Epiphyte Biodiversity in the Coffee Agricultural Matrix: Canopy Stratification and Distance from Forest Fragments

Abstract: Quality of the agricultural matrix profoundly affects biodiversity and dispersal in agricultural areas. Vegetatively complex coffee agroecosystems maintain species richness at larger distances from the forest. Epiphytes colonize canopy trees and provide resources for birds and insects and thus effects of agricultural production on epiphytes may affect other species. We compared diversity, composition, and vertical stratification of epiphytes in a forest fragment and in two coffee farms differing in management intensity in southern Mexico. We also examined spatial distribution of epiphytes with respect to the forest fragment to examine quality of the two agricultural matrix types for epiphyte conservation. We sampled vascular epiphytes in a forest fragment, a shade polyculture farm, and a shade monoculture farm at 100 m, 200 m, and 400 m from the forest. Epiphyte and orchid richness was greater in the forest than in the monoculture but richness was similar in the forest and polyculture farm. Epiphyte species composition differed with habitat type, but not with distance from the forest. In the forest, epiphytes were distributed throughout tree canopies, but in the farms, epiphytes were primarily found on trunks and larger branches. Epiphyte richness and species similarity to forest species declined with distance from the forest fragment in the monoculture, but richness and similarity to forest species did not decline with distance from forest in the polyculture. This suggests polyculture coffee has greater conservation value. In contrast, monoculture coffee is likely a sink habitat for epiphytes dispersing from forests into coffee. Coffee farms differ from forests in terms of the habitat they provide and species composition, thus protecting forest fragments is essential for epiphyte conservation. Nonetheless, in agricultural landscapes, vegetatively complex coffee farms may contribute to conservation of epiphytes more than other agricultural land uses.     

A Framework for Assessing Supply‐Side Wildlife Conservation

Market‐based, supply‐side interventions such as domestication, cultivation, and wildlife farming have been proposed as legal substitutes for wild‐collected plants and animals in the marketplace. Based on the literature, we devised a list of the conditions under which supply‐side interventions may yield positive conservation outcomes. We applied it to the trade of the orchid Rhynchostylis gigantea, a protected ornamental plant. We conducted a survey of R. gigantea at Jatujak Market in Bangkok, Thailand. Farmed (legal) and wild (illegal, protected) specimens of R. gigantea were sold side‐by‐side at market. These results suggest farmed specimens are not being substituted for wild plants in the marketplace. For any given set of physical plant characteristics (size, condition, flowers), the origin of the plants (wild vs. farmed) did not affect price. For all price classes, farmed plants were of superior quality to wild‐collected plants on the basis of most physical variables. These results suggest wild and farmed specimens represent parallel markets and may not be substitutable goods. Our results with R. gigantea highlight a range of explanations for why supply‐side interventions may lack effectiveness, for example, consumer preferences for wild‐collected products and low financial incentives for farming. Our results suggest that market‐based conservation strategies may not be effective by themselves and may be best utilized as supplements to regulation and education. This approach represents a broad, multidisciplinary evaluation of supply‐side interventions that can be applied to other plant and animal species. Un Marco de Referencia para Evaluar la Oferta de la Conservación de Vida Silvestre