Journals / Coğrafya Dergisi / 2020 / Sayı: 41

Primary Conservation Area Selection with Biodiversity Indices: A Case Study on the Kargı and Karpuz River Valleys (Mediterranean Region–Turkey)

Biyoçeşitlilik İndisleri Kullanılarak Öncelikli Koruma Alanı Seçimine Bir Örnek: Kargı Çayı ve Karpuz Çayı Vadileri (Akdeniz Bölgesi-Türkiye)

Seda Akkurt Gümüş(Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi, Coğrafi Bilgi Sistemleri Programı, Manisa, Türkiye)0000-0001-7879-8460
Meral Avcı(İstanbul Üniversitesi, Coğrafya Bölümü, İstanbul, Türkiye)0000-0003-4367-3021
Pages
147–164
Publication Date
2020-12-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

For all plant species diversity of the two valleys, Whittaker’s gamma diversity index (γ) was used and the Kargı River valley was identified as the priority area for conservation.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Diversity components are explained with different concepts, approaches, and methods.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Biodiversity conservation in specific areas of rich plant species diversity and endemism rate in Turkey is significant enough to be managed sustainably.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:For all plant species diversity of the two valleys, Whittaker’s gamma diversity index (γ) was used and the Kargı River valley was identified as the priority area for conservation.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Alfa · beta ve gama çeşitlilik indisi · Anadolu

Abstract

Diversity components are explained with different concepts, approaches, and methods. Biodiversity conservation in specific areas of rich plant species diversity and endemism rate in Turkey is significant enough to be managed sustainably. Identifying biodiversity at different scales is one of the most critical steps before implementing protection measures. In the Mediterranean region, plant species are in danger due to various factors: expansion of urban areas, rapid population growth, and fire. Against these threats, it will be a useful initiative to focus on areas with diverse species and to give priority to conservation in these regions. In this study, plant species diversity was calculated with the alpha (α) and beta (β) biodiversity indices, using data collected from fieldwork in the two river valleys, Kargı and Karpuz. The Shannon–Wiener index (αH) was used for alpha species diversity, and Whittaker’s index (βw) was preferred for the beta diversity index. As a result, the areas with the least alpha diversity in the Karpuz River valley are the source and the upper course of the river and the areas with the highest diversity are the lower and middle courses. Beta diversity is high in the upper course and less in the lower and middle courses where anthropogenic activities are dominant. In contrast, in the Kargı River valley, alpha and beta diversity is low in the middle part and more in the upper and lower courses. For all plant species diversity of the two valleys, Whittaker’s gamma diversity index (γ) was used and the Kargı River valley was identified as the priority area for conservation.

Özet

Biyoçeşitlilik kavramı ilk ortaya çıktığından beri çeşitli yaklaşım ve metotlarla açıklanmaya çalışılmıştır. Türkiye’de bitki tür çeşitliliği ve endemizm oranının yüksek olduğu belirli alanlarda biyoçeşitliliğin korunması ve sürdürülebilir bir şekilde yönetilmesi oldukça önemlidir. Biyoçeşitliliğin farklı ölçeklerde belirlenmesi, korumaya yönelik tedbirler alınmadan önce atılacak en önemli adımlardan birisidir. Özellikle Akdeniz Bölgesi’nde bitki türleri birçok farklı etmen sebebiyle tehlike altındadır. Bu tehditler karşısında tür çeşitliliğinin daha zengin olduğu alanlara odaklanıp koruma önceliğinin bu bölgelere verilmesi faydalı bir girişim olacaktır. Bu çalışmada Akdeniz Bölgesi’nde iki akarsu vadisinde (Kargı Çayı vadisi ve Karpuz Çayı vadisi) aynı fenolojik dönemde yapılan arazi çalışmalarıyla toplanan veri kullanılarak, bitki tür çeşitliliği alfa (α) ve beta (β) biyoçeşitlilik indisleriyle hesaplanmıştır. Alfa tür çeşitliliği için Shannon-Wiener indisi (αH), beta çeşitlilik için ise Whittaker’ın beta çeşitlilik (βw) indisi kullanılmıştır. Karpuz Çayı’nda alfa çeşitliliğin en az olduğu alanlar akarsuyun kaynak çevresi ve üst çığırı, en fazla olduğu alanlar alt ve orta çığırdır. Beta çeşitlilik ise üst çığırda yüksek, antropojenik faaliyetlerin hakim olduğu alt ve orta kesimlerde düşüktür. Kargı Çayı’nda alfa ve beta çeşitlilik orta kesimde az, yukarı ve aşağı çığırlarda fazladır. İki vadinin bitki çeşitliliği Whittaker’ın gama çeşitlilik (γ) indisi kullanılarak karşılaştırılmış ve Kargı Çayı vadisi korumada öncelikli alan olarak belirlenmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Gümüş, S. A., Avcı, M. (2020). Primary Conservation Area Selection with Biodiversity Indices: A Case Study on the Kargı and Karpuz River Valleys (Mediterranean Region–Turkey). Coğrafya Dergisi, Sayı: 41, 147–164. https://doi.org/10.26650/JGEOG2020-0056

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (47)

  1. Anderson, M. J., Crist, T. O., Freestone, A. L. & Sanders, N. J. (2011). Navigating the multiple meanings of β-diversity: a roadmap for the practising ecologist. Ecology Letters, 14, 19–28.
  2. Avcı, M. (2018). Ekosistem Coğrafyası, İstanbul Üniversitesi Açık ve Uzaktan Eğitim Fakültesi, Coğrafya Lisans Programı, İstanbul.
  3. Boulos, L., Miller, A. G. & Mill, R. R. (1994). Regional overview South West Asia and the Middle East. Centers of Plant Diversity I (Ed. S.D. Davis, V.H. Heywood and A.C. Hamilton), WWF and IUCN, U.K., 293–308.
  4. Buckley, L. B. & Jetz, W. (2007). Environmental and historical constraints on global patterns of amphibian richness. Proceedings Biological Science/The Royal Society, 274, 1167–1173.
  5. Cayuela, L., Benayas, J. M. R., Justel, A. & Salas-Rey, J. (2006). Modelling tree diversity in a highly fragmented tropical montane landscape. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 15(6), 602–613.
  6. Cody, M. L. (1975). Towards a theory of continental species diversities: bird distributions over mediterranean habitat gradients, Ecology and Evolution of Communities, (Ed: Cody, M.L. & Diamond, J.M.), Belknap Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 214–275.
  7. Condit, R., Pitman, N., Egbert, G., Leigh, J., Chave, J., Terborgh, J., Foster, R., Nunez, V., Aguilar, V., Valencia, R., Villa, G., Muller-Landau, H., Losos, E. & Hubbel, H. (2002). Beta- diversity in Tropical forest trees. Science, 295, 666–669.
  8. Davis, P. H. (1965-1985). Flora of Turkey and the East Aegean Islands. Edinburgh University Press, Vol: 1-9, Edinburgh.
  9. Davis, P. H., Mill, R. R., Tan, K., (1998). Flora of Turkey and the East Aegean Islands (Supplement 1). Edinburgh University Press, Vol: 10, Edinburgh.
  10. Duman, H. (2005). Kargı Çayı vadisi, Türkiye’nin 122 Önemli Bitki Alanı, (Ed: N. Özhatay, A. Byfield, S. Atay), WWF Türkiye (Doğal Hayatı Koruma Vakfı) Yayını, İstanbul, 231–232.
  11. Fortin, M. & Dale, M. R. T. (2005). Spatial Analysis: A Guide for Ecologists, Cambridge University Press.
  12. Gaston, K. J. (2010). Biodiversity, Conservation Biology for All (Ed. Sodhi, N.S. ve Ehrlich, P.R.). Oxford University Press Inc., New York.
  13. Groombridge, B. & Jenkins, M. D. (2002). World Atlas of Biodiversity. UNEP, University of California Press, USA.
  14. Gueze, M., Paneque-Galvez, C., Luz, A.C., Pino, J., Orto-Martines, M., Reyes-Garcia, V. & Manuel, J. (2013). Determinants of tree species turnover in southern Amazonian rain forest. Journal of Vegetation Science, 24, 284–295.
  15. Gülsoy, S. & Özkan, K. (2008). Tür çeşitliliğinin ekolojik açıdan önemi ve kullanılan bazı indisler. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, A(1): 168–178.
  16. Güner, A., Özhatay, N., Ekim, T. & Başer, K. H. C. (2000). Flora of Turkey and the East Aegean Islands (Supplement 2). Edinburgh University Press, Vol: 11, Edinburgh.
  17. Harrison, S., Ross, S. J. & Lawton, J. H. (1992). Beta diversity on geographic gradients in Britain. Journal of Animal Ecology, 61(1), 151–158.
  18. Hui, C. (2015). Unlocking Patterns of Nature- The Marriage of Mathematics and Ecology, Sun Media Press.
  19. Jost, L. (2007). Partitioning diversity into independent alpha and beta components. Ecology, 88(10), 2427–2439.
  20. Jurasinski, G., Retzer, V. & Beierkuhnlein, C. (2009). Inventory, differentiation, and proportional diversity: a consistent terminology for quantifying species diversity. Oecologia, 159, 15–26.
  21. Keil, P., Schweiger, O., Kühn, I., Kunin, W. E., Kuussaari, M., Settele, J., Henle, K., Brotons, L., Pe’er, G., Lengyel, S., Moustakas, A., Steinicke, H. & Storch, D. (2012). Patterns of beta diversity in Europe: the role of climate, land cover and distance across scales. Journal of Biogeography, 39, 1473–1486.
  22. Koleff, P., Gaston, K. J. & Lennon, J. J. (2003). Measuring beta diversity for presence–absence data. Journal of Animal Ecology, 72, 367–382.
  23. Legendre, P., Borcard, D. & Peres-Neto, P. P. (2005). Analyzing beta diversity: partitioning the spatial variation of community composition data. Ecological Monographs, 75(4), 435–450.
  24. Legendre, P., Mi, X., Ren, H., Ma, K., Yu, M., Sun, I.F. & He, F. (2009). Partitioning beta diversity in a subtropical broad-leaved forest in China. Ecology, 90, 663–674.
  25. Loreau, M. (2000). Are communities saturated? on the relationship between α, β and γ diversity. Ecology Letters, 3(2), 73–76.
  26. MacArthur, R. H. (1965). Patterns of species diversity. Biological Reviews, 40, 510–533.
  27. Magurran, A. E. (2005). Species abundance distributions pattern or process?. Functional Ecology, 19(1), 177–181.
  28. Mora, C., Tittensor, D. P., Adl, S., Simpson, A. G. B. & Worm, B. (2011). How many species are there on earth and in the ocean? PLoS Biology, 9(8): e1001127. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001127
  29. Negiz, M. G. (2013). Gölhisar (Burdur) Yöresinde Odunsu Tür Çeşitliliği ile Yetişme Ortamı Özellikleri Arasındaki İlişkiler, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Doktora Tezi.
  30. Negiz, M. G. & Özkan, K. (2016). The relationships between beta plant diversity and climatic variables: a case study in Kuyucak mountain district. GEOMED 2016 Bildiri Özetleri Kitabı, 218.
  31. Neilan, W. L., Barton, P. S., McAlpine, C. A., Wood, J. T. & Lindenmayer, D. B. (2019). Contrasting effects of mosaic structure on alpha and beta diversity of bird assemblages in a human-modified landscape.Ecography, 42(1), 173–186.
  32. Nekola, J. C. & White, P. S. (1999). The distance decay of similarity in biogeography and ecology, Journal of Biogeography, 26(4), 867-878.
  33. Özkan, K. (2010). Orman ekosistem çeşitliliği haritalama çalışmaları için ekolojik alan çeşitliliğinin belirlenmesi üzerine bir öneri. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, A(2), 136–148.
  34. Özkan, K. (2016), Biyolojik Çeşitlilik Bileşenleri (α, ß ve γ) Nasıl Ölçülür, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Yayınevi, Isparta.
  35. Pimm, S. L. & Gittleman, J. L. (1992). Biological diversity: where is it?. Science, 255(5047), 940.
  36. Pinto-Ledezma, J. N., Larkin, D. J. & Cavender-Bares, J. (2018). Patterns of beta diversity of vascular plants and their correspondence with biome boundaries across North America. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 1–13.
  37. Socolar, J. B., Gilroy, J. J., Kunin, W. E. & Edwards, D. P. (2016). How should beta-diversity inform biodiversity conservation?. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 31(1), 67–80.
  38. Tuomisto, H. (2010a). A diversity of beta diversities: straightening up a concept gone awry. Part 1. Defining beta diversity as a function of alpha and gamma diversity, Ecography, 33(1), 2–22.
  39. Tuomisto, H. (2010b). A diversity of beta diversities: straightening up a concept gone awry. Part 2. Quantifying beta diversity and related phenomena. Ecography, 33, 23–45.
  40. Veech, J. A. & Crist, T. O. (2007). Diversity partitioning without statistical independence of alpha and beta. Ecology, 91(7), 1964–1969.
  41. Volkov, I., Banavar, J. R., Hubbell, S. P. & Maritan, A. (2003). Neutral theory and relative species abundance in ecology. Nature, 424, 1035–1037.
  42. Wang, Z., Fang, J., Tang, Z. & Shi, L. (2012). Geographical patterns in the beta diversity of China’s woody plants: the influence of space, environment and range size. Ecography, 35, 1092–1102.
  43. Westhoff, V. & Maarel, E. van der (1980). The Braun-Blanquet Approach. Classification of Plants Communities (Ed. R.J. Whittaker): 287-399. The Haque: Dr. W. Junk bv Publishers.
  44. Whittaker, R. H. (1960). Vegetation of the Siskiyou mountains, Oregon and California. Ecological Monographs, 30, 279–338.
  45. Whittaker, R. H. (1972). Evolution and measurement of species diversity. Taxon, 21, 213–251.
  46. Wilson, M. V. & Shmida, A. (1984). Measuring beta diversity with presence-absence data. Journal of Ecology, 72, 1055–1064.
  47. Zhang, Q., Hou X., Li F.Y., Niu J., Zhou Y., Ding Y. (2014). Alpha, beta and gamma diversity differ in response to precipitation in the inner Mongolia grassland. Plos One, 9(3), 1–9.