International Journal of Agricultural Science and Research (IJASR) ISSN(P): 2250-0057; ISSN(E): 2321-0087 Vol. 6, Issue 5, Oct 2016, 347-352 © TJPRC Pvt. Ltd
INFLUENCE OF URBANIZATION ON AGRO BIODIVERSITY: A STUDY IN BANGALORE RURAL URBAN CONGLOMERATE MOHAMMAD NAZIM SAKANDARI, M. H. GIRIPRASAD, M. H. GOPIKA, S. HATTAPPA & A. N. SRINGESWARA
University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bangalore, Karnataka, India ABSTRACT Agroforesty Agroforesty is considered considered a promising alternative alternative to conventional conventional agriculture agriculture that can both conserve bio-diversity and support local livelihoods. Multiple cropping systems may be particularly important for conservation of biodiversity, biodiversity, especially species of conservation concern. Here, we examined w hether multiple cropping system supports higher diversity of species native to nearby forest areas. Our results clearly indicate the hypothesis, that multiple cropping systems support the higher biodiversity and it majorly majorly of native and n aturalized aturalized species. Such cropping systems could be effectively effectively used as alternative alternative measure in conserving the species of conservation conservation concern. In turn, this higher diversity also supports the farming community for their additional livelihood supplement. KEYWORDS: Agrobiodive Agrobiodiversity, rsity, Urbanization, Urbanization, Bangalore, Phytodivers Phytodiversity ity
Received: Sep 22, 2016; Accepted: Oct 07, 2016; Published: Oct 14, 2016; Paper Id.: IJASROCT201642
INTRODUCTION Agricultural biodiversity or in short agrobiodiversity can be regarded as a subset of biodiversity that is in
O r i g i n a l A r t i c l e
and around farmlands. It is the outcome of the interactions among genetic resources, the environment and the management practices. Agrobiodiversity, in general, is the plant genetic resource for food and agriculture production. It It has an important important role to meet meet the demand demand for food resources of a growing growing population population (Thrupp 1998). 1998). Urban, peri-urban and rural food systems are increasingly important to the food and nutrition security of cities, as rural farm communities will continue to supply much much of the food for most urban populations. In the back gr ound, the present study was conducted with the objectives to assess the agrobiodiversity along the urban and rural gradients around B angalore. angalore.
MATERIALS AND METHODS The study area selected for the present study are three villages in Bangalore urban and rural districts, along the Bangalore – Ghati road, a major track that witnesses witnesses housing industrialization, industrialization, institutions, institutions, farming (traditional), contemporary and commercial practices. The first village was Rajanukunte situated in the north of Bangalore and about 10 km from GKVK Campus and in close proximity with urban area; this was considered urban site. The second was Hadonahalli village, which is situated in the semi-urban area having both intensive farming and some traditional farming practice; this considered as peri-urban site. The third village was located adjacent to the town of Doddaballapur, away from Bangalore urban limits; this site with traditional farming practices was was considered as rural site.
www.tjprc.org
[email protected]
348
Mohammad Nazim Sakandari, M. H. Giriprasad, M. H. Gopika, Gopika, S. Hattappa Hattappa & A. N. Sringeswara Sringeswara
In order to have fair representation representation of three s ystems, stratified random sampling sampling procedures were followed. In each system, three quadrats were been laid and the cropping systems systems noted down with different different crops grown. Vegetation Sampling
Three sample plots of the size 100 x 100 m were laid in each sampling site to stud y the impact on urbanization on agro-biodiversity. agro-biodiversity. All the trees with gbh ≥ 30 cm ( girth at breast height, i.e., 1.37 m from the ground) were enumerated in the entire 100 x 100 m plot with their girth and height. Shrubs were enumerated in two 10 x 10 m subplots laid in opposite corner of the large plot with their number and collar girth. Herbaceous species including climbers were recorded in four 1 x 1 m subplots of four corners of the main plot. The sample plots were marked with nylon threads and corners were demarcated with wooden pegs and tied with red ribbon for easy visibility.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS A total of 94 different species have been recorded in the all the three study sites, including trees, shrubs and herbaceous elements representing 57 families families with an a verage of 42.67 species (range 36 – 48 species). Out of the 94 species 36 were trees, 15 were shrubs including woody lianas and 43 were herbs including herbaceous climbers. Among the three study sites, rural site has highest number of species with 48 species followed by peri-urban site with 44 species and lowest in urban site with 36 species. The same trend was also n oticed with respect to trees, shrubs and herbs in all the three sampling sites with little variations. We found more number of herbs in urban and peri-urban site and and also in more more number of herbs in urban comparative comparative to rural site. site. Highest Shannon-Wiener diversity index were observed in rural site with a mean index value of 4.05 and lowest in urban site with a mean index value of 3.78. Similar pattern were also observed for Simpson index. Whereas the evenness index was highest in per-urban (mean index value of 0.96) site followed followed by rural and in urban site (0.94 each). Total density and basal area was also highest in rural site with 91 individuals and 3.43 m² ha -1, respectively compared to other two sampling sites. All the above results were summarized in the Table 1. Table 1: Floristic Structure of Three Sampling Sites in the Study Area
With respect to floristic richness, among the three sampling sites, rural sampling site has highest species diversity and richness and dominance of species is shared by many species and also of nati ve species. species. In other two sampling sites, it Impact Factor Factor (JCC): 4.8136 4.8136
NAAS Rating: 3.53 3.53
Influence of Urbanization Urbanization on Agro Biodiversity: Biodiversity: A Study in Bangalore Bangalore Rural Urban Conglomerate
349
is dominated by few species and mostly of exotic species. Similar study with the meta-analysis of the publication of agrobiodiversity revealed that about 30% more species richness and 50% more abundance of species in organic farming system practicing away from the urban areas compared to the intensive farming around the urban areas (Bengtsson et al. , 2005). Tree Component
Importance value index reveals that in urban site Azadirachta indica was the dominant species with an IVI of 67.92 followed by Eucalyptus camaldulensis (IVI of 62.2) and Casuarina equisetifolia equisetifolia (IVI of 30.07). In peri-urban site,
Eucalyptus camaldulensis camaldulensis was the dominant species with an IVI of 40.28 followed by Tectona grandis (IVI of 32.83) and Artocarpus heterophyllus (IVI of 25.74). In rural site, Cocos nucifera was the dominant tree species with an IVI of 40.22 followed by Azadirachta indica (IVI of 39.63) and Grevillea Grevillea robusta (IVI of 28.13). In urban site five dominant species shared the 65% of the total IVI. Whereas, in peri-urban site the dominant five species shared about 45% of the total IVI. In rural site 52% of the total IVI was shared by the five dominant species. Shrub Component
Only rural site showed more number of shrubby species compared to other two sites. In urban site shrub species were found and the Lanatana camara was the dominant species covering 65% of t he total IVI. In peri-urban peri-urban site, only five species of shrubs were found growing among them Citrus limon and Cassia auriculata were the dominant species and they shared 57% of the total IVI. Whereas in rural site, 12 shrubby species were found growing and there also Lantana camara was the dominant species followed by Tabernaemontana alternifolia and Hibiscus rosa-sinensis rosa-sinensis. These three shared abou t 43% of the total IVI. Herb Component
Highest number herbaceous species were noticed urban site, where an exotic weedy species Parthenium
hysterophorus was the dominant herb followed by Alternanthera sessilis and Calyptocarpus vialis. In peri-urban site Calyptocarpus vialis, an exotic species was the dominant followed by Alysicarpus monilifer and Celosia argentea. However in rural site Eleusine indica indica, wild relative of ragi, was the dominant species followed by Coriandrum sativum and
Malvastrum coromandelianum coromandelianum. Economic Value
Out of recorded species, 84 species have various economical values, which are used by the farmers. Of the economically economically important species, medicinal plant ranked first with 70 species (48.28%) followed followed by 28 species (19.31%) of Gums & Resins value and 11 species (7.59%) each of fodder and timber value (Figure 1). Out of 70 medicinal species recorded in the study sites, the rural and peri-urban sites accounted for 36 species e ach and 25 species from urban site. For all other uses rural site accounted for maximum number of species followed by peri-urban and urban sites except for gums and resins, where peri-urban sites accounted for 16 species compared to rural site with 15 species. In present scenario, timber and oil yielding species is found to be the major component that generates income to some extent and other uses are for their livelihood subsistence. Similar studies conducted in Naban river watershed, China, where NTFP’s like bamboo shoots and medicinal plants yield little income to them, many of the villagers collecting the same for their livelihood subsistence (Dahaneh, 2012, Moinuddin and Xie, 2009). Higher usage of plants as medicine in an agrobiodiversity system was also observed in home garden agrobiodiversity system in Kanykmari district, India (Paul and Jeeva, 2013). www.tjprc.org
[email protected]
350
Mohammad Nazim Sakandari, M. H. Giriprasad, M. H. Gopika, Gopika, S. Hattappa Hattappa & A. N. Sringeswara Sringeswara
Figure 1: Economic Values of Species Found in all the Three Sampling Sites REFERENCES
1. BENGTSSON, BENGTSSON, J., AHNSTRÖM, AHNSTRÖM, J., AND WEIBULL, C,A. 2005. The effects of organic agriculture agriculture on biodiversity biodiversity and abundance: a meta-analysis Jou. of App. Eco, 42: 261–269 2. DAHANEH, DAHANEH, A. G. 2012. Agrobiodiversity Agrobiodiversity and its use in Naban River Watershed National Nature Re serve: implications implications for bio-cultural diversity conservation. Ph. D. thesis submitted to University of Hohenheim. 3. MOINUDDIN, MOINUDDIN, H. AND XIE, J. 2009. 2009. Ecosystem Services Valuation Valuation as a Basis for Promoting Promoting Policies Conducive Conducive to PES and Climate Change Mitigation in Xishuangbanna, Southern Yunnan, China. In: International Conference on Sustainable Land use and Ecosystem Conservation, 4-7 May May 2009, Beijing, P.R. China. 4. PAUL, Z. M. AND S. JEEVA. 2013. Agrobiodiversity Agrobiodiversity i n the Homegardens Homegardens of Chirakkarai Chirakkarai Village, Village, Kanyakumari Kanyakumari District, Tamilnadu, India. Indian Forester, 11: 1003-1011. 5.
THRUPP, L. A. 1998, Cultivating diversity. Agrobiodiversity and food security. World Resources Institute, Washington DC, 80 p. http://pdf.wri.org/cultivatingdiversity_bw.pdf. Accessed 13 Jul 2012 .
APPENDICES Table 2: Importance Value Index of Top Five Species of Trees, Shrubs and Herbs in Three Sampling Sites Urban Species
Azadirachta indica indica Eucalyptus camaldulensis Casuarina equisetifolia equisetifolia Cordia obliqua Santalum album Lantana camara Solanum erianthum
Parthenium hysterophorus Alternanthera sessilis sessilis Impact Factor Factor (JCC): 4.8136 4.8136
22.64
Sampling Sites Peri-urban Species Species IVI Tree Component 13.43 Eucalyptus camaldulensis camaldulensis
Cocos nucifera
40.22
20.73
Tectona grandis
10.94
Azadirachta indica indica
39.63
10.02 6.54 5.70
Artocarpus heterophyllus heterophyllus Cassia fistula Acacia catechu
8.58 6.53 5.83
Grevillea robusta Tamarindus indica Moringa oleifera oleifera
28.13 26.26 22.05
192.53 107.47
Citrus limon Cassia auriculata Lantana camara Erythroxylum monogynum monogynum Murraya koenigii koenigii
Lantana camara camara Tabernaemontana alternifolia Unidentified Hibiscus rosa-sinensis rosa-sinensis Phyllanthus reticulatus
56.25 40.98 32.91 32.35 21.22
16.99
Calyptocarpus vialis
28.89
Eleusine indica
27.69
16.03
Alysicarpus monilifer monilifer
17.78
Coriandrum sativum
21.03
IVI
Shrub Component 33.54 23.56 16.78 14.90 11.22 Herb Component
Rural Species
IVI
NAAS Rating: 3.53 3.53
Influence of Urbanization Urbanization on Agro Biodiversity: Biodiversity: A Study in Bangalore Bangalore Rural Urban Conglomerate
351
Table 2: Contd.,
Calyptocarpus vialis Eleusine indica Aristida hystrix
www.tjprc.org
15.71 15.71 14.10
Celosia argentea Oxalis corniculata Cassia tora
15.93 15.93 14.07
Malvastrum coromandelianum Lagascea mollis mollis Dinebra retroflexa retroflexa
19.36 17.69 16.03
[email protected]
