + ------
280. Melia azedarach L. - + - - - - + - + + -
281. Morus nigra L. - + - - - - + + + + -
316 282. Morus alba L. - + - - - - + + + + -
283. Fraxinus hookerrii Wenzig - - - - + - - + + - -
284. Fraxinus xanthoxyloides (G. Don) DC. - + - - - - + - + - -
285. Epilobium angustifolium L. + ------
286. Epilobium hirsutum L. + ------
287. Epilobium royleanum Hausskn, Oesterr. - - - + - - + - - - +
288. Orobanche cernua Leofl. + ------
289. Papaver nudicaule L. - - - + - + - - - - +
290. Astragalus amberstianus Bth.ex. Royle. - - + - - - + - - - +
291. Chesneya cuneata (Benth.) Ali. + ------
292. Chesneya depressa (Oliv.) Pop. + ------
293. Cicer macranthum M. Popov - - - - + - + - - - +
294. Cicer nuristanicum Kitamura. - - - + - - + - - + -
295. Colutea paulsenii Freyn.ssp. mesantha, (Shap. ex Ali) Ali. + ------
296. Glycyrrhiza glabra var. glandulifera (Waldst. & Kit.) - - + - - - + - + - - Boiss.
317 297. Galegia officinales L. - - - - + + - - - - +
298. Hedysarum folconeri Baker. + ------
299. Hedysarum minjanense Rech.f. + ------
300. Hedysarum cachemirianum Benth. ex Baker + ------
301. Hedysarum alpinum L. + ------
302. Lotus corniculatus var. tenuifolius L. - - - + - - + - - - +
303. Medicago lupulina L. - - + - - + - - - + -
304. Medicago sativa L. - - + - - + - - - + -
305. Melilotus officinalis (L.) Pall. - + - - - + - - - + -
306. Melilotus indica (L.) All. - - + - - + - - - + -
307. Oxytropis crassiuscula A. Boriss + ------
308. Psoralea drupaceae Bunge. + ------
309. Trifolium resupinatum L. - + - - - + - - - + -
310. Trifolium repens L. - - + - - + - - - + -
311. Trigonella incisa Benth. - - + - - + - - - + -
318 312. Vicia bakeri Ali. + ------
313. Vicia sativa L. - + - - - + - - - + -
314. Plantago major L. - - + - - + - - - + -
315. Platanus orientalis L. + ------
316. Acantholimon leptostahyum Aitch. - - - - + - + - - + -
317. Acantholimon longiflorum Boiss. - - + - - - + - - - +
318. Acantholimon lycopodioides (Girard.) Boiss. - - - - + - + - - - +
319. Acantholimon polystachyum Boiss. - - + - - - - + - - +
320. Acantholimon stocksii Boiss. - - - + - - + - - - +
321. Acantholimon longiscapum Bokhari - - - - + - + - - - +
322. Polygala sp. + ------
323. Oxyria digyna (L.) Hill, Hort. - - - + - - + - - + -
324. Polygonum paronychioides C.A. Mey.f - - - - + - + - - + +
325. Rheum webbianum Royle. - - - + - + - - - - +
326. Rumex hastatus D. Don - - - + - - + - - + -
319 327. Androsace mucronifolia Watt. + ------
328. Primula macrophylla var. macrophylla D. Don + ------
329. Adonis aestivalis L. + ------
330. Anemone rupicola var. sericea Hook.f.& Thomson - - - - + + - - - + -
331. Aquilegia pubiflora Wall. Ex Royle + ------
332. Clematis alpina var. sibirica (L.) O. Kuntze, Verh. + ------
333. Clematis aspleniifola Schrenk + ------
334. Clematis graveolens Lindl. - - - - + - + - - - +
335. Clematis orientalis L. - - - - + - - + - + -
336. Ranunculus laetus Wall.ex Hook.f. & Thoms. + ------
337. Thalictrum foetideum L. - - + - - - + - - + +
338. Thalictrum alpinum L. + ------
339. Trollius acaulis Lindl. - - - + - - + - - + -
340. Rhamnus prostrata Jacq.ex Parker - - - - + - + - - + +
341. Cotoneaster affinis var. bacillaris (Lindl.) Schneider. - - - + - + - - - + -
320 342. Cotoneaster nummularia Fisch. & Mey. - - + - - - + - - + +
343. Cotoneaster racemiflorus (Desf.) Booth ex Bosse - - - - + - + - + - -
344. Crataegus songarica C. Koch. ------+ - + - -
345. Crataegus wattiana Hemsl. & Lace, J .L. + ------
346. Duchesnea indica (Andrews) Focke + ------
347. Fragaria nubicola (Hook.f.) Lindl.ex Lacaita - - - + - + - - - + -
348. Potentilla desertorum Bunge. + ------
349. Potentilla grisea Juz.var. grisea + ------
350. Prunus prostrata Labill. - - + - - - + - + - -
351. Prunus jacquemontii Hook.f. - - + - - - + - + - -
352. Prunus griffithii (Boiss.) C. K. Schneid - - + - - - + - - - +
353. Prunus kuramica (Korsh.) Kitamura. - - + - - - + - + - -
354. Pyrus pashia Buch.-Ham. ex D.Don - - + - - - + - + - -
355. Rosa ecae Aitch. - - - + - - + - - - +
356. Rosa beggeriana Schrenk. - - - + - - + - - - +
321 357. Rosa webbiana Wall.ex. Royle. - - - + - - + - - - +
358. Rubus sanctus Schreb. + ------
359. Spiraea pilosa Franch. + ------
360. Sorbaria tomentosa (Lindl.) Rehder var. tomentosa + ------
361. Asperula oppositifolia Reg. & Schmalh. + ------
362. Rubia tibetica Hook.f. - - - - + - + - - - +
363. Haplophyllum dubium Korov. - - - + - + - - - + -
364. Salix turanica Nasarov. - - + - - - + - + - -
365. Salix pycnostachya Andersson. - - - + - - + - + - -
366. Salix acmophylla Boiss. - - - + - - + - + - -
367. Linaria odora (M.B.) Fisch. + ------
368. Linaria vulgaris Miller, Gard. + ------
369. Pedicularis bicornuta Klotzsch. + ------
370. Scrophularia scabiosifolia Benth. - - - + - + - - - + -
371. Scrophularia striata Boiss. - - - + - + - - - - +
322 372. Verbascum thapsus L. + ------
373. Veronica anagalis-aquatica L. - - - - + - - + - - +
374. Lycopersicum esculentum L. - - + - - + - - - + -
375. Solanum nigrum L. - - + - - + - - - + -
376. Solanum tuberosum L. ------+ - - + -
377. Myricaria squamosa Desv. + ------
378. Tamaricaria elegans (Royle) Qaiser & Ali - - - + - - + - - - +
379. Verbena officinalis L. - - - - + + - - - + -
380. Valeriana hardwickii var. hoffmeisteri (Kl.) Clarke + ------
381. Vitis jacquemontii Parker. - - - + - + - - - + -
382. Viola rupestris Schm. - - - + - - + - - - +
383. Valerianella szovitsiana Fisch. & C.A. Mey. + ------
384. Valerianella dentata (L.) Poll. + ------
Key: NP= Non Palatable, HP= Highly Palatable, MP= Most Palatable, RP= Rarely Palatable, LP= Less Palatable
Part Used: WP= Whole Plant, L= Leaves, S= Shoots; Livestock: C= Cow, G= Goat, S= Sheep
323 Appendix-13 Questionare for Ethnobotany
324