Alteração - Atendimento do Repositório Institucionalclique aqui para acessar a portaria
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|metadata.revistascielo.dc.title:||Comparison between the quadrants and prodan methods for floristic, phytosociologic and volumetric analyses|
|metadata.revistascielo.dc.creator:||Brito, Alan de|
Ferreira, Maria Zélia
Mello, José Márcio de
Scolforo, José Roberto Soares
Oliveira, Antônio Donizete de
Júnior, Fausto Weimar Acerbi
|metadata.revistascielo.dc.identifier.citation:||BRITO, A. de et al. Comparison between the quadrants and prodan methods for floristic, phytosociologic and volumetric analyses. Cerne, Lavras, 2015.|
|metadata.revistascielo.dc.description.abstract:||The objective of this study was to compare the exactness of the estimates of the floristic composition, of the phytosociologic and volumetric analyses, using the quadrants and Prodan (1968) methods. Moreover, it objectified to compare for the quadrants method the estimators considered for Cottan & Curtis (1956) and for Pollard (1971). The study was carried out in a Montane Semideciduous Seasonal Forest patch located in Lavras, Minas Gerais. For the floristic analysis, the Prodan (1968) method identified a larger number of families (33), genera (64) and species (79), revealing to be more efficient than the quadrants method (28 families, 52 genera and 63 species). Considering the phytosociologic analysis, both methods were representative for the species that had higher importance value index (IVI). Moreover, they presented similar diversity and equability indices when compared with the parametric values. For floristic and phytosociologic analyses, the estimators of Cottan & Curtis (1956) e Pollard (1971) presented the same results. The quadrants method, underestimate the total volume for the estimators of Cottan & Curtis (1956) e Pollard (1971), and the first one presented results closer to the parametric value. The same happened for the volumes calculated per species. The Prodan (1968) method presented the worst performance, underestimating the total volume, and overestimating the volume per species, that presented low dominance.|
|Appears in Collections:||CERNE|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.