Species richness, diversity, structure, and distribution patterns across dominating forest communities of low and mid-hills in the Central Himalaya

Figures & data

Figure 1. Location map of the study area in Uttarakhand, India.

Figure 2. Rainfall and temperature patterns of studied (a) subtropical and (b) temperate forest stands during study period 2017–2019.

Table 1. Broad characteristics of investigated forest stands in Uttarakhand, Western Himalayan region.

Parameter	Sal forest	Chir-pine forest	Banj-oak forest	Mixed-oak forest
Forest location	Chorgaliya	Baldiyakhan	Kailakhan	Kilbury
Altitude (m)	300–330	1450–1600	1750–1950	2050–2250
Latitude (N)	29°081’	29°20.92’	29°22.40’	29°25.43’
Longitude (E)	79°39.41’	79° 26.76’	79°28.58’	79° 26.16’
Dominant canopy species	Shorea robusta	Pinus roxburghii	Quercus leucotrichophora	Quercus lanuginosa
Status of forest	Reserve forest	Reserve forest	Reserve forest	Reserve forest
Soil moisture (%)	19.09 ± 2.24	20.75 ± 3.14	25.35 ± 3.65	26.33 ± 4.93
Water Holding Capacity (WHC %)	46.28 ± 0.72	51.96 ± 1.25	58.68 ± 4.29	63.52 ± 0.76
Soil pH	6.65 ± 0.05	6.58 ± 0.05	6.04 ± 06	5.91 ± 0.09
Organic Carbon (OC%)	1.25 ± 0.03	2.42 ± 0.23	4.25 ± 0.49	3.43 ± 0.34
Nitrogen (N%)	0.14 ± 0.011	0.21 ± 0.008	0.38 ± 0.02	0.41 ± 0.003
Soil texture (%)	Loamy Sand	Sandy clay	Sandy loam	Sandy loam

Table 2. Structural attributes of the forest stands in Uttarakhand, Western Himalaya.

Parameter	Sal forest	Chir-pine forest	Banj-oak forest	Mixed-oak forest
Tree density (individuals ha^−1)	756	672	652	884
Sapling density (individuals ha^−1)	278	140	208	368
Seedling density (individuals ha^−1)	3086	1696	176	250
Total shrub density (individuals ha^−1)	7176	6160	1700	3504
Total herb density (individuals m^−2)	27.37	119.85	234.80	152.52
Tree basal area (m^2 ha^−1)	47.52	43.64	51.58	33.42
Density of dominant species (individuals ha^−1)	388(SR)	540(PR)	412(QL)	324(QLG)
Density of co-dominant species (individuals ha^−1)	112 (MP)	78 (CD)	74 (CD)	260 (QF)

SR = Shorea robusta, PR = Pinus roxburghii, QL = Quercus leucotrichophora, QLG = Quercus lanuginosa, MP = Mallotus philippensis, ME = Myrica esculenta, CD = Cedrus, deodara, QF = Quercus floribunda

Table 3. ANOVA analysis (F and p value) of vegetation parameter among study sites.

Vegetation parameter	F-statics	P value
Tree density	3.82	0.03*
Sapling density	5.29	0.09
Seedling density	46.05	0.004*
Total Basal area (trees)	4.45	0.01**
Species diversity (trees)	0.28	0.92
Species evenness (trees)	2.74	0.08
Concentration of dominance	0.09	0.09
Shrub density	77.02	0.002**
Herb density	25.23	0.004**

Level of significance: ** p < 0.01, *p < 0.05

Table 4. Diversity, dominance and evenness indices for tree, sapling and seedlings stratum for different investigated forest stands.

Parameter	Sal forest	Chir-pine forest	Banj-oak forest	Mixed-oak forest
Shannon Index (H’)
Tree	1.65	1.10	2.04	2.31
Shrub	2.18	2.35	3.02	3.34
Herb	1.49	4.09	3.29	2.52
Concentration of dominance (CD)
Tree	0.40	0.66	0.42	0.24
Shrub	0.28	0.30	0.13	0.11
Herb	0.42	0.075	0.16	0.33
Species evenness (SE)
Tree	0.60	0.46	0.82	0.90
Shrub	0.81	1.07	1.07	1.34
Herb	0.52	0.85	0.63	0.81

Table 5. Distribution pattern of tree, shrub and herb species across forest stands.

Parameter	Strata	Random	Regular	Contagious
Sal forest	Tree	0.00	37.50	62.50
	Shrub	83.33	0.00	16.67
	Herb	0.00	0.00	100.00
Chir-pine forest	Tree	0.00	18.18	81.82
	Shrub	44.44	0.00	55.56
	Herb	0.00	0.00	100.00
Banj-oak forest	Tree	8.33	16.67	75.00
	Shrub	20.00	40.00	40.00
	Herb	3.85	0.00	96.15
Mixed-oak forest	Tree	0.00	38.46	61.54
	Shrub	36.36	36.36	27.27
	Herb	0.00	0.00	100.00

Figure 3. (I–IV): Girth class structure of studies forest stands in the Western Himalayan region (CBH classes represents A: 0–10 cm, B: 10–30 cm; C: 31–60 cm; D: 61–120 cm; E: 120–150 cm; F: 150–180 cm; G: 180–210 cm and H: >210 cm).

Table 6. Regeneration status of species across forest stands.

Regeneration category (%)	Sal forest	Chir-pine forest	Banj-oak forest	Mixed-oak forest	Total
Good	1 (11)	-	1 (7.69)	1 (7)	3 (6)
Fair	5 (56)	5 (35.71)	7 (53.84)	8 (57)	25 (50)
No regeneration	2 (22)	5 (35.71)	4 (30.76)	4 (29)	15 (30)
New regeneration	1 (11)	4 (28.52)	1 (7.69)	1 (7)	7 (14)

Figure 4. Dominant plant families (Top 10) of selected forest stands in the Central Himalaya

Table 7. Comparison of present study (density and basal area) with other forest stands of the Himalayan region.

Forest type	Altitude (m)	Density (ha^−1)	TBA (m^2 ha^−1)	Reference
Sal old growth forest	300–330	441–726	41.00–56.40	Rana et al. (1989)
Sal forest	500–750	287–617	25.38–77.60	Adhikari et al. (2017)
Sal forest Central Himalaya	400–800	140–455	6.82–72.55	Mittal et al. (2020)
Community managed Sal forest	700–1000	650– 911	-	Kapkoti et al. (2016)
Sal forest	300–330	756	47.52	Present study
Banj-Oak forest	2050–2600	940	39.40	Saxena and Singh (1982)
Banj-Oak forest	2500–2600	830	30.69	Rikhari et al. (1991)
Oak forest Kumaun Himalaya	1800–1900	1260	31.70	Rana et al. (1989)
Oak forest Garhwal Himalaya	1500–2500	698–1227	-	V. Singh et al. (2015)
Pine forest Kumaun Himalaya	1700–2100	2798	-	Gosain et al. (2015)
Chir-pine forest	700–1000	500–560	26.79–56.94	H. Singh et al. (2009)
Chir-pine forest	1700–1800	885	12.65	Gurarni et al. (2010)
Chir-pine forest	1200–1500	560–1640	25–47.2	Chaturvedi and Singh (1987)
Chir-pine forest	1000–1800	135–575	11.12–41.36	Kumar et al. (2021)
Chir-pine forest	1750–1850	510–1250	49.32–70.90	N. Singh et al. (2014)
Pine-oak mixed forest	1700–2200	1000	14.55	Gurarni et al. (2010)
Chir-pine forest	1450–1650	652	43.64	Present study
Banj-oak forest Almora	1780–1980	390–1550	17.0–49.10	Verma and Garkoti (2019)
Oak forest	1900–2250	570–660	33.17–36-49	Rawat and Singh (1988)
Banj-oak forest	1700–1900	960–1100	40.88–58.86	H. Singh et al. (2009)
Oak and pine	1200–1950	472–1194	27.95–54.87	Joshi and Chandra (2020)
Oak forest	1790–1930	390–1550	17–49.10	Verma and Garkoti (2019)
Oak forest	1600–3000	433	88.06	G. Singh and Rawat (2012)
Banj-oak forest	1750–1850	510–1250	33.88–62.6	N. Singh et al. (2014)
Banj-oak	2100–2250	460–917	9.65– 44.28	Bargali et al., 2013
Oak forest	1500–2000	390	17.27	Dhanai et al. (2000)
Banj-oak forest	1800–2200	900–1500	-	Devlal & Sharma, 2008
Banj-oak	1300–2600	832	-	Kumar and Ram (2005)
Mixed oak forest	1750–2000	790	35.39	Kusumlata (1991)
Banj-oak forest,	1650–1750	540–935	33.88–62.6	N. Singh et al. (2014)
Banj-oak forest	1750–1950	652	51.58	Present study
Mixed oak forest	2050–2250	884	33.42	Present study

TBA = Total Basal area

Rana, B. S., Singh, S. P., & Singh, R. P., et al. (1989). Biomass and net primary productivity in Central Himalayan forests along an altitudinal gradient. Forest Ecology and Management, 27(3–4), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-1127(89)90107-2

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Adhikari, B., Kapkoti, B., Lodhiyal, N., & Lodhiyal, L. S., et al. (2017). Structure and regeneration of Sal (Shorea robusta Gaertn f.) forests in Shiwalik Region of Kumaun Himalaya, India. Indian Journal of Forestry, 40(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.54207/bsmps1000-2017-0N83L0

 Google Scholar

Mittal, A., Singh, N., & Tewari, A., et al. (2020). Quantitative analysis and regeneration status of forest trees species in Kumaun Central Himalaya. Indian Journal of Ecology, 47(2), 507–513.

 Google Scholar

Kapkoti, B., Adhikari, B., Lodhiyal, N., & Lodhiyal, L. S., et al. (2016). Structure and diversity of Sal forests in government and community management systems in Kumaun region of Central Himalaya. Current World Environment, 11(1), 126. https://doi.org/10.12944/CWE.11.1.16

 Google Scholar

Saxena, A. K., & Singh, J. S. (1982). A phytosociological analysis of woody species in forest communities of a part of Kumaun Himalaya. Vegetatio, 50(1), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00120674

 Google Scholar

Rikhari, H. C., Tewari, J. C., Rana, B. S., & Sharma, S., et al. (1991). Woody vegetation and regeneration status in a mixed oak forest of Kumaun Himalaya. Indian Forester, 117(4), 274–283.

 Google Scholar

Singh, V., Chauhan, D. S., & DaSguPTa, S., et al. (2015). Vegetation status and plant diversity of Chandrabadani Oak forest along anthropogenic disturbance gradient in Garhwal Himalaya, Uttarakhand, India. Journal of Global Agriculture and Ecology, 3(1), 26–37.

 Google Scholar

Gosain, B. G., Negi, G. C. S., Dhyani, P. P., Bargali, S. S., & Saxena, R., et al. (2015). Ecosystem services of forests: Carbon stock in vegetation and soil components in a watershed of Kumaun Himalaya, India. International Journal of Ecology and Environmental Science, 41(3–4), 177–188.

 Google Scholar

Singh, H., Kumar, M., & Sheikh, M. A., et al. (2009). Distribution pattern of oak and pine along altitudinal gradients in Garhwal Himalaya. Nature and Science, 7(11), 81–85.

 Google Scholar

Gurarni, D., Arya, N., Yadava, A., & Ram, J., et al. (2010). Studies on plant biodiversity of pure Pinus roxburghii Sarg. forest and mixed pine-oak forest in Uttarakhand Himalaya. New York Science Journal, 3(8), 1–5.

 Google Scholar

Chaturvedi, O. P., & Singh, J. S. (1987). The structure and function of pine forest in Central Himalaya. I. Dry matter dynamics. Annals of Botany, 60(3), 237–252. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a087442

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kumar, M., Kumar, A., Kumar, R., Konsam, B., Pala, N. A., & Bhat, J. A., et al. (2021). Carbon stock potential in Pinus roxburghii forests of Indian Himalayan regions. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 23, 12463–12478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-01178-y

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Singh, N., Tamta, K., Tewari, A., & Ram, J., et al. (2014). Studies on vegetational analysis and regeneration status of Pinus roxburghii, Roxb. and Quercus leucotrichophora forests of Nainital Forest Division. Global Journal of Science Frontier Research, 14(3), 41–47.

 Google Scholar

Verma, A. K., & Garkoti, S. C. (2019). Population structure, soil characteristics and carbon stock of the regenerating Banj-oak forests in Almora, Central Himalaya. Forest Science and Technology, 15(3), 117–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/21580103.2019.1620135

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Rawat, Y. S., & Singh, J. S. (1988). Structure and function of oak forests in central Himalaya. I. Dry matter dynamics. Annals of Botany, 62(4), 397–411. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a087673

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Joshi, V. C., & Chandra, N. (2020). Pattern of diversity and regeneration potential along altitudinal gradient in selected forest stands of Kumaun Himalaya. Indian Forester, 146(4), 301–305. http://doi.org/10.36808/if/2020/v146i4/146911

 Google Scholar

Singh, G., & Rawat, G. S. (2012). Quantitative analysis of tree species diversity in different oak (Quercus spp.) dominated forests in Garhwal Himalaya, India. Notulae Scientia Biologicae, 4(4), 132–140. https://doi.org/10.15835/nsb448200

 Google Scholar

Bargali, K., Bisht, P., Khan, A., & Rawat, Y. S., et al. (2013). Diversity and regeneration status of tree species at Nainital Catchment, Uttarakhand, India. International Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation, 5(5), 270–280. http://doi.org/10.5897/IJBC10.099

 Google Scholar

Dhanai, C. S., Panwar, V. P., & Sharma, C. M., et al. (2000). Effect of aspect and soil on the structure of quercus leucotrichophora natural stands in Western Himalaya. Indian Journal of Forestry, 23(3), 349–356.

 Google Scholar

Devlal, R., & Sharma, N. (2008). Altitudinal changes in dominance-diversity and species richness of tree species in a temperate forest of Garhwal Himalaya. Life Science Journal, 5(2), 53–57.

 Google Scholar

Kumar, A., & Ram, J. (2005). Anthropogenic disturbances and plant biodiversity in forests of Uttaranchal, central Himalaya. Biodiversity and Conservation, 14(2), 309–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-004-5047-4

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kusumlata, B. N. (1991). Quantitative analysis and regeneration potential of moist temperate forest in Garhwal Himalaya. Indian Journal of Forestry, 14(2), 98–106.

 Google Scholar