Indian Journal of Plant Sciences ISSN: 2319-3824 (Online) An Online International Journal Available at http://www.cibtech.org/jps.htm 2013 Vol. 2 (3) July-September, pp.35-42/Ghosh Research Article DIVERSITY AND DISTRIBUTION OF CLIMBING PLANTS IN LITTORAL FOREST OF NORTH ANDAMAN NORTH ANDAMAN ISLANDS, INDIA *Asutosh Ghosh Taxonomy and Biosystematics Lab, Department of Botany, University of Calcutta, Kolkata, WB, India *Author for Correspondence ABSTRACT The present study examined the floristic diversity, dominance, abundance and IVI of climbers and lianas species in the tropical littoral vegetation of North Andaman forest. A total of 377 climbing plants belonging to 53 species, 33 genera, and 20 families were identified. The most dominant families are Papilionaceae (15.09%), Arecaceae (13.20%). These consisted of 27 liana and 26 herbaceous climber species. Hook climbing was the most predominant (27%) climbing mechanism. The dominant species recorded from this forest were Calamus andamanicus, (IVI-26.84), Daemonorops manii (IVI-16.73). Tylophora indica shows the highest frequent (100%) species. Most of the species were randomly distributed (60.37%) whereas some showed clumped distribution (39.62%). Key Words: Diversity, Climbing Plants, Littoral, North Andaman INTRODUCTION Climbers occur in all woody ecosystem of the world although a high abundance is considered to be characteristic of tropical and subtropical forests (Bongers et al., 2005). Specifically in tropical rain forest, they comprise about 25-30% of species diversity (Schnitzer and Bongers, 2002). Climbers play important ecological roles in the forest ecosystem dynamics and functioning (Nabe-Nielsen, 2001; Bongers et al., 2002) they contribute substantially to canopy closure after tree fall and help stabilize the microclimate underneath (Schnitzer and Bongers, 2002). In spite of the numerous roles climbers play in ecosystems, little attention has been given to them they are scanty treated in literature (Bongers et al., 2005) almost all work on forest plant communities have over relied heavily on tree (Turner et al., 1996) probably due to commercial value of many trees among other reasons (Bongers et al., 2005). A few quantitative ecological studies on lianas are available from the forests of Sarawak (Proctor et al., 1983; Putz and Chai, 1987), Sabah, East Ma-laysia (Campbell and Newbery, 1993), Queensland, Australia (Hegarty, 1989, 1990), Hunter Valley, New South Wales (Chalmers and Turner, 1994), Knysna, South Africa (Balfour and Bond, 1993), Itu-ri, Congo (Makana et al., 1998), Costa Rica (Lie-berman et al., 1996), Barro Colorado island, Pa-nama (Putz, 1984) and in the subtropical humid forest of Bolivia (Pinard et al., 1999). Such studies are lacking from Indian forests, except for the two recent works in the forest of Anamalais, Western Ghats (Muthuramkumar and Parthasarathy, 2000; Srinivas and Parthasarathy, 2000) and from the Ka-lrayan hills, Eastern Ghats (Kadavul and Partha-sarathy, 1999). North Andaman, a major group of islands, is rich in species diversity. But very little information exists on the ecological aspects of the littoral forest communities these Islands. The specific objectives of the present study was to determine the diversity and distribution of climbing plants in the littoral forest of North Andaman as a way of contributing to the understanding of the general floristic composition, abundance and diversity. MATERIALS AND METHODS The North Andaman is the northernmost island of the Andaman region and includes about 70 other smaller islands. It is located between 1341 N to 1250 N latitudes and 9211 E to 9307 E longitudes, covering an area of 1458 km2, and is separated from the Middle Andaman by Austin Strait. 35 Indian Journal of Plant Sciences ISSN: 2319-3824 (Online) An Online International Journal Available at http://www.cibtech.org/jps.htm 2013 Vol. 2 (3) July-September, pp.35-42/Ghosh Research Article The phytosociological study in this region was carried out during the years 2001-2004, through nested quadrate sampling method. Twelve quadrate plots (32 x 32 m) were studied for recording ground covers (Mishra, 1966; Malhotra, 1973; Das and Lahiri, 1997; Rai et al., 2011) (Figure 1). In each quadrate the climbing plants were enumerated and measured for girth (GBH >0.5 cm) at breast height. The collected voucher specimens were processed into mounted herbarium sheets following the conventional methodology (Jain and Rao, 1977) and were identified and deposited at CUH Herbarium. Climbing mechanisms were also studied for each species and classified them based on observations in the field and reliable references (Putz, 1984). The collected field-data were analyzed for Species structure (frequency, density, abundance, basal area, importance value index (IVI), using the formula as suggested by Mishra (1966), Phillips (1959), Das and Lahiri (1997) and Ghosh (2006). The species diversity was determined using Shannon-Weiner’s Index (1963). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION In this Littoral forest, a total of 53 species of climbers and lianas were recorded, of which 52 species are angiosperms, and one species is a Pteridophyte (Lygodium flexuosum). Within the angiosperms, 37 species are from the dicotyledons (24 genera, 15 families) and 15 species are from the monocotyledons (9 genera, 5 families). In such forest, 26 species (49.05%) are climbers and 27 species (50.94%) are lianas. The most diverse families in terms of species richness were Papilionaceae (15.09%), Arecaceae (13.20%), Caesalpiniaceae, Menispermaceae and Vitaceae (7.54%) (The details of the determined phytosociological values are recorded in Table 1). Within the 52 species, 20 species (37.73%) are hook climbers, 15 species (28.3%) are stem twiners, 9 (16.98%) tendril climbers, 5 (9.43%) root climbers, and 4 (7.54%) branch twiners (Figure 1). It was found that Tylophora indica shows the highest frequency (100%) with density of 13.3333/hec. in the forest; followed by Cissus discolor and Thunbergia laurifolia (frequency: 66.66%, density: 11.6667/hec). In four species (Species Codes: 6, 23, 25, and 32) the frequency is low (16.66%) with density of 4.1666/hec.; followed by six species (Species Codes: 1, 9, 26, 27, 43 and 45) same frequency (16.66%), but bit lower density (2.5/hec.). It is found that Bridelia cinnamomea has highest relative abundance (8.2791) with 16.16% frequency in the forest followed by Bridelia stipularis (rel. abund.- 3.9216, with frequency 16.16%); Calamus longisetus (rel. abund.- 3.7764, with frequency 25%); Lygodium flexuosum (rel. abund.- 3.0502, with frequency 16.16%); Tinospora cordifolia (rel. abund.- 2.9049, with frequency 25%) and Dalbergia candenatensis (rel. abund.-2.7597, with 50% frequency). Among the littoral species, minimum rel. abundance (0.8714) with 25% frequency has been found in two species Plecospermum andamanicum and Scindapsus officinalis (Figure 2). Data on density-Rank relationship of species show that Bridelia cinnamomea and Dalbergia volubilis occupy first rank with maximum density 15.8333/hec, followed by Tylophora indica (13.3333/hec), Cissus repens, Thunbergia laurifolia (11.6666/hec), Calamus longisetus (10.8333/hec), Capparis floribunda, and Cissus discolor (10/hec) etc. The minimum density (1.6666/hec) is found in Diploclisia glaucescens, Tetrastigma lanceolarium, Ventilago madraspatana etc. Except Bridelia cinnamomea, and Dalbergia volubilis, other species show logarithmic pattern with regression value (R 2) =0.9843 (Figure 3). From the plotting of mean and variance of species in the littoral forest it is evident that species having values ranging from 0.1667-1.5833 and 0.3333-14.0833 of mean and variance respectively, whereas those with the range from 0.0833-1.1667 and 0.0833-1.4773 of mean and variance respectively are generally random in distribution in the habitat. Degree of freedom is 11. The species are aggregated in distribution show 0 to 0.024371 probabilities with chi square values ranging from 22 to 97.8421, whereas species of random distribution show probability of 0.027062 to 0.894982 with chi square values ranging from 5.6667 to 21.6667 (Figure 4). Calamus andamanicus, shows the highest IVI (26.84), followed by Daemonorops manii (16.73), Daemonorops kurzianus (16.42), Dalbergia candenatensis (13.35), Calamus longisetus (12.17), Tylophora 36 Indian Journal of Plant Sciences ISSN: 2319-3824 (Online) An Online International Journal Available at http://www.cibtech.org/jps.htm 2013 Vol. 2 (3) July-September, pp.35-42/Ghosh Research Article indica (10.89). The minimum IVI (1.18) is found in Tetrastigma lanceolarium. Except Calamus andamanicus, other species show logarithmic pattern with regression value (R 2) =0.9416 (Figure 5). Types of climbers and lianas in Littoral forest. Stem tw iner 20 Branch Tw iner 15 Tendril No. of climbers 10 & lianas. Hook 5 Root climber 0 Figure 1: Types of climbers and lianas in Littoral forest Rel. Abundance Comparison of Relative Abundance and Frequency of Species y = 0.0571x + 0.1528 R2 = 0.8588 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Frequency Figure 2: Comparison of Relative Abundance and frequency of Littoral forest Comparison of Density-Rank relation of Species 60 50 y = -25.77Ln(x) + 68.579 R2 = 0.9843 Rank 40 30 20 10 0 0 5 10 15 20 De ns ity/he c. Figure 3: Comparison of density-rank relation of Littoral forest species COMPARISON OF MEAN AND VARIANCE OF SPECIES IN LITTORAL FOREST 16 14 VARIANCE 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 0.5 1 MEAN 1.5 Figure 4: Comparison of mean and variance of Littoral forest species 37 Indian Journal of Plant Sciences ISSN: 2319-3824 (Online) An Online International Journal Available at http://www.cibtech.org/jps.htm 2013 Vol. 2 (3) July-September, pp.35-42/Ghosh Research Article Table 1: Phytosociological analysis of the recorded species [F= Frequency, D= Density, RA = Relative Abundance, RD = Relative Density, RF = Relative Frequency, IVI = Importance Value Index, A/F= Abundance and frequency Ratio] Sp. code 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Species Family Adenia cardiophylla (Masters) Engler Adenia trilobata (Roxb.) Engl. Ancistrocladus tectorius (Lour.) Merr. Bridelia cinnamomea Hook.f Bridelia stipularis (L.) Bl. Passifloraceae Caesalpinia andamanica (Prain) Hattink Caesalpiniaceae Caesalpinia bonduc Roxb. Caesalpinia crista L. Caesalpiniaceae (L.) Ancistrocladacea e Euphorbiaceae Euphorbiaceae Caesalpiniaceae Caesalpiniaceae 10 11 Calamus longisetus Griff. Arecaceae 12 Calamus palustris Griff. Arecaceae 13 14 Calamus pseudorivalis Becc. Calamus viminalis Willd. Arecaceae Arecaceae 15 Capparis floribunda Wight Cappariadaceae 16 Cayratia japonica (Thunb.) Gagnep. Cissus discolor Bl. Vitaceae Cissus repens Lam. Vitaceae Menispermaceae 18 19 20 21 22 Cyclea peltata (Lam.) Hook. f. & Thomson D RA RF RD Rel. Dom. IVI A/F Ratio 16.67 25 1.30 1.04 0.8 0.01 1.83 9 25 58.33 2.03 1.55 1.86 0.01 3.42 9.33 50 16.67 66.67 158.3 1.16 8.27 3.11 1.04 2.12 5.04 0.88 1.11 6.10 7.18 2.66 57 16.67 75 3.92 1.04 2.39 0.57 3.99 27 16.67 41.67 2.17 1.04 1.33 1.81 4.16 15 58.33 83.33 1.24 3.63 2.65 3.27 9.55 2.44 25 33.33 1.16 1.55 1.06 1.55 4.16 5.33 16.67 25 1.30 1.04 0.8 0.61 9 66.67 75 0.98 4.15 2.39 20.3 25 108.3 3.77 1.55 3.45 7.17 2.44 26.8 4 12.1 7 25 25 50 33.33 1.74 1.16 1.55 1.55 1.59 1.06 3.52 2.4 6.66 5.01 8 5.33 41.67 66.67 1.39 2.59 2.12 3.76 8.47 3.84 41.67 100 2.09 2.59 3.18 0.03 5.80 5.76 25 41.67 1.45 1.55 1.33 0.08 2.96 6.66 66.67 33.33 116.7 100 1.52 2.61 4.15 2.07 3.71 3.18 0.25 0.22 8.10 5.47 2.62 9 33.33 58.33 1.52 2.07 1.86 0.02 3.94 5.25 50 75 1.30 3.11 2.39 10.9 41.67 58.33 1.22 2.59 1.86 12.3 50 158.3 2.76 3.11 5.04 5.2 16.4 3 16.7 4 13.3 5 16.67 41.67 2.17 1.04 1.33 1.17 3.52 8 15 Passifloraceae Caesalpinia enneaphylla Roxb. Calamus andamanicus Kurz 17 F Arecaceae Vitaceae Arecaceae Daemonorops kurzianus Becc Daemonorops manii Becc Arecaceae 1.68 17.33 3 3.36 Dalbergia candenatensis (Dennst.) Prain Papilionaceae Papilionaceae 24 Dalbergia confertiflora Benth. Dalbergia junghuhnii Benth. Papilionaceae 41.67 50 1.04 2.59 1.59 1.53 5.71 2.88 25 Dalbergia volubilis Roxb. Papilionaceae 16.67 41.67 2.17 1.04 1.33 0.09 2.44 15 26 Derris andaminaca Prain Papilionaceae 16.67 25 1.30 1.04 0.8 0.79 2.61 9 27 Derris elegans andamanensis 16.67 25 1.30 1.04 0.8 1.03 2.86 9 23 Benth. f. 6.33 Papilionaceae 38 Indian Journal of Plant Sciences ISSN: 2319-3824 (Online) An Online International Journal Available at http://www.cibtech.org/jps.htm 2013 Vol. 2 (3) July-September, pp.35-42/Ghosh Research Article 28 Dinochloa andamanica Kurz Poaceae 29 Diploclisia glaucescens (Bl.) Diels Dregea volubilis (L. f.) Benth. ex Hook. Ficus fruticosa Roxb. Menispermaceae Moraceae 33 Ficus sarmentosa BuchananHamilton ex Smith Flagellaria indica L. 34 Gouania leptostachya DC. Rhamnaceae 35 Hoya parasitica Wall. ex Wight Asclepiadaceae 36 Convolvulaceae 38 Ipomoea obscura (L.) Ker Gawler Ipomoea pes-caprae (L.) R. Brown Ipomoea pes-tigridis L. Convolvulaceae 39 Lygodium flexuosum (L.) Sw. Lygodiaceae 40 Momordica charantia L. Cucurbitaceae 41 Mucuna DC. (Willd.) Papilionaceae 42 Mucuna monosperma DC. ex Wight Papilionaceae 43 Paramignya andamanica (King) Tan. Plecospermum andamanicum King Raphidophora pertusa (Roxb.) Schott Scindapsus officinalis (Roxb.) Schott Stephania japonica (Thunb.) Miers Tetracera sarmentosa ssp. andamanica (Hoogl.) Hoohl. Tetrastigma lanceolarium (Roxb.) Planchon in A. & C. DC. Thunbergia laurifolia Lindley Rutaceae Tinospora cordifolia (Willd.) Hook.f. & Thomson Tylophora. indica (Burm.f.) Merr. Ventilago madraspatana Gaertn. Menispermaceae 30 31 32 37 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 gigantea 33.33 91.67 2.39 2.07 2.92 2.44 7.43 8.25 16.67 16.67 0.87 1.04 0.53 0.1 1.67 6 41.67 58.33 1.22 2.59 1.86 0.31 4.76 3.36 25 66.67 2.32 1.55 2.12 3.93 7.61 10.67 16.67 41.67 2.17 1.04 1.33 1.73 4.09 15 8.33 25 2.61 0.52 0.8 0.03 1.34 36 33.33 75 1.96 2.07 2.39 2.46 6.91 6.75 41.67 75 1.56 2.59 2.39 0.02 4.99 4.32 25 58.33 2.03 1.55 1.86 0.01 3.42 9.33 33.33 50 1.30 2.07 1.59 0.01 3.67 4.5 25 66.67 2.32 1.55 2.12 0.02 3.69 10.67 16.67 58.33 3.05 1.04 1.86 0.01 2.90 21 25 41.67 1.45 1.55 1.33 0.01 2.89 6.66 8.33 25 2.61 0.52 0.8 1.01 2.31 36 16.67 33.33 1.74 1.04 1.06 1.38 3.47 12 16.67 25 1.30 1.04 0.8 1.04 2.87 9 25 25 0.87 1.55 0.8 1.37 3.72 4 16.67 25 1.30 1.04 0.8 0.31 2.14 9 25 25 0.87 1.55 0.8 0.02 2.37 4 58.33 66.67 0.99 3.63 2.12 0.53 6.27 1.95 16.67 33.33 1.74 1.04 1.06 0.51 2.61 12 8.33 16.67 1.74 0.52 0.53 0.13 1.18 24 66.67 116.7 1.52 4.15 3.71 0.23 8.09 2.62 25 83.33 2.90 1.55 2.65 0.2 4.40 13.33 1.33 24 Asclepiadaceae Moraceae Flagellariaceae Convolvulaceae Moraceae Araceae Araceae Menispermaceae Dilleniaceae Vitaceae Thunbergiaceae Asclepiadaceae 100 133.3 1.16 6.22 4.24 0.43 10.8 9 8.33 16.67 1.74 0.52 0.53 1.15 2.19 Rhamnaceae 39 Indian Journal of Plant Sciences ISSN: 2319-3824 (Online) An Online International Journal Available at http://www.cibtech.org/jps.htm 2013 Vol. 2 (3) July-September, pp.35-42/Ghosh Research Article Comparison of IVI of Species 30 y = 13.684e-0.0412x R2 = 0.9416 Range of IVI 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 No. of Species Figure 5: Comparison of IVI of littoral forest species S & N1 (exp. of H') Floral Species Diversity at Different Plots 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 2 3 S 4 N1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Plots Figure 6: Comparison of species richness (S) and diversity (N1) of littoral forest plots Figure 7: Dendogram of taxic similarity of littoral plots In this vegetation, highest number of stems and species are found in the diameter classes of 5 cm to 6.99 cm. and 7- 8.99 cm. No stem has been recorded in 2-2.49 cm. and above 18 cm diameter classes; though number of stems and species are appreciably high in the diameter classes of 0.5-0.99 cm and 1.5-1.99 cm. Shannon Wiener Index (H’) showed that the plot numbers 2 and 3 show high species richness (S >_47), the diversity of these plots are relatively high (N1> 15.15) in comparison to plot number 1, 4 and 5, where species richness is high (S<28) but the diversity is relatively low (N1 >14.05). It is also found that the plot numbers 7, and 12 show high diversity (N1 <10.42), but their species richness is low (S <17). Plots like 6, 8, 9, 10, and 11 show more or less proportionate S and N1 values (Figure 6). It has been observed that the plots 6th and 10th, situated in the Paget-Point Island with the highest taxonomic similarity (45.92593002) are similar to plot 2 nd (43.25204468). Plots 7th and 11th are quite far from each other but they show relatively high similarity (40.68965912) and together with plots 1 st, 5th, 12th are more or less similar in species composition with similarity 39.16667175. 3 rd and 9th plots are in different locations separated by sea and show poor similarity. Plot 8th is entirely of different composition and is found as a separate cluster form the rest (Figure 7). 40 Indian Journal of Plant Sciences ISSN: 2319-3824 (Online) An Online International Journal Available at http://www.cibtech.org/jps.htm 2013 Vol. 2 (3) July-September, pp.35-42/Ghosh Research Article ACKNOWLEDEMENT The financial assistance from DBT-DOS is dually acknowledged. Special thanks are due to Prof. P. K. Mukherjee and Dr. Krishna Chaudhuri, Department of Botany, Calcutta University. REFERENCES Balfour AD and Bond WJ (1993). Factors limiting climber distribution and abundance in a Southern Aferican forest. Journal of Ecology 81 93-99. Bongers F, Schnitzer SA and Traore D (2002). The importance of lianas and consequences for forest management in West Africa. Bioterre Rev. Int. Sci. de la Vie et la Terre, No. special: 59-70 Bongers F, Parren MPE, Swaine MD and Traore D (2005). Forest climbing plants of West Africa: intoduction 5–18. In: Bongers F, Parren MPE and Traore D (eds.), Forest climbing plants of West Africa: Diversity, Ecology and Management, CAB International, Wallingford, Oxfordshire, UK. Campbell EJF and Newberry DM (1993). Ecological relationships between lianas and trees in lowland rain forest in Sabah, East Malaysia. Journal of Tropical Ecology 9(4) 469-490. Chalmers AC and Turner JC (1994). Climbing plants in relation to their supports in a stand of dry rainforest in the Hunter Valley, New South Wales. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales 114(1-4) 73-90. Das AP and Lahiri AK (1997). Phytosociological studies on the ground covering flora indifferent types of vegetation in Tiger Hill, Darjeeling District, West Bengal (India). Indian Journal of Forestry 123(12) 1176 -1187. DeWalt SJ, Schnitzer SA and Denslow JS (2000). Density and diversity of lianas along a chronosequence in a central Panamanian lowland forest. Journal Tropical Ecology 16 1-19. Ghosh C (2006). Biology of Tea Garden Weeds in Darjiling District of West Bengal (India), PhD Thesis, University of North Bengal. Gentry AH (1991). The distribution and evolution of climbing plants. In: Putz FE and Mooney HA (Eds), The Biology of Vines 3-49, Cambridge University Press Hegarty EE (1989). The climbers-lianes and vines. Ecosystems of the World 14B. Tropical Rain Forest Ecosystems edited by Lieth H and Werger MJA 339- 353, Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Jain SK and Rao RR (1977). A Handbook of field and Herbarium Methods. Today andtomorrow’s Printers and Publishers, New Delhi. Jongkind CCH and Hawthorne WD (2005). A botanical synopsis of the lianas and other forest climbers. In: Parren MPE, Traore D, Bongers F (Eds), Forest Climbers of West Africa 19-39, CABI Publishing, Wallingford. Kadavul K and Parthasarathy N (1999). Lianas in two tropical semi-evergreen forest sites on the Kalrayan hills, Eastern Ghats, south India. Tropical Biodiversity 6 197-208. Kuzee ME and Bongers F (2005). Climber abundance, diversity and colonization in degraded forests of different ages in Cote d'Ivoire. In: Bongers F, Parren MPE, Traore D (Eds), Forest Climbers of West Africa: Diversity, Ecology and Management 67-84, CABI Publishing, Wallingford. Lieberman D, Lieberman M, Peralta A and Hartshorn GS (1996). Tropical forest structure and composition on a large-scale altitudinal gradient in Costa Rica. Journal of Ecology 84 137–152. Makana JR, Hart TB and Hart JA (1998). Forest structure and diversity of lianas and understory treelets in monodominant and mixed stands in the Ituri forest, Democratic Replublic of Congo. In: Forest biodiversity research, monitoring and modelling, conceptional background and Old World case studies (eds.), Dallmier F and Comiskey JA, Man and the Biosphere Series 20, UNESCO, Paris, France: Parthenon Publishing Group Ltd 429-446. Malhotra SK (1973). Studies on the Limestone Vegetation of Sahasradhara near Dehra DunPhytosociological Studies: Importance Value Index. Indian Journal of Forestry 99(2) 102 - 115. Mishra R (1966). Ecology Work Book. Oxford & I.B.H. Calcutta. 41 Indian Journal of Plant Sciences ISSN: 2319-3824 (Online) An Online International Journal Available at http://www.cibtech.org/jps.htm 2013 Vol. 2 (3) July-September, pp.35-42/Ghosh Research Article Muthuramkumar S and Parthasarathy N (2000). Alpha diversity of lianas in a tropical evergreen forest in the Anamalais, Westtern Ghats, India. Diversity and Distributions 6 1-14. Nabe-Nielsen J (2001). Diversity and distribution of lianas in a neotropical rain forest, Yasuni National Park, Ecuador. Journal of Tropical Ecology 17(1) 1-19 Parthasarthy N, Muthuranmkumar S and Sridhar MR (2004). Patterns of liana diversity in tropical evergreen forest of Peninsular India. Forest Ecology and Management 190 15-31. Philips EA (1959). Methods of Vegetation study. Henry Holt and Co. Inc. New York, U.S.A. Pinard MA, Putz FE, Rumiz R and Jardim A (1999). Ecological characterization of tree species for guiding forest management decisions in seasonally dry forest in Lomerro, Bolivia. Forest Ecology and Management 113 201-213. Procto J, Anderson JM, Chai P and Vallack HW (1983). Ecological studies in four contrasting lowland rainforests in Gunung Mulu National Park, Sarawak I. Forest environment, structure and floristics, Journal of Ecology 71 237-260 Putz FE (1984). The natural history of lianas on Barro Colorado Island, Panama. Ecology 65 1713-1724. Putz FE and Chai P (1987). Ecological studies of lianas in Lambir National Park, Sarawak, Malaysia. Journal of Ecology 75 523-531. Rai U, Das AP and Singh S (2011). Understanding the forest types in lower hills of Darjiling Himalaya using satellite and ground truth data. In: Ghosh C and Das AP, Recent Studies in Biodiversity and Traditional Knowledge in India, Sarat Book House, Kolkata 203- 213. Schnitzer SA and Bongers F (2002). The ecology of lianas and their role in forests. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 17 223-230. Shannon CE and Weiner W (1963). Mathematical Theory of Communication. University of llinios Press, Illinios, U.S.A. 42