Impacts of rubber plantation on diversity of understory vegetation and soil animals in bao lam rubber enterprise, Bao Lam district, Lam Dong province

2 16.42 1.98 12.06 86.70 2.04 2.35 
 8 RB 14.81 0.98 6.62 13.46 1.64 12.18 81.20 1.67 2.06 
 9 RB 11.63 1.39 11.95 12.23 1.69 13.82 76.70 1.91 2.49 
 10 RB 12.43 1.16 9.33 11.69 1.76 15.06 79.90 1.67 2.09 
 *RB: Rubber plantations *AV: Adjacent vegetation 
54 JOURNAL OF FORESTRY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY NO. 5 - 2017 
 Silviculture 
 The mean height of rubber plantations range been applied similar tending activities 
from 11.63 m to 16.31 m and adjacent meanwhile adjacent vegetations are secondary 
vegetations are from 10.30 m to 16.95 m. The tropical forest. 
average coefficient of variation (VH%) on the About canopy coverage: Based on the data 
height in rubber plots is 8.35%, lower than that in Table 1, the means canopy coverage of 
in the adjacent vegetation (28.16%). The mean rubber plantation range from 76.70% to 
of DBH of rubber plantations are from 11.69 90.20%; those values are from 79.40% to 
cm to 18.47 cm and mean DBH of adjacent 89.10%. Vegetation coverage in both rubber 
vegetation are form 10.35 cm to 14.87 cm. plantation and adjacent vegetationare quite 
Average coefficient of variation on the tree high. This is good for protecting soil from 
diameter in rubber plot is 12.31%, much lower erosion. The average coefficient of variation on 
than that in the adjacent vegetation (VD% = the canopy coverage in rubber plot (VC%) is 
85.12%). So the average height and diameter of 2.22%, slightly lower than that in the adjacent 
trees in rubber plots aremore uniform than vegetation (VC% = 2.51). 
those in the adjacent vegetation plots, because Species composition of understory vegetation 
rubber plantations are even-age and they have 
 Table 2. Species composition of understory vegetation in plots 
 Sl N X
 Vegetation i 
Plot (Number (number of (Average Species composition 
 type 
 of species) individuals) number ) 
 1.14 Ch + 0.86 Bo + 0.86 Cn + 0.86 Dm 
 1 AV 26 42 1.62 + 0.57 Bg + 0.57 Ct + 0.57 Cx + 0.57 Gt 
 + 0.57 La + 0.57 Ru + 0.57 Rn + 0.57 Tk 
 2 AV 22 39 1.77 1.60 Ho + 1.60 Ld + 1.20 Ba + 1.20 Dr 
 1.35 Bb + 1.35 Ct + 1.08 Dx + 1.08 La + 
 3 AV 28 55 1.96 
 0.81 Be + 0.81 Cn + 0.81 Ms 
 0.71 Bg + 0.71 Ct + 0.71 Cx + 0.71 Ho + 
 4 AV 21 35 1.67 0.71 Ms + 0.71 Qd + 0.71 St + 0.71 Tp + 
 0.71 Tk 
 1.18 Ct + 1.18 Ho + 0.88 Bc + 0.88 Cg + 
 5 AV 27 43 1.59 
 0.88 La + 0.88 Xu 
 6 RB 11 19 1.73 3.33 Ct + 2.50 Bb + 1.67 Dx 
 1.43 Ct + 1.43 Dx + 1.43 La + 1.43 Qb + 
 7 RB 15 30 2.00 
 0.95 Cm + 0.95 Ho 
 8 RB 18 24 1.33 2.61 Ct + 1.74 Du + 1.30 Bo + 1.30 Ck 
 1.48 Bb + 1.48 Ct + 1.48 Ho +1.11 Co + 
 9 RB 16 26 1.63 
 1.11 Dm + 1.11 Tp 
 1.60 Bo + 1.60 La + 1.20 Cm + 1.20 Dr 
 10 RB 11 21 1.91 
 + 1.20 Dx 
 *RB: Rubber plantations *AV: Adjacent vegetation 
 In which: 
 Ba: Euodia lepta; Bb: Chromolaena odorata; Bc: Breynia fruticosa; Be: Mallotus floribundus; 
 Bg: Hibiscus sabdariffa; Bo: Lygodium flexuosum; Cg: Cynodon dactylon; Ch: Phyltanth usurinaria; 
 Ck: Grewia asiatica; Cm: Chrysopogon aciculatus; Cn: Embeli aribes; Co: Cyperus rotundus; 
 Ct: Lophantherum gracile; Cx: Achyranthes aspera; Dm: Colocasia gigantean; Dr: Canna edulis; 
 Du: Streblus indica; Dx: Dryopteris filix-mas; Gt: Catunaregam tomentosa; Ho: Ageratum conyzoides; 
 La: Psychotria montana; Ld: Vernonia amygdalina; Ms: Rubus alcaefolicus; Qb: Selaginella frondosa; 
 Qd: Blechnum oriantale; Rn: Sauropus androgynous; Ru: Mallotus philippinensis; 
 St: Strophanthus caudatus; Tk: Helicteres hirsuta; Tp: Smilax glabra; Xu: Lasianthuswallichii 
 JOURNAL OF FORESTRY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY NO. 5 - 2017 55
 Silviculture 
 The number of species of understory vegetation. It might prove that rubber plantation 
vegetation in rubber plantation is from 11 to 18. has impacts on composition of understory 
Meanwhile in adjacent vegetation this number species. 
is from 21 to 28, much higher than that in Diversity of understory vegetation 
rubber plantation. Adjacent vegetation plots Two diversity indices used to compare are: 
have more and different dominant species than Simpson’s diversity index and Shannon-
that in theplots of rubber plantation. Species Weaver diversity index. All data are showed in 
composition of understory vegetation in plots the Table 3. 
of rubber plantation isdifferent from adjacent 
 Table 3. Diversity indicesof understory vegetation in plots 
 Sl (number of N (number of 
 Plot Vegetation type D' H' 
 species) individual) 
 1 AV 18 35 0.96 2.80 
 2 AV 12 25 0.93 2.35 
 3 AV 14 37 0.93 2.50 
 4 AV 18 42 0.96 2.83 
 5 AV 15 34 0.95 2.61 
 6 RB 6 12 0.85 1.63 
 7 RB 11 21 0.93 2.29 
 8 RB 9 23 0.87 2.06 
 9 RB 10 27 0.92 2.21 
 10 RB 11 25 0.92 2.27 
 Max (10 plots) 18 42 0.96 2.83 
 Max (Rubber) 11 27 0.93 2.29 
 Max (Adjacent vegetation) 18 42 0.96 2.83 
 Min (10 plots) 6 12 0.85 1.63 
 Min (Rubber) 6 12 0.85 1.63 
 Min (Adjacent vegetation) 12 25 0.93 2.35 
 *RB: Rubber plantations *AV: Adjacent vegetation 
 The table 3 shows that the Simpson’s from 1.63 to 2.29. Those values of adjacent 
diversity indices of understory vegetation of vegetation are from 2.35 to 2.83. Understory 
rubber plantation are from 0.85 to 0.93, lower vegetation in adjacent vegetation has higher 
than that of adjacent vegetation which range species richness than that in rubber plantation. 
from 0.93 to 0.96. It means understory The highest diversity indices valuesisbelonging 
vegetation in rubber plantation has low to plot 4 (plot of adjacent vegetation) and 
biodiversity than that in adjacent vegetation. thelowest diversity indexisbelongingto plot 6 
The Shannon-Weaver diversity indices of (plot of rubber plantation). 
understory vegetation in rubber plantation are 
56 JOURNAL OF FORESTRY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY NO. 5 - 2017 
 Silviculture 
 20 60
 15
 40
 10 AV AV
 5 RB 20 RB
 0
 0
 1 2 3 4 5
 1 2 3 4 5
 Figure 1. Number of species in plot Figure 2. Number of individuals in plot 
 comparison comparison 
 1 3
 0,95
 0,9 2
 AV AV
 0,85 1
 0,8 RB RB
 0,75 0
 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
 Figure 3. Simpson’s diversity index in plot Figure 4. Shannon-Weaver diversity 
 comparison index in plot comparison 
 The differencein diversity of understory Whitney U test and the resultsare showed in the 
vegetation between rubber plantation and following table 4. 
adjacent vegetationis identified by Mann-
 Table 4. Biodiversity indices comparison 
 Rubber Adjacent 
 | | Conclusion 
 plantation vegetation 
 Significantly different 
 Number of species (Sl) 9.40 15.40 3.63 
 (Sig. Diff.) 
 Number of individuals (N) 21.60 34.60 2.10 Sig. Diff. 
 Simpson (D') 0.90 0.95 2.31 Sig. Diff. 
 Shannon - Weaver (H') 2.09 2.62 2.10 Sig. Diff. 
 It isshowed that |U Stat| of all valuesare that, the mean values of all diversity indices of 
higher than 1.96. It means the biodiversity of adjacent vegetation are higher than that of 
understory vegetation between 2 types of rubber plantation. So rubber plantation 
vegetationare significantly different. Besides decreases diversity of understory vegetation. 
 JOURNAL OF FORESTRY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY NO. 5 - 2017 57
 Silviculture 
 Species composition of soil animals 
 Table 5. Species composition of soil animals in plots 
 Sl N X
 Vegetation i 
Plot (Number of (number of (Average Soil animal species composition 
 type 
 species) individuals) number ) 
 3.38 Mc + 1.76 Kl + 1.47 Kv + 1.25 Gi 
 1 AV 12 136 11.33 
 + 0.88 Kb 
 2 AV 8 89 11.33 6.29 Mc + 1.35 Gi 
 3 AV 8 92 11.50 3.37 Mc + 2.17 Kl + 1.63 Gi + 1.30 Bh 
 4 AV 8 70 8.75 3.86 Mc + 2.00 Kv + 1.71 Gi + 1.57 Kb 
 5 AV 9 81 9.00 3.09 Mc + 2.59 Kv + 1.60 + 1.11 Dm 
 6 RB 10 75 7.50 3.2 Mc + 2.53 Gi + 1.33 Kv 
 7 RB 7 73 10.43 4.66 Mc + 2.19 Kv + 2.05 Gi 
 8 RB 7 130 18.57 4.77 Mc + 1.46 Kl + 1.38 Kb 
 9 RB 11 82 7.45 3.90 Mc + 1.46 Kv + 1.34 Gi + 1.10 Kl 
 10 RB 8 96 12.00 4.17 Mv + 2.40 Gi + 1.46 Kl 
 *RB: Rubber plantations *AV: Adjacent vegetation 
 Where: 
 Bh: Canthon vigilans; Gi: Pontoscolex corethrurus; Kb: Leptogeny spp; Kl: Solenopsis spp; 
 Kv: Oecophylla smaragdina; Mc: Macrotermes annandalei 
 The numbers of species of soil animal in rubber is similar to that of adjacent vegetation. 
 rubber plantation are from 7 to 10 species. So the impact of rubber on species component 
 These values in adjacent vegetation arefrom 8 of soil animals is negligible. 
 to 12 species. Individuals of soil animal in Diversity of soil animals 
 rubber plantation range from 73 to 130. While Two diversity indices used to compare are: 
 in adjacent vegetation they range from 70 to Simpson’s diversity index and Shannon-
 136. The average numbers between rubber Weaver diversity index. All data are showed in 
 plantation plots and adjacent plots aresimilar. the following table: 
 The species composition of soil animals in 
 Table 6. Biodiversity resultsin plots 
 Sl (number of N (number of 
 Plot Vegetation type D' H' 
 species) individuals) 
 1 AV 12 136 0.81 1.86 
 2 AV 8 89 0.58 1.31 
 3 AV 8 92 0.80 1.73 
 4 AV 8 70 0.68 1.87 
 5 AV 9 81 0.80 1.77 
 6 RB 10 75 0.81 1.88 
 7 RB 7 73 0.70 1.39 
 8 RB 6 130 0.70 1.41 
 9 RB 11 82 0.80 1.91 
 10 RB 8 96 0.75 1.59 
 Max (10 plots) 12 136 0.81 1.91 
 Max (Rubber) 11 130 0.81 1.91 
 Max (Adjacent vegetation) 12 136 0.81 1.87 
 Min (10 plots) 6 70 0.58 1.31 
 Min (Rubber) 6 73 0.70 1.39 
 Min (Adjacent vegetation) 8 70 0.58 1.31 
 *RB: Rubber plantations *AV: Adjacent vegetation 
 58 JOURNAL OF FORESTRY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY NO. 5 - 2017 
 Silviculture 
 The maximum number of species and Simpson’s diversity index and Shannon-
number of individuals are in plot of the Weaver diversity index are in plot of rubber 
adjacent vegetation. Besides that, nearly all of plantation. Based on the maximum and 
the minimum diversity indices are belonging to minimum value of diversity indices we can 
plots of the adjacent vegetation, except only the realize that diversity of soil animals in rubber 
number of species. The max and min values plantation plots are similar tothat of adjacent 
between rubber area and adjacent vegetation vegetation. 
are close together. The different about diversity of understory 
 Simpson diversity values of soil animal in vegetation between rubber plantation and 
rubber plantation range from 0.70 to 0.81. adjacent vegetation is identified by using 
These values of that of adjacent vegetation are Mann-Whitney U test function and the results 
from 0.58 to 0.81. The maximum value of are showed in the table 7. 
 Table 7. Biodiversity index comparison 
 Adjacent 
 Rubber | | Conclusion 
 vegetation 
 Number of species (Sl) 8.40 9.00 0,65 Not Sig. Diff. 
 Number of individuals (N) 91.20 93.60 0,10 Not Sig. Diff. 
 Simpson (D') 0.75 0.73 0,31 Not Sig. Diff. 
 Shannon - Weaver (H') 1.64 1.70 0,10 Not Sig. Diff. 
 After analysis we have the result: |U Stat| of of soil animals in adjacent vegetation; it 
all value are lower than 1.96, so all diversity meansthe practices that applied in rubber 
indices of soil animals in rubber plots are plantation did not have significant effects to 
nearly similar with diversity indices of soil soil animal diversity so far. 
animals in adjacent vegetation plots. So we can When implementing tending activity in 
conclude that rubber plantation has negligible rubber plantation such as weeding and using 
impacts on diversity of soil animals. herbicide people need to consider about 
IV. CONCLUSION understory vegetation to maintain its 
 The structural characteristics of rubber biodiversity for future economic and 
plantationare not much different from environmental uses. 
characteristics of adjacent vegetation, only There should be more studies on the effect 
DBH of trees in rubber plantation different of rubber plantation on biodiversity and 
from that of adjacent vegetation. environment for the better vision to harmonize 
 Diversity of understory vegetation in rubber economic and environmental purposes, leading 
plantationsis lower than that of understory to the better strategy for conservation and 
vegetation in adjacent vegetation, it means management of natural resource in the area. 
rubber plantation has negative impacts on REFERENCES 
understory vegetation, leading to theless 1. James A. Danoff-Burg (2003). Choosing between 
diversity of understory vegetation, that mainly diversity indices. Department of Ecology, Evolution & 
 Environmental Biology, Columbia University. 
explained by human activities in rubber 
 2. Magurran, A.E. (1988). Ecological Diversity 
plantation area. and its Measurement. Princeton University Press, 
 Diversity of soil animals in rubber plantation Princeton, NJ. 
isnot significantly different from the diversity 3. Nguyen Hai Tuat, Nguyen Trong Binh (2005). 
 JOURNAL OF FORESTRY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY NO. 5 - 2017 59
 Silviculture 
Exploitation and use of SPSS to process research data in 5. Simpson, E. H. (1949). Measurement of diversity. 
forestry. Agricultural Publishing House, Hanoi. London: Nature. 
 4. Shannon, C. E. And W. Wiener (1963). The 6. 
mathematical theory of communities. University of luong-va-nang-suat-cay-cao-su-tai-viet-nam.7964.html 
Illinoisat Urbana, Illinois Press. 
 ẢNH HƯỞNG CỦA VIỆC TRỒNG CÂY CAO SU 
 TỚI ĐA DẠNG THỰC VẬT DƯỚI TÁN RỪNG VÀ ĐỘNG VẬT ĐẤT 
 TẠI NÔNG TRƯỜNG CAO SU BẢO LÂM, HUYỆN BẢO LÂM, TỈNH LÂM ĐỒNG 
 Lê Xuân Trường1, Ngô Gia Bảo2 
 1,2Trường Đại học Lâm nghiệp 
 TÓM TẮT 
 Nghiên cứu tiến hành tại Nông trường Cao su Bảo Lâm, huyện Bảo Lâm, tỉnh Lâm Đồng, tập trung vào tác động 
 của rừng trồng Cao su tới đa dạng của thực vật dưới tán rừng và động vật đất. Dựa trên số liệu thu được về tầng 
 cây cao, số loài và số cá thể của lớp thực vật dưới tán rừng và động vật đất trong 5 ô tiêu chuẩn lập dưới tán rừng 
 Cao su, 5 ô tiêu chuẩn lập ở các thảm thực vật xung quanh khu vực đã chỉ ra đặc điểm phân bố và tính toán chỉ 
 số đa dạng của thực vật dưới tán rừng và động vật đất. Đối với thực vật dưới tán rừng khu vực nghiên cứu có 56 
 loài cây thuộc 35 họ, chủ yếu tập trung vào các họ Ráy, họ Cúc, họ Thầu dầu, họ Dâu tằm, họ Đơn nem, họ Cà 
 phê và họ Lúa. Tổ thành loài của lớp thực vật dưới tán rừng khác so với khu vực xung quanh. Tất cả các chỉ số 
 đa dạng ở rừng trồng Cao su đều thấp hơn thực vật ở khu vực xung quanh. Đối với động vật đất khu vực nghiên 
 cứu phát hiện 15 loài thuộc 10 họ tập trung vào các họ Giun to, họ Giun trung bình, họ Kiến, họ Mối và họ 
 Bướm đêm. Tổ thành loài của động vật đất dưới tán rừng Cao su tương đồng với tổ thành động vật đất dưới tán 
 thảm thực vật xung quanh. Chỉ số đa đạng sinh học của động vật đất ở hai khu vực này cũng tương tự nhau. 
 Từ khóa: Đa dạng, động vật đất, rừng trồng cao su, tác động, thực vật dưới tán rừng. 
 Received : 04/9/2017 
 Revised : 18/9/2017 
 Accepted : 04/10/2017 
60 JOURNAL OF FORESTRY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY NO. 5 - 2017