Biodiversity and Conservation (2006) 15:1219–1252 DOI 10.1007/s10531-005-0768-6
Springer 2006 -1 Biodiversity hotspots and conservation priorities in the Campo-Ma‘an rain forests, Cameroon M.G.P. TCHOUTO1,*, M. YEMEFACK2, W.F. DE BOER3, J.J.F.E. DE WILDE4, L.J.G. VAN DER MAESEN4 and A.M. CLEEF5 1 Limbe Botanic Garden, BP 437, Limbe, Cameroon; 2International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation (ITC), PO Box 6, 7500 AA Enschede, The Netherlands; 3Resource Ecology Group, Wageningen University, Bornsesteeg 69, 6708 PD, Wageningen, The Netherlands; 4 Biosystematics Group, Wageningen University, Generaal Foulkesweg 37, 6703 BL, Wageningen, The Netherlands; 5Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics (IBED) Research Group, Palynology and Paleo/Actuo-ecology, University of Amsterdam, Kruislaan 318, 1090 GB Amsterdam, The Netherlands; *Author for correspondence (e-mail: peguy2000@yahoo.com) Received 3 February 2004; accepted 7 January 2005 Key words: Biodiversity, Cameroon, Campo-Ma’an, Central Africa, Conservation, Endemic species, Forest refuge, Genetic Heat Index, Pioneer Index, Plant diversity, Tropical rain forest Abstract. Until recently, patterns of species richness and endemism were based on an intuitive interpretation of distribution maps with very limited numerical analyses. Such maps based solely on taxonomic collections tend to concentrate on collecting efforts more than biodiversity hotspots, since often the highest diversity is found in well-collected areas. During the last decades, there has been an overwhelming concern about the loss of tropical forest biological diversity, and an emphasis on the identification of biodiversity hotspots in an attempt to optimise conservation strategies. Furthermore, the concept of sites of high diversity, or hotspots, has attracted the attention of conservationists as a tool for conservation priority settings. With the development of GIS tools, geostatistics, phytosociological and multivariate analysis software packages, more rigorous numerical analyses of distributional and inventory data can be used for assessing conservation priorities. In the Campo-Ma’an rain forest, inventory data from 147 plots of 0.1 ha each and 7137 taxonomic collections were used to examine the distribution and convergence patterns of strict and narrow endemic species. We analysed the trends in endemic and rare species recorded, using quantitative conservation indices such as Genetic Heat Index (GHI) and Pioneer Index (PI), together with geostatistic techniques that help to evaluate and identify potential areas of high conservation priority. The results showed that the Campo-Ma’an area is characterised by a rich and diverse flora with 114 endemic plant species, of which 29 are restricted to the area, 29 also occur in southwestern Cameroon, and 56 others that are also found in other parts of Cameroon. Although most of the forest types rich in strict and narrow endemic species occur in the National Park, there are other biodiversity hotspots in the coastal zone and in areas such as Mont d’Eléphant and Massif des Mamelles that are located outside the National Park. Unfortunately, these areas, supporting 17 strict endemic species that are not found in the park, are under serious threat and do not have any conservation status for the moment. Taking into consideration that with the growing human population density, pressure on these hotspots will increase in the near future, it is suggested that priority be given to the conservation of these areas and that a separate management strategy be developed to ensure their protection. 1220 Introduction Central African rain forests are among the top conservation priority areas in the world (Davis et al. 1994; Heywood and Watson 1995; Myers et al. 2000). The Campo-Ma’an rain forest, in the southern part of Cameroon, falls under the Guineo–Congolian Regional Centre of Endemism that is reported to be species-rich with high levels of endemism (White 1979, 1983; Davis et al. 1994). It is situated in the middle of the Atlantic Biafran forest zone that extends from Southeast Nigeria to Gabon and the Mayombe area in Congo (Letouzey 1968, 1985). The vegetation in the Campo-Ma’an area is determined by climate, especially rainfall, altitude, soils, proximity to the sea and human disturbance (Tchouto 2004). The structure and composition of the forest, as well as the vegetation types change progressively from the mangrove or coastal forest on sandy shorelines through the endemic lowland evergreen forest rich in Caesalpinioideae with Calpocalyx heitzii and Sacoglottis gabonensis, to the submontane forest on hilltops and the mixed evergreen and semi-deciduous forest in the drier Ma’an area. Other vegetation types/sub-types include swamps, seasonally flooded forests, riverine and secondary forests. The forest in the Ma’an area is described as transitional between the coastal evergreen forest and the semi-deciduous forest of the interior. In view of the rich and diverse flora of the Campo-Ma’an rain forest, as well as its high level of endemism, it has been identified as one of the key conservation sites in Cameroon (Gartlan 1989; Foahom and Jonkers 1992). The Campo-Ma’an area is a Technical Operational Unit (TOU) that comprises a National Park, five forest management units, two agro-industrial plantations, and a multi-uses zone (Tchouto 2004). Despite the low population density, there are many stakeholders and different types of land use. Activities such as logging, industrial and shifting agriculture exert varying ecological impact on the forest ecosystem. This has led to deforestation, habitat fragmentation and alteration of the coastal forests. With the increasing destruction of natural ecosystems, it is important to identify biodiversity hotspots and conservation priorities in order to enable an effective management. To achieve this, we need to study the species composition and species distribution, so that we can target conservation resources and efforts to rich and diverse areas with a high number of endemic species. Endemism is commonly regarded as an important criterion for assessing the conservation value of a given area. In this study, forest inventory data and taxonomic collections will be used to examine the distribution and convergence patterns of strict and narrow endemic species. We will use new quantitative conservation indices such as GHI (Genetic Heat Index) and Pioneer Index (PI) to analyse trends in endemic and rare species in the various forest types. Finally, geostatistic analysis and techniques will help to evaluate and identify potential areas of high conservation priority. 1221 Materials and methods Study area The study was conducted in the Campo-Ma’an rain forest in south Cameroon. The site covers about 7700 km2 and it is located between latitudes 210¢– 252¢ N and longitudes 950¢–1054¢ E. Following the FAO classification system, soils in the Campo-Ma’an area are generally classified as Ferrasols and Acrisols (Franqueville 1973; Muller 1979; van Gemerden and Hazeu 1999). They are strongly weathered, deep to very deep and clayey in texture (except at the seashores and in river valleys where they are mainly sandy), acid and low in nutrients with pH (H2O) values generally around 4. The topography ranges from undulating to rolling in the lowland area, to steeply dissect in the more mountainous areas. In the Campo area, altitudes are mostly low, ranging from sea level to about 500 m. In the eastern part, which is quite mountainous, the altitude varies between 400 and 1100 m and the rolling and steep terrain brings about a more variable landscape. The area has a typical equatorial climate with two distinct dry seasons (November–March and July to mid-August) and two wet seasons (April–June and mid-August to October). The average annual rainfall generally decreases with increasing distance from the coast, ranging from 2950 mm/year in Kribi and 2800 mm in Campo to 1670 mm in Nyabissan in the Ma’an area. The average annual temperature is about 25 C and there is little variation between years. The hydrography of the area shows a dense pattern with many rivers, small river basins, fast-flowing creeks and rivers in rocky beds containing many rapids and small waterfalls. Generally, the area has a low population density of about 10 inhabitants per square kilometre and is sparsely populated (ca. 61,000 inhabitants) with most people living around Kribi, along the coast, and in agro-industrial and logging camps (ERE Développement 2002; de Kam et al. 2002). Despite the low population density, there are few employment opportunities. The local people are very poor and so far rely solely on the forest resources to meet their basic needs. As a result, local pressure on the CampoMa’an rain forest is increasing and there are several activities that are carried out in the area with varying ecological impacts on the forest ecosystem. These activities include agriculture, logging, poaching and hunting. Botanical assessment Sampling was carried out between 2000 and 2003 in 147 plots of 0.1 ha (50 m · 20 m) in representative and homogeneous vegetation types (see Table 6 for an overview of the plots per vegetation type). In each 0.1-ha plot, all trees, shrubs, herbs and lianas with DBH ‡1 cm (diameter at breast height, about 1.3 m above ground) were measured, recorded and identified. These plots were established in undisturbed forests or matured secondary forests within 12 vegetation 1222 Table 1. Star categories and GHI weight classes as defined for Cameroon. Star category Weight for GHI Comments Black (BK) 27 Gold (GD) 9 Blue (BU) 3 Scarlet (SC) 1 Red (RD) Pink (PK) Green (GN) 1 1 – Species which are only found in Campo-Ma’an area (strictly endemic) or near endemics (species which also occur in some localities around Campo-Ma’an such as Bipindi, Edea-Kribi, Lolodorf or southern part of Cameroon). Urgent attention to conservation of population is needed. Cameroon endemics, rare and threatened Lower Guinea endemics. Cameroon has definitely responsibility for preserving these species. Lower Guinea and Guineo–Congolian endemics which are widespread internationally but rare in Cameroon, or vice versa. Common but under serious pressure from heavy exploitation. Exploitation needs to be curtailed if usage is to be sustainable. Protection of all scales vital. Common but under pressure from exploitation. Common and moderately exploited. Widespread Guineo–Congolian, pantropical and tropical African species that are not under pressure. No particular conservation concern. Adapted from Hawthorne and Abu-Juam (1995), Hawthorne (1996) and Tchouto et al. (1998). types ranging from coastal forest, mangrove, swamp, lowland evergreen forest, mixed evergreen and semi-deciduous forest to submontane forest at higher elevations (800–1100 m above sea level). Most of the plots were located in the National Park and the forest management units which are less affected by human activities. Furthermore, in each representative vegetation type, a provisional plant species checklist was made in the field with information on their growth form, guild and frequency. A guild refers to a group associated with a common way of life (Table 2). For unknown species, a voucher specimen was collected. The study also involved the collection of fertile specimens encountered in plots, vegetation types and specific habitats such as exposed rocks and riverbanks. The geographic co-ordinates of each plot, sample or specimen were recorded using the Global Positioning System (GPS, Garmin 12XL model with estimated precision of ±10 m). These co-ordinates were used for mapping main vegetation types, species distribution, and biodiversity hotspots. A duplicate of each specimen was mounted and preserved in the Kribi Herbarium. Others duplicates were sent to the National Herbarium in Yaounde, Cameroon (YA) and the Nationaal Herbarium Nederland, Wageningen University Branch (WAG) for further identification and preservation. Criteria for taxa inclusion A plant species checklist was generated from the inventory data, from the plant collections made during the study, and from specimens previously collected in the area by other scientists, stored in the Cameroon and Wageningen herbaria. Furthermore, a taxonomic search for potential taxa of high conservation 1223 Table 2. Guild and weight classes. Guild Weight for PI Comment Pioneer (PI) 2 Non-Pioneer light demanding (NP) 1 Shade-bearers (SB) 0 Regenerating only in forest gaps and therefore indicating disturbed forest (e.g. Ceiba, Musanga, Harungana, Macaranga). Although some juveniles are also found in the understorey of undisturbed forest, they require gaps to develop to full maturity. Generally, non-pioneer light demanding are abundant in matured disturbed forest (e.g. Albizia, Entandrophragma, Piptadeniastrum, Pycnanthus). Understorey herbs, shrubs and trees which grow, flower and fruit in undisturbed forest (e.g. Cola, Diospyros, Psychotria, Rinorea). Adapted from Hawthorne and Abu-Juam (1995), Hawthorne (1996) and Cable and Cheek (1998). priority such as endemic, rare, new and threatened species was carried out using existing floras and monographs (Keay and Hepper 1954–1972; Aubréville and Leroy 1961–1992; Aubréville and Leroy 1963–2000; Lebrun and Stork 2003; Satabié and Leroy 1980–1985; Satabié and Morat 1986–2001), the IUCN (2002) red list categories, and the WCMC (1998) world list of threatened trees. On the basis of this information, a list of 141 species of high conservation values was produced with information on their habit, guild, star category (Table 1) and chorology. In this list, priority was given to taxa that are strictly endemic to the Campo-Ma’an area. Followed by species that are endemic to southwestern Cameroon (also occurring in Bipindi and Lolodorf areas) or Cameroon and Lower Guinea endemics (especially if they reach their northern or southern limit of distribution in Campo-Ma’an). Furthermore, species that reach their northern or southern limit of distribution in the Campo-Ma’an area were also included in the list. Star rating of species and measurement of forest conservation value A star rating system, based on the work of Hawthorne and Abu-Juam (1995) and Hawthorne (1996) in Ghana, Cable and Cheek (1998) and Tchouto et al. (1998) in Cameroon, was used to define the conservation status of each species recorded (Table 1). The factors considered when categorising species into star categories are their distribution, ecology, local abundance, taxonomy, life history, interaction with ecosystem parameters and economic importance (Hawthorne 1996). Therefore, species that are endemic, rare, threatened, or likely to represent a scarce genetic resource, are more valuable than others are. Hence, forests richer in such species receive a higher score than others. The GHI concept was developed by Hawthorne (1996) to express the conservation value of a given forest, and the PI concept to express the level of 1224 disturbance in a given forest. GHI is an attempt to provide a scale, on which to measure the genetic ‘temperature’ or value of the forest. A plot/forest with an average GHI >150 will be considered warm or hot. In general, for species with completed monographs, black stars occupy about 1–3 filled degree squares on a standard distribution map, gold stars 4–14, blue stars 15–30, and green star more than 30 degree squares. Hawthorne (1996) defined the guild as a flexible concept used to circumscribe a group of plant species with a similar ecology and way of life. All the species were grouped into guild classes as defined in Table 2 and a PI score was calculated as an expression of the relative contribution of pioneers. Five classes of human disturbance were used to evaluate the forest quality and condition as defined in Table 3. These classes were mainly based on the field observation of the level of human disturbance and the state of forest degradation. The GHI and PI values of each sample were calculated using the TREMA database as follows: Genetic Heat Index (GHI) ¼ ½ð(BK
BK weightÞ þ ðGD
GD weightÞ þ ðBU
BU weightÞ þ ðRD
RD weight))= ðBK þ GD þ BU þ GN þ RDÞ
100; where BK = number of black star species; GD = number of gold star species; BU = number of blue star species; GN = number of green star species; and RD = number of red, scarlet and pink star species. Pioneer Index (PI) ¼ ðPioneer
PI weightÞ þ (NP
NP weightÞ
100; Total number of species where PI = number of pioneer species and NP = number of non-pioneer light demanding species. Table 3. Forest condition classes showing the degree of human disturbance on the natural forest cover. Forest condition Classes Notes Excellent Virtually undisturbed Good Less than 25% disturbed 25–50% disturbed Undisturbed forest, with good canopy and few signs of human disturbance except for hunting and NTFPs collection. Small patches of recent disturbances (<25%) with good canopy cover. Obviously disturbed with significant patches (25–50%) of recent degradation but with good predominant forest and broken upper canopy. Considerable are (>50%) of recent degradation. Patchy with heavily disrupted canopy. No significant forest left (<2% good forest). Massive land conversion for plantation or farm. Slightly degraded Mostly degraded Very poor More than 50% disturbed Farm land 1225 Geostatistical analysis Conservation indices such GHI and PI are likely to vary throughout a region. Geostatistics (Isaaks and Srivastava 1989; Webster and Oliver 2001) were applied to quantify the spatial distribution of GHI within the Campo-Ma’an forest. Geographic analyses were done using ILWIS software (ILWIS 2001) and GSTAT package (Pebesma and Wesseling 1998) of R software (R Development Core Team 2002). The semivariance was calculated for GHI data on a minimum lag distance of 1250 m and each lag distance class contained at least 105 pairs of points. The semivariogram parameters (nugget, sill and range) were computed using the GSTAT fit variogram function. During the study of GHI spatial variability, the main objective was to obtain a map from point observations. Since this also required the estimation of a value at un-visited locations, the technique commonly used is known as kriging (Isaaks and Srivastava 1989). The semivariogram function was then used to extrapolate the GHI values in the CampoMa’an forest at 100 m · 100 m grid, using ordinary kriging. The output map was reclassified into five classes of conservation value (Hawthorne 1996). Results Species richness and endemism A plant species checklist made of 2297 species of vascular plants, ferns and fern allies was generated from inventory data and from 2348 herbarium specimens and 4789 ecological specimens collected in the various plots. They belonged to 851 genera and 155 families. More than 67% of the specimens were identified at species level, 28% at generic level, 4% at family level and 1% remained unidentified. The 20 most important families and genera are shown in Tables 4 and 5. In terms of growth form, tree species contributed for 26% to the total number of 2297 species recorded, followed by herbs (24%), shrubs (23%) and climbers (17%), respectively. About 72% of the total number of species recorded was also found in the Campo-Ma’an National Park and the remaining 28% were only found in the coastal forest and the semi-deciduous forests located outside the park. In addition to a list of 92 threatened species (Appendix 2) recorded in IUCN (2002) and WCMC (1998), a list with 141 plant species of high conservation priorities was produced, with information on their growth forms, guild, chorology and star categories (Appendix 1). Only species that are endemic to Cameroon and species that reach their northern or southern limit of distribution are included in this list. The Campo-Ma’an area has about 114 endemic species, 29 of which are only known from the area, 29 only occur in the southwestern part of Cameroon, and 56 near endemics that also occur in other parts of Cameroon (Appendix 1 and Figure 1). Shrubs contributed for 38% of the 114 endemic species (Appendix 1), herbs 29%, trees 20% and climbers 11%. Moreover, 540 species (23% of the total 1226 Table 4. Most important families recorded in the Campo-Ma’an area. No. Family No. of species Predominant growth forms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Rubiaceae Euphorbiaceae Leguminosae-Caesalpinioideae Apocynaceae Annonaceae Acanthaceae Leguminosae-Papilionaideae Sterculiaceae Gramineae Orchidaceae Melastomataceae Moraceae Celastraceae Cyperaceae Dichapetalaceae Sapindaceae Araceae Loganiaceae Sapotaceae Begoniaceae Others(135 families) 279 117 96 80 69 68 65 62 54 54 46 40 39 39 39 36 34 33 30 29 988 Trees, shrubs, herbs and climbers Trees, shrubs, herbs and climbers Trees and shrubs Trees, shrubs, herbs and climbers Trees, shrubs and climbers Herbs Trees, herbs and climbers Shrubs and trees Herbs Terrestrial and epiphytic herbs Shrubs and herbs Trees, shrubs and herbs Climbers Herbs Climbers Trees and shrubs Herbs and hemi-epiphytes Shrubs and climbers Trees and shrubs Terrestrial and epiphytic herbs Trees, shrubs, climbers and herbs Table 5. Most important genera recorded in the Campo-Ma’an area. No. Genus No. of species Predominant growth forms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Dichapetalum (Dichapetalaceae) Psychotria (Rubiaceae) Cola (Sterculiaceae) Begonia (Begoniaceae) Diospyros (Ebenaceae) Salacia (Celastraceae) Strychnos (Loganiaceae) Rinorea (Violaceae) Drypetes (Euphorbiaceae) Combretum (Combretaceae) Dorstenia (Moraceae) Campylospermum (Ochnaceae) Bulbophyllum (Orchidaceae) Ficus (Moraceae) Garcinia (Guttiferae) Asplenium (Aspleniaceae) Culcasia (Araceae) Landolphia (Apocynaceae) Tricalysia (Rubiaceae) Bertiera (Rubiaceae) Others (831 genera) 37 35 32 29 27 27 24 23 21 18 18 17 16 16 16 15 15 15 15 14 1867 Climbers Shrubs Trees and shrubs Terrestrial and epiphytic herbs Trees and shrubs Climbers Climbers Trees and shrubs Trees and shrubs Climbers Herbs Shrubs Terrestrial and epiphytic herbs Trees and stranglers Trees and shrubs Epiphytic herbs Herbs and hemi-epiphytes Climbers Trees an shrubs Shrubs Trees, shrubs, climbers and herbs 1227 Figure 1. Distribution of 114 strict and narrow endemic plant species recorded in the CampoMa’an area (gray circle). Black circle represents the distribution of 17 threatened strict endemics that are not found in the National Park. The size of the circle represents the relative density of endemics at a given point. number of species) recorded are endemic to the Lower Guinea Centre of Endemism, 1123 species (49%) are Guineo–Congolian endemics and 105 species (5%) are Guinea endemics as described by White (1979). Overall, there was a high concentration of strict and narrow endemic species in the lowland evergreen forest rich in Caesalpinioideae, coastal and submontane forests located in the western and northern parts of Ma’an and a relatively low concentration of these species in Ma’an area (Figure 1). Although more than 70% of the total endemic species recorded were also found in the National Park, 17 of the 29 strict endemic species were not recorded in the park (Appendix 1). The distribution patterns of these 17 taxa showed a high concentration of species around Campo, Lobe, Massif des Mamelles, Mont d’Eléphant and Zingui and a very poor representation in the Ma’an area (Figure 1). GHI and measurement of forest conservation value More than 57% of the plots have a high GHI score with the highest score recorded in the submontane forest (GHI = 294.4) and the lowest score in mangrove (GHI = 3.1). As shown in Figure 2, the submontane forest had the highest average GHI score of 214.7, followed by the lowland evergreen forest rich in Caesalpinioideae with Calpocalyx heitzii and Sacoglottis gabonensis 1228 Figure 2. The average Genetic Heat Index (GHI = bars) and average Pioneer Index (PI = line) for the various vegetation types as defined in Table 6. (GHI = 194.1). The mangrove and the coastal forest on sandy shorelines had the lowest average GHI score (GHI = 3 and 120.2, respectively). The average PI was very high in the mangrove forest (PI = 125), coastal forest on sandy shorelines (PI = 66.9) and in the forest rich in Aucoumea klaineana (PI = 60). Generally, there was a significant decrease in average GHI with increasing average PI (Figure 2). As shown in Figure 3, there was a very strong significant negative correlation between the average GHI scores and the PI scores recorded in the various vegetation types (F1–10 = 111.71, R2 = 0.918, p < 0.0001). However, the correlation was rather weak with a low explanatory factor when the analysis was carried out using all plots as individual data points (F1–45 = 94.00, R2 = 0.393, p<0.0001). Most of the forest types within the National Park were virtually undisturbed or less than 25% disturbed (Figure 4). The coastal forest between Campo and Kribi, as well as the forests around Massif des Mamelles, Mont d’Eléphant, agro-industrial plantations, logging concessions and settlements were much more affected by human activities (Figure 4). These forests were often more than 25% disturbed by human activities and were characterised by a high PI scores (Figures 2 and 4). Geostatistical results The analysis of the spatial structure of the dataset did not show any preferential spatial trend. Therefore, an omni-directional analysis of the semivariance (best described by a spherical model) was applied. Figure 5 shows the semivariogram and its characteristics. The GHI variable showed a strong spatial dependence 1229 Figure 3. Correlation between the average GHI scores and the average PI scores for the various vegetation types. Figure 4. Impact of human disturbance on the Campo-Ma’an rain forest. within a range of 10,500 m. The nugget (645) was low compared to the total variance or sill (3700). This suggests that more than 82% (100*(Sill-Nugget)/Sill) of the semivariance of GHI could be modelled by the variogram over a range of 10 km. The output map of the ordinary kriging (Figure 6) was reclassified into 1230 Figure 5. Spherical variogram model for GHI in the Campo-Ma’an rain forest (estimated from 147 points of 0.1 ha each). Figure 6. Ordinary kriging map showing the distribution of GHI scores and conservation hotspots within the Campo-Ma’an rain forest The following GHI values are defined for the various conservation classes (Hawthorne 1996): Very high conservation value for GHI >200; High conservation value (150 ‡ GHI <200); Moderate conservation value (100 ‡ GHI <150); Low conservation value (50 < GHI <100) and very low conservation value (GHI <50). 1231 five GHI classes, partitioning the conservation value of the Campo-Ma’an forest. This partition showed that 1% of the area was characterised by a very high conservation value, 45% by a high conservation value, 30% by an average conservation value, 15% by a low conservation value and 9% by a very low conservation value. A considerable portion of the National Park and the forests around Massif des Mamelles and Mont d’Eléphant was characterised by a high conservation value, with highest values found in Dipikar Island, Massif des Mamelles, Mont d’Eléphant and in the submontane forest on hilltops. The forests in the Ma’an area, around Campo and agro-industrial plantations, near villages and along the roads had a low conservation value. Similar patterns were observed for the distribution of strict and narrow endemic species (Figure 1). Discussion General vegetation patterns The Campo-Ma’an has a diverse range of vegetation that changes progressively from sea level to 1100 m at higher altitudes. The wetter Campo area was dominated by the lowland evergreen forest rich in Caesalpinioideae and the drier Ma’an area by the mixed evergreen and semi-deciduous forest. More than 65% of the forest types recorded had at least 250 species (Table 6). The submontane forest had the highest frequency of species-rich plots (93% of the plots had above 100 species/0.1 ha). Other rich vegetation types included the lowland evergreen forest rich in Caesalpinioideae with Calpocalyx heitzii and Sacoglottis gabonensis (81%), the lowland evergreen forest rich in Caesalpinioideae with Sacoglottis gabonensis (78%), the lowland evergreen forest rich in Caesalpinioideae (76%) and the mixed evergreen and semi-deciduous forest (67%). The mangroves, swamps and the coastal vegetations on sandy shorelines were species-poor. The explanation for the diverse range of forest types and habitats might stem partly from the fact that the Campo-Ma’an vegetation is influenced by several environmental factors such as rainfall, altitude, soil, the proximity to the sea and the degree of human disturbance (Tchouto 2004). As a result there was a gradual variation in dominant species, forest type and structure from the coast to the hilltops and the drier forest in the Ma’an region. Species richness and endemism The Campo-Ma’an area is characterised by a rich and diverse flora with more than 2297 species of vascular plants, ferns and fern allies. The site has about 114 endemic plant species out of which 29 are strictly endemic to the site. The number of endemic plant species is relatively high considering the size of the area, and more than 75% of the current vegetation cover was characterised 1232 Table 6. Number of plots, number of species and number of stem/ha recorded within the various vegetation types for all plants with DBH ‡1 cm. Vegetation types No of plots No of species Average No of stems/ha Caesalp (2.3 ha) Caesalpcasa (2.5 ha) Caesalpsa (1.4 ha) Cosaga (0.9 ha) Cosaca (0.9 ha) Cosas (0.4 ha) Mixevergreen (2.1 ha) Mixsemideci (1.6 ha) Submontane (1.4 ha) Swamps (0.5 ha) Mangrove (0.2 ha) Okoumé forests (0.5 ha) Total for the Campo-Ma’an area 23 25 14 9 9 4 21 16 14 5 2 5 147 557 (75–128) 555 (93–139) 474 (86–138) 303 (81–140) 326 (78–108) 100 (27–55) 523 (63–135) 481 (86–147) 499 (79–148) 246 (18–108) 4 (3–4) 234 (18–107) 1116 (3–148) 4380 5326 5935 5810 5864 4710 4983 5460 6094 4276 8630 4802 5312 (2500–5750) (3120–7020) (4350–7120) (4940–8010) (4740–7570) (3630–5700) (3890–6980) (4390–6340) (3680–8449) (2070–5960) (8150–9100) (3720–5800) (2070–9100) Minimum and maximum values are given betweem brackets. Submontane = Submontane forest; Caesalpcasa = Lowland evergreen forest rich in Caesalpinioideae, Calpocalyx heitzii and Sacoglottis gabonensis; Casealpsa= Lowland evergreen forest rich in Caselpinioideae and Sacoglottis gabonensis; Caesalp= Lowland evergreen forest rich in Caesalpinioideae; Cosaga= Coastal forest with Sacoglottis gabonesis; Mixsemideci= Mixed evergreen and semi-deciduous forest with elements predominant; Mixevergreen= Mixed evergreen and semideciduous forest with semi-deciduous elements of evergreen forest predominant; Okoumé= forest rich in Aucoumea klaineana; Cosaca= Coastal forest with Sacoglottis gabonensis and Calpocalyx heitzii; and Cosas= Coastal forest on sandy shorelines. either by very high, high or average GHI values (Figure 6). Furthermore, the distributions of strict and narrow endemic species showed a high concentration of these species in the submontane forest between Ebianemeyong and Akom II, in Dipikar Island, and in the forests in and around Massif des Mamelles, Lobe, Mont d’Eléphant and Zingui. Surprisingly, the mixed evergreen and semideciduous forest in the Ma’an area showed a relatively low concentration of these species (Figure 1). The explanation for the high occurrence of endemics might stem partly from the fact that the area falls within a series of postulated rain forest refugia in Central Africa (Hamilton 1982; White 1983; Maley 1987, 1989, 1990, 1993, 1996; Sosef 1994, 1996). In such refugia, the unique combination of climatic and geological histories, contemporary ecological factors, and inherent biological properties of taxa and their combinations, may have contributed to survival and/or speciation (Barbault and Sastrapradja 1995; Hawksworth and Kalin-Arroyo 1995). Furthermore, the Campo-Ma’an area forms part of the Guineo–Congolian Regional Centre of Endemism (White 1983). All families endemic to this biogeographic region are also found in the Campo-Ma’an area (White 1983). They include Hoplestigmataceae, Huaceae, Lepidobotryaceae, Medusandraceae, Pandaceae, Pentadiplandraceae and Scytopetalaceae. Moreover, 82% of endemic genera cited by White (1983) also occur in the area. 1233 Forest richness and biodiversity hotspots Considering the fact that the occurrence of endemic species contributes significantly to the conservation value of a forest, it is important to study their distribution and abundance prior to any conservation initiatives. This is mainly due to the fact that strict and narrow endemic species are restricted to small areas, and are therefore highly vulnerable to human disturbance and other forms of environmental changes (Myers 1988; Williams 1993; Heywood and Watson 1995). A study carried out in the Campo-Ma’an rain forest has revealed that the submontane forest, the lowland evergreen forest rich in Caesalpinioideae with Calpocalyx heitzii and Sacoglottis gabonensis, and the lowland evergreen forest rich in Caesalpinioideae are richer in strict and narrow endemics compared to the other forest types found in secondary forest and along the coast. This is confirmed by the high average GHI scores recorded in these forest types (Figure 2). Most of these forest types were located in the National Park and the lowland evergreen forests around Massif des Mamelles and Mont d’Eléphant. They were virtually undisturbed or less than 25% disturbed by human activities (Figure 4). This implies that the Massif des Mamelles and the Mont d’Eléphant areas represent other biodiversity hotspots, located outside of the Park (Figure 6). There was a strong significant negative correlation between the average GHI scores and the average PI scores recorded in the various vegetation types. Most plots located near settlements and in secondary forests were characterised by a low conservation value with low GHI scores and high PI scores. This confirmed that disturbed forests are rich in pioneer species but poor in plant species with high conservation priority. It is worth reiterating that a considerable portion of the Campo-Ma’an area has been selectively logged at least twice during the past 30 years. Although logging damages were moderate and had low impact on the total forest biodiversity, it has created forest gaps that allowed the development of many pioneer species. This might have contributed to the high average PI scores registered in the coastal forest types. In these areas with conflicts between human and conservation activities, there is an urgent need to develop participatory approaches to sustainable natural resource management that integrates the objectives of conservation with local development. Threatened species During the selection of species of high conservation priority, taxa were chosen on a global rather than a Cameroonian or a Campo-Ma’an perspective of conservation importance. Of the 29 strict endemic species that are only known from the Campo-Ma’an area, 17 were not recorded in the National Park illustrating the need for conservation activities outside the park. Although these 17 strict endemics are not immediately threatened with extinction, the 1234 most threatened are probably those occurring in the coastal zone and in areas located at the vicinity of large agro-industrial plantations, since these areas are heavily exploited. As shown in Figure 4, their habitats are fragmented and degraded because these areas are surrounded by farms and heavily disturbed forests. Considering the fact that extinct species are taxa that are no longer known to exist in the world after repeated search in their type localities (WCMC 1998; IUCN 2002), we cannot yet talk about extinction because no attempt has been made to search for these species. Furthermore, only 67% of the total amount of specimens collected was identified at species level. However, with the ongoing speed of forest degradation noticed in the coastal area, eight of these strict endemics (Beilschmiedia dinklagei, Deinbollia macroura, Ledermanniella batangensis, Psychotria aemulans, P. batangana, P. dimorphophylla, P. oligocarpa, and Strychnos canthioides) that are only known from the coastal zone can be categorised as endangered species. While the nine others that are located inland around Efoulan, Fenda, Massif des Mamelles, Mont d’Eléphant and Zingui can be categorised as vulnerable. They are Afrotrewia kamerunica, Bulbophyllum alinae, Begonia montis-elephantis, Calvoa stenophylla, Dorstenia dorstenioides, Guaduella mildbraedii, Hypolytrum sp. nov., Scaphopetalum acuminatum and S. brunneo-purpureum. Some of them so far are only known from type specimens or from a few collections made in the type locality before the 60s. Others such as Afrotrewia kamerunica, Begonia montis-elephantis and Hypolytrum sp. nov. have a restricted range with a small and restricted population. Furthermore, habitat fragmentation may convert a previously more continuous population structure to a metapopulation structure, with local populations becoming so small that they may have a substantial risk of extinction (Hawksworth and Kalin-Arroyo 1995). Implications for biodiversity conservation The Campo-Ma’an National Park The National Park is the core conservation area of the Campo-Ma’an Technical Operational Unit. It is surrounded by areas under several land uses that have varying ecological impact on the park and the surrounding forests. The park is of high conservation priority with about 72% of the 2297 species of vascular plants, ferns and fern allies recorded so far in the Campo-Ma’an area. More than 70% of the total endemic species recorded were also found in the National Park, and most of the forest types with high GHI scores, low PI scores and high conservation priority species were also found in the park (Figures 2 and 6). The most important one is the endemic lowland evergreen forest rich in Caesalpinioideae with Calpocalyx heitzii and Sacoglottis gabonensis, a vegetation type that only occurs in the Campo area (Letouzey 1985; Gartlan 1989; Thomas and Thomas 1993). Other forest types such as the submontane forest on hilltops, the lowland evergreen forest rich in 1235 Caesalpinioideae and the mixed evergreen and semi-deciduous forests are also well represented. So far the National Park is the only area with a legal conservation status. It is a permanent state forest that is protected by law and solely used for forest and wildlife conservation. However, its boundaries have not been marked, the management plan has not yet been produced and protection is weak. Therefore, it is of urgent need to demarcate the boundary of the park, to reinforce its protection, and to complete and implement its management plan as soon as possible. Massif des Mamelles and Mont d’Ele´phant This study has demonstrated that other hotspots for biodiversity conservation, such as Mont d’Eléphant and Massif des Mamelles, are located outside the National Park (Figure 6). These areas are non-permanent forest estates that can be allocated for human activities such as logging, agro-industry, agriculture, agro-forestry, community forest, communal forest or private forest. Moreover, hunting, fishing, mineral exploitation or any other form of economic activities is allowed if done in accordance to the 1994 forest law. Unfortunately, these areas do not have any conservation status and a number of ongoing human activities have negative impacts on the forest ecosystem (Tchouto 2004). In addition to the construction of the Tchad-Cameroon oil pipeline terminal at Grand Batanga and the rock exploitation on Mont d’Eléphant, there exists a plan to exploit the iron ore deposits of the Massif des Mamelles. All these activities, if realized, would affect the vegetation and thus impact the biodiversity. As shown in Figure 4, these fragmented forest patches with high conservation priorities are more seriously exposed to forest degradation and habitat loss since they are surrounded by disturbed and degraded forests. Furthermore, they are the type localities for some rare endemic species such as Afrotrewia kamerunica, Begonia montis-elephantis, Bulbophyllum alinae and Hypolytrum sp. nov. that are so far only known from the type specimens or from few collections made in these areas. Pressure on these fragmented hotspots will increase in the future with the growing human population density, the few local employment opportunities and the poverty of the local people, for whom the forest is a major resource. In order to ensure the protection of these areas, it is suggested that local community be encouraged to create community forests with several management zones. Each community forest should have the identified biodiversity hotspot as the core conservation area, surrounded by a buffer zone stimulating the sustainable management of non-timber forest products and hunting practices. The coastal zone, Ntem basin, Lobe and Memve’ele waterfalls The coastal zone is a narrow strip (65 km long) along the Atlantic Ocean from the Lobe waterfalls to the Ntem estuary in the Dipikar Island that extends about 2–3 km inland. It has suffered and continues to suffer from intense 1236 human pressure that has led to the destruction of most of its natural vegetation (Figure 4). However, it is worth mentioning that some rare endemic species such as Deinbollia macroura, Psychotria batangana, P. dimorphophylla, P. oligocarpa, and Strychnos canthioides are so far only known from this zone. Furthermore, there is an impressive network of rivers and streams in the Campo-Ma’an area that presents a number of very specialised riparian habitats. Our study confirmed that the Lobe, Bongola, Memve’ele waterfalls and Ntem basin (Boucle du Ntem) support a rich riparian flora with many endemic and rare rheophile species (Cusset 1987; Thomas and Thomas 1993). Most of the endemic rheophytes are of the genus Ledermanniella in the Podostemaceae family. These rheophytes which are found on exposed rocks in streambeds, are seasonally submerged by fast-flowing water, and normally reproduce in drier periods when the water level recedes. The Ntem basin is also reported to constitute an important refuge for wildlife and fish fauna because of the presence of many rare species of freshwater fishes (Vivien 1991; Matthews and Matthews 2000; Djama 2001). Therefore, it is suggested to develop a separate management strategy in order to protect these riparian habitats. Conclusion The study provides important information on the abundance and distribution of endemic species, as well as the location of biodiversity hotspots in the Campo-Ma’an area. This information is essential for any decision-making process for biodiversity conservation and sustainable natural resource management. Our study has revealed that the area is characterised by a rich flora with more than 2297 species of vascular plants and about 114 endemic plant species, of which 29 are only found in the area. Although most of the forest types with plant species of high conservation priorities appeared to occur in the Campo-Ma’an National Park, there are several human activities in the area with varying negative ecological impacts on the forest ecosystem. Therefore, the successful management and long-term sustainability of the Park will largely depend on the ability to reconcile the objectives of conservation and other uses at its vicinity. The study also demonstrated that there are other biodiversity hotspots in the coastal zone and areas such as Mont dEléphant and Massif des Mamelles that are located outside the National Park. These areas support 17 strict endemic species that are not found in the park. Unfortunately, these strict endemics are the most threatened since their habitats are fragmented and degraded as a result of past and present land conversion to subsistence and industrial plantations. Furthermore, these hotspots are the type localities for some rare endemic species that are so far only known from type specimens or from a few collections made in these areas. Contrary to the National Park, these hotspots do not yet have any conservation status per se. However, although the park is a 1237 permanent state forest which is protected by law and should be solely used for forest and wildlife conservation, its boundaries have not been marked, the management plan has not yet been produced and protection is weak. It is, therefore, of urgent need to demarcate its boundary, reinforce its protection, and complete and implement its management plan as soon as possible. Furthermore, in view of the fact that pressure on these fragmented hotspots is likely to increase in the future with the growing human population density, it is suggested that a separate management strategy be developed to ensure the protection of these biodiversity hotspots and their endemic species. Acknowledgements This study was carried out in the framework of the Campo-Ma’an Biodiversity Conservation and Management Project, Cameroon, and was financially supported by Tropenbos International, The Netherlands. We will like to thank G. Achoundong, J.M. Onana, B. Sonke, L. Zapfack and P. Mezili at the National Herbarium, Cameroon, and F.J. Breteler and C.C.H. Jongkind at the Nationaal Herbarium Nederland, Wageningen University Branch, who assisted in plant identification. The staff of Campo-Ma’an Project is also acknowledged with gratitude for their assistance and support during the fieldwork. Particular thanks are for my field assistants Elad Maurice and Ossele Mathilde for their enthusiastic support and cooperation. We will also like to extend our sincere thanks to all chiefs and village representatives, for their active participation in the organisation and collection of field data. No. Family 1 Acanthaceae 2 Annonaceae 3 Annonaceae 4 Apocynaceae 5 Apocynaceae 6 Apocynaceae 7 Apocynaceae 8 9 Araceae Araceae Species Guild Star Habit Chorology Notes sb GD Hb Cam Akom II, Dipikar Island, Western and South Cameroon sb GD Sh Sw-Cam sb GD Sh Cam Akom II, Dipikar Island, Massif des Mamelles, Bipindi and Lolodorf Massif des Mamelles, Bipindi and Lolodorf sb GD Sh Cam Ma’an, South, Centre and East Cameroon Np GD Lwcl Cam Efoulan, Bipindi, Makak and Mt. Cameroon sb BK Sw-Cam Campo, Bipindi and Lolodorf sb GD Sh Lg sb sb BK He GD Hb Sw-Cam Cam Np GD Swcl Cam Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to Akom II, Onoyong and Ma’an Massif des Mamelles, Dipikar Island, Ma’an and Bipindi Bifa, Zingui, Akom II, Dipikar Island, Bipindi, Mt Cameroon and Eseka Dipikar Island, Ebolowa and Mt. Cameroon sb bu Hb Lg Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to Bipindi, Zingui sb bu Hb Lg Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to Ebianemeyong sb bu Hb Lg sb bu Hb Lg Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to Bipindi, Zingui and Grand Batanga Northern limit of distribution, from Congo, Gabon to Mvini and Efoulan 10 Aristolochiaceae 11 Balsaminaceae 12 Balsaminaceae 13 Begoniaceae Stenandrium thomense (Milne-Redh.) Vollesen Monanthotaxis elegans (Engl. and Diels) Verdc. Monodora zenkeri Engl. and Diels* Callichilia monopodialis (K.Schum.) Stapf* Landolphia flavidiflora (K. Schum.) Persoon* Petchia africana Leeuwenb.* Tabernaemontana hallei (Boiteau) Leeuwenb. Culcasia bosii Ntepe-Nyame Culcasia panduriformis Engl. and Krause Pararistolochia preussii (Engl.) Hutch. & Dalziel Impatiens hians Hook.f. var. bipindensis (Gilg) Grey- Wilson Impatiens gongolana N.Hallé Begonia anisosepala Hook.f. 14 Begoniaceae Begonia clypeifolia Hook.f. Sh 1238 Appendix 1 List of 141 plant species that are either strictly endemic to the Campo-Ma’an area (only found in Carapo-Ma’an) or near endemic (also occur in the western parts of south Cameroon or other parts of Cameroon). 15 Begoniaceae 16 Begoniaceae 17 18 19 Begoniaceae Begoniaceae Begoniaceae 20 Begoniaceae 21 Burseraceae 22 Burseraceae 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Begonia mbangaensis Sosef Begonia microsperma Warb. Begonia montis’-elephantis J.J.de Wilde* Begonia zenkeriana Smith and Wassh. Aucoumea klaineana Pierre Dacryodes buettneri (Engl.) Lam. Capparaceae Ritchiea simplicifolia Oliv. var. Caloneura (Gilg) Kers Celastraceae Pristimera luteoviridis (Exell) N.Hallé var. kribiana N.Hallé Chrysobalanaceae Dactyladenia cinera (Engl. ex de Wild) Prance and F.White** Chrysobalanaceae Dactyladenia icondere (Baill.) Prance and F.White Combretaceae Combretum cinnabarinum Engl. and Diels Cyperaceae Hypolytrum sp. nov. ined.* Dichapetalaceae Dichapetalum altescandens Engl. * Dichapetalaceae Dichapetalum cymulosum (Oliv.) Engl.* Dichapetalaceae Dichapetalum librevillense Pellegr.* bu Ep bu Hb Lg Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to Mvini, Efoulan and around Kom River Lg Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to Lolabe and around Kribi Sw-Cam Akom II, Efoulan, Bipindi and Lolodorf Cam Ebianemeyong, Ma’an, South-west and South Cameroon Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from a small population on Mt d’Eléphant Sw-Cam Campo, Massif des Mamelles, Dipikar Island, Bipindi and Lolodorf Lg Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to Ma’an and Ebianemeyong Lg Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to Ma’an and Ebianemeyong Cam Lobe, Campo, Kienke, Dipikar Island, Bipindi, Lolodorf and Ebolowa Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from few collections on Mt d’Eléphant and Dipikar Island sb sb sb BK Hb GD Hb BK Hb sb BK Hb Pi bu Tr Np bu Tr sb BK Sh Np BK Swcl sb BK Tr Sw-Cam sb bu Sh Lg np bu Lwcl sb np BK bu Hb Lwcl np GD Lwcl Northern limit of distribution, from Congo, Gabon to Grand Batanga, Campo and Dipikar Island Lg Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to Bipindi and Dipikar Island Campo-Ma’an New species only known from Mont d’Eléphant Lg Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to Efoulan and Zingui Cam Grand Batanga, Campo, Bipindi, Lolodorf and Douala np bu Lg Lwcl Rare species, only known from type specimens (Bipindi) and a record from Grand Batanga Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to Mt d’Eléphant and Campo 1239 31 Begonia elaeagnifolia Hook. ep f. Begonia heterochroma Sosef sb No. Family Species Guild Star Habit Chorology 32 Dichapetalaceae np BK Lwcl 33 Dichapetalaceae Dichapetalum oliganthum Breteler* Tapura tchoutoi Breteler sb BK Sh 34 Dryopteridaceae sb bu He 35 Ebenaceae sb BK Tr 36 Ebenaceae sb Bu Tr 37 Euphorbiaceae sb BK Sh 38 Gnetaceae Lastreopsis davalliaeformis (Tardieu) Tardieu* Diospyros alboflavescens (Gürke) F.White Diospyros soyauxii Gürke and K. Schum. Afrotrewia kamerunica Pax and Hoffm.* Gnetum buchholzianum Engl. np GD Hcl 39 Gramineae Guaduella mildbraedii Pilg.* sb BK Hb 40 Gramineae pi bu Hb 41 42 Guttiferae Guttiferae Hyparrhenia wombaliensis (Vanderyst ex Robyns) Clayton* Garcinia conrauana Engl. Garcinia densivenia Engl. Sb ri GD Tr GD Tr 43 Icacinaceae Alsodeiopsis zenkeri Engl. rh GD Sh 44 45 Icacinaceae Icacinaceae 46 Icacinaceae Iodes kamerunensis Engl. sb Rhaphiostylis ovalifolia Engl. sb ex Sleumer* Rhaphiostylis subsessilifolia sb Engl. GD Swcl GD Swcl BK Swcl Notes Sw-Cam Grand Batanga, Campo, Mt d’Eléphant, Kribi, Longi and Lolodorf. Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from few collections around Bifa and Dipikar Island Lg Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to Bipindi and Zingui Sw-Cam Rare species, only known from few collections from Bifa, Zingui and Bipindi Lg Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to Campo and Zingui Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from Massif des Mamelles Cam Dipikar Island, Onoyong, Ma’an, Littoral, South-west and South provinces of Cameroon Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from few collections in the Campo area Lg Northern limit of distribution, from Congo to Campo Cam Cam Akom II, South-west and South Cameroon Dipikar Island, Ebianemeyong, Mvini, Littoral and South Cameroon Cam Frequent along the Bongola and Ntem rivers, and other rivers in Littoral, East and South Cameroon Cam Akom II, Dipikar Island, Bipindi, Bertoua and Nanga Eboko Cam Coastal forest around Kribi, Grand Batanga, Lolabe, Elabi Massif des Mamelles, Littoral and South Cameroon Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from Grand Batanga, Ebianemeyong and Mt d’Eléphant 1240 Appendix 1 (Continued) Ixonanthaceae 48 Lauraceae 49 Lauraceae 50 Lauraceae 51 Lauraceae 52 Lauraceae 53 Leguminosae -Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae -Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae -Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae -Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae -Caesalpinioideae LeguminosaeCaesalpinioideae Leguminosae -Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae -Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae -Caesalpinioideae 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 np bu Tr sb BK Tr sb BK Tr Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from few records around Grand Batanga sb BK Tr Sw-Cam sb BK Tr Sw-Cam sb BK Tr Sw-Cam np bu Tr Lg sb GD Tr Cam np GD Tr Cam sw bu Tr Lg np bu Tr Lg ri bu Tr Lg sb BK Tr Sw-Cam Gilbertiodendron pachyant- np hum (Harms) J.Léonard Plagiosiphon longitubus sb (Harms) J.Léonard BK Tr Sw-Carm BK Tr Sw-Cam Ochthocosmus calothyrsus (Mildbr.) Hutch. and Dalziel Beilschmiedia cuspida (K. Krause) Robyns and Wilczek Beilschmiedia dinklagei (Engl.) Robyns and Wilczek* Beilschmiedia klainei Robyns and Wilczek Beilschmiedia papyracea (Stapf) Robyns and R.Wilczek Beilschmiedia welczekii Fouilloy Amphimas ferrugineus Pierre ex Pellegr. Anthonotha leptorrhachis (Harms) J.Léonard Aphanocalyx hedinii (A.Chev.) Wieringa Aphanocalyx ledermannii (Harms) Wieringa Copaifera religiosa J.Léonard Daniellia klainei A.Chev. Dialium zenkeri Harms Lg Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to Cameroon (frequent in the Campo-Ma’an area) Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from Fenda and Akom II Rare species, only known from few records from Akom II, Ebianemeyong and Bipindi Rare species, only known from Ebianemeyong, Akom II, Fenda and Bipindi Akom II, Mvini, Nkoelon, Dipikar Island, Ebianemeyong, Ma’an, Bipindi and Lolodorf Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to Dipikar Island, Ma’an, Onoyong and Akom II Bifa, Campo, Dipikar Island, Lobe, Massif des Mamelles, Mt d’Eléphant, Bipindi, Lolodorf and Mt Cameroon Akom II, Ebianemeyong, Kom, Ma’an, Bipindi and Eseka Northern limit of distribution, occurs along rivers from Gabon, Equatorial Guinea to the Dipikar Island Northern limit of distribution, from Congo to Akom II and Efoulan Northern limit of distribution, from Congo to Akom II, Eoulan and Ma’an Campo, Dipikar Island, Onoyong, Bipindi and Lolodorf Ebianemeyong, Kom, Massif des Mamelles, Bipindi and Lolodorf Akom II, Efoulan, Ma’an, Bipindi, and Lolodorf 1241 47 No. Family Species Guild Star Habit Chorology Notes 62 Plagiosiphon multijugus (Harms) J.Léonard Tetraberlinia moreliana Aubrév.* Chlorophytum petrophyllum K.Krause Mostuea neurocarpa Gilg sb GD Tr Cam Akom II, Dipikar Island, Ma’an, Bipindi and Kribi-Edea areas sb bu Lg sb GD Hb Cam Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon, Bidou and Mt. D’Eléphant Bifa, Dipikar Island, Mvini, Littoral and South Cameroon sb bu Sh Lg np BK Lwcl ri GD Tr np GD Lwcl pa GD Pa pi GD Hb Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to Bifa, Campo and Dipikar Island Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from few collections around Grand Batanga and Lolabe Cam Akom II, Dipikar Island, Ebianemeyong, Onoyong, Bipindi, Lolodorf, Kribi-Edea and South-west Cameroon Cam Dipikar Island, Mvini, Ma’an, Bipindi, Masok, Douala-EdeaKribi areas. Cam Grand Batanga, Bongola, Bipindi, Eseka, Barombi and along the Lokoundje and Nyong rivers. Cam Ma’an, Onoyong and South Cameroon sb BK Hb Sw-Cam sb BK Hb sb BK Hb sb bu Hb BK Sh 64 Leguminosae -Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae -Caesalpinioideae Liliaceae 65 Loganiaceae 66 Loganiaceae 63 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 Strychnos canthioides Leeuwenb. * Loganiaceae Strychnos elaeocarpa Gilg ex Leeuwenb. Loganiaceae Strychnos mimfiensis Gilg ex Leeuwenb. Loranthaceae Tapinanthus preussii (Engl.) Tiegh. Marantaceae Hypselodelphys zenkeriana (K.Schum.) Milne-Redh. Melastomataceae Amphiblemma letouzeyi Jacq.-Fél.* Melastomataceae Calvoa calliantha Jacq.-Fél. Melastomataceae Calvoa stenophylla Jacq.-Fél* Melastomataceae Guyonia tenella Naud. Melastomataceae Memecylon arcuato-margin- sb atum Gilg ex Engl. var. arcuatomarginatum Tr Rare species, only known from few collections recorded on hills around Akom II, Efoulan and Bipindi Sw-Cam Rare species, only known from Ebianemeyong, Akom II and Bipindi Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from type specimens collected in Zingui Lg Northern limit of distribution, from Equatorial Guinea to Lobe and Bongola Cam Akom II Dipikar Island, Kom, Mt. D’Eléphant, Kienke, Longi and Kribi-Edea 1242 Appendix 1 (Continued) 76 Menispermaceae 77 Menispermaceae 78 Moraceae 79 Moraceae 80 Myrsinaceae Albertisia glabra (Diels and Troupin) Forman Penianthus camerounensis A.Dekker Dorstenia dorstenioides (Engl.) Hijman and C.C.Berg* Dorstenia involuta M.Hijman Ardisia dolichocalyx Taton sb BK 81 Myrtaceae Eugenia kameruniana Engl.* sb 82 Ochnaceae 83 Ochnaceae 84 Ochnaceae Campylospermum letouzeyi Farron Campylospermum zenkeri (Engl. ex Tiegh.) Farron Testulea gabonensis Pellegr. 85 Olacaceae 86 Orchidaceae 87 Orchidaceae 88 Orchidaceae 89 Orchidaceae Swcl sb GD Sh sb BK Hb sb BK Hb sb GD Hb Cam BK Sh Cam sb GD Sh Cam sb GD Sh Cam np bu Octoknema dinklagei Engl. sb GD Tr Bulbophyllum alinae Szlachetko* Corymborkis minima P.J.Cribb* Podandriella batesii (la Croix) Szlachetko and Olszewski* Polystachya letouzeyana Szlachetko and Olszewski* ep BK sb GD Hb sb BK Hb ep BK Ep Tr Ep Sw-Cam Rare species, only known from Dipikar Island and Bipindi Cam Afan, Akom II, Dipikar Island, Ebianemeyong, Mekok, Littoral, South and South-west Cameroon Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from few collection around Kienke and Fenda Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from Dipikar Island and Ma’an Bifa, Campo, Dipikar Island, Onoyong, Littoral, South and South-west Cameroon Rare species, only known from Ebianemeyong, Ma’an, Nyabissan Dipikar Island and South Cameroon Campo, Massif des Mamelles, Kribi-Edea and South Cameroon Lg Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to Dipikar Island, Ma’an and Onoyong Cam Akok, Grand Batanga, Lolabe, South and South-west Cameroon Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from few collections on Mt d’Eléphant Cam Rare species, only known from few collections around Campo, Lolabe and Korup National Park Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from Akom II, Efoulan and Ebianemeyong Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from Efoulan 1243 No. Family 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 Orchidaceae Species Vanilla africana Lindley subsp. cucullata (Kraenzlin and K. Shum.) Szlachetko and Olszewski * Podostemaceae Ledermanniella annithomae C. Cusset* Podostemaceae Ledermanniella batangensis (Engl.) C. Cusset* Podostemaceae Ledermanniella bosii C.Cusset Podostemaceae Ledermanniella boumiensis C. Cusset Podostemaceae Ledermanniella kamerunensis (Engl.) C. Cusset Podostemaceae Ledermanniella linearifolia Engl. Podostemaceae Ledermanniella variabilis (G.Taylor) C.Cusset Rhizophoraceae Cassipourea kamerunensis (Engl.) Alston Rhizophoraceae Cassipourea zenkeri (Engl.) Alston Rubiaceae Chazaliella sciadephora (Hiern) Petit and Verdc, var. condensata Verdc. Rubiaceae Ecpoma apocynaceum K.Schum. Rubiaceae Hymenocoleus glaber Robbr. Guild Star Habit Chorology Notes np BK Hcl Sw-Cam Campo, Massif des Mamelles, Mt d’Eléphant and Bipindi rh BK Hb Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from Memve’ele water falls rh BK Hb Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from Lobe water falls rh BK Hb rh bu Hb rh BK Hb rh GD Hb rh GD Hb sb GD Sh Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from the Ntem Basin, Bongola, Lobe and Memve’ele waterfalls Lg Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to the Bongola and Memve’ele water falls Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from the Bongola water falls in Dipikar Island Cam Lobe and Bongola falls in the Campo-Ma’an area, and in the Nkam river in Yabassi Cam Bongola and Lobe water falls, and in Mamfe river in Southwest Cameroon Cam Akom II, Littoral and South Cameroon sb GD Sh Cam sb GD Sh Cam Akom II Bifa, Ebianemeyong, Eboundja, Lobe, Ma’an, Bipindi, Lolodorf and South Cameroon Mvini, Onoyong, Ma’an, Littoral and South Cameroon pi BK Sw-Cam Rare species, only known from Bifa, Zingui and Bipindi sb GD Hb Cam Akom II, Dipikar Island, Massif des Mamelles, Mvini, Littoral, South and South-west Cameroon Sh 1244 Appendix 1 (Continued) 103 Rubiaceae 104 105 Rubiaceae Rubiaceae 106 Rubiaceae 107 108 Rubiaceae Rubiaceae 109 Rubiaceae 110 Rubiaceae 111 Rubiaceae 112 Rubiaceae 113 Rubiaceae 114 Rubiaceae 115 Rubiaceae 116 Rubiaceae 117 Rubiaceae 118 Rubiaceae lxora aneimenodesma K.Schum. subsp. aneimenodesma Ixora synactica De Block* Oxyanthus oliganthus K.Schum. Pavetta camerounensis S.Manning subsp. camerounensis Pavetta kribiensis J.Manning Pavetta mpomii S.Manning GD Sh Cam Akom II, Dipikar Island, Bipindi and Lolodorf sb sb BK Sh GD Sh Sw-Cam Cam Rare species, only known from Efoulan, Zingui and Bipindi Akom II, Ma’an and South Cameroon sb GD Sh Cam Akom II, Bifa, Campo, Dipikar Island, Massif des Mamelles, Mt d’Eléphant, Littoral and South Cameroon sb sb BK BK Sw-Cam Sw-Cam sb GD Sh Cam Rare species, only known from Mvini, Bipindi and Lolodorf Mt d’Eélephant, Mvini, Nkoelon, Ebianemeyong, Bipindi and Lolodorf Dipikar Island, Mvini, Nkoelon and South Cameroon np GD Hb Cam sb BK Sh Campo-Ma’an sb BK Sh Campo-Ma’an sb GD Sh Cam ri BK Sh Campo-Ma’an sb BK Sh Sw-Cam sb BK Sh Campo-Ma’an sb GD Sh Cam sb GD Sh Cam Sh Sh Ebianemeyong, Nyabissan, Ma’an, Centre and South Cameroon Rare species, only known from few collections around Grand Batanga Rare species, only known from few collections around Grand Batanga Akom II, Bifa, Ma’an, Bipindi, Lolodorf, Centre and South Cameroon Rare species, only known from few collections from Grand Batanga and Lobe Rare species, only known from Akom II, Onoyong, Bipindi and Lolodorf Rare species, only known from few collections around Grand Batanga Akok, Bifa, Campo, Dipikar Island, Kom, Mvini and South Cameroon Akom II, Dipikar Island, Massif des Mamelles, Mvini, and South Cameroon 1245 Pavetta staudtii Hutch. and Dalziel Pseudosabicea medusula (K.Schum.) N.Hallé Psychotria aemulans K. Schum.** Psychotria batangana K. Schum.* Psychotria camerunensis Petit Psychotria dimorphophylla K. Schurm.* Psychotria lanceifolia K.Schum. Psychotria oligocarpa K.Schum.* Psychotria sadebeckiana K.Schum.var. elongata Petit Psychotria sadebeckiana K.Scham. var. sadebeckiana sb No. Family Guild Star Habit Chorology Notes sb GD Sh Cam sb GD Sh Cam Dipikar Island, Massif des Mamelles, Centre and South Cameroon Ebianemeyong, Mvini, Centre and South Cameroon sb GD Swcl Cam Mvini, Nkoelon, Centre and South Cameroon sb BK Sh Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from few collections around Campo sb BK Sh sb bu Sh Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from Bifa, Massif des Mamelles and Dipikar Island Lg Northern limit of distribution, from Gabon to Dipikar Island sb GD Sh Cam BK Sh BK Tr 128 Scytopetalaceae Rhaptopetalum sessilifoIium sb Engl.* Sterculiaceae Cola fibrillosa Engl. and sb Krause Sterculiaceae Cola letouzeyana Nkongm. sb GD Sh 129 Sterculiaceae sb GD Sh 130 Sterculiaceae sb BK Sh 131 Sterculiaceae sb BK Sh 132 Sterculiaceae sb BK Sh 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 Species Rubiaceae Tricalysia amplexicaulis Robbr. Rubiaceae Tricalysia talbotii (Wemham) Keay Rubiaceae Vangueriella laxiflora (K.Schum.) Verdc. Sapindaceae Deinbollia macroura Gilg ex Radlkofer* Sapindaceae Deinbollia mezilii D.W.Thomas and D.J.Harris Sapindaceae Deinbollia pycnophylla Gilg ex Radlk. Scytopetalaceae Pierrina zenkeri Engl. Cola praeacuta Brenan and Keay Scaphopetalum acuminatum Engl. and K. Krause* Scaphopetalum brunneo-purpureum Engl. and K. Krause** Scaphopetalum zenkeri K-Schum. Bifa, Campo, Ebianemeyong, Ma’an, Nyabissan, Littoral and South Cameroon Sw-Cam Rare species, only known from few collections around Efoulan and Bipindi Sw-Cam Rare species, only known from few collections around Dipikar Island and Bipindi Cam Akora II, Dipikar Island, Ebianemeyong, Onoyong, Centre and South Cameroon Cam Bifa, Dipikar Island, Massif des Mamelles, South and Southwest Cameroon Carapo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from few collections from Efoulan and Fenda Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from few collections from Fenda and Zingui Sw-Cam Akom II, Dipikar Island, Ebianemeyong, Bipindi and Lolodorf 1246 Appendix 1 (Continued) 133 Thymelaeaceae 134 Urticaceae 135 Violaceae 136 Violaceae 137 138 Dicranolepis glandulosa H.H.W.Pearson Urera gravenreuthi Engl. sb GD Sh pi GD Hcl sb BK Sh sb BK Sh Violaceae Violaceae Allexis zygomorpha Achoundong and Onana* Rinorea campoensis M. Brandt ex Engl. Rinorea microglossa Engl.* Rinorea sp. nov. 1 ined.* sb sb BK GD Sh Sh 139 Violaceae Rinorea sp. nov. 2 ined.* sb GD Sh 140 Zingiberaceae Sb BK Hb 141 Zingiberaceae Aulotandra kamerunensis Loes. Renealmia densispica Koechlin Sb BK Hb Cam Akom II, Dipikar Island, Grand Batanga, Campo, Littoral South, and South-west Cameroon Cam Dipikar Island, Ma’an, Littoral, South and South-west Cameroon Cam Coastal forest between Edea and Campo, Bidou, Akok, Longi, Bipindi and Lolodorf Campo-Ma’an Rare species, only known from Campo, Dipikar Island, Lobe and Massif des Mamelles Sw-Cam Efoulan, Bipindi, Lolodorf, Centre and South Cameroon Cam Coastal forest between Kribi and Campo, Dipikar Island, and Douala-Edea-Kribi regions Cam Kienke, Massif des Mamelles, Dipikar Island, Kribi, KribiEdea, Douala- Yaounde, and Eseka regions Sw-Cam Rare species, only known from few collections from Ebianemeyong, Nyabissan and Bipindi Sw-Cam Rare species, only known from few collections from Dipikar Island, Ebianemeyong and Ambam Those species that reach their northern or southern limit of distribution in the Campo-Ma’an area are also included in the list. *Species strictly endemic to the Campo-Ma’an area that were not recorded in the National Park. **Species for which the status or range needs more investigation. Guild: ep, epiphyte; np, non-pioneer light demanding; pi, pioneer; rh, rheophyte; ri, riverine; sb, shade-bearer; and sw, swamp. Star: as defined in Table 1. Habit: Ep, epiphyte; Hb, herb; Hcl, herbaceous climber; He, hemi-epiphyte; Lwcl, large woody climber; Swcl, small woody climber; Pa, parasite; Sh, shrub; and Tr, tree. Chorology: Campo-Ma’an, strict endemic to Campo-Ma’an; Sw-Cam, endemic to southwestern part of Cameroon; Cam, endemic to Cameroon; Lg, Lower Guinea endemic (especially those species that reach either their northern or southern limit of distribution in the Campo-Ma’an area). 1247 No. Family Species Guild Habit Chorology IUCN/WCMC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Afrofittonia silvestris Lindau Sclerochiton preussii (Lindau) C.B.Clarke Antrocaryon micraster A. Chev. and Guillaum. Trichoscypha bijuga Engl. Trichoscypha mannii Hook. f. Boutiquea platypetala Le Thomas Pachypodanthium barteri (Benth.) Hutch. and Dalziel Uvariastrum zenkeri Engl. and Diels Uvariodendron connivens (Benth.) R.E.Fr. Tylophora cameroonica N.E.Br. Cordia platythyrsa Baker Aucoumea klaineana Pierre Dacryodes igaganga Aubrev. And Pellegr. Salacia lehmbachii Loes. var. pes-ranulae N.Hallé Dactyladenia cinera (Engl. ex de Wild) Prance and F.White Terminalia ivorensis A.Chev. Hemandradenia mannii Stapf Diospyros barteri Hiern Diospyros crassiflora Hiern Amanoa strobilacea Müll.Arg. Crotonogyne manniana Müll.Arg. Drypetes preussii (Pax) Hutch. Drypetes tessmanniana (Pax) Pax and K.Hoffm. Neoboutonia mannii Benth. Pseudagrostistachys africana (Müll.Arg.) Pax and K.Hoffm. Garcinia brevipedicellata (Baker f.) Hutch. and Dalziel Garcinia kola Heckel Garcinia staudtii Engl. Hoplestigma pierreanum Gilg Afrostyrax kamerunensis Perkins and Gilg sb sb pi sb sb sb sw sb sb pi pi pi np np sb np sb sb sb sb sb sb sb pi sb sb sb sb np sb Acanthaceae Acanthaceae Anacardiaceae Anacardiaceae Anacardiaceae Annonaceae Annonaceae Annonaceae Annonaceae Asclepiadaceae Boraginaceae Burseraceae Burseraceae Celastraceae Chrysobalanaceae Combretaceae Connaraceae Ebenaceae Ebenaceae Euphorbiaceae Euphorbiaceae Euphorbiaceae Euphorbiaceae Euphorbiaceae Euphorbiaceae Guttiferae Guttiferae Guttiferae Hoplestigmataceae Huaceae Hb Hb Tr Tr Tr Sh Tr Sh Tr Swcl Tr Tr Tr Swcl Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Sh Sh Tr Sh Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Lg Lg Lg Lg Lg Lg Lg Lg Lg Lg Gc Lg Lg Lg Sw-Cam Gu Lg Gu Gc Gu Lg Lg Lg Gu Lg Lg Gc Lg Lg Lg VU A1c + 2c EN B1 + 2e VU A1cd CR A1c + 2abc VU A1C, B1 + 2c EN A1c + 2c VU A1c VU A1c, B1 + 2c LR/nt LR/nt VU A1d VU A1cd VU A1cd + 2cd VU B1 + 2c CR B1 + 2c VU A1cd LR/nt VU A1c EN A1d VU A1c, B1 + 2c LR/nt VU B1 + 2c CR A1c + 2c LR/nt VU A1c, B1 + 2c VU A1c, B1 + 2c VU A1cd VU A1c, B1 + 2c CRA1c + 2c VU A1c, B1 + 2c 1248 Appendix 2 IUCN (1994) threat categories for 92 plant species recorded in the Campo-Ma’an area that are listed in The IUCN (2002) Red List of Threatened Species and The World List of Threatened Trees (WCMC 1998). Huaceae Irvingiaceae Irvingiaceae Leguminosae-Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae-Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae-Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae-Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae-Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae-Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae-Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae-Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae-Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae-Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae-Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae-Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae-Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae-Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae-Caesalpinioideae Leguminosae-Mimosoideae Leguminosae-Mimosoideae Leguminosae-Mimosoideae Leguminosae-Papilionoideae Leguminosae-Papilionoideae Leguminosae-Papilionoideae Leguminosae-Papilionoideae Liliaceae Melastomataceae Melastomataceae Melastomataceae Meliaceae Meliaceae Meliaceae Meliaceae Meliaceae Afrostyrax lepidophyllus Mildbr. Irvingia excelsa Mildbr. Irvingia gabonensis (Aubry-Lecomte ex O’Rorke) Baill. Afzelia bipindensis Harms Afzelia pachyloba Harms Anthonotha leptorrhachis (Harms) J.Léonard Aphanocalyx hedinii (A.Chev.) Wieringa Daniellia klainei A.Chev. Daniellia oblonga Oliv. Dialium bipindense Harms Dialium tessmannii Harms Didelotia unifoliolata J.Léonard Gilbertiodendron pachyanthum (Harms) J.Léonard Guibourtia ehie (A. Chev.) J. Léonard Loesenera talbotii Baker f. Pellegriniodendron diphyllum (Harms) J.Léonard Plagiosiphon longitubus (Harms) J.Léonard Swartzia fistuloides Harms Calpocalyx heitzii Pellegr. Calpocalyx letestui Pellegr. Calpocalyx ngouniensis Pellegr. Craibia atlantica Dunn Millettia laurentii De Wild. Millettia macrophylla Benth. Ormocarpum klainei Tisser. Chlorophytum petrophyllum K.Krause Memecylon candidum Gilg Memecylon dasyanthum Gilg ex Lederman and Engl. Warneckea wildeana Jacq.-Fél. Entandrophragma angolense (Welw.) C.DC. Entandrophragma candollei Harms Entandrophragma cylindricum (Sprague)Sprague Entandrophragma utile (Dawe and Sprague) Sprague Guarea cedrata (A.Chev.) Pellegr. sb np np np np sb np ri np np sb sb np np sb sb sb sb np sb sb sb np pi sb sb sb sb sb np np np np np Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Sh Hb Sh Tr Sh Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Lg Gc Gc Gc Gc Cam Cam Lg Lg Lg Lg Lg Sw-Cam Gc Lg Gu Sw-Cam Gc Lg Gc Gc Gc Gc Lg Lg Cam Lg Lg Lg Tra Gc Gc Gc Gc VU A1c, B1 + 2c LR/nt LR/nt VU A1cd VU A1d CR A1c + 2c CR B1 + 2abcd, C1 + 2ab LR/nt VU A1c LR/nt LR/nt LR/nt VU D2 VU A1c VU A1c, B1 + 2c LR/nt CR A1 + 2c EN A1cd VU A1c, B1 + 2c VU D2 VU A1c VU A1c EN A1cd VU A1c, B1 + 2c CR A1c CR A1c + 2c VU B1 + 2c VU B1 + 2c VU D2 VU A1cd VU A1 cd VU A1cd VU A1cd VU A1c 1249 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 No. Family Species Guild Habit Chorology IUCN/WCMC 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 Meliaceae Meliaceae Meliaceae Meliaceae Meliaceae Moraceae Myrtaceae Ochnaceae Ochnaceae Rhizophoraceae Rubiaceae Rubiaceae Rutaceae Sapotaceae Sapotaceae Sapotaceae Sapotaceae Simaroubaceae Sterculiaceae Sterculiaceae Sterculiaceae Sterculiaceae Sterculiaceae Sterculiaceae Sterculiaceae Sterculiaceae Violaceae Violaceae Guarea thompsonii Sprague and Hutch. Khaya anthotheca (Welw.) C. DC. Khaya ivorensis A.Chev. Lovoa trichilioides Harms Turraeanthus africanus (Welw. ex C DC.) Pellegr. Milicia excelsa (Welw.) C.C.Berg Eugenia kameruniana Engl. Lophira alata Banks ex Gaertn.f. Testulea gabonensis Pellegr. Anopyxis klaineana (Pierre) Engl. Hallea stipulosa (DC.) Leroy Nauclea diderrichii (De Wild. And T.Durand) Merrill Vepris heterophylla Letouzey Autranella congolensis (De Wild.) A.Chev. Baillonella toxisperma Pierre Gluema ivorensis AubréV. and Pellegr. Tieghemella africana Pierre Nothospondias staudtii Engl. Cola hypochrysea K.Schum. Cola philipijonesii Brenan and Keay Cola praeacuta Brenan and Keay Cola semecarpophylla K.Schum. Mansonia altissima (A.Chev.) A.Chev. var. kamerunica Jacq.-Fél. Pterygota bequaertii De Wild. Pterygota macrocarpa K.Schum. Sterculia oblonga Mast. Allexis cauliflora (Oliv.) Pierre Allexis obanensis (Baker f.) Melchior np np np np sb pi sb pi np np sw pi sb np np np np np sw sb sb sb np np np pi sb sb Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Sh Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Sh Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Sh Sh Sh Tr Tr Tr Tr Sh Sh Gc Gc Gc Gc Gc Tra Cam Gc Lg Gc Gc Gc Gc Gc Lg Gc Lg Gc Lg Lg Cam Lg Gu Gc Gc Gc Lg Lg VU A1c VU A1cd VU A1cd VU A1cd VU A1cd LR/nt CR A1c VU A1cd EN A1cd VU A1cd VU A1cd VU A1cd EN A1c, B1 + 2c CR AIcd VU A1cd VU B1 + 2c EN A1cd VU B1 + 2c VU A1c EN B1 + 2c CR A1c + 2c LR/cd EN A1cd VU A1cd VU A1cd VU A1cd VU A1c, B1 + 2c VU B1 + 2c NB: Guild, habit and chorology categories as defined in Appendix 1. 1250 Appendix 2 (Continued) 1251 References Aubréville A. and Leroy J.-F. (eds) 1961–1992. Flore du Gabon. Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris. Aubréville A. and Leroy J.-F. (eds) 1963–2000. Flore du Cameroun, vol. 1–20. Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris. Barbault R. and Sastrapradja S. 1995. Generation, maintenance and loss of biodiversity. In Heywood V.H. and Watson R.T. (eds), Global Biodiversity Assessment. Cambridge University Press, UNEP, pp. 192–294. Cable S. and Cheek M. 1998. The plants of Mount Cameroon. A conservation checklist. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Cusset C. 1987. Flore du Cameroun. In: Satabié B. and Morat Ph. (eds), Podostemaceae, vol. 30. Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris. Davis S.D., Heywood V.H. and Hamilton A.C. 1994. Centres of Plant Diversity. A Guide and Strategy for their Conservation. WWF, IUCN. de Kam M., Fines J.-P. and Akogo G. (eds) 2002. Schéma Directeur pour le developpement de l’Unité Technique Opérationnelle de Campo-Ma’an, Cameroun. Campo-Ma’an Series 1, . Djama T. 2001. Inventaire quantitatif des poissons dans l’UTO Campo-Ma’an. Projet CampoMa’an, Kribi, Cameroon. ERE Développement 2002. Etude socio-économique dans l’UTO de Campo-Ma’an. Rapport final phase 2: résultats d’énquetes auprés des ménages. SNV/Projet Campo-Ma’an. Foahom B. and Jonkers W.B.J. 1992. A Programme for Tropenbos Research in Cameroon. Final report. Tropenbos-Cameroon Programme (Phase I). The Tropenbos Foundation, Wageningen. Franqueville A. 1973. Atlas regional Sud-Ouest 1. République du Cameroun. ORSTOM, Yaoundé, Cameroun. Gartlan J.S. 1989. La conservation des ecosystemes forestiers du Cameroun. IUCN. Hamilton A.C. 1982. Environmental History of Africa: A Study of the Quaternary. Academic Press, London. Hawks worth D.L. and Kalin-Arroyo M.T. 1995. Magnitude and distribution of biodiversity. In: Heywood V.H. and Watson R.T. (eds), Global Biodiversity Assessment. UNEP, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 108–191. Hawthorne W.D. 1996. Holes and the sums of parts in Ghanian forest: regeneration, scale and sustainable use. Proc. R. Soc. Edin. 104: 75–176. Hawthorne W.D. and Abu-Juam M. 1995. Forest protection in Ghana with particular reference to vegetation and plant species. The IUCN Forest Conservation Programme. Heywood V.H. and Waston R.T. 1995. Global Biodiversity Assessment. UNEP, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. ILWIS 2001. ILWIS 3.0 Academic: User’s Guide. ITC, Enschede. Isaaks E.H. and Srivastava R.M. 1989. An Introduction to Applied Geostatistics. Oxford University Press, New York. IUCN 1994. IUCN Red List Categories. IUCN, Gland. IUCN 2002. 2002 IUCN Red list of Threatened Species. IUCN Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge. Keay R.W.J. and Hepper F.N. (eds) 1954. Flora of West Tropical Africa. 2nd edn., 3 vols. Crown Agents, London. Lebrun J.P. and Stork A.L. 2003. Tropical African flowering plants-ecology and distribution, vol. 1. Annonaceae-Balanitaceae. Conservatoire et Jardin Botanique de la Ville de Genéve. Letouzey R. 1968. Etude phytogeographique du Cameroun. Le Chevalier, Paris. Letouzey R. 1985. Notice de la carte phytogéographique du Cameroun, vol. 1–5. Institut de la Carte Internationale de la Végétation, Toulouse. Maley J. 1987. Fragmentation de la forêt dense humide Africaine et extention des biotopes montagnards du Quaternaire recent. Paleoecol. Afr. 18: 307–309. 1252 Maley J. 1989. Late Quaternary climatic changes in the African rainforest: the question of forest refuges and the major role of sea surface temperature variations. In Lewen M. and Sarthein M. (eds), Paleoclimatology and Paleometeolorogy: Modern and Past Patterns of Global Atmospheric Transport. Kluwer, London, pp. 585–616. Maley J. 1990. Histoire récente de la forêt dense humide africaine: essai sur le dynamisme de quelques formations forestières. In: Lanfranchi R. and Schwartz D. (eds), Paysage quaternaire de l’afrique centrale Atlantique pp.367–382. Maley J. 1993. The climatic and vegetational history of the equatorial regions of Africa during the upper Quaternary. In: Shaw T., Sinclair P., Andah B. and Okpoko A. (eds), The Archeology of Africa: Food, Metals and Towns, pp. 43–52. Maley J. 1996. Le cadre paléoenvironnemental des refuges forestiers africains : quelques données et hypothéses. In: der Maesen L.J.G., der Burgt X.M. and de Rooy J.M. (eds), The Biodiversity of African Plants. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 519–535. Matthews A. and Matthews A. 2000. Primate Population and Inventory of Large and Medium Sized Mammals in the Campo-Ma’an Project Area in Southwest Cameroon, including Management Recommendations. Projet Campo-Ma’an, Kribi, Cameroun. Muller J.P. 1979. Carte des sols du Cameroun. Atlas de la République Unie du Cameroun. Myers N. 1988. Threatened biotas ‘hotspots’ in tropical forests. Environmentalist 8: 187–208. Myers N., Mittermeir R.A., Mittermeir C.G., da Fonseca G.A.B and Kent J. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853–858. Pebesma E.J. and Wesseling C.G. 1998. GSTAT: a program for geostatistical modelling, prediction and simulation. Comput. Geosci. 24: 17–31. R Development Core Team 2002. The R Environment for Statistical Computing and Graphics: Reference Index. The R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. Version 1.6.2. Satabié, B. and Leroy J.-F. 1980. Flore du Cameroun, vol. 21–28. Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris. Satabié B. and Morat Ph. 1986–2001. Flore du Cameroun, vol. 29–37. Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris. Sosef M.S.M. 1994. Refuge Begonias. Taxonomy, phylogeny and historical biogeography of Begonia sect. Loasibegonia and sect. Scutobegonia in relation to glacial rain forest refuges in Africa. PhD Thesis, Wageningen Agricultural University. Sosef M.S.M. 1996. Begonias and African rain forest refuges : general aspects and recent progress. In: der Maesen L.J.G., der Burgt X.M. and de Rooy J.M. (eds), The Biodiversity of African Plants. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 602–611. Tchouto P., Pouakouyou D. and Acworth J. 1998. Rapid Botanical Survey methodology. Technical report to DFID/Mount Cameroon Project. Limbe Botanic Garden and Herbarium. Tchouto M.G.P. 2004. Plant diversity in a Central African rain forest: implifications for biodiversity conservation in Cameroon. Phd Thesis, Wageningen University. Thomas D.W. and Thomas J.C. 1993. Botanical and ecological survey of the Campo-Ma’an area. A report to the World Bank, Washington. Van Gemerden B.S. and Hazeu G.W. 1999. Landscape ecolofical survey (1:100,000) of the BipindiAkom II-Lolodorf region, Southwest Cameroon. Tropenbos-Cameroon Document 1. Vivien J. 1991. Faune du Cameroun. Guide des mammiféres et poisons. GICAM, Cameroun. WCMC 1998. The World List of Threatened Trees. World Conservation Press, . Webster R. and Oliver M.A. 2001. Geostatistics for Environmental Scientists. Wiley & sons, Chichester. White F. 1979. The Guineo-Congolian region and its relationships to other phytochoria. Bull. Jard. Nat. Belg./Bull. Nat. Plant. Belg. 49: 11–55. White F. 1983. The Vegetation of Africa. UNESCO, Paris. Williams P.H. 1993. Measuring more of biodiversity for chosing conservation areas, using taxonomic relatedness. In: Moon T.-Y. (ed.), International Symposium on Biodiversity and Conservation. Korean Entomological Institute, Seoul, pp. 199–227.