EFEITOS DA COBERTURA DO SOLO NA ABUNDÂNCIA E RIQUEZA DE REGENERANTES EM TRATAMENTOS DE RESTAURAÇÃO NO BIOMA MATA ATLÂNTICA

Luz, Alexia Rodrigues Campos; Massi, Klécia Gili; Pocius, Olidan; Campos, Marina Merlo Sampaio de; Santiami, Edson Luís

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Scientific Article • Rev. Árvore 48 • 2024 • https://doi.org/10.53661/1806-9088202448263729 copiar

EFEITOS DA COBERTURA DO SOLO NA ABUNDÂNCIA E RIQUEZA DE REGENERANTES EM TRATAMENTOS DE RESTAURAÇÃO NO BIOMA MATA ATLÂNTICA

Autoria SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

RESUMO

Há suficientes evidências de que os resultados de um programa de restauração dependem em grande parte do contexto da paisagem. Os usos e coberturas prévios da terra e a paisagem devem ser considerados nos projetos de restauração, pois influenciam todo o processo, especialmente na dispersão de sementes e na regeneração natural das áreas. Neste trabalho verificou-se o efeito da paisagem (uso do solo) no sucesso da restauração em áreas de plantio total, semeadura direta e de regeneração natural no bioma Mata Atlântica, sudeste do Brasil. A metodologia baseou-se em unidades demonstrativas de restauração, com foco nos indicadores de riqueza e abundância de regenerantes, juntamente com dados de uso e cobertura da terra das áreas entre os anos de 2010, 2015 e 2020, obtidos das Coleções MapBiomas. Aplicou-se modelos lineares generalizados e análise de correlação entre os dados. Nossa hipótese era que uma paisagem com mais cobertura florestal e de regeneração natural (mosaico de agricultura e pastagem) afetariam positivamente os regenerantes em locais restaurados, o que observamos apenas em áreas de tratamento de regeneração natural. Nos locais de restauração ativa, o mosaico de agricultura e pastagem foi negativamente associado e o uso agricultura foi positivamente associado aos regenerantes. Encontramos maior abundância e riqueza de regenerantes em locais de regeneração natural do que semeadura direta e plantio de mudas. A influência da paisagem, nomeadamente do mosaico, desempenhou um papel crucial neste sucesso. Além disso, o uso da terra, conforme observamos nos últimos cinco e dez anos, explicou os regenerantes nos locais estudados. Assim, os resultados mostram que o contexto paisagístico e o histórico anterior de uso do solo são essenciais para compreender as limitações à sucessão e definir estratégias de restauração custo-efetivas.

Palavras-Chave:
Uso do solo; Regeneração; Paisagem do entorno

Table 1 Demonstration units (DUs), your average central coordinate and its hydrographic basin, climate, biome, soil, land use and relief in studied sites of Conservador da Mantiqueira restoration program, southeast Brazil.

DUs	Hydrographic basin	Climate	Biome	Soil	Land use	Relief
Cruzeiro (22°39’00’’S, 44°57’12’’ W)	Rio Paraíba do Sul	Cfa	Atlantic rainforest	Red-yellow Latosols	Agriculture (pasture), urban areas, native vegetation	Hilly to mountains (15 a 24 degrees)
Inconfidentes (22°18’23’’S, 46°19’47’’W)	Rio Grande	Cwb	Atlantic rainforest	Latosols, Gleysols, Cambisols	Agriculture (pasture and coffee), urban areas, native vegetation	Hilly to mountains
Machado (21°42’11’’S, 45°52’55’’W)	Rio Grande	Cwb	Atlantic rainforest	Red-yellow Latosols and Dystrophic red Latosols	Agriculture (pasture and coffee), urban areas, native vegetation	Hilly to mountains (8 to 45%)
Muzambinho (21°20’55’’S, 46°32’05’’W)	Rio Grande	Cwb	Atlantic rainforest	Dystrophic red Latosols	Agriculture (pasture and coffee), urban areas, native vegetation	Hilly to mountains (8 to 45%)
Piracicaba (22°48’13’’S, 47°48’31’’O)	Rio Piracicaba	Aw	Atlantic rainforest	Red-yellow Argisols and Neosols	Agriculture (sugar cane), urban areas	Flat

Table 2 Average percentage cover of forest, mosaic and farming in 2020, in the last five and ten years in natural regeneration, seedling planting and seed sowing treatments in Conservador da Mantiqueira restoration program, southeast Brazil.

	Natural regeneration	Seedling planting	Seed sowing
Forest 2020	10.03	12.45	8.97
Forest in the last 5 years	0.07	0.14	-0.51
Forest in the last 10 years	-0.26	-0.02	-1.33
Mosaic 2020	29.80	31.23	29.82
Mosaic in the last 5 years	2.61	3.60	3.56
Mosaic in the last 10 years	-1.50	-0.67	-0.64
Farming 2020	33.71	28.86	35.28
Farming in the last 5 years	-2.83	-3.82	-3.11
Farming in the last 10 years	1.01	0.28	1.23
Regenerants density	18.38	9.28	11.20
Regenerants richness	3.20	1.85	2.60

Table 3 Regenerant density (A, B and C) and richness (D, E and F) of the natural regeneration treatment (A and D), seedling planting (B and E) and seed sowing (C and F). Full and Reduced models. P-values <0.05 represent significant variables.

	Forest				Mosaic				Farming
	Full		Reduced		Full		Reduced		Full		Reduced
Predictors	Estimates	p	Estimates	p	Estimates	p	Estimates	p	Estimates	p	Estimates	p
Predictors	(SE)		(SE)		(SE)		(SE)		(SE)		(SE)
A
(Intercept)	2.71	<.001	2.72	<.001	2.63	<.001	2.65	<.001	2.65	<.001	2.65	<.001
(Intercept)	(0.21)		(0.20)		(0.17)		(0.17)		(0.20)		(0.18)
2020 (current)	-0.30	0.413			0.20	0.499			0.52	0.523	0.45	0.056
2020 (current)	(0.37)				(0.30)				(0.81)		(0.24)
5 years	-0.42	0.436	-0.64	0.089	0.46	0.171	0.70	<.001	-0.91	0.051	-0.88	<.001
5 years	(0.53)		(0.38)		(0.33)		(0.19)		(0.47)		(0.21)
10 years	0.72	<.001	0.71	0.002	-0.33	0.17			-0.06	0.914
10 years	(0.22)		(0.23)		(0.24)				(0.52)
Observations	21		21		21		21		21		21
Nagelkerke's R2	0.60		0.56		0.82		0.76		0.76		0.76
p-value	0.011		0.006		< .001		< .001		0.001		< .001
B
(Intercept)	2.29	<.001	2.23	<.001	1.51	<.001	1.50	<.001	1.62	<.001	1.73	<.001
(Intercept)	(0.26)		(0.28)		(0.37)		(0.36)		(0.33)		(0.36)
2020 (current)	-0.61	0.070			-1.35	0.004	-1.24	0.002	3.01	<.001	1.47	<.001
2020 (current)	(0.34)				(0.47)		(0.40)		(0.85)		(0.21)
5 years	0.70	0.184			0.16	0.765			-0.04	0.882
5 years	(0.53)				(0.53)				(0.26)
10 years	-0.43	0.284	-0.06	0.843	-0.79	0.048	-0.92	<.001	-1.51	0.068
10 years	(0.40)		(0.29)		(0.40)		(0.26)		(0.83)
Observations	21		21		21		21		21		21
Nagelkerke's R2	0.09		0.004		0.72		0.72		0.70		0.62
p-value	0.710		0.854		0.002		< .001		0.002		< .001
C
(Intercept)	2.37	<.001	2.41	<.001	2.31	<.001	2.34	<.001	2.29	<.001	2.31	<.001
(Intercept)	(0.23)		(0.20)		(0.21)		(0.20)		(0.23)		(0.21)
2020 (current)	-0.62	0.070			-0.44	0.511			1.24	0.060	0.55	0.002
2020 (current)	(0.34)				(0.67)				(0.66)		(0.18)
5 years	0.73	0.238			0.45	0.438			-0.93	0.017	-0.55	<.001
5 years	(0.62)				(0.58)				(0.39)		(0.16)
10 years	-0.22	0.606	0.08	0.717	-0.07	0.849	-0.43	<.001	-0.60	0.247
10 years	(0.43)		(0.22)		(0.39)		(0.12)		(0.52)
Observations	21		21		21		21		21		21
Nagelkerke's R2	0.14		0.012		0.34		0.27		0.43		0.38
p-value	0.556		0.681		0.134		0.037		0.061		0.042
D
(Intercept)	1.11	<.001	1.11	<.001	1.11	<.001	1.11	<.001	1.09	<.001	1.12	<.001
(Intercept)	(0.15)		(0.14)		(0.14)		(0.13)		(0.13)		(0.13)
2020 (current)	-0.45	0.110	-0.33	0.079	-0.10	0.694			0.80	0.170
2020 (current)	(0.28)		(0.19)		(0.25)				(0.59)
5 years	0.16	0.570			0.43	0.072	0.33	0.006	-0.71	0.073	-0.31	0.010
5 years	(0.27)				(0.24)		(0.12)		(0.40)		(0.12)
10 years	0.29	0.070	0.32	0.007	0.10	0.654			-0.53	0.153
10 years	(0.16)		(0.12)		(0.22)				(0.37)
Observations	21		21		21		21		21		21
Nagelkerke's R2	0.41		0.39		0.39		0.38		0.51		0.31
p-value	0.067		0.034		0.077		0.010		0.024		0.022
E
(Intercept)	0.58	0.014	0.62	0.004	0.28	0.271	0.28	0.247	0.39	0.109	0.43	0.056
(Intercept)	(0.24)		(0.21)		(0.26)		(0.24)		(0.24)		(0.22)
2020 (current)	-0.19	0.614			-0.71	0.073	-0.71	0.016	1.16	0.087	0.65	<.001
2020 (current)	(0.37)				(0.40)		(0.30)		(0.68)		(0.20)
5 years	0.50	0.400			-0.003	0.994			0.07	0.651
5 years	(0.59)				(0.35)				(0.16)
10 years	-0.39	0.309	-0.09	0.629	-0.54	0.067	-0.54	0.002	-0.47	0.506
10 years	(0.39)		(0.19)		(0.30)		(0.17)		(0.71)
Observations	21		21		21		21		21		21
Nagelkerke's R2	0.15		0.02		0.67		0.67		0.64		0.59
p-value	0.432		0.578		< .001		< .001		0.002		< .001
F
(Intercept)	0.92	<.001	0.94	<.001	0.89	<.001	0.91	<.001	0.92	<.001	0.92	<.001
(Intercept)	(0.19)		(0.17)		(0.17)		(0.17)		(0.20)		(0.17)
2020 (current)	0.09	0.842			-0.45	0.285			0.41	0.583
2020 (current)	(0.47)				(0.42)				(0.75)
5 years	-0.57	0.295	-0.08	0.606	0.70	0.124	0.27	0.024	-0.41	0.246	-0.21	0.201
5 years	(0.55)		(0.16)		(0.46)		(0.12)		(0.35)		(0.16)
10 years	0.46	0.111			0.34	0.391			-0.24	0.617
10 years	(0.29)				(0.40)				(0.48)
Observations	21		21		21		21		21		21
Nagelkerke's R2	0.18		0.02		0.32		0.23		0.19		0.13
p-value	0.394		0.553		0.127		0.050		0.357		0.149

Sociedade de Investigações Florestais Universidade Federal de Viçosa, CEP: 36570-900 - Viçosa - Minas Gerais - Brazil, Tel: (55 31) 3612-3959 - Viçosa - MG - Brazil
E-mail: rarvore@sif.org.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] *Corresponding author.