Research Article Woody Species Diversity in Traditional ...downloads.hindawi.com/archive/2015/643031.pdfe Sorensen coe cient of similarity ( )isgivenbythe following formula: = 2 2

Research ArticleWoody Species Diversity in Traditional AgroforestryPractices of Dellomenna District Southeastern EthiopiaImplication for Maintaining Native Woody Species

Abiot Molla1 and Gonfa Kewessa2

1Department of Natural Resource Management Debre Markos University 251 269 Debre Markos Ethiopia2Department of Forestry Madda Walabu University 251 247 Bale Robe Ethiopia

Correspondence should be addressed to Abiot Molla abiotmolla6gmailcom

Received 23 September 2015 Revised 2 November 2015 Accepted 3 November 2015

Academic Editor Alexandre Sebbenn

Copyright copy 2015 A Molla and G Kewessa This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons AttributionLicense which permits unrestricted use distribution and reproduction in any medium provided the original work is properlycited

The major impact of humans on forest ecosystems including loss of forest area habitat fragmentation and soil degradation leadsto losses of biodiversity These problems can be addressed by integration of agriculture with forests and maintaining the existingforests This study was initiated to assess woody species diversity of traditional agroforestry practices Three study sites (BurkituChire and Erba) were selected based on the presence of agroforestry practice Forty-eight (48) sample quadrants having an areaof 20m times 20m 16 sample quadrants in each study site were systematically laid using four transect lines at different distance Thediversity of woody species was analyzed by using different diversity indices A total of 55 woody species belonging to 31 familieswere identified and documented There were significantly different (119875 lt 005) among the study Kebeles (peasant associations)Mangifera indica Entada abyssinica and Croton macrostachyus were found to have the highest Important Value Index The resultsconfirmed that traditional agroforestry plays a major role in the conservation of native woody species However threats to woodyspecies were observed Therefore there is a need to undertake conservation practices before the loss of species

1 Introduction

Agriculture is the main backbone of the economy but alsothe major occupation of Ethiopian population [1] Rapidpopulation growth and long history of sedentary agriculturehave changed the land useland cover systems and causedenvironmental degradation in many developing countriesincluding Ethiopia [2] Bishaw and Asfaw [3] indicated thatpopulation growth and environmental degradation on forestecosystems lead to loss of forest area habitat fragmenta-tion soil degradation and biodiversity losses Internationalconcern is to find alternative farming systems that areecologically and economically sustainable as well as culturallyacceptable to local communities

Agroforestry is a dynamic ecologically based naturalresources management system through integration of treeson farms that diversifies agricultural landscapes and sustains

production for increased social economic and environmen-tal benefits [4] Agroforestry systems are known to bringabout changes in edaphic microclimatic floral faunal andother components of the ecosystem through biorecycling ofmineral elements environmental modifications and changesin floral and faunal composition [5ndash7] According to Schrothet al [8] agroforestry also contributes to biodiversity conser-vation on a landscape scale in three ways These are (i) theprovision of supplementary secondary habitat for species thattolerate a certain level of disturbance (ii) the reduction ratesof conversion of natural habitat in certain cases and (iii) thecreation of a more benign and permeable ldquomatrixrdquo betweenhabitat remnants compared with less tree-dominated landuses which may support the integrity of these remnants andthe conservation of their populations

There are several types of traditional agroforestry prac-tices in different parts of Ethiopia Some of the different

Hindawi Publishing CorporationInternational Journal of BiodiversityVolume 2015 Article ID 643031 13 pageshttpdxdoiorg1011552015643031

2 International Journal of Biodiversity

agroforestry practices include coffee shade tree systemsscattered trees on the farm land home gardens woodlotsfarm boundary practices and trees on grazing lands [9 10]Adjoining habitats that are more similar to the remnants interms of structure and floristic composition are the mostbeneficial to the long-term preservation of biodiversity [8] Inaddition to supporting native species of plants and animalsagroforestry areas may contribute to the conservation ofbiodiversity by increasing the connectivity of populationscommunities and ecological processes in fragmented land-scapes [11]

Agroforestry systems may maintain considerableintraspecific genetic variation at the landscape level andthis variation is essential for adaptation to changes inenvironmental conditions [12] Agroforestry systems serveas in situ conservation areas for many species that farmersvalue and therefore wish to conserve [13] The mechanismsby which traditional agroforestry systems contribute tobiodiversity have been examined by various authors [8 14ndash16] The same authors indicated that agroforestry plays fivemajor roles in conserving biodiversity (1) provides habitatfor species that can tolerate a certain level of disturbance (2)helps to preserve germ-plasm of sensitive species (3) helps toreduce the rates of conversion of natural habitat by providinga more productive sustainable alternative to traditionalagricultural systems that may involve clearing naturalhabitats (4) provides connectivity by creating corridorsbetween habitat remnants which may support the integrityof these remnants and the conservation of area-sensitivefloral and faunal species and (5) helps to conserve biologicaldiversity by providing other ecosystem services such aserosion control and water recharge thereby preventing thedegradation and loss of surrounding habitat Agroforestrypractices are the main option to reduce these problems Inthe study area (Dellomenna District) farmers have beenpracticing different traditional agroforestry practices byintegrating different woody perennials crops and livestockcomponents in their lands These traditional agroforestrypractices constitute perennial and herbaceous plants thatmay promote biodiversity conservation and socioeconomicalternatives to local communities However the contributionof these traditional agroforestry practices on biodiversityconservation has not been studied so far in DellomennaDistrict Therefore this study was initiated to investigatestatus of woody species diversity in traditional agroforestrypractices of Dellomenna District with particular emphasison maintaining native woody species

2 Materials and Methods

21 The Study Area

Location Dellomenna District is one of the districts found inBale Zone Southeast Ethiopia Geographically it lies between6∘401015840ndash7∘101015840N and 39∘301015840ndash40∘ E (Figure 1) The districtcomprises 14 Kebeleswith a total area of 461665 hectares It is

bordered in the west by Harenna-Buluk District in the eastby Berbere and Guradamole Districts in the North by GobaDistrict and in the South by Madda Walabu District [17]

Topography and Climate The area is characterized by flatlands and moderately steep rolling hills with valley bottomsThe altitude of the district ranges within 1000ndash2500 metersabove sea level It has two agroclimatic zones where 867is ldquoKollardquo (dry hot tropical climate) while the remaining133 is ldquoWoina Degardquo (moist to humid warm subtropicalclimate) The rainfall pattern in the area is the bimodaltype that is middle of March to end of May (short rainseason) and September to October (the main rainy season)Annual rainfall ranges within 700ndash1200mm The averagetemperature for Dellomenna is 18∘C [17]

Population and Means of Livelihood The total population ofDellomenna District is 96161 with a population density of21 personskm2 [18] There are various sources of livelihoodand income for local communities living in the districtTheseinclude Coffee arabica honey Catha edulis crops livestockproduction timber and other nontimber forest productsThese products serve either for household consumption or forcash income or both For example honey Catha edulis andcoffee are exclusively for income and field crops and livestockare mainly for household consumption

Land Use The land use categories of this district are forestagriculture grazing land and settlement [17] According toTadesse and Feyera [18] natural forest and woodlands stillaccount for the largest share of the land use types in thedistrict Despite its large coverage natural forest in Del-lomenna District is under pressure by humans Agriculturalexpansion settlement overgrazing forest fire and intensivemanagement of coffee in the forest are themajor threats to thenatural forest Tef (Eragrostis tef (Zucc) Trotter) maize (Zeamays) sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L) and haricot bean arethe major field crops grown in the district Fruits like mango(Mangifera indica) banana (Musa species) papaya (Caricapapaya) avocado Annona muricata and Psidium guajavaare common in the area Vegetables including cabbagecarrot pepper onion Irish potato and sweet potato (Ipomoeabatatas) are also grown in the area [18] Various types oftraditional agroforestry practices are also observed in thearea These include home garden and multipurpose treeson the farm land and farm boundary agrosilvopastoral andsilvopastoral [19]

22 Data Collection Methods

221 Sampling Techniques Systematic sampling methodswere employed during the course of this study The sam-pling procedures focused on identification of areas havingtraditional agroforestry practices Accordingly three studysites were selected Burkitu Chire and Erba Kebele wereselected Finally based on the topography or the gradient land

International Journal of Biodiversity 3

0 10 20 40 60 80

(km)

560000

560000

590000

590000

620000

620000

650000

650000

680000

680000

680000680000

660000 660000

700000 700000

720000 720000

740000 740000

Bale ZoneDellomenna District

Kebeles

RK_NAMEBurkituChireErba

N

⟨All other values⟩

Figure 1 Map of the study sites in Dellomenna District Southeastern Ethiopia

use systems four transect lines were aligned at an intervalof 500m in each selected Kebele On each transect fourquadrats were laid at an interval of 200m The first transectline and the first plot were systematically selected

A total of 48 quadrats 16 quadrats in each selectedKebelewere used for vegetation assessment

Samples of all tree and shrub species encountered duringthis assessment were collected and recorded in their localnames and later converted into scientific name by researchersthemselves and by the use of agroforestry database treespecies reference and selection [20] useful trees and shrubs ofEthiopia [21 22] and Flora of Ethiopia and Eritrea Edwardset al [23] Hedberg et al [24] and Hedberg et al [25] For

identification of the trees and shrubs that were not identifiedby researchers and by use of reference materials expert fieldidentification was made

222 Sampling Design For the assessment of the diversity ofwoody species in traditional agroforestry practices all woodyspecies were recorded and diameters at breast height (DBH13m) for all woody species ge5 cm were measured using acaliper or diameter tape except for coffee [26] The diameterof coffee shrub was measured at 15 cm aboveground [27]A quadrat size of 20 times 20m (400m2) was used for woodyspecies assessment for diameter ge5 cm [28] Within this plotfive subplots of 5 times 5m at four corners and in the center were


laid for sapling assessment for diameter of 1ndash5 cm Withineach subplot again a small five plot of 2 times 2mwas laid in eachcorner and center for seedling assessment for diameter lt1 cm[28] The dimensions of the quadrats and sampling size coin-cide with recommended practice in the ecological literatureand represent a compromise between recommended practiceaccuracy and practical considerations of time resources andeffort [28]

23 Data Analysis

231 Woody Species Diversity Indices Woody species diver-sity was analyzed by using different diversity indices Shan-non diversity index (1198671015840) Shannon equitabilityevennessindex (119864) species richness (119878) and Simpson diversity index(119863) were calculated and analyzed These diversity indicesprovided important information about rarity and common-ness of species in a community Species richness is the totalnumber of species in the community [29] It is the oldest andthe simplest concept of species diversity

232 Shannon-Wiener Diversity Index (1198671015840) Shannonrsquos indexaccounts for both abundance and evenness of the speciespresent Two components of diversity are combined in theShannon diversity index (1) the number of species and(2) equitability or evenness portion of individuals amongthe species [29 30] The Shannon diversity index (1198671015840) ishigh when the relative abundance of the different species inthe sample is even and is low when few species are moreabundant It is based on the theory that when there is a largenumber of specieswith even proportions the uncertainty thata randomly selected individual belongs to a certain speciesincreases and thus diversity increases It relates proportionalweight of the number of individuals per species to the totalnumber of individuals for all species [31] The Shannondiversity index is calculated as follows

1198671015840

= minus

119878

sum

119894=1

119901119894ln119901119894 (1)

where 1198671015840 is Shannon diversity index and 119901119894is proportion of

individuals found in the 119894th speciesValue of the index (1198671015840) usually lies between 15 and 35

although in exceptional cases the value can exceed 45 [31]The larger the1198671015840 value the higher the diversity

Evenness (Shannon equitability) index (119864) was calculatedas described by Kent and Coker [31] to estimate the homoge-neous distribution of tree species on farms

119864 =

1198671

119867max=

1198671

ln 119878=

sum119878

119894=1

119901119894ln119901119894

ln 119878with 119867max == ln 119878 (2)

where 119878 is the number of species and 119901119894is proportion

of individuals of the 119894th species or the proportion of thetotal species 119864 has values between 0 and 1 with 1 beingcomplete evenness [31] Usually Shannon diversity indexplaces most weight on the rare species in the sample [29] and

hence Simpsonrsquos diversity (119863) was used to include the mostabundant species

233 Simpsonrsquos Diversity Index (119863) Simpsonrsquos diversityindex is derived from a probability theory and it is theprobability of picking two different species at random [29 3032] Simpsonrsquos diversity (119863) is calculated as

119863 = 1 minussum1199012

119894

(3)

where 119863 is Simpsonrsquos diversity index and 119901119894is proportion of

individuals found in the 119894th speciesSimpsonrsquos diversity index gives relatively little weight to

the rare species and more weight to the most abundantspecies It ranges in value from 0 (low diversity) to amaximum of (1 minus 1119878) where 119878 is the number of species[29 30] The above indices which are generally referred toas alpha diversity indicate richness and evenness of specieswithin a locality but they do not indicate the identity ofthe species where it occurs Hence variation in compositionof woody species among the different land use types (patchforests and agroforestry) was determined by computing Betadiversity Beta diversity (120573) is usually expressed in termsof a similarity index between different habitats in the samegeographical area [32]

234 Similarity Indices (119878119904) Similarity indices measure the

degree to which the species compositions of different systemare alikeManymeasures exist for the assessment of similarityor dissimilarity between vegetation samples or quadrats TheSorensen similarity coefficient is applied to qualitative dataand is widely used because it gives more weight to the speciesthat are common to the samples rather than to those that onlyoccur in either sample [31]

The Sorensen coefficient of similarity (119878119904) is given by the

following formula

119878119904=

2119886

2119886 + 119887 + 119888

(4)

where 119878119904is Sorensen similarity coefficient 119886 is number of

species common to both samples 119887 is number of speciesdistinctive in sample 1 and 119888 is number of species distinctivein sample 2

235 Important Value Index The Important Value Index(IVI) is a composite index based on the relative measuresof species frequency abundance and dominance [31] Itindicates the significance of species in the system It iscalculated as follows

IVI ()

= Relative abundance + Relative dominance

+ Relative frequency


Relative abundance

=

Number of individual 119904 of woody speciesTotal number of woody individual 119904

lowast 100

Relative dominance

=

Dominance of woody speciesTotal dominance of all woody species

lowast 100

Relative frequency

=

Frequency of woody speciesFrequency of all woody species

lowast 100

(5)

24 Statistical Analysis Variation in woody species diversitywas tested using one-way ANOVA Significant differences inmean values for woody species diversity were tested by leastsignificance difference at 119875 lt 005 All statistical computa-tions were made using SAS statistical Software version 90[33]

3 Results

31 Characterizing of the Study Area The types of traditionalagroforestry practices found in the study area included scat-tered trees parkland agroforestry home gardens agroforestrypractices and live fences

In Chire Kebele home gardens and parkland agroforestrywere more common than in Erba and Burkitu Live fencetypes of agroforestry were more common in Erba than theother two Kebeles In Burkitu Kebele Mango based homegarden and scattered trees types of agroforestry practiceswerecommon In each study site fruit trees like Mangifera indicaare dominantly found

32 Woody Species Diversity

321 Woody Species Richness Abundance and Frequency Atotal of 55 woody species belonging to 31 families were gath-ered identified and recorded in the traditional agroforestrypractices of the study sites (see Appendix) Forty-seven (47)(85) of these species were indigenous while the remaining 8species (15) were exotic Anacardiaceae Bignoniaceae andMyrtaceae family had the highest number of woody species(7 each) while Apocynaceae Cupressaceae FlacourtiaceaeMeliaceae Papilionoideae Proteaceae Rhamnaceae Santa-laceae and Sapotaceae families had the lowest number ofwoody species (2 each) Highest numbers of woody specieswere recorded at Chire while lowest numbers of species wererecorded at Erba (Table 1)

The woody species richness for Chire was significantly(119875 = 00202) higher than Burkitu and Erba (Table 2)

Table 1 Woody species richness in traditional agroforestry practicein Dellomenna District Southeastern Ethiopia

Kebele Number of species (richness) RankBurkitu 33 2Chire 38 1Erba 28 3

Table 2 Mean woody species richness and abundance per plot oftraditional agroforestry practices in Dellomenna District South-eastern Ethiopia

Kebelessite Richness AbundanceMeans (plusmn STD) Means (plusmn STD)

Burkitu 613 plusmn 103ab 3413 plusmn 484a

Chire 875 plusmn 076a 3213 plusmn 279a

Erba 594 plusmn 031b 3006 plusmn 364a

Overall mean 694 plusmn 17 321 plusmn 389Note Different letter(s) ordered vertically on mean values show a significantdifference at 119875 lt 005 among the three Kebeles

8000

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0001 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53

Woody species

Freq

uenc

y (

)

Figure 2 Frequency occurrences of woody species across tradi-tional agroforestry practices in Dellomenna District SoutheasternEthiopia (for more details see Table 10)

However there was no significant difference inwoody speciesabundance per plot (119875 = 07586) among the three Kebeles

Out of the total 55 woody species found in the areathe dominantly observed species were Croton macrostachyus(6875) followed byMangifera indica (6042) followed byPersea americana (3542) while 20 species had the lowestfrequency (208) (Figure 2)

322 Diversity Indices Shannon-Wienerrsquos diversity indexindicated that Chire Kebele was more diverse than the othertwo Kebeles (Table 3) A similar trend was noticed in terms ofSimpsonrsquos diversity index Shannon evenness (99) indicatedthat the highest homogeneity of woody species was foundin Chire Kebele compared with the other two Kebeles Thelowest Shannon diversity index Simpson diversity index andevenness were recorded in Burkitu Kebele


Table 3 Woody species diversity indices in traditional agroforestrypractice in Dellomenna District Southeastern Ethiopia

Diversity indicesKebele Shannon Simpson EvennessBurkitu 253 090 091Chire 273 093 099Erba 266 092 096

Table 4 Sorensenrsquos similarity index of woody species in tradi-tional agroforestry practice in Dellomenna District SoutheasternEthiopia

Kebele Sorensenrsquos similarity index () land usesite nameBurkitu Chire Erba

Burkitu 507 558Chire 521Erba

Table 5 The five woody species with the highest IVIs in tradi-tional agroforestry practices in Dellomenna District SoutheasternEthiopia

Kebele Scientific name Important Value Index (IVI in )

Burkitu

Croton macrostachyus 2818Annona reticulata 2511Calpurnia aurea 231Mangifera indica 2200Casimiroa edulis 2001

Chire

Mangifera indica 2638Catha edulis 2204

Croton macrostachyus 2192Syzygium guineense 1952Rhus natalensis 1869

Erba

Mangifera indica 3307Croton macrostachyus 3161Entada abyssinica 3014

Catha edulis 2405Rhus natalensis 2027

323 Sorensenrsquos Similarity Index of Woody Species The simi-larity of woody species maintained in the three study Kebeleswas summarized by Sorensenrsquos similarity index (Table 4)Based on the presence and absence of woody species inthe sampled plots the highest similarity in woody speciescomposition was recorded between Burkitu and Erba whilethe lowest woody species similarity was recorded betweenBurkitu and Chire

The Important Value Index (IVI) of all woody speciesin the study Kebeles is listed in Appendix The five woodyspecies with the highest IVIs in each study Kebele are given indescending order in Table 5 The species with the highest IVIwereCrotonmacrostachyus andAnnona reticulata in Burkitu

Mangifera indica andCatha edulis in Chire andM indica andC macrostachyus in Erba

4 Discussion

Woody Species Composition and DiversityThe highest woodyspecies richness in the Chire traditional agroforestry couldbe due to its relatively well organized irrigation activitiescompared with the other study Kebeles The woody speciesrichness of the study area was comparable with another studyin Ethiopia ([34] 64 woody species from Beseku) and lowerthan a study in Nicaragua ([35] 83 tree species) In additionthe woody species richness in this study was lower comparedwith several other studies for example 120 trees and shrubsfrom Sidama in Southern Ethiopia [10] 459 tree and shrubspecies around Mt Kenya in central and eastern Kenya [36]289 woody plants from suburban areas in Sri Lanka [37] and122 trees and shrubs from Northeast India [38]

The number of woody species per plot recorded in thepresent study is less when compared with the earlier report ofKindt [39] from Meru Kenya in which the average numberof species per farm was 54 ranging from 28 to 97 The totaland average number of individual woody species per plotrecorded in the present study is also higher than similar stud-ies reported from other locations For example Kindt et al[40] reported 166 tree species per farm ranging from 157 to175 for western Kenya The higher woody species abundanceper plot in the present study could be because woody speciesabundance largely depends on the planting pattern of thewoody species as reported in home gardens of Sidama [10]

The variation in woody species richness could be dueto site characteristics management strategy socioeconomicfactors [10] and farmersrsquo preferences for tree species andfunctions in different localities [41] For example farmersmaintained many tree and shrub species for environmentalservices like soil and water conservation in the drier regionsof the West African Sahel [41] The frequency of distributionof tree species on farms in the present study was variableAs one would expect tree species with a greater economicor ecological value or both were found to be frequentlydistributed across the farms Mangifera indica was the mostfrequent species occurring in 97 of the sampled farms Itis followed by Croton macrostachyus Entada abyssinica andAnnona reticulateThe low abundance species could indicatethat the population size might be too low to sustain thesespecies within the agroecosystem unless their abundanceis increased as reported by OrsquoNeill et al [42] Since treespecies diversity is required for the long-term survival ofspecies tree integration on farms could be one of the areasfor conservation

Shannonrsquos diversity index of woody species in this studyin traditional agroforestry systems was comparable to thestudy on Kerala garden in India ranging from 112 to 3 [43]Tolera [44] who recorded Shannon diversity index Simpsonindex and evenness as 222 083 and 064 respectively alsocomparable to the present study It is higher than the findingfor Sidama home gardens by Abebe [10] and is comparablewith the findings in the home gardens of Thailand whichranges from 19 to 27 for Shannon index [45]


Table 6 List of woody species in the overall traditional agroforestry practices in Dellomenna District Southeastern Ethiopia

Number Local name Scientific name Family Origin (EI)1 Wanga Acacia oerfota (A nubica) Fabaceae Indigenous2 Karxafa Acacia senegal Celastraceae Indigenous3 Karchofe Albizia gummifera (JFGmel) CA Smith Mimosaceae Indigenous4 Sarara Allophylus abyssinicus (Hochst) Radlk Sapindaceae Indigenous5 Gishta Annona reticulata L Annonaceae Indigenous6 Cheekata Calpurnia aurea (Lam) Benth Fabaceae Indigenous7 Hagamssa Carissa edulis (Forssk) Vahl Apocynaceae Indigenous8 Kasmira Casimiroa edulis La Llave amp Lex Rutaceae Indigenous9 Jimaa Catha edulis (Vahl) Forssk ex Endl Celastraceae Indigenous10 Meteqamma Celtis africana Ulmaceae Indigenous11 Lomii Citrus aurantifolia (Christm) Swingle Rutaceae Indigenous12 Burtukana Citrus sinensis (L) Osbeck Rutaceae Indigenous13 Dhandhaasa Combretum ghasalense Engl amp Diels Combretaceae Indigenous14 Waddessa Cordia africana Lam Boraginaceae Indigenous15 Bakanisa Croton macrostachyusHochst ex Del Euphorbiaceae Indigenous16 Lookoo Diospyros abyssinica (Hiern) White Ebenaceae Indigenous17 Kolati Diospyros mespiliformisHochst ex A Ebenaceae Indigenous18 Ruukeessa Dracaena afromontanaMildbr Agavaceae Indigenous19 Waleensu Erythrina brucei Schweinf Papilionoideae Indigenous20 Ulaagaa Ehretia cymosaThonn Boraginaceae Indigenous21 Kontir Entada abyssinica Steudel ex A Rich Mimosoideae Indigenous22 Nech bahirzaf Eucalyptus globulus Labill Myrtaceae Exotic23 Miheesa Euclea schimperi Ebenaceae Indigenous24 Qiltu Ficus vasta Forssk Moraceae Indigenous25 Muluqaa Filicium decipiens Sapindaceae Indigenous26 Akukkuu Flacourtia indica (Eleusinej) Flacourtiaceae Indigenous27 Grevillea Grevillea robusta Proteaceae Exotic28 Honcho Juniperus procera (Hochst ex Endl) Cupressaceae Indigenous29 Andarku Lannea schimperi Anacardiaceae Indigenous30 Lucinaa Leucaena leucocephala (Lam) de Wit Mimosoideae Exotic31 Mango Mangifera indica L Anacardiaceae Exotic32 Kombolcha Maytenus arbutifolia Celastraceae Indigenous33 Kinin zaf Melia azedarach L Meliaceae Exotic34 Qolati Mimusops kummel Sapotaceae Indigenous35 Onomaa Olea capensis Oleaceae Indigenous36 Gagama Olea capensis subsp macrocarpa Oleaceae Indigenous37 Ejerssaa Olea europaea subsp cuspidata Oleaceae Indigenous38 Waatoo Osyris compressa Decn Santalaceae Indigenous39 Avocado Persea americanaMill Lauraceae Exotic40 Lilluu Piliostigma thonningii (Schum) Caesalpiniaceae Indigenous41 Birbirsa Podocarpus falcatus (Thunb) Podocarpaceae Indigenous42 Zeytuna Psidium guajava L Myrtaceae Exotic43 Dabaqaa Rhus natalensis Anacardiaceae Indigenous44 Koboo Ricinus communis L Euphorbiaceae Indigenous45 Qondabarbere Schinus molle L Anacardiaceae Exotic46 Horoqa Spathodea campanulata (Snilotica) Bignoniaceae Indigenous47 Badeesa Syzygium guineense (Willd) DC Myrtaceae Indigenous48 Hadheessa Teclea nobilis Del Rutaceae Indigenous49 Talarsquoaa Trema orientalis (L) Blume Ulmaceae Indigenous50 Gurbii Triumfetta pentandra A Rich Tiliaceae Indigenous


Table 6 Continued

Number Local name Scientific name Family Origin (EI)51 Ebicha Vernonia amygdalina Del Asteraceae Indigenous52 Rejii Vernonia auriuliferaHiern Asteraceae Indigenous53 Arabee Verprise dainelli Rutaceae Indigenous54 Biftikanafa Warburgia ugandensis Canellaceae Indigenous55 Kankura Ziziphus spp Rhamnaceae IndigenousE exotic I indigenous

Table 7 List of woody species and their Important Value Index in traditional agroforestry of Burkitu Kebele in Dellomenna DistrictSoutheastern Ethiopia

Number Scientific name Family Fre RF AB RAB DBH (cm) RD () IVI1 Annona reticulata L Annonaceae 9 1023 66 1444 1570 044 25112 Calpurnia aurea (Lam) Fabaceae 3 341 90 1969 000 000 23103 Casimiroa edulis La Llave amp Lex Rutaceae 4 455 61 1335 3457 211 20014 Combretum ghasalense Engl Combretaceae 6 682 47 1028 1450 037 17475 Croton macrostachyusHochst Euphorbiaceae 21 2386 7 153 3965 278 28186 Diospyros abyssinica (Hiern) Ebenaceae 1 114 3 066 9013 1437 16177 Diospyros mespiliformisHochst Ebenaceae 3 341 10 219 000 000 5608 Dracaena afromontanaMildbr Agavaceae 3 341 19 416 6880 838 15949 Entada abyssinica Mimosoideae 3 341 23 503 5839 603 144710 Ficus vasta Forssk Moraceae 1 114 1 022 7325 949 108511 Filicium decipiens Sapindaceae 1 114 3 066 6581 766 94612 Flacourtia indica (Eleusinej) Flacourtiaceae 2 227 2 044 6051 648 91913 Lannea schimperi Anacardiaceae 3 341 15 328 000 000 66914 Mangifera indica L Anacardiaceae 10 1136 40 875 3266 189 220015 Maytenus arbutifolia Celastraceae 1 114 1 022 5000 442 57816 Olea capensis Oleaceae 2 227 15 328 000 000 55617 Olea capensis subspmacrocarpa Oleaceae 2 227 3 066 3605 230 52318 Olea europaea subsp cuspidata Oleaceae 1 114 1 022 4500 358 49419 Persea americanaMill Lauraceae 2 227 2 044 3395 204 47520 Piliostigma thonningii (Schum) Caesalpiniaceae 3 341 3 066 827 012 41921 Podocarpus falcatus (Thunb) Podocarpaceae 1 114 1 022 4000 283 41922 Psidium guajava L Myrtaceae 1 114 1 022 3822 258 39423 Rhus natalensis Anacardiaceae 2 227 2 044 1800 057 32824 Rhus natalensis Benth Anacardiaceae 1 114 12 263 000 000 37625 Ricinus communis L Euphorbiaceae 2 227 5 109 000 000 33726 Syzygium guineense (Willd) Myrtaceae 1 114 4 088 000 000 20127 Trema orientalis Ulmaceae 1 114 2 044 1080 021 17828 Triumfetta pentandra A Rich Tiliaceae 1 114 1 022 600 006 14229 Vernonia amygdalina Del Asteraceae 1 114 1 022 000 000 13630 Vernonia auriuliferaHiern Asteraceae 1 114 1 022 000 000 13631 Verprise dainelli Rutaceae 1 114 1 022 000 000 13632 Warburgia ugandensis Canellaceae 1 114 1 022 000 000 13633 Ziziphus spp Rhamnaceae 1 114 1 022 000 000 136Fre frequency RF relative frequency AB abundance RAB relative abundance RD relative dominance


Table 8 List of woody species and their Important Value Index in traditional agroforestry practices in Chire Kebele in Dellomenna DistrictSoutheastern Ethiopia

Number Scientific name Family Fre RF DBH (cm) RD AB RAB IVI1 Acacia senegal Celastraceae 2 1527 00 0 2 040 1932 Albizia gummifera (JFGmel) Mimosaceae 1 0763 210 269 6 121 4663 Allophylus abyssinicus (Hochst) Sapindaceae 1 0763 00 0 1 020 0964 Annona reticulata L Annonaceae 1 0763 125 095 2 040 2125 Calpurnia aurea (Lam)Benth Fabaceae 5 3817 00 0 13 262 6436 Carissa edulis (Forssk)Vahl Apocynaceae 1 0763 00 0 2 040 1177 Catha edulis (Vahl)Forssk ex Endl Celastraceae 7 5344 00 0 83 1670 22048 Combretum ghasalense Engl amp Diels Combretaceae 5 3817 70 03 42 845 12579 Cordia africana Lam Boraginaceae 3 2290 290 514 4 080 82310 Croton macrostachyusHochst ex Del Euphorbiaceae 12 9160 240 35 46 926 219211 Dracaena afromontanaMildbr Agavaceae 4 3053 151 14 17 342 78712 Erythrina brucei Schweinf Papilionoideae 1 0763 380 882 1 020 97913 Ehretia cymosaThonn Boraginaceae 1 0763 70 03 1 020 12614 Entada abyssinica (Steudel) Mimosoideae 10 7634 00 0 50 1006 176915 Euclea schimperi Ebenaceae 3 2290 100 061 7 141 43116 Ficus vasta Forssk Moraceae 1 0763 380 882 1 020 97917 Ficus vasta Forssk Moraceae 1 0763 00 0 2 040 11718 Grevillea robusta Proteaceae 1 0763 00 0 4 080 15719 Juniperus procera (Hochst ex Endl) Cupressaceae 1 0763 00 0 1 020 09620 Mangifera indica L Anacardiaceae 14 10687 152 14 71 1429 263821 Maytenus gracilipes Celastraceae 1 0763 00 0 8 161 23722 Mimusops kummel Sapotaceae 1 0763 0 1 020 09623 Olea capensis subsp macrocarpa Oleaceae 1 0763 90 049 1 020 14624 Olea capensis subspmacrocarpa (O hochstetteri) Oleaceae 1 0763 00 0 1 020 09625 Olea europaea subsp cuspidata Oleaceae 1 0763 510 159 8 161 182326 Osyris compressa Decn Santalaceae 1 0763 00 0 2 040 11727 Persea americanaMill Lauraceae 6 4580 258 407 12 241 110728 Piliostigma thonningii (Schum) Caesalpiniaceae 2 1527 196 235 2 040 42829 Podocarpus falcatus (Thunb) Podocarpaceae 1 0763 80 039 1 020 13630 Psidium guajava L Myrtaceae 3 2290 134 11 3 060 40031 Ricinus communis L Euphorbiaceae 2 1527 93 053 3 060 26632 Spathodea campanulata Bignoniaceae 2 1527 118 085 11 221 45933 Rhus natalensis Anacardiaceae 8 6107 370 836 21 423 187034 Syzygium guineense (Willd) Myrtaceae 11 8397 259 409 35 704 195235 Teclea nobilis Del Rutaceae 1 0763 00 0 2 040 11736 Vernonia amygdalina Del Asteraceae 1 0763 00 0 5 101 17737 Vernonia auriuliferaHiern Asteraceae 7 5344 240 352 13 262 114838 Warburgia ugandensis Canellaceae 1 0763 30 005 2 040 122Fre frequency RF relative frequency RD relative dominancy AB abundance RA relative abundance

The IVI is an aggregate index that summarizes the densityabundance and distribution of a species It measures theoverall importance of a species and gives an indication ofthe ecological success of a species in a particular area Thetree species with the highest IVI recorded in traditional

agroforestry were M indica Entada abyssinica and Cmacrostachyus The IVI values can also be used to prioritizespecies for conservation and specieswith high IVI value needless conservation efforts whereas those having low IVI valueneed high conservation effort


Table 9 List of woody species and their Important Value Index in traditional agroforestry practices in Erba Kebele in Dellomenna DistrictSoutheastern Ethiopia

Number Scientific name Family Fre RF REDBH (cm) RD AB AB IVI

1 Acacia oerfota (A nubica) Fabaceae 1 110 0 0 1 025 1352 Annona reticulata L Annonaceae 8 879 107 058 13 323 12603 Calpurnia aurea (Lam) Fabaceae 1 110 00 0 9 224 3344 Catha edulis (Vahl) Celastraceae 4 440 00 0 79 1965 24055 Celtis africana Ulmaceae 1 110 52 014 1 025 1496 Citrus aurantifolia (Christm) Rutaceae 3 330 90 041 13 323 6947 Citrus sinensis (L) Rutaceae 1 110 120 073 1 025 2088 Combretum ghasalense Engl Combretaceae 1 110 00 0 1 025 1359 Cordia Africana Boraginaceae 1 110 130 086 1 025 22110 Croton macrostachyusHochst Euphorbiaceae 10 1099 375 719 54 1343 316111 Entada abyssinica Mimosoideae 10 1099 00 0 77 1915 301412 Eucalyptus globulus Labill Myrtaceae 1 110 235 282 2 050 44113 Leucaena leucocephala (Lam) Mimosoideae 1 110 55 015 1 025 15014 Mangifera indica L Anacardiaceae 14 1538 158 127 66 1642 330715 Melia azedarach L Meliaceae 3 330 154 120 5 124 57416 Olea europaea (Mill) Oleaceae 1 110 248 314 1 025 44917 Persea americanaMill Lauraceae 5 549 182 170 12 299 101818 Piliostigma thonningii (Schum) Caesalpiniaceae 2 220 126 080 2 050 35019 Psidium guajava L Myrtaceae 4 440 127 083 15 373 89620 Rhus natalensis Anacardiaceae 3 330 555 1573 5 124 202721 Ricinus communis L Euphorbiaceae 1 110 136 094 1 025 22822 Schinus molle L Anacardiaceae 1 110 290 429 1 025 56423 Spathodea campanulata Bignoniaceae 1 110 380 737 1 025 87224 Syzygium guineense (Willd) Myrtaceae 2 220 354 639 5 124 98425 Trema orientalis (L) Blume Ulmaceae 1 110 320 522 1 025 65726 Triumfetta pentandra A Rich Tiliaceae 2 220 00 0 5 124 34427 Vernonia amygdalina Del Asteraceae 1 110 213 231 2 050 39128 Vernonia auriuliferaHiern Asteraceae 1 110 0 0 5 124 234Fre frequency RF relative frequency RD relative dominancy AB abundance RA relative abundance

5 Conclusion and Recommendations

The results of the present study confirm that traditionalagroforestry practices play a major role in the conserva-tion of native woody species like Syzygium guineense andJuniperus procera which are endemic to Ethiopia and thecritically endangered species like Cordia africana and Cmacrostachyus Based on the results obtained from thestudy the following recommendations are offeredThis studyfocused mainly on the assessment of the woody speciesdiversity in traditional agroforestry practices hence in-depthassessment of all natural habitats is important to quantifythe status of native woody species in the area Creatingawareness at the grass roots level about wise utilization of

the woody species in the area is crucial in order to preventthe loss of valuable tree species The governmental andnongovernmental organizations should promote differentagroforestry practices to conserve indigenous woody speciesthrough circa situm conservation

Appendix

See Tables 6 7 8 and 9

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper


Table 10 Legend of Figure 2

Number Scientific name1 Croton macrostachyus2 Mangifera indica3 Persea americana4 Entada abyssinica5 Syzygium guineense6 Rhus natalensis7 Annona reticulata8 Catha edulis9 Vernonia auriulifera10 Flacourtia indica11 Psidium guajava12 Calpurnia aurea13 Combretum ghasalense14 Dracaena afromontana15 Olea europaea16 Piliostigma thonningii17 Triumfetta pentandra18 Cordia africana19 Podocarpus falcatus20 Ricinus communis21 Vernonia amygdalina22 Verprise dainelli23 Dracaena afromontana24 Citrus aurantifolia25 Euclea schimperi26 Ficus vasta Forssk27 Filicium decipiens28 Lannea schimperi29 Maytenus arbutifolia30 Melia azedarach31 Acacia senegal32 Casimiroa edulis33 Mimusops kummel34 Olea capensis35 Olea capensis subsp macrocarpa36 Spathodea campanulata (Snilotica)37 Trema orientalis38 Warburgia ugandensis39 Ziziphus spp40 Acacia oerfota41 Albizia gummifera42 Allophylus abyssinicus43 Carissa edulis44 Celtis africana45 Citrus sinensis46 Diospyros abyssinica47 Erythrina brucei48 Ehretia cymosa49 Eucalyptus globulus50 Grevillea robusta51 Juniperus procera

Table 10 Continued

Number Scientific name52 Leucaena leucocephala53 Osyris compressa54 Schinus molle55 Teclea nobilis

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to Madda Walabu University forfinancial support for the research work The authors alsothank Dellomenna District Pastoral Development Office fortheir cooperation during the field work They also acknowl-edge the development agents of the three Kebeles for theircooperation and farmers who opened the gates of their farmland as well as those people who provided their supportsdirectly or indirectly for the successful accomplishment ofthis research

References

[1] Ministry of Mines and Energy (MoME) Geological Survey ofEthiopia Industrial Minerals and Rocks Resource Potentials ofEthiopia Ministry ofMines and Energy (MoME) Addis AbabaEthiopia 2003

[2] E Feoli L G Vuerich and Z Woldu ldquoProcesses of envi-ronmental degradation and opportunities for rehabilitation inAdwa Northern Ethiopiardquo Landscape Ecology vol 17 no 4 pp315ndash325 2002

[3] B Bishaw and Z Asfaw Water Resources Management inEthiopia Implications for the Nile Basin Hydrological andRelated Aspects of Deforestation and Degradation of WoodyVegetation Cambria Press Amherst NY USA 2010

[4] ICRAF ldquoAgroforestry potentials for the Ethiopian highlandsrdquoWorking Paper International Centre for research in Agro-forestry (ICRAF) Nairobi Kenya 1997

[5] P K Shukla ldquoNutrient dynamics of tea plantations and theirimpact on soil productivitymdasha case study from Indiardquo inProceedings of the 8th World Forestry Congress pp 1ndash11 BuenosAires Argentina October 2009

[6] B Manjur T Abebe and A Abdulkadir ldquoEffects of scatteredF albida (Del) and C macrostachyus (Lam) tree species onkey soil physicochemical properties and grain yield of Maize(ZeaMays) a case study at umbuloWacho watershed southernEthiopiardquoWudpecker Journal of Agricultural Research vol 3 no3 pp 63ndash73 2014

[7] G Kewessa L Tiki and A Molla ldquoEffects of Hypericumrevolutum (Vahl) tree on major soil nutrients and on selectedsoil physico-chemical properties in Goba District OromiaEthiopiardquoWudpecker Journal of Agricultural Research vol 4 no1 pp 6ndash13 2015

[8] GD Schroth G A B Fonseca C AHarvey C Gascon andHANVasconcelosAgroforestry and Biodiversity Conservation inTropical Landscapes Island Press Washington DC USA 2004

[9] Z AsfawTree species diversity top soil conditions and arbuscularmycorrhizal association in the Sidama traditional agroforestryland-use Southern Ethiopia [PhD dissertation] Swedish Uni-versity of Agriculture Uppsala Sweden 2003


[10] T AbebeDiversity in homegarden agroforestry systems in South-ern Ethiopia [PhD thesis] Wageningen University Wagenin-gen The Netherlands 2005

[11] C A Harvey and W A Haber ldquoRemnant trees and the con-servation of biodiversity in Costa Rican pasturesrdquo AgroforestrySystems vol 44 no 1 pp 37ndash68 1998

[12] I K Dawson A Lengkeek J C Weber and R JamnadassldquoManaging genetic variation in tropical trees linking knowl-edge with action in agroforestry ecosystems for improvedconservation and enhanced livelihoodsrdquo Biodiversity and Con-servation vol 18 no 4 pp 969ndash986 2009

[13] I K Dawson M R Guariguata J Loo et al ldquoWhat is therelevance of smallholdersrsquo agroforestry systems for conservingtropical tree species and genetic diversity in circa situm in situand ex situ settings A reviewrdquo Biodiversity and Conservationvol 22 no 2 pp 301ndash324 2013

[14] J A McNeely ldquoNature vs nurture managing relationshipsbetween forests agroforestry and wild biodiversityrdquo Agro-forestry Systems vol 61 pp 155ndash165 2004

[15] C A Harvey J Gonzalez and E Somarriba ldquoDung beetle andterrestrial mammal diversity in forests indigenous agroforestrysystems and plantain monocultures in Talamanca Costa RicardquoBiodiversity and Conservation vol 15 no 2 pp 555ndash585 2006

[16] V S Singh andD N Pandey ldquoMultifunctional agroforestry sys-tems in India science-based policy optionsrdquo RSPCBOccasionalPaper 42011 2011

[17] S Feyera Biodiversity and Ecology of Afromontane Rainforestwith Wild Coffee Arabica L Populations in Ethiopia Ecologyand Development Series no 38 Cuvillier Gottingen Germany2006

[18] W Tadesse and S Feyera Sustainable Management and Pro-motion of Forest Coffee in Bale Ethiopia Bale Eco-RegionSustainable Management Program SOS SahelFARM-AfricaAddis Ababa Ethiopia 2008

[19] A Worku Status of traditional agroforestry and its futurepotential development as buffer zone agroforestry for the naturalforest conservation in burkitu peasant association OromiaEthiopia [MS thesis] Hawassa UniversityWondoGenet Collegof Forestry andNatural Resources Sheshamane Ethiopia 2009

[20] A S Salim A J Simons C Orwa J Chege B Owuorand A Mutua Agroforestry Database A Tree Species Referenceand Selection Guide Version 20 World Agroforestry CentreNairobi Kenya 2002

[21] A Bekele Useful Trees and Shrubs for Ethiopia RSCU NairobiKenya 1993

[22] A Bekele Useful Trees of Ethiopia Identification Propagationand Management in 17 Agro-Ecological Zones RELMA inICRAF Project Nairobi Kenya 2007

[23] S Edwards T Mesfin and Hedberg Flora of Ethiopia andEritrea Vol 2 Part 2 The National Herbarium Addis AbabaUniversity Addis Ababa Ethiopia Department of SystematicBotany Uppsala University Uppsala Sweden 1995

[24] I Hedberg B Friis and S Edwards Flora of Ethiopia andEritrea Vol 5 Part 2 Asteraceae (Compositae) The NationalHerbarium Addis Ababa University Addis Ababa EthiopiaDepartment of Systematic Botany Uppsala University UppsalaSweden 2004

[25] I Hedberg E Kelbessa S Edwards S Demissiew and EPersson Flora of Ethiopia and Eritrea vol 7 of Gentianaceaeto Cyclocheilaceae The National Herbarium Addis AbabaUniversity Addis Ababa Ethiopia Department of SystematicBotany Uppsala University Uppsala Sweden 2006

[26] K G Mac Diken A Guide to Monitoring Carbon Storagein Forestry and Agroforestry Prooects Winrock InternationalArlington Va USA 1997

[27] M Segura M Kanninen and D Suarez ldquoAllometric modelsfor estimating aboveground biomass of shade trees and coffeebushes grown togetherrdquo Agroforestry Systems vol 68 no 2 pp143ndash150 2006

[28] R P Hernandez P Koohafkan and J AntoineAssessing CarbonStocks andModelingWin-Win Scenarios of Carbon Sequestrationthrough Land-Use Changes Food and Agriculture Organizationof the United Nations Rome Italy 2004

[29] C J Krebs Ecological Methodology vol 2nd Addison WesleyLongman Menlo Park Calif USA 1999

[30] C J Krebs The Experimental Analysis of Distribution andAbundance Harper amp Row Publishers New York NY USA1985

[31] M Kent and P Coker Vegetation Description and Analysis APractical Approach Belhaven Press London UK 1992

[32] A E Magurran Ecological Diversity and Its MeasurementCroom Helm London UK 1988

[33] SAS (Statistical Analysis Software) SAS Userrsquos Guide Ver-sion 160 GLM-VARCOMP SAS Institute Incorporation GaryNorth Carolina 4th edition 2004

[34] M Tolera Z Asfaw M Lemenih and E Karltun ldquoWoodyspecies diversity in a changing landscape in the south-centralhighlands of Ethiopiardquo Agriculture Ecosystems and Environ-ment vol 128 no 1-2 pp 52ndash58 2008

[35] V E Mendez R Lok and E Somarriba ldquoInterdisciplinaryanalysis of homegardens in Nicaragua micro-zonation plantuse and socioeconomic importancerdquo Agroforestry Systems vol51 no 2 pp 85ndash96 2001

[36] Z Oginosako P Simitu C Orwa and S Mathenge ldquoAre theycompeting or compensating on farm Status of indigenous andexotic tree species in a wide range of agro-ecological zones ofEastern and Central Kenya surrounding Mt Kenyardquo ICRAFWorking Paper 16 World Agroforestry Centre Nairobi Kenya2006

[37] M A Sandya Kumari Plant diversity in home gardens and itscontribution to household economy in Suburban areas in SriLanka [MS thesis] Mahidol University SalayaThailand 2009

[38] T Das and A K Das ldquoInventorying plant biodiversity inhomegardens a case study in Barak Valley Assam North EastIndiardquo Current Science vol 89 no 1 pp 155ndash163 2005

[39] R Kindt Methodology for tree species diversification planningfor African agroecosystems [PhD thesis] Faculty of Agriculturaland Applied Biological Sciences Ghent Belgium 2002

[40] R Kindt A J Simons and P V Damme ldquoDo farm characteris-tics explain differences in tree species diversity among westernKenyan farmsrdquo Agroforestry Systems vol 63 no 1 pp 63ndash742005

[41] MD Faye J CWeber T A Abasse et al ldquoFarmersrsquo preferencesfor tree functions and species in theWest African Sahelrdquo ForestsTrees and Livelihoods vol 20 no 2-3 pp 113ndash136 2011

[42] G A OrsquoNeill I K Dawson C Sotelo-Montes et al ldquoStrategiesfor genetic conservation of trees in the PeruvianAmazon basinrdquoBiodiversity and Conservation vol 10 no 6 pp 837ndash850 2001

[43] B Mohan Kumar S J George and S Chinnamani ldquoDiversitystructure and standing stock of wood in the homegardens ofKerala in peninsular Indiardquo Agroforestry Systems vol 25 no 3pp 243ndash262 1994


[44] M Tolera Woody species diversity of agricultural land scapes inArsi Negelle District Ethiopia impact for biodiversity conserva-tion [MS thesis]WondoGenet College of Forestry andNaturalResource Hawassa University Awasa Ethiopia 2006

[45] N Gajaseni and J Gajaseni ldquoEcological rationalities of thetraditional homegarden system in the Chao Phraya BasinThailandrdquo Agroforestry Systems vol 46 no 1 pp 3ndash23 1999

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Anatomy Research International

PeptidesInternational Journal of


Hindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom

International Journal of

Volume 2014

Zoology


Molecular Biology International

GenomicsInternational Journal of


The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014


BioinformaticsAdvances in

Marine BiologyJournal of



Signal TransductionJournal of


BioMed Research International

Evolutionary BiologyInternational Journal of



Biochemistry Research International

ArchaeaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014


Genetics Research International


Advances in

Virolog y

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Nucleic AcidsJournal of

Volume 2014

Stem CellsInternational



Enzyme Research



Microbiology


agroforestry practices include coffee shade tree systemsscattered trees on the farm land home gardens woodlotsfarm boundary practices and trees on grazing lands [9 10]Adjoining habitats that are more similar to the remnants interms of structure and floristic composition are the mostbeneficial to the long-term preservation of biodiversity [8] Inaddition to supporting native species of plants and animalsagroforestry areas may contribute to the conservation ofbiodiversity by increasing the connectivity of populationscommunities and ecological processes in fragmented land-scapes [11]

Agroforestry systems may maintain considerableintraspecific genetic variation at the landscape level andthis variation is essential for adaptation to changes inenvironmental conditions [12] Agroforestry systems serveas in situ conservation areas for many species that farmersvalue and therefore wish to conserve [13] The mechanismsby which traditional agroforestry systems contribute tobiodiversity have been examined by various authors [8 14ndash16] The same authors indicated that agroforestry plays fivemajor roles in conserving biodiversity (1) provides habitatfor species that can tolerate a certain level of disturbance (2)helps to preserve germ-plasm of sensitive species (3) helps toreduce the rates of conversion of natural habitat by providinga more productive sustainable alternative to traditionalagricultural systems that may involve clearing naturalhabitats (4) provides connectivity by creating corridorsbetween habitat remnants which may support the integrityof these remnants and the conservation of area-sensitivefloral and faunal species and (5) helps to conserve biologicaldiversity by providing other ecosystem services such aserosion control and water recharge thereby preventing thedegradation and loss of surrounding habitat Agroforestrypractices are the main option to reduce these problems Inthe study area (Dellomenna District) farmers have beenpracticing different traditional agroforestry practices byintegrating different woody perennials crops and livestockcomponents in their lands These traditional agroforestrypractices constitute perennial and herbaceous plants thatmay promote biodiversity conservation and socioeconomicalternatives to local communities However the contributionof these traditional agroforestry practices on biodiversityconservation has not been studied so far in DellomennaDistrict Therefore this study was initiated to investigatestatus of woody species diversity in traditional agroforestrypractices of Dellomenna District with particular emphasison maintaining native woody species

2 Materials and Methods

21 The Study Area

Location Dellomenna District is one of the districts found inBale Zone Southeast Ethiopia Geographically it lies between6∘401015840ndash7∘101015840N and 39∘301015840ndash40∘ E (Figure 1) The districtcomprises 14 Kebeleswith a total area of 461665 hectares It is

bordered in the west by Harenna-Buluk District in the eastby Berbere and Guradamole Districts in the North by GobaDistrict and in the South by Madda Walabu District [17]

Topography and Climate The area is characterized by flatlands and moderately steep rolling hills with valley bottomsThe altitude of the district ranges within 1000ndash2500 metersabove sea level It has two agroclimatic zones where 867is ldquoKollardquo (dry hot tropical climate) while the remaining133 is ldquoWoina Degardquo (moist to humid warm subtropicalclimate) The rainfall pattern in the area is the bimodaltype that is middle of March to end of May (short rainseason) and September to October (the main rainy season)Annual rainfall ranges within 700ndash1200mm The averagetemperature for Dellomenna is 18∘C [17]

Population and Means of Livelihood The total population ofDellomenna District is 96161 with a population density of21 personskm2 [18] There are various sources of livelihoodand income for local communities living in the districtTheseinclude Coffee arabica honey Catha edulis crops livestockproduction timber and other nontimber forest productsThese products serve either for household consumption or forcash income or both For example honey Catha edulis andcoffee are exclusively for income and field crops and livestockare mainly for household consumption

Land Use The land use categories of this district are forestagriculture grazing land and settlement [17] According toTadesse and Feyera [18] natural forest and woodlands stillaccount for the largest share of the land use types in thedistrict Despite its large coverage natural forest in Del-lomenna District is under pressure by humans Agriculturalexpansion settlement overgrazing forest fire and intensivemanagement of coffee in the forest are themajor threats to thenatural forest Tef (Eragrostis tef (Zucc) Trotter) maize (Zeamays) sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L) and haricot bean arethe major field crops grown in the district Fruits like mango(Mangifera indica) banana (Musa species) papaya (Caricapapaya) avocado Annona muricata and Psidium guajavaare common in the area Vegetables including cabbagecarrot pepper onion Irish potato and sweet potato (Ipomoeabatatas) are also grown in the area [18] Various types oftraditional agroforestry practices are also observed in thearea These include home garden and multipurpose treeson the farm land and farm boundary agrosilvopastoral andsilvopastoral [19]

22 Data Collection Methods

221 Sampling Techniques Systematic sampling methodswere employed during the course of this study The sam-pling procedures focused on identification of areas havingtraditional agroforestry practices Accordingly three studysites were selected Burkitu Chire and Erba Kebele wereselected Finally based on the topography or the gradient land


0 10 20 40 60 80

(km)

560000

560000

590000

590000

620000

620000

650000

650000

680000

680000

680000680000

660000 660000

700000 700000

720000 720000

740000 740000


Kebeles


N










23 Data Analysis



1198671015840

= minus

119878

sum

119894=1

119901119894ln119901119894 (1)





119864 =

1198671

119867max=

1198671

ln 119878=

sum119878

119894=1

119901119894ln119901119894

ln 119878with 119867max == ln 119878 (2)





119863 = 1 minussum1199012

119894

(3)







following formula

119878119904=

2119886

2119886 + 119887 + 119888

(4)




IVI ()




Relative abundance

=


lowast 100

Relative dominance

=


lowast 100

Relative frequency

=


lowast 100

(5)


3 Results














8000

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0001 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53

Woody species

Freq

uenc

y (

)













Burkitu


Chire



Erba






4 Discussion









Table 6 Continued
















Appendix







Table 10 Continued


Acknowledgments


References























































Volume 2014

Zoology






















Advances in

Virolog y



Volume 2014




Enzyme Research



Microbiology


0 10 20 40 60 80

(km)

560000

560000

590000

590000

620000

620000

650000

650000

680000

680000

680000680000

660000 660000

700000 700000

720000 720000

740000 740000


Kebeles


N










23 Data Analysis



1198671015840

= minus

119878

sum

119894=1

119901119894ln119901119894 (1)





119864 =

1198671

119867max=

1198671

ln 119878=

sum119878

119894=1

119901119894ln119901119894

ln 119878with 119867max == ln 119878 (2)





119863 = 1 minussum1199012

119894

(3)







following formula

119878119904=

2119886

2119886 + 119887 + 119888

(4)




IVI ()




Relative abundance

=


lowast 100

Relative dominance

=


lowast 100

Relative frequency

=


lowast 100

(5)


3 Results














8000

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0001 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53

Woody species

Freq

uenc

y (

)













Burkitu


Chire



Erba






4 Discussion









Table 6 Continued
















Appendix







Table 10 Continued


Acknowledgments


References























































Volume 2014

Zoology






















Advances in

Virolog y



Volume 2014




Enzyme Research



Microbiology



23 Data Analysis



1198671015840

= minus

119878

sum

119894=1

119901119894ln119901119894 (1)





119864 =

1198671

119867max=

1198671

ln 119878=

sum119878

119894=1

119901119894ln119901119894

ln 119878with 119867max == ln 119878 (2)





119863 = 1 minussum1199012

119894

(3)







following formula

119878119904=

2119886

2119886 + 119887 + 119888

(4)




IVI ()




Relative abundance

=


lowast 100

Relative dominance

=


lowast 100

Relative frequency

=


lowast 100

(5)


3 Results














8000

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0001 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53

Woody species

Freq

uenc

y (

)













Burkitu


Chire



Erba






4 Discussion









Table 6 Continued
















Appendix







Table 10 Continued


Acknowledgments


References























































Volume 2014

Zoology






















Advances in

Virolog y



Volume 2014




Enzyme Research



Microbiology


Relative abundance

=


lowast 100

Relative dominance

=


lowast 100

Relative frequency

=


lowast 100

(5)


3 Results














8000

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0001 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53

Woody species

Freq

uenc

y (

)













Burkitu


Chire



Erba






4 Discussion









Table 6 Continued
















Appendix







Table 10 Continued


Acknowledgments


References























































Volume 2014

Zoology






















Advances in

Virolog y



Volume 2014




Enzyme Research



Microbiology









Burkitu


Chire



Erba






4 Discussion









Table 6 Continued
















Appendix







Table 10 Continued


Acknowledgments


References























































Volume 2014

Zoology






















Advances in

Virolog y



Volume 2014




Enzyme Research



Microbiology





Table 6 Continued
















Appendix







Table 10 Continued


Acknowledgments


References























































Volume 2014

Zoology






















Advances in

Virolog y



Volume 2014




Enzyme Research



Microbiology


Table 6 Continued
















Appendix







Table 10 Continued


Acknowledgments


References























































Volume 2014

Zoology






















Advances in

Virolog y



Volume 2014




Enzyme Research



Microbiology













Appendix







Table 10 Continued


Acknowledgments


References























































Volume 2014

Zoology






















Advances in

Virolog y



Volume 2014




Enzyme Research



Microbiology








Appendix







Table 10 Continued


Acknowledgments


References























































Volume 2014

Zoology






















Advances in

Virolog y



Volume 2014




Enzyme Research



Microbiology




Table 10 Continued


Acknowledgments


References























































Volume 2014

Zoology






















Advances in

Virolog y



Volume 2014




Enzyme Research



Microbiology














































Volume 2014

Zoology






















Advances in

Virolog y



Volume 2014




Enzyme Research



Microbiology











Volume 2014

Zoology






















Advances in

Virolog y



Volume 2014




Enzyme Research



Microbiology








Volume 2014

Zoology






















Advances in

Virolog y



Volume 2014




Enzyme Research



Microbiology

Documents

Research Article Woody Species Diversity in Traditional ...downloads.hindawi.com/archive/2015/643031.pdfe Sorensen coe cient of similarity ( )isgivenbythe following formula: = 2 2