Skip to main content
Log in

The study of microclimate in response to different plant community association in tropical moist deciduous forest from northern India

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biodiversity and Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The data on microclimate were collected between 2010 and 2011 in five forest communities (dry miscellaneous, sal mixed, lowland miscellaneous, teak and savannah) in a tropical moist deciduous forest in Katerniaghat Wildlife Sanctuary, Uttar Pradesh, India to compare how vegetation structure affects microclimate. Diurnal variations in microclimatic variables [photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) at forest understory level, air temperature, soil surface temperature, ambient CO2, air absolute humidity] were measured with LI-COR 840, LI-COR 191, LI-COR 190 SZ, LI-1400-101 and LI-1400-103 (LI-COR; Lincoln, NE, USA) at centre of three 0.5 ha plots in each forest community. The diurnal trend in microclimatic parameters showed wide variations among communities. PAR at forest floor ranged from 0.0024 to 1289.9 (μmol m−2s−1) in post-monsoon season and 0.0012 to 1877.3 (μmol m−2s−1) in mid-winter season. Among the five communities, the highest PAR value was observed in savannah and lowest in sal mixed forest. All the forest communities received maximum PAR at forest floor between 1000 and 1200 h. The ambient air temperature ranged from 19.15 to 26.69°C in post-monsoon season and 11.31 to 23.03°C in mid-winter season. Soil temperature ranged from 13.54 to 36.88°C in post-monsoon season and 6.39 to 29.17°C in mid-winter season. Ambient CO2 ranged from 372.16 to 899.14 μmol mol−1 in post-monsoon season and 396.65 to 699.65 μmol mol−1 in mid-winter season. In savannah ecosystem, diurnal trend of ambient CO2 was totally different from rest four communities. According to Canonical correspondence analysis, PAR and ambient CO2 are most important in establishment of forest community, among microclimatic variables.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arya SP (1988) Micrometeorology. Academic Press, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashton PMS (1992) Some measurements of the microclimate within a Sri Lankan tropical rainforest. Agric For Meteorol 59:217–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breckle SW (2002) Walter’s vegetation of the earth: the ecological systems of the geo-biosphere, 4th revised edn. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Chazdon RL, Fetcher N (1984) Photosynthetic light environments in lowland rain forest in Costa Rica. J Ecol 72:553–564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen J, Sari CS, Thomas RC, Robert JN, Kimberley DB, Glenn DM, Brian LB, Jerry FF (1999) Microclimate in forest ecosystem and landscape ecology. Bioscience 49:288–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cootam G, Curtis JT (1956) The use of distance measures in phytosociology sampling. Ecology 37:451–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies-Colley RJ, Payne GW, Elswijk MV (2000) Microclimate gradients across a forest edge. NZ J Ecol 24:111–121

    Google Scholar 

  • Gates DM (1980) Biophysical plant ecology. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hammer Q, Harper DAT, Ryan PD (2001) PAST: Paleontological Statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontologia Electronica 4(1):9

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill MO (1973) Diversity and evenness: a unifying notation and its consequences. Ecology 54:427–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hubbell SP, Foster RB (1986) Canopy gaps and the dynamics of a Neotropical forest. In: Crawley MJ (ed) Plant ecology. Blackwell, Boston, pp 77–96

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchison BA, Baldocchi DD (1989) Forest meteorology. In: Johnson DW, Van Hook RI (eds) Analysis of biogeochemical cycling processes in Walker Branch Watershed. Springer, New York, pp 21–95

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jones HG (1983) Plants and microclimate. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Landsberg JJ (1986) Physiological ecology of forest production. Academic Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovejoy TE, Hannah L (2005) Climate change and biodiversity. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Misra R (1968) Ecology work book. Oxford and IBH Publishing Company, New Delhi, p 224

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan DC, Smith H (1981) Non-photosynthetic responses to light quality. In: Lange OL, Nobel PS, Osmond CB, Ziegler H (eds) Physiological plant ecology. I. Responses to the physical environment. Springer, Berlin, pp 109–134

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Parker GG (1995) Structure and microclimate of forest canopies. In: Lowman M, Nadkarni N (eds) Forest canopies: a review of research on a biological frontier. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 73–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearcy RW (1987) Photosynthetic gas exchange responses of Australian tropical forest tress in canopy, gap and understory micro-environments. Funct Ecol 1:169–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg NJ (1974) Microclimate: the biological environment. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Shuttleworth WJ (1989) Micrometerology of temperate and tropical forests. Philos Trans R Soc London, Ser B 324:299–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson EM (1949) Measurement of diversity. Nature 163:688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ter-Braak CJF (1986) Canonical correspondence analysis: a new eigenvector method for multivariate direct gradient analysis. Ecology 67:1167–1179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodward FI, Kelly CK (2008) Responses of global plant diversity capacity to changes in carbon dioxide concentration and climate. Ecol Lett 11:1229–1237

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yoda K (1978) Three dimensional distribution of light intensity in a tropical rain forest of West Malaysia. Jpn J Ecol 24:247–254

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to Dr. C. S. Nautiyal, Director, National Botanical Research Institute (CSIR), Lucknow, India for providing necessary facilities and encouragement. Thanks are also due to Sri. B. K. Patnaik, PCCF (Wildlife), Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow and Sri. R. K. Singh, DFO (Wildlife), Bahraich for granting permission to carry out the research and facilities to visit the area and all the Forest Range Officers of Katerniaghat Wildlife Sanctuary for their valuable support. The funds to carry out this work were received from CSIR, New Delhi under NWP-020. The comments and recommendations of two anonymous reviewers and Editor-in-Chief David Hawksworth are also greatly acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Soumit K. Behera.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Behera, S.K., Mishra, A.K., Sahu, N. et al. The study of microclimate in response to different plant community association in tropical moist deciduous forest from northern India. Biodivers Conserv 21, 1159–1176 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-012-0230-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-012-0230-5

Keywords

Navigation