Biodiversity of the Maputaland Centre

Wyk, A.E. van

doi:10.1007/978-94-009-0285-5_26

Cited by 47 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are two distinct habitat types in these reserves, i.e., sand forest and mixed woodland, and the smaller patches of sand forest are embedded within a larger matrix of mixed woodland (van Wyk 1996; see Plate 1). Sand forest is characterized by tree species such as Dialium schlechteri and Erythrophleum lasianthum (Caesalpinioideae) (Moll 1977, van Wyk 1996 savanna species such as Acacia burkei, Albizia versicolor, and A. adianthifolia (Mimosoideae). It has a well-developed grass understory represented by Aristida, Pogonarthria, and Perotis species (Moll 1977(Moll , 1980.…”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Replicated sampling sites in these reserves were selected from within standardized vegetation communities (sand forest and mixed woodland; van Wyk 1996). Two sand forest sites and two mixed woodland sites were sampled in each reserve, i.e., eight sampling sites, grouped into four reserve-habitat combinations (Tembe sand forest, Tembe mixed woodland, Sileza sand forest, Sileza mixed woodland).…”

Section: Samplingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nonetheless, both bird and dung beetle assemblages are known to differ significantly between mixed woodland and sand forest habitats (van Rensburg et al 1999;B. J. van Rensburg, S. L. Chown, A. S. van Jaarsveld, and M. A. McGeoch, unpublished manuscript), and sand forest characteristically exists as distinct patches of varying sizes within a matrix of mixed woodland (van Wyk 1996, van Rensburg et al 1999. At the patch scale bimodality was found for all sand forest assemblages, whereas the two unimodal occupancy distributions at this scale were associated with mixed woodland.…”

Section: The Shape Of Occupancy Distributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Testing Generalities in the Shape of Patch Occupancy Frequency Distributions

Rensburg

McGeoch

Matthews³

et al. 2000

Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Bimodal patch occupancy frequency distributions regularly appear in studies of a variety of taxa at a variety of spatial scales. Metapopulation models associated with the core-satellite hypothesis and a strong rescue effect predict the occurrence of this bimodality. However, there have been numerous other explanations, both artifactual and biological, of bimodality in patch occupancy frequency distributions. One approach to a better understanding of the phenomenon is to conduct studies on a variety of taxa and spatial scales. Here we examine patterns of patch occupancy frequency distributions for plants, dung beetles, and birds at four spatial scales in sand forest and mixed woodland in Tembe Elephant Park and Sileza Nature Reserve in South Africa. We then examine the predictions of each alternative mechanism proposed to explain bimodality with respect to the patterns found in this study. The incidence of bimodality was high. Little evidence was found for any of the artifactual or nonmetapopulation-based explanations of bimodality. Although there were no between-taxon differences in the shape of occupancy distributions, there was a clear trend of decreasing frequency of bimodality with an increase in the size of the area examined. The general shape of range-size frequency distributions in combination with an area effect is suggested as a mechanism underlying this pattern. Metapopulation dynamics associated with a strong rescue effect could also not be excluded as a possible mechanism playing a role in generating the bimodality found at the patch scale.

show abstract

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Samplingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Shape Of Occupancy Distributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Testing Generalities in the Shape of Patch Occupancy Frequency Distributions

Rensburg

McGeoch

Matthews³

et al. 2000

Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the Maputaland Centre of Endemism includes various vegetation types (van Wyk 1996), for logistic reasons, comparisons were made only between two wellrepresented ecotypes comprising the physiognomic extremes of forest (shaded) and grassland (unshaded). These habitat types show quite different microclimates as regards radiant heat, light intensity, ambient temperatures and humidity, and harbour quite different dung beetle faunas (Davis et al 2002).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is floristically varied comprising numerous vegetation ecotypes and endemic taxa (van Wyk 1996). Towards the northern end of the Centre of Endemism, the Maputo Special Reserve (MSR) currently protects some of the least disturbed patches of coastal vegetation in the region (Mucina and Rutherford 2006) as well as a number of dung beetle species that are endemic to the southern tip of Mozambique and the adjoining northeast KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa (Davis et al 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How might intensification of farming influence dung beetle diversity (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) in Maputo Special Reserve (Mozambique)?

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are concerns over the increasing encroachment of humans, domestic livestock, and farming onto Maputo Special Reserve because of the potential for habitat modification. Therefore, differences between an undisturbed area of the reserve and a neighbouring farming area are assessed using dung beetle as indicators. In each of the two areas, pig-dung-baited pitfall traps were used to sample dung beetle assemblages in two contrasting habitats, grassland and forest. Distributional analysis of the 57 species and 36 942 individuals that were captured, showed that species richness, species turnover, relative abundance patterns, and biogeographical composition differed strongly between both habitats and areas under different land usage. However, in analyses that apportion variation, the greatest amounts were related to habitat rather than land usage. Even so, in both habitats, the total and mean number of species per trap was higher in the farmed area than in the reserve although this was a significant trend only in grassland. Furthermore, in grassland, widespread species were better represented in the farmed area than in the reserve whereas in forest, widespread species were poorly represented compared to grassland. Also in forest, Maputaland endemics were better represented in the reserve than in the farmed area. Further work is necessary to separate the different geographical, ecological, and land usage factors responsible for the patterns detected in this preliminary study. Even so, there are clearly differences between the Maputo Special Reserve and the farmed area.

show abstract