Effects of landuse change and forest fragmentation on the biodiversity and ecosystem functioning in the tropical lowlands of sri lanka

... Sri Lanka, India Sri Lanka, India Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini... Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini... Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini Onthophagini

Logged forest Home

Pinus plantations

Lycaenidae Lime Blue Chilades lajus lajus Not endemic 0 x  x 0

Nymphalidae Common Rose Pachliopta aristolochiae

ceylonica Not endemic 0 x  x  x 

Papilio polymnestor parinda

Graphium sarpedon teredon

Graphium doson

Chilasa clytia lankeswara

Papilio polytes romulus

Papilio demoleus demoleus

Appias albina darada

Leptosia nina nina

Leptosia nina nina

Abisara echerius prunosa

a x = presence; 0= absence of an individual species in a given habitat

180

Appendix 3.2: Species accumulation curves for butterflies 

  (c) 

Appendix 3.2: Species accumulation curves (a); population abundance curves (b); and rarefaction curves (c); for butterflies in sampled habitat types  

Appendix 3.3 – Summary statistic of the multi-response permutation procedure

expectation, independent of sample size (e.g., A = 0, when heterogeneity within group equals expectation by chance (McCune and Grace, 2002)

Appendix 3.4 Distribution, endemism and conservation status of amphibian species recorded during the

study

Family Amphibian species

a Primary forest

Logged forest

melanostictus 0 0 x 0 Not endemic oviparous least concern terrestrial

cynophlyctis 0 0 x 0 Not endemic oviparous least concern aquatic

U.I.D 1 0 x x 0 Not Evaluated direct not evaluated arboreal

a x = presence; 0= absence of an individual species in a given habitat in all transects

Pseudophilautus (Synonym Philautus)

U.D.I = Unidentified species Source for status: (http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/)

Appendix 3.5 Species accumulation curves for amphibians

Appendix 3.6 –(a) Average values of environmental variables (±SD) that best describe the

species richness and abundance of butterflies and amphibians in all sampled habitats (b)

Correlation matix for the environmental variables Climatic and structural environmental

variables were measure within a 5 m radius plot from the central point of each transect

Percentage of canopy cover measured with a circular densitometer, percent of shrub cover

(visually estimated), diameter at breast height (dbh) of the closest 10 trees with dbh > 5 cm,

average litter depth (cm) calculated from five randomly selected points, litter cover (visual

estimated), soil temperature & humidity(measured with a Kestrel 2000 weather meter)

Values are given as means with Standard Error (SE)

Litter thickness

Water availability

Relative Humidity

Primary forest 53.80 ± 4.00 69.92 ± 3.73 2.33 ± 0.12 9.00 ± 4.19 86.9 ± 1.2 87.33 ± 1.29 27.33 ± 0.36 Secondary forest 60.60 ±3.43 80.36 ±4.95 3.32 ±0.21 25.00 ±5.80 73.5 ±2.0 82.79 ±1.66 27.52 ±0.42 Home gardens 68.20 ±3.59 57.20 ±5.52 1.89 ±0.15 19.40 ±4.65 28.5 ±2.8 75.38 ±1.27 28.02 ±0.24

Appendix 4.1 Species checklist of the Scarabaeinae beetles recorded in Sri Lanka

Copris1

Gymnopleurus cyaneus

Gymnopleurus1 (Garreta ) smaragdifer

Liatongus (Paraliatongus) rhadamistus

Onthophagini Caccobius1 (Caccophilus) indicus D Harold, 1867 Sri Lanka, India

Caccobius2 (Caccophilus) aterrimus

Caccobius1 (Caccophilus) diminutivus

Caccobius2 (Caccophilus) ultor

Cleptocaccobius durantoni

Cleptocaccobius2 (Caccophilus) inermis

Functional groups: R= roller; T= tunneler; D= dweller; Distribution: *Sri Lanka = first record for Sri Lanka

Genus: 1= previously recorded but not recorded during the survey; 2= recorded during the survey but not verified

Species: unk= unknown; xxxx (near) = closest similar species

Sampled habitats: relatively undisturbed forested habitats; disturbed forested habitats; plantation forests; - cultivated areas; home gardens; urban

area

**Sri Lanka, India, Myanmar Afganistan, India, Sri Lanka

South Asia Sri Lanka, Myanmar

South Asia South Asia

Sri Lanka, Myanmar Endemic

Endemic

Endemic

Global Global

Sri Lanka, India Sri Lanka, India

Sri Lanka, India

Sri Lanka, India Sri Lanka, India Asia

Onthophagini Onthophagus (Digionthophagus) bonasus T Fabricius, 1775

Onthophagini Onthophagus (Digionthophagus) gazella (catta) T Fabricius, 1787

Onthophagini Onthophagus (Micronthophagus) ochreatus T d'Orbigny, 1897

Onthophagini Onthophagus (Micronthophagus) oculatus T Arrow, 1931

Onthophagini Onthophagus (Onthophagiellus) solmani T Stebnicka, 1975

Onthophagini 1

Onthophagus (Proagoderus) pactolus T Fabricius, 1787

Onthophagini Onthophagus(Colobonthophagus) dama T Fabricius, 1798

Onthophagini Onthophagus(Paraphanaeomorph bifaciatus T Fabricius 1781

Onthophagini Onthophagus1

Onthophagini Onthophagus2

Onthophagini Onthophagus(Serrophorus) rectecornutus T Lansberge, 1883

Onthophagini Phaedotrogus 1

Scarabaeini Scarabaeus1 (Kheper) erichsoni R Harold, 1867

Wiedemann, 1823

R

R

hirtus Hirtus Sisyphus (crispatus)

Sisyphus (crispatus)

Sisyphini

Sisyphini

Appendix 4.2 Dung beetles of Sri Lanka: some selected species -Plate 1

1

Appendix 4.2-Plate 2

Appendix 4.2-Plate 3

178

Appendix 4.2-Plate 4

Appendix 4.2-Plate 5

180

Appendix 4.2-Plate 6

Appendix 4.2-Plate 7

182

Appendix 4.2-Plate 8

Appendix 4.2-Plate 9

184

Appendix 4.2-Plate 10

Appendix 4.2-Plate 11

186

Appendix 4.2-Plate 12

Appendix 4.2-Plate 13

188

Appendix 4.2-Plate 14

Appendix 4.3- A representative set of the distribution maps of Scarabaeinae beetles in Sri Lanka

190

Appendix 5.1: Species accumulation curves (a); population abundance curves (b); and rarefaction curves (c) for dung beetles in sampled habitat types

Appendix 5.2: (a) Dung beetle abundance and seasonal variation (inset: average abundance) (b) average species richness across land use types

      (a)   

Appendix 5.4: Climatic and structural environmental variables that were used for the regression tree Measures were taken within a 5 m radius plot from the central point of each transect The variables were soil temperature (TS), soil pH (PHS), litter cover (CL), litter depth (DL), shrub cover (CS), canopy cover (CC) and mean diameter at breast height of trees (MDBH) and number

of trees with DBH>5cm within the plot Values are given as means with Standard Error (SE) PF= primary forest, SL= selectively logged forest; HG= home gardens, Tea = tea plantations  

PF 6.08 ±0.02 83.14±1.20 2.58±0.13 31.53±1.86 76.02±1.22 18.61±0.65 23.83±1.01 20.97±0.15

SL 6.03±0.02 74.93±1.36 2.41±0.11 44.47±2.16 66.61±1.14 22.65±0.91 18.46±0.48 21.29±0.18

HG 6.22±0.05 31.80±1.92 1.27±0.09 35.35±2.22 29.72±1.78 3.99±0.28 15.66±0.87 23.98±0.15 Tea 6.05±0.06 45.63±2.44 1.23±0.07 74.30±2.20 6.85±0.92 1.09±0.13 11.12±1.70 23.73±0.17

194

Appendix 5.5 Species of Scarabaeinae and Aphodinae dung beetle species recorded from the study sites and their attributes; Guild;1= dweller; 2=tunneler; 3=roller; Size class; 1(small) =<8

mm ; 2 (medium) = 9-15 mm; 3(large) = > 15.1; Diel activity; 1= Nocturnal; 2= Diurnal; Body size = Width of elytra width x body length measured from the anterior margin of the pronotum to the pygidium; Forest = Primary forest & selectively logged forest; Non forest = home gardens & tea plantations; Affinity = proportionate abundance; abundance in a habitat/ total abundance The measurements were taken from SYNCROSCOPY digital optical microscope Small Class2: 2 – 4mm: Small Class 1: 5 – 8mm ; Medium: 9 -15mm:: Large Class 1; 16 -25mm Large Class 2:

Appendix 6.1(a): Species accumulation curves for dung beetles in all sampled fragments

Appendix 6.1(b): Population abundance curves for dung beetles in all sampled fragments

198

Appendix 6.2 – (a–g)

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

200

(f)

(g) Appendix 6.2 – (a–g) Influence of fragment characteristics on standardized dung beetle community

parameters (a) Stotal (total species richness) and Sintact (richness of the intact forest species assemblage)

vs fragment area (ha), (b) Stotal and Sintact vs fragment area to edge ratio (c) Stotal and Sintact vs fragment distance from nearest intact forest (m), (d) Ntotal (total abundance) and Nintact (abundance of the intact forest species assemblage)vs fragment area (ha), (e) Ntotal (total abundance) and Nintact (abundance

of the intact forest species assemblage)vs area to edge ratio),(f) Ntotal and Nintact vs fragment distance from nearest intact forest (m), (g) EH (Shannon evenness index)vs fragment area (ha) Linear regressions are shown for visual purposes

Appendix 6.3 Fragment characteristics that were used in data analysis and interpretation:

(AREA) Fragment area (ha), (RAE) unweighted area /edge ratio, (CAT) Category of the

vegetation cover in the matrix (1) Good 2) Average 3) Degraded), (MATRIX) Category (matrix) based on the dominant land use within 1km belt from the fragment (1= >60% homegardens; 2=

>% agriculture), (TEA) Intensity tea (1 = large scale; 2= domestic); (F2) #of fragments within 1

km distance from the fragment boundary, (DNFrag) distance to the nearest fragment within 1 km (m), (DNF) distance to the nearest large primary forest (m), (ForCorr) presence of a prominent vegetation belt between the fragment and the nearest forest fragment, (PI) Proximity index, ∑ (A1/d1)*1000) + (A2/d2)*1000)+ (Ai/di)*1000); i= number of fragments within 1 km from the fragment boundary This is a measure of the sizes of the nearest forest fragments weighted by the distance

*Overall category of the fragment: (Cat) 1) Good2) Average 3) Degraded: calculated from

o Proportion of the hillock covered 1) fully covered 2) partially covered 3) fully exposed

o Evenness of the canopy and quality of vegetation 1) Even throughout 2) good with gaps 3) average 4) sparse or poor with many openings

o Consistency of the canopy (1)Thick canopy and large trees 2) many openings but good quality 3) many shrubs and thick undergrowth less/ small trees

o Quality of soil (decided by the colour/organic matter, moisture and heaviness 1) Moist dark soil with thick leaf litter 2) Dry brittle light coloured soil with thick leaf litter 3) Moist dark

202

with minimum litter 4) Dry brittle light coloured soil, substrate more rocky than soil

o Utilization by locals (1) Minimum utilization (2) relatively heavy (information provided by the local community)

Appendix 6.4: Environmental variables measured during the study: soil pH; soil temperature,

litter cover, average litter depth (cm); percent of shrub cover, canopy cover (measured with a

circular densitometer), number of trees with diameter at breast height dbh > 5 cm and dbh of the

10 trees closest to the center within the 5m radius plot Data is given with the standard error (SE)

Fragment Soil temp Soil pH Litter

cover (%)

Litter depth (cm)

Shrub cover(%)

Canopy cover(%)

# of trees dbh > 5cm

Average dbh (cm)