Research ArticleAPPLIED ECOLOGY

Reconciling biodiversity and carbon stock conservation in an Afrotropical forest landscape

See allHide authors and affiliations

Science Advances  28 Mar 2018:
Vol. 4, no. 3, eaar6603
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aar6603
  • Fig. 1 Location of the plots within regrowth (Δ), mixed old-growth (□), and monodominant old-growth (○) forest in the Yangambi Biosphere Reserve (DRC), situated in the center of the African continent (lower right inset).
  • Fig. 2 Relationships between metrics of α biodiversity and carbon storage differ between organismal groups.

    Graphical representations of polynomial regressions for species richness (green), Shannon diversity (red), and Simpson diversity (blue), with associated shaded areas representing 95% confidence regions. Regrowth forests are depicted with ▲ and old-growth forests with ●. Significant linear and quadratic components are indicated with “L*” and “Q*,” respectively, whereas nonsignificant regressions are shown with dashed lines (table S2). Across rows from top to bottom: trees, slime molds, fungi, leaf lichens, bark lichens, flies, ants, birds, rodents, and shrews.

  • Fig. 3 For most groups, community composition differs more between forests with larger differences in carbon stock.

    The Pearson correlation coefficient illustrates the strength of association between species dissimilarity (Sørensen and Morisita-Horn) and difference in carbon stock (no abundances were available for fungi and slime molds). For each index, significance (α = 0.05) is indicated by an asterisk. Colors indicate whether the correlation of α diversity with carbon storage was found to be increasing, decreasing, or random for the associated α diversity measures (species richness and Simpson diversity).

  • Fig. 4 Specialization of species in regrowth or old-growth forests for each organismal group.

    (A) Percentage of observed species occurring only in old-growth, only in regrowth, or in both forest types. (B) Percentage of species classified as old-growth specialists, regrowth specialists, generalists, or too rare to classify. Assessments executed for each species group separately.

Supplementary Materials

  • Supplementary material for this article is available at http://advances.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/4/3/eaar6603/DC1

    fig. S1. AGC increases from regrowth to old-growth forest (mixed or monodominant).

    fig. S2. Orthogonal polynomial regression between each aspect of taxonomic biodiversity at the α level and carbon stock for each group.

    fig. S3. Relationships between compositional dissimilarity (Sørensen and Morisita-Horn indices) and difference in carbon stocks (in Mg ha−1) between plots.

    table S1. Overview of the sampled groups.

    table S2. Parameter estimates for orthogonal polynomial regression between each of three measures of taxonomic biodiversity at the α-level and carbon storage, separately for each organismal group.

    table S3. For most groups, community composition differs more between forests with larger differences in carbon stock.

    table S4. Compositional dissimilarity (Sørensen and Morisita-Horn) is unrelated to geographic distance between pairs of plots, except for trees based on Sørensen dissimilarity in old-growth forests.

    table S5. Number of observed individuals and species in regrowth and old-growth forests for each organismal group.

    Biodiversity data

    References (6167)

  • Supplementary Materials

    This PDF file includes:

    • fig. S1. AGC increases from regrowth to old-growth forest (mixed or monodominant).
    • fig. S2. Orthogonal polynomial regression between each aspect of taxonomic biodiversity at the α level and carbon stock for each group.
    • fig. S3. Relationships between compositional dissimilarity (Sørensen and Morisita-Horn indices) and difference in carbon stocks (in Mg ha−1) between plots.
    • table S1. Overview of the sampled groups.
    • table S2. Parameter estimates for orthogonal polynomial regression between each of three measures of taxonomic biodiversity at the α-level and carbon storage, separately for each organismal group.
    • table S3. For most groups, community composition differs more between forests with larger differences in carbon stock.
    • table S4. Compositional dissimilarity (Sørensen and Morisita-Horn) is unrelated to geographic distance between pairs of plots, except for trees based on Sørensen dissimilarity in old-growth forests.
    • table S5. Number of observed individuals and species in regrowth and old-growth forests for each organismal group.
    • References (61–67)

    Download PDF

    Other Supplementary Material for this manuscript includes the following:

    Files in this Data Supplement:

Navigate This Article