Abstract
Agroforestry systems are widely extolled as a biodiversity-friendly alternative to food and wood production. However, few studies on large-vertebrates in the tropics consistently support this assumption. In the Amazonian ‘arch of deforestation’, commodity cropland and pastures for beef production have relentlessly replaced native forests. Agroforestry should therefore be both economically profitable and a more wildlife-friendly land-use alternative. Here we assess the local abundance and habitat use by forest primates and ungulates in a landscape mosaic containing large areas of primary forest and teak (Tectona grandis) agroforestry. We focused on animals of these groups because they have similar day ranges and home ranges, and are at the same trophic level. We surveyed 12 transects in both of these environments, totalling 485 km walked. We recorded four ungulate (Tayassu pecari, Pecari tajacu, Mazama americana, and Tapirus terrestris) and seven primate species (Ateles chamek, Lagothrix carta, Sapajus apella, Saimiri ustus, Chiropotes albinasus, Plecturocebus cf. moloch and Mico cf. emiliae). We indicate the importance of a species-level approach to evaluate the contribution of agroforests to population persistence. Large-bodied atelids, which are ripe-fruit-pulp specialists, were never recorded in teak agro-forest. Sakis were more common in primary forest, while the smallest faunivore-frugivores had similar sighting rates in both environments. Ungulates exhibited subtler differences in their use of space than primates, but their sighting rates and track counts indicated temporal niche partition. White-lipped peccaries and red brocket deer were the only ungulates more frequently recorded in primary forest areas. Teak agroforestry still harbours some large and midsized frugivores, which may contribute with some biotic ecosystem services if their patches are connected to primary tropical forests. However, teak agroforestry should not be used to justify population subsidies for all Amazonian forest vertebrate species, since at least some threatened species clearly avoid forest stands dominated by this fast-growing exotic tree.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Arruda, C., Von Ryn, P., Defontaines, S., da Silva, R.P., Lugi, L.F., Silveira, R., Castro, C.K.C., [dataset] 2004. Fichário dos plantios da Fazenda Sáo Nicolau.
Bhagwat, S.A., Willis, K.J., Birks, H.J.B., Whittaker, R.J., 2008. Agroforestry: a refuge fortropical biodiversity? Trends Ecol. Evol. (Amst.) 23, 261–267, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2008.01.005.
Bicknell, J., Peres, C.A., 2010. Vertebrate population responses to reduced-impact logging in a neotropical forest. For. Ecol. Manage. 259, 2267–2275, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2010.02.027.
Bonnington, C., Weaver, D., Fanning, E., 2007. The use of teak (Tectona grandis) plantations by large mammals in the kilombero valley. Southern Tanzania. Afr. J. Ecol. 47, 138–145, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2028.2007.00890.x.
Cassano, C.R., Barlow, J., Pardini, R., 2012. Large mammals in an agroforestry mosaic in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Biotropica 44, 818–825, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/J.1744-7429.2012.00870.X.
Chaudhary, A., Burivalova, Z., Koh, L.P., Hellweg, S., 2016. Impact of forest management on species richness: global meta-analysis and economic trade-offs. Sci. Rep. 6, 1–10, http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep23954.
Edwards, D.P., Gilroy, J.J., Woodcock, P., Edwards, F.A., Larsen, T.H., Andrews, D.J.R., Derhé, M.A., Docherty, T.D.S., Hsu, W.W., Mitchell, S.L., Ota, T., Williams, L.J., Laurance, W.F., Hamer, K.C., Wilcove, D.S., 2014. Land-sharing versus land-sparing logging: reconciling timber extraction with biodiversity conservation. Glob. Chang. Biol. 20, 183–191, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12353.
Espartosa, K.D., Pinotti, B.T., Pardini, R., 2011. Performance of camera trapping and track counts for surveying large mammals in rainforest remnants. Biodivers. Conserv. 20, 2815–2829, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10531-011-0110-4.
Estrada, A., Raboy, B.E., Oliveira, L.C., 2012. Agroecosystems and primate conservation in the tropics: a review. Am. J. Primatol. 74, 696–711, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ajp.22033.
Fischer, J., Abson, D.J., Butsic, V., Chappell, M.J., Ekroos, J., Hanspach, J., Kuemmerle, T., Smith, H.G., von Wehrden, H., 2014. Land sparing versus land sharing: moving forward. Conserv. Lett. 7, 149–157, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/conl.12084.
Fragoso, J.M.V., Levi, T., Oliveira, L.F.B., Luzar, J.B., Overman, H., Read, J.M., Silvius, K.M., 2016. Line transect surveys underdetect terrestrial mammals: implications forthesustainability of subsistence hunting. PLoS One 11, e0152659, http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0152659.
Gibbs, H.K., Ruesch, A.S., Achard, F., Clayton, M.K., Holmgren, P., Ramankutty, N., Foley, J.A., 2010. Tropical forests were the primary sources of new agricultural land in the 1980s and 1990s. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107 (38), 16732–16737.
Harikrishnan, S., Vasudevan, It, Udhayan, A., Mathur, P.K., 2012. Biodiversity values of abandoned teak, Tectona grandis plantations in southern Western Ghats: is there a need for management intervention? Basic Appl. Ecol. 13, 139–148, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2012.01.001.
Hawes, J.E., Peres, C.A., 2013. Ecological correlates of trophic status and frugivory in neotropical primates. Oikos 123, 365–377, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.00745.x.
Healey, S.P., Gara, R.I., 2003. The effect of a teak (Tectona grandis) plantation on the establishment of native species in an abandoned pasture in Costa Rica. For. Ecol. Manage. 176, 497–507, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(02)00235-9.
Jenkins, R.K.B., Roettcher, It, Corti, G., 2003. The influence of stand age on wildlife habitat use in exotic teak tree. Biodivers. Conserv., 975–990.
Kollert, W., Cherubini, I., 2012. Teak resources and market assessment 2010 (Tectona grandis Linal.). For. Dep. FAO UN Plant. For. Trees Work. Pap. Ser 5, 32.
Kremen, C., 2015. Reframing the land-sparing/land-sharing debate for biodiversity conservation. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci., http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/nyas.12845.
Mayle, B.A., Putman, R.J., Wyllie, I., 2000. The use of trackway counts to establish an index of deer presence. Mamm. Rev. 30, 233–237, http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/J.1365-2907.2000.00071.X.
Parry, L., Barlow, J., Peres, C.A., 2009. Hunting for sustainability in tropical secondary forests. Conserv. Biol. 23, 1270–1280, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.15231739.2009.01224.x.
Peres, C.A., Cunha, A.A., 2011. Manual Censo e Monitoramento de Vertebrados de Medio e Grande Porte por Transeccao Linear em Florestas Tropicais. Wildlife Conservation Society, Brasilia, Brasil, pp. 26.
Phalan, B., Balmford, A., Green, R.E., Scharlemann, J.P.W., 2011. Minimising the harm to biodiversity of producing more food globally. Food Policy 36, S62–S71, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2010.11.008.
Rodrigues, D.J., Izzo, T.J., Battirola, L.D., 2011. Descobrindo a Amazonia Meridional: Biodiversidade da Fazenda Sáo Nicolau. Pau e Prosa Comunicaçáo, Cuiabá, Mato Grosso, Brasil, pp. 301.
Silva, C.A., Lima, M., 2018. Soy moratorium in Mato Grosso: deforestation undermines the agreement. Land Use Policy 71, 540–542, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.11.011.
Soares-Filho, B., Rajáo, R., Macedo, M., Carneiro, A., Costa, W., Coe, M., Rodrigues, H., Alencar, A., 2014. Cracking Brazil’s forest code. Science 344 (80), 363–364, http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.124663.
Tobler, M.W., Carrillo-Percastegui, S.E., Powell, G., 2009. Habitat use, activity patterns and use of mineral licks by five species of ungulate in south-eastern Peru. J. Trop. Ecol. 25, 261–270, http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0266467409005896.
von Wehrden, H., Abson, D.J., Beckmann, M., Cord, A.F., Klotz, S., Seppelt, R., 2014. Realigning the land-sharing/land-sparing debate to match conservation needs: considering diversity scales and land-use history. Landsc. Ecol. 29, 941–948, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/sl0980-014-0038-7.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Oliveira, A.T.M., Bernardo, C.S.S., de Melo, F.R. et al. Primate and ungulate responses to teak agroforestry in a southern Amazonian landscape. Mamm Biol 96, 45–52 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2019.03.015
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2019.03.015