Environmental factors control and climate change impact on forest type: Dong PraYa Yen-KhaoYai world heritage in Thailand

Abstract

Climate is a major determinant of global vegetation patterns and has a significant influence on the distribution and structure of forest ecosystems. Dong PraYa Yen-KhaoYai Forest Complex has been a UNESCO natural world heritage site since 2007, but little is known about its plant community. Our study aims to identify each plant community within the world heritage area and calculate its potential for carbon content. We determine both the relationship between forest type and both physio-chemical soil properties and climate change impact. We employed allometric equations to calculate aboveground biomass and both cluster analysis and canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) to examine the relationship between forest type and physiochemical soil properties. An equation for each physical parameter was used to predict the forest model. The climate scenario under A2 and B2 was applied to calculate future predominant forest types. Our results reveal that the forest ecosystems at Tab Lan (TL) have the highest species count (332 species) followed by Pang Srida (PD), KhaoYai (KY), Dong Yai (DY), and Tapraya (TY), with 293, 271, 169, and 99 species, respectively. We found KY to have the highest recorded carbon storage value at 2507.6 tC/ha followed by TL, PD, TY, and DY (1613.8, 1269.1, 844 and 810.7 tC/ha, respectively). Cluster analysis results indicated that the dominant species in each forest type is different. Moreover, CCA revealed that soil organic matter (SOM) and soil acid-base indicators are the best parameters to establish correlation for each forest type. Based on our results, future climate predictions show a negative impact on evergreen forests, but a positive one on deciduous ones.

Share and Cite:

Pumijumnong, N. , Payomrat, P. , Techamahasaranont, J. and Panaadisai, S. (2013) Environmental factors control and climate change impact on forest type: Dong PraYa Yen-KhaoYai world heritage in Thailand. Natural Science, 5, 135-143. doi: 10.4236/ns.2013.51A021.

1. INTRODUCTION

Forest area use is an optimum option for climate change mitigation. In developing countries, however, forest degradation is in direct conflict with controlling climate change. Exercising a natural forest reserve strategy is an option that will protect and preserve existing forests. Reforestation should also be employed. Forest ecosystems are vital for the welfare of living things and mankind [1]. Forests are sources of raw materials and provide basic human needs such as food, clothing, housing, and medicine [2]. Additionally, forests balance the environment. Deforestation impacts soil and water resources, leading to direct and indirect socioeconomic problems.

The IPCC [3] report on the impact of the Global Climate Model (GCM) on tropical forests does not especially focus on Thailand. Thai natural forest resources may experience different impacts of climate change than reported. This research is the first of its kind that downscales the global climate model to a regional one, specifically, to a 25 km × 25 km grid size of forestry covering Thailand [4]. We selected physical factors that account for every forest type in Thailand. The objectives of our research are the following: first, to identify environmental factors that control forest type; to calculate total carbon content of each forest type; and to examine the impact of climate change on forest type.

2. STUDY AREA

The total area of the Dong PraYa Yen-Khao Yai forest complex is 6152.13 sq. km2. It is situated at 14˚00' - 14˚33'N and 101˚05' - 103˚14'E in northeastern Thailand, covering 6 provinces including Saraburi, Nakhon Nayok, Nakhon Rachasrima, Prachin Buri, Sakaew, and Buri Rum. Dong PraYa Yen-KhaoYai Forest Complex is the second UNESCO world heritage site created in Thailand, and is comprised of four national parks and a wildlife sanctuary (Figure 1). Khao Yai National Park consists of hill evergreen forest(KY_HEF), moist evergreen forest (KY_MEF), dry evergreen forest(KY_DEF), mixed deciduous forest (KY_MDF), secondary forest (KY_SF), grasslands (KY_GL), and deciduous dipterocarp forest (KY_DDF). Tab Lan National Park consists of hill evergreen forest (TL_HEF), moist evergreen forest (TL_ MEF), dry evergreen forest (TL_DEF), mixed deciduous forest (TL_MDF), deciduous dipterocarp forest (TL_ DDF), and palm forest (TL_PF). Pang Srida National Park consists of dry evergreen forest (PD_DEF), mixed deciduous forest (PD_MDF), deciduous dipterocarp forest (PD_DDF), secondary forest (PD_SF), and grassland (PD_GL). Ta Phraya National Park consists of dry evergreen forest (TY_DEF), mixed deciduous forest (TY_ MDF), deciduous dipterocarp forest (TY_DDF), and grassland (TY_GL). Dong Yai Wildlife Sanctuary consists of deciduous dipterocarp forest (DY_DDF), mixed deciduous forest (DY_MDF), deciduous dipterocarp forest (DY_DDF), and grassland (DY_GL). This world heri tage site encompasses all major habitat types and at least 2500 plant species (16 endemic) of the 20,000 - 25,000 species estimated for Thailand [5].

3. METHODOLOGY

Dong PraYaYen-KhaoYai forest complex consists of eight ecosystems: hill evergreen forest, moist evergreen forest, dry evergreen forest, mixed deciduous forest, dipterocarp deciduous forest, secondary forest, palm forest, and grassland. For each forest type, three plot sizes including 40 × 40 m2, 4 × 4 m2, and 1 × 1 m2 were plotted. All seventy-four plots were examined. Above and below ground biomass were calculated by using allometric equations (protocols described in the works of [6,7]). Soil was randomly chosen for 1 subsamples in 3 samples. Total soil sampling included 27 pits from our total study area. Soil was collected in 4 levels: 0 - 30 cm, 30 - 60, 60 - 90, and >90 cm, for analyzing texture, bulk density, soil moisture, soil reaction (pH), soil organic matter (SOM), % organic carbon (%OC), cation exchange capacity (CEC), total nitrogen, available phosphorus (avai.P), available potassium (avai.K), and total organic carbon (TOC) by using standard methods [8]. To reduce the number of sample plots, similar forest types were grouped. Twenty-four plots were further analyzed for cluster and canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) to examine the relationship between forest type and physio-chemical

Figure 1. Map of Thailand and study area.

soil properties [9]. We applied fuzzy probability theory [10] to model each forest type. The predicted forest types were compared with the actual classifications by the Royal Forest Department in Thailand, 2002 [11]. Finally, climate scenario under A2 and B2 [4] during the years 2000-2040 was performed with the predicted forest model.

4. RESULTS

4.1. Plant Species

Plant species were identified according to the guidelines of Gardner et al. [12]. A local expert and plant taxonomist from the Royal Forest Department found that TL was the most abundant species (332 species), followed by PD (293 species), KY (271 species), DY (169 species), and TY (99 species), respectively.

4.2. Important Value Index (IVI) in Plant Communities

There exists high forestry biodiversity in each national park. Therefore, we presented only the top five of the highest IVI values of each species in a study area as follows (Table 1).

4.3. Cluster Analysis

By using IVI values to assign sample units to groups based on redundant response patterns, we classified our samples units into 7 groups (Figure 2).

Group 1 is the largest and comprises types KY, TL, PD, DY, and TY. These include KY-HEF, KY-DEF, KY-MEF; TL-MEF, TL-MDF, TL-DEF, TL-PF and TL-HEF; PDMEF, PD-DEF; DY-DEF, DY-MDF; TY-DEF. Most forest types of this group are characteristically high in moisture. Group 2 consists of only KY_DDF, Group 3 of only DY_GL, Group 4 of PD_MDF and TY_MDF. Moreover, Group 5 is composed of mostly dry dipterocarp forest (DDF) except the dipterocarp forest in KY that is placed in Group 2. Group 6 consists of KY_MDF, PD_SF, KY_SF, and KY_GL. Group 7 incorporates PD_GL and TY_GL.

By using two-way cluster analysis, we discerned that the dominant species of each evergreen forest is distinct. This infers that each forest type is the same, but the dominant plant species is different, highlighting species diversity (Figure 3).

4.4. Canonical Correspondence Analysis (CCA)

Fourteen soil parameters in four depths (0 - 30, 30 - 60, 60 - 90, >90 cm) were tested by correlation coefficient to find the best representative parameter before further analysis (CCA). We found that OM, OC, TOC, and N ex-

Table 1. List of the top five of the highest IVI values.

hibited high correlation (r > 0.9; p < 0.01) for every soil depth parameter. OM was there representative parameter used to calculate the correlation. pH and phosphorus content have high positive correlations (r > 0.6; p < 0.01) for every soil depth. We thus selected pH as a representative parameter to calculate the correlation. CEC, sand and clay also exhibit high correlations (r > −0.7; p < 0.01) for every soil depth, and we subsequently chose sand as a parameter to calculate further correlations. In summary,

Figure 2. Cluster analysis.

Figure 3. Two-way analyses for evergreen forest.

all parameters used for further calculations are pH, OM, K, Mg, Ca, sand, silt, and bulk density (Tables 2 and 3).

We selected the higher correlation value with plot score, pH (R = 0.939 at Axis 2), and OM (R = −0.699 at Axis 1). For the second calculation, we included above ground carbon (ABGtc) for each forest type.

Figure 4 shows, unambiguously, that forest types HEF, DEF, MEF, MDF, DDF, GL, SF, and PF were located from left to right, a placement consistent with organic matter (OM). The correlation between Axis1 and aboveground carbon is negative (R = −0.797) and pH is positive (R = 0.835) (Tables 2 and 3). The evergreen forest had higher moisture content, consistent with potential to store high amounts of organic matter.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1] Nkem, J., Oswald, D., Kudejira, D. and Kanninen, M. (2009) Counting on forests and accounting for forest contributions in natural climate actions. Working paper 47, Center for International Forestry Research, CIFOR, Indonesia. www.cifor.cgiar.org
[2] Sedjo, R. and Sohngen, B. (1998) Impacts of climate change on forests. RFF Climate Issue Brief#9, 2nd Edition.
[3] IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report, Chapter 12 and Summary for Policymakers.
[4] Southeast Asia Regional Centre (SEA START RC) (2008) Climate change scenario model for Thailand. Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok. http://research.start.or.th/climate/
[5] MacKinnon, J. (1997) Protected area review of the Indo-Malayan realm. The Asian Bureau for Conservation, World Bank Publication, Canterbury.
[6] Ogawa, H., Yoda, K., Ogino, K. and Kira, T. (1965) Comparative ecological studies on three main types of forest vegetation in Thailand II. Plant biomass. Natural and life in Southeast Asia, 4, 49-80.
[7] Tsutsumi, T., Yoda, K., Sahunalu, P., Dhanmanonda, P. and Prachaiyo, B. (1983) Forest: Felling, burning and regeneration. In: Kyuma, K. and Pairitra, C., Eds., Shifting cultivation. Tokyo.
[8] Panaadisai, S. (2011) Carbon stock in natural forest ecosystem in world heritage Dongphraya Yen-KhaoYai forest complex, Thailand. M.Sc. Thesis, Faculty of Graduate Studies, Mahidol University, Bangkok.
[9] Peck, J.E. (2010) Multivariate analysis for community ecologists: Step-by-step using PC-ORD. MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach.
[10] Pumijumnong, N. and Techamahasaranont, J. (2008) Climate change impact of forest area in Thailand. Proceeding of the FORTROP II: Tropical Forest Change in a Changing World. Bangkok, 17-20 November 2008, 143-157.
[11] Royal Forest Department (2002) Forest type in Thailand. Office of Forest Information, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Bangkok.
[12] Gardner, C., Sittisunthorn, P. and Anusarnsunthorn, W. (2000) Trees in north Thailand: A guide to the trees species in the forest, northern Thailand. Kopfi Publishing, Bangkok.
[13] Smitinnand, T. (1977) Vegetation and ground covers of Thailand. The Forest Herbarium, Royal Forest Department, Bangkok.
[14] Kutinatara, U. (1998) Forest ecosystem. Department of Forest Biology, Faculty of Forestry, Kasetsart University, Bangkok.
[15] IPCC (2001) Climate change 2001: The scientific basis. In: Houghton, J.T., Ding, Y., Griggs, D.J., Noguer, M., van der Linden, P.J., Dai, X., Maskell, K. and Johnson, C.A., Eds., Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
[16] Zhang, L., Mi, X., Shao, H. and Ma, K. (2011) Strong plant-soil associations in a heterogeneous subtropical broad-leaved forest. Plant Soil, 347, 211-220. doi:10.1007/s11104-011-0839-2
[17] Fu, B.J., Liu, S.L., Ma, K.M. and Zhu, Y.G. (2004) Relationship between soil characteristics, topography and plant diversity in a heterogeneous deciduous broad-leaved forest near Beijing, China. Plant and Soil, 261, 47-54. doi:10.1023/B:PLSO.0000035567.97093.48
[18] John, R., Dalling, J.W., Harms, K.E., Yavitt, J.B., Stallard, R.F., Mirabello, M., Hubbell, S.P., Valencia, R., Navarrete, H., Vallejo, M., Robin, B. and Foster, R.B. (2006) Soil nutrients influence spatial distributions of tropical tree species. www.pnas.orgcgidoi10.1073pnas.0604666104
[19] Brown, S. and Logo, A.E. (1982) The storage and production of organic matter in tropical forests and their role in the global carbon cycle. Biotropica, 14, 191-187. doi:10.2307/2388024
[20] Janmahasatien, S., Phopinit, S. and Wichiennopparat, W. (2007) Soil carbon in the Sakaerat dry evergreen forest and the Maeklong mixed deciduous forest. www.dnp.go.th
[21] Terakunpisut, J., Gajaseni, N. and Ruankawe, N. (2007) Carbon sequestration potential in aboveground biomass of Thong PhaPhum national forest. Applied ecology and environmental research, 5, 93-102.
[22] Boonpragob, K. (1996) Thailand’s role in a global context. Climate change—Local solutions for global problems. Linking Local Solutions to Global Needs: Thailand’s Environment Agenda in the 21st Century, Thailand Environment Institute, Bangkok.
[23] Boonpragob, K. and Santisirisomboon, J. (1996) Modeling potential changes of forest area in Thailand under climate change. Water, Air and Soil Pollution, 92, 107-117.
[24] Trisurat, Y., Alkemade, R. and Arets, E. (2009) Projecting forest tree distributions and adaptation to climate change in northern Thailand. Journal of Ecology and Natural Environment, 1, 055-063.
[25] Ravindrannath, N.H., Joshaxenai, N.V., Sukumar, R. and Saxena, A. (2006) Impact of climate on forests in India. Current science, 90, 354-361.
[26] Staringa, T. (2008) Indonesia’s vulnerability to climate change: An increasing trend. Regional Health Forum, 12, 56-58.
[27] WWF (2007) Climate change impacts on APEC countries.

Copyright © 2024 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.