Efecto de las plantaciones forestales no nativas de pinos y eucaliptos en los vertebrados terrestres: Una revisión descriptiva sobre los trabajos realizados en la Argentina

Alejandro A. Schaaf; Juan M. Nadalino Rioja; Juan I. Reppucci; Román A. Ruggera

doi:10.25260/EA.24.34.3.0.2390

Authors

Alejandro A. Schaaf Grupo de Ecología Urbana y de Disturbios-Instituto de Ecorregiones Andinas (INECOA-CONICET UNJu). Cátedra de Diversidad Biológica III, Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Universidad Nacional de Jujuy. San Salvador de Jujuy, Argentina
Juan M. Nadalino Rioja Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Universidad Nacional de Jujuy. San Salvador de Jujuy, Argentina
Juan I. Reppucci Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET). Jaguares en el Límite. Administración de Parques Nacionales-Delegación Regional Noroeste (APN-DRNOA). Salta, Argentina
Román A. Ruggera Grupo de Ecología Urbana y de Disturbios-Instituto de Ecorregiones Andinas (INECOA-CONICET UNJu). Cátedra de Diversidad Biológica III, Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Universidad Nacional de Jujuy. San Salvador de Jujuy, Argentina

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.24.34.3.0.2390

Keywords:

anthropic activities, ecoregions, native fauna, Neotropics

Abstract

Monospecific plantations with non-native trees increased in recent decades in different regions around the world. In particular, in Argentina, this type of production is being encouraged, causing a replacement of the native landscape and potentially affecting different groups of animals. For this reason, we conducted a literature review of what is known, and the gaps in information, on the effects of non-native pine and eucalyptus plantations on terrestrial vertebrates in different ecoregions of Argentina. We found a total of 34 published articles, 48% of which focused specifically on the role of pine and eucalyptus plantations on vertebrates. Birds and medium and large terrestrial mammals were the most studied taxonomic groups, mainly in the Atlantic and Patagonian forests. Regarding the effects, the most reported were a decrease in richness, changes in species composition and reduced use of non-native plantations by different vertebrate groups. The type of plantation management, especially with regard to the conservation and connectivity with the native forest, would be key to reducing the negative impact on vertebrate species. Additionally, we found that there are still information gaps in certain ecoregions and vertebrate groups (e.g., herpetofauna, small mammals). Therefore, we suggest that this type of studies should be encouraged in different regions of the country, in order to make known the effects of this type of anthropic activity, as well as to guarantee the good management and conservation of the surrounding native environments, and the genetic flow of the associated biodiversity populations.

References

Azpiroz, A. B., J. P. Isacch, R. A. Dias, A. S. Di Giacomo, C. S Fontana, and C. M. Palarea. 2012. Ecology and conservation of grassland birds in southeastern South America: a review. Journal of Field Ornithology 83(3):217-246. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1557-9263.2012.00372.x.

Barlow, J., L. A. Mestre, T. A. Gardner, and C. A. Peres. 2007. The value of primary, secondary and plantation forests for Amazonian birds. Biological Conservation 136(2):212-231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2006.11.021.

Brancalion, P. H., N. T. Amazonas, R. L. Chazdon, J. van Melis, R. R. Rodrigues, C. C. Silva, et al. 2020. Exotic eucalypts: From demonized trees to allies of tropical forest restoration? Journal of Applied Ecology 57(1):55-66. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13513.

Brazeiro, A., A. Cravino, P. Férnandez, and F. Haretche. 2018. Forestación en pastizales de Uruguay: Efectos sobre la diversidad de aves y mamíferos a escala de rodal y del paisaje. Ecosistemas 27(3):48-59. https://doi.org/10.7818/ECOS.1508.

Burraco, P., M. Iglesias-Carrasco, C. Cabido, and I. Gómez-Mestre. 2018. Eucalypt leaf litter impairs growth and development of amphibian larvae, inhibits their antipredator responses and alters their physiology. Conservation Physiology 6(1):coy066. https://doi.org/10.1093/conphys/coy066.

Cicheleiro, J., M. Santos‐Pereira, A. L. Luza, D. D. S. Huning, and N. Zanella. 2021. Effects of natural forest and tree plantations on leaf‐litter frog assemblages in Southern Brazil. Austral Ecology 46(8):1246-1254. https://doi.org/10.1111/aec.13081.

Corbelli, J. M., G. A. Zurita, J. Filloy, J. P. Galvis, N. L. Vespa, and I. Bellocq. 2015. Integrating taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic beta diversities: interactive effects with the biome and land use across taxa. PloS ONE 10(5):e0126854. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0126854.

Devictor, V., R. Julliard, J. Clavel, F. Jiguet, A. Lee, and D. Couvet. 2008. Functional biotic homogenization of bird communities in disturbed landscapes. Global Ecology and Biogeography 17(2):252-261. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2007.00364.x.

Di Bitetti, M. S., A. Paviolo, and C. De Angelo. 2006. Density, habitat use and activity patterns of ocelots (Leopardus pardalis) in the Atlantic Forest of Misiones, Argentina. Journal of Zoology 270(1):153-163. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.2006.00102.x.

Di Giacomo, A. S., and A. G. Di Giacomo 2004. Extinción, historia natural y conservación de las poblaciones del Yetapá de Collar (Alectrurus risora) en la Argentina. Ornitología Neotropical 15(Suppl):145-157.

FAO. 2020. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020 - Key findings. Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/ca8753en.

Flynn, D. F., M. Gogol‐Prokurat, T. Nogeire, N. Molinari, B. T. Richers, B. B. Lin, et al. 2009. Loss of functional diversity under land use intensification across multiple taxa. Ecology Letters 12(1):22-33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01255.x.

Gangenova, E., G. A. Zurita, and F. Marangoni. 2018. Changes to anuran diversity following forest replacement by tree plantations in the southern Atlantic forest of Argentina. Forest Ecology and Management 424:529-535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2018.03.038.

Gangenova, E., M. I. Giombini, G. A. Zurita, and F. Marangoni. 2020. Morphological responses of three persistent native anuran species after forest conversion into monoculture pine plantations: tolerance or prosperity? Integrative Zoology 15(5):428-440. https://doi.org/10.1111/1749-4877.12440.

Gardner, T. A., M. A. Ribeiro‐júnior, J. O. S. Barlow, T. C. S. Ávila‐Pires, M. S. Hoogmoed, and C. A. Peres. 2007. The value of primary, secondary, and plantation forests for a neotropical herpetofauna. Conservation Biology 21(3):775-787. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00659.x.

Herzon, I., A. Auninš, J. Elts, and Z. Preikša. 2008. Intensity of agricultural land-use and farmland birds in the Baltic States. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 125(1-4):93-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2007.11.008.

Iezzi, M. E., P. Cruz, D. Varela, C. De Angelo, and M. S. Di Bitetti. 2018. Tree monocultures in a biodiversity hotspot: Impact of pine plantations on mammal and bird assemblages in the Atlantic Forest. Forest Ecology and Management 424:216-227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2018.04.049.

Ingaramo, M. D. R., E. G. Etchepare, B. B. Álvarez, and E. Porcel. 2012. Riqueza y composición de la fauna de anuros en la región oriental de la Reserva Natural Provincial Esteros del Iberá, Corrientes, Argentina. Revista de Biología Tropical 60(2):759-769. https://doi.org/10.15517/rbt.v60i2.3996.

Irwin, S., S. M. Pedley, L. Coote, A. C. Dietzsch, M. W. Wilson, A. Oxbrough, et al. 2014. The value of plantation forests for plant, invertebrate and bird diversity and the potential for cross-taxon surrogacy. Biodiversity and Conservation 23:697-714. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-014-0627-4.

Keenan, R. J., G. A. Reams, F. Achard, J. V. de Freitas, A. Grainger, and E. Lindquist. 2015. Dynamics of global forest area: Results from the FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. Forest Ecology and Management 352:9-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.06.014.

Lantschner, V., and V. Rusch. 2014. Efecto de las plantaciones forestales sobre la fauna en la Patagonia andina: ¿cómo compatibilizar la producción con la conservación? Producción Forestal 8:12-14.

Lantschner, M. V., V. Rusch, and J. P. Hayes. 2012. Habitat use by carnivores at different spatial scales in a plantation forest landscape in Patagonia, Argentina. Forest Ecology and Management 269:271-278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2011.12.045.

Lantschner, M. V., V. Rusch, and J. P Hayes. 2013. Do exotic pine plantations favour the spread of invasive herbivorous mammals in Patagonia? Austral Ecology 38(3):338-345. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2012.02411.x.

MAGyP. 2014. Argentina: plantaciones forestales y gestión sostenible. Unidad de Cambio Rural, Ministerio de Agricultura, Ganadería y Pesca, Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Minagri (Ministerio de Agricultura, Ganadería y Pesca de la Nación). 2012. Elaboración de un mapa de plantaciones forestales de la República Argentina de actualización permanente: Área SIG e Inventario Forestal. Dirección de Producción Forestal.

Moher, D., A. Liberati, J. Tetzlaff, D. G. Altman, and PRISMA Group. 2009. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Annals of Internal Medicine 151(4):264-269. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-3-54.

Mott, B., R. A. Alford, and L. Schwarzkopf. 2010. Tropical reptiles in pine forests: assemblage responses to plantations and plantation management by burning. Forest Ecology and Management 259(5):916-925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.11.031.

Newbold, T. 2018. Future effects of climate and land-use change on terrestrial vertebrate community diversity under different scenarios. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 285(1881): 20180792. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2018.0792.

Nanni, A. S., M. Piquer Rodríguez, M. D. Rodríguez, M. M. Núñez Regueiro, M. E. Periago, S. Aguiar, et al. 2020. Presiones sobre la conservación asociadas al uso de la tierra en las ecorregiones terrestres de la Argentina. Ecología Austral 30:304-320. https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.20.30.2.0.1056.

Núñez, M. A., J. Hayward, T. R. Horton, G. C. Amico, R. D. Dimarco, M. N. Barrios-García, and D. Simberloff. 2013. Exotic mammals disperse exotic fungi that promote invasion by exotic trees. PLoS ONE 8(6):e66832. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0066832.

Paritsis, J., and M. A. Aizen. 2008. Effects of exotic conifer plantations on the biodiversity of understory plants, epigeal beetles and birds in Nothofagus dombeyi forests. Forest Ecology and Management 255(5-6):1575-1583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2007.11.015.

Paviolo, A., P. Cruz, M. E. Iezzi, J. M. Pardo, D. Varela, C. De Angelo, et al. 2018. Barriers, corridors or suitable habitat? Effect of monoculture tree plantations on the habitat use and prey availability for jaguars and pumas in the Atlantic Forest. Forest Ecology and Management 430:576-586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2018.08.029.

Phifer, C. C., J. L Knowlton, C. R. Webster, D. J. Flaspohler, and J. A. Licata. 2017. Bird community responses to afforested eucalyptus plantations in the Argentine pampas. Biodiversity and Conservation 26(13):3073-3101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-016-1126-6.

Powers, R. P., and W. Jetz. 2019. Global habitat loss and extinction risk of terrestrial vertebrates under future land-use-change scenarios. Nature Climate Change 9(4):323-329. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0406-z.

SAGyP. 2022. Reporte Nacional. Estimación de las reservas de carbono orgánico del suelo con plantaciones forestales y otros usos de la tierra, en distintas regiones de Argentina. Programa Nacional Forestales-INTA.

Sarasola, J. H., and J. J. Negro. 2006. Role of exotic tree stands on the current distribution and social behaviour of Swainson's hawk, Buteo swainsoni in the Argentine Pampas. Journal of Biogeography 33(6):1096-1101. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2699.2005.01445.x.

Schivo, F., R. Grimson, D. Aquino, and R. D. Quintana. 2023. Difficult times for amphibians: Effects of land-use change at the local and landscape scales in the Iberá Wetlands. Acta Oecologica 120:103931. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actao.2023.103931.

Schvezov, N., J. Caffetti, C. Silva, J. Boeris, D. Baldo, and R. Lajmanovich. 2023. Impact of soil from monoculture pine plantations on two anuran species from the Atlantic Forest: Odontophrynus reigi and Leptodactylus luctator. Science of The Total Environment 869:161769. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.161769.

Stephens, S. S., and M. R. Wagner. 2007. Forest plantations and biodiversity: a fresh perspective. Journal of forestry 105(6):307-313. https://doi.org/10.1093/jof/105.6.307.

Sung, Y. H., N. E. Karraker, and B. C. Hau. 2012. Terrestrial herpetofaunal assemblages in secondary forests and exotic Lophostemon confertus plantations in South China. Forest Ecology and Management 270:71-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2012.01.011.

Tilman, D., P. B. Reich, and F. Isbell. 2012. Biodiversity impacts ecosystem productivity as much as resources, disturbance, or herbivory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109(26):10394-10397. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1208240109.

Trimble, M. J., and R. J. Van Aarde. 2014. Supporting conservation with biodiversity research in sub-Saharan Africa’s human-modified landscapes. Biodiversity and Conservation 23:2345-2369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-014-0716-4.

Umetsu, F., and R. Pardini. 2007. Small mammals in a mosaic of forest remnants and anthropogenic habitats-evaluating matrix quality in an Atlantic forest landscape. Landscape Ecology 22:517-530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-006-9041-y.

Williams, J. J., R. Freeman, F. Spooner, and T. Newbold. 2022. Vertebrate population trends are influenced by interactions between land use, climatic position, habitat loss and climate change. Global Change Biology 28(3):797-815. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15978.

Zurita, G. A., N. Rey, D. M. Varela, M. Villagra, and M. I. Bellocq. 2006. Conversion of the Atlantic Forest into native and exotic tree plantations: Effects on bird communities from the local and regional perspectives. Forest Ecology and Management 235(1-3):164-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2006.08.009.