Botânica

Unveiling neotropical serpentine flora: a list of Brazilian tree species in an iron saturated environment in Bom Sucesso, Minas Gerais

Aretha Franklin Guimarães
Universidade Federal de Lavras, Brasil
Luciano Carramaschi de Alagão Querido
Universidade Federal de Lavras, Brasil
Polyanne Aparecida Coelho
Universidade Federal de Lavras, Brasil
Paola Ferreira Santos
Universidade Federal de Lavras, Brasil
Rubens Manoel dos Santos
Universidade Federal de Lavras, Brasil

Unveiling neotropical serpentine flora: a list of Brazilian tree species in an iron saturated environment in Bom Sucesso, Minas Gerais

Acta Scientiarum. Biological Sciences, vol. 41, 2019

Universidade Estadual de Maringá

Received: 14 September 2018

Accepted: 15 May 2019

Abstract: Serpentine soils are those holding at least of 70% iron-magnesium compounds, which make life intolerable for many species. Although plant's adaptation to environmental toughness is widely studied in tropics, virtually nothing is known about Brazilian serpentine flora. Our aim was to bring up and characterize the serpentine flora in Bom Sucesso, Minas Gerais state, Brazil. We performed expeditions utilizing rapid survey sampling method to identify the arboreal compound in the area. Plants within circumference at breast high (CBH) up to 15,7 cm were included in our study. A specialist identified all the individuals to species level. We found 246 species located in 59 botanical families. Fabaceae, Myrtaceae and Melastomataceae were the most representative families in the area. Serpentine areas usually present a few species capable to survive to adverse conditions, contrasting the high number found in our study. To our knowledge, this is the first floristic survey in serpentine areas in the neotropics, reinforcing the need for more studies about plant diversity in those areas. It seems that serpentinites is not the key factor influencing plant diversity in the neotropics. The high diversity found in our study strengthens serpentine areas as a place for conservation concern.

Keywords: ultramafic vegetation, trace elements, heavy metals, serpentine soil.

Introduction

Serpentine soils are those holding 70% or more iron-magnesium compounds, leading to rocky soils with many degrees of nutritional imbalance, containing high concentrations of weathered ultramafic rocks (Salihaj, Bani, & Echevarria, 2016). They are drifted from ultramafic rocks, shaping environments with low capacity to hold water, nutrient deficit and plenty of toxic materials such as nickel, chrome, magnesium and iron (Anacker, 2014). Although there some areas of serpentine soils in South America, they are scares around the globe, with the majority of them found in the Circum-pacific margin and Mediterranean Sea (Hseu, Zehetner, Fujii, Watanabe, & Nakao 2018), leading to a large gap of knowledge and only a few floristic surveys in Brazil and Central America (Almeda & Martins, 2015). Iron (Fe) and Magnesium (Mg) are known as trace elements because they are found at very small concentrations on plants, and when at higher concentrations, their presence can lead to leaf death, necrotic brown spotting on leaves, chlorosis, cellular damage, permutagenic damage, DNA strand breaks and DNA base modifications (Nagajyoti, Lee, & Sreekanth, 2010). Heavy metals are known to interfere directly on the physiological processes of the plants, playing an important role in the redox reactions, being an integral part of enzymes, interfering in CO2 fixation, nutrient absorption, gaseous exchange and respiration (Nagajyoti et al., 2010). Altogether, those physical and chemical characteristics make serpentine soils a harsh environment for plants, hosting a reduced flora when compared to the neighboring areas (Brady, Kruckeberg, & Bradshaw Jr., 2005).

Serpentine plants need to endure harsh environmental conditions, and therefore understanding the ecological species that survive in those places is an important part of the serpentine problem (Kazakou et al., 2010). They are also known for the presence of extremely specialized habitats that hosts ‘islands’ of biodiversity and endemic flora (Chiarucci & Baker, 2007). In the tropics, flora associated with serpentine soil is a topic of concern for scientists (Cano, Cano-Ortiz, Del Río, Ramirez, & Ruiz, 2014), but despite the high endemism rates found on those places, floristic surveys exclusive from these locals on South America are scarce (Almeda & Martins, 2015).

Iron rich environments figure among the most threatened and less studied places in State Minas Gerais (Jacobi & Carmo, 2008). The state endured resource exploitation for livestock farming, wood harvest and anthropic fire, reducing its vegetation to a few. Mining in Brazil (from licenses to search for the ore to extractions) quadrupled between 2000 to 2009, reaching a 698.000 km2 area in national territory (Jacobi, Carmo, & Campos, 2011). Despite all the measures that are being taken to preserve Brazilian biodiversity, few are those that intend to conserve mineral rich environments (Jacobi et al., 2011).

Due the high threaten to forest fragments and the advances on the mining industry in soils with high concentration of heavy metals (Hseu & Iizuka, 2013), it's urgent to understand vegetation distribution in serpentine environments and utilize those studies to help recover disturbed areas. Our study's aim was to characterize flora in a serpentine area in Bom Sucesso, Minas Gerais State, Brazil, by producing a species list that can further be used on conservation projects.

Material and methods

Study area

We conducted this study in Minas Gerais State, Bom Sucesso municipality in an area known as Morro das Almas, located between the coordinates 21º 01' 58" South and longitude 44º 45' 28" West, in an altitude of 952 m above the sea level. The region presents a mosaic of phytophysiognomies, since the Minas Gerais State is an ecotone area (transitional areas between phytophysiognomies) Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE, 2012) with the main vegetation types belonging to the Cerrado (Brazilian savannah) and Mata Atlântica Domain IBGE (2013). Climate in the region is usually marked by two well defined seasons - wet and rainy summers, with dry cold winters IBGE (2013). The mean annual precipitation is 1776 mm concentrated in the months of October to March and mean temperature of 19ºC (Figure 1). The area was previously studied by the Departamento de Ciências do Solo (Department of Soil Science) from Universidade Federal de Lavras, where they investigated the geology of the area and found that the flora from that locality stands upon soils holding high saturation of iron oxide (Fe2O3 on 72.33%), characterizing serpentine soils Araujo, Pedroso, Amaral, and Zinn (2014). Local landscape is surrounded by natural fields - a mosaic of Altitude and rocky fields), in which is usual the presence of livestock grazing.

Map and coordinates of a serpentine soil area and the associated flora at Bom Sucesso municipality, Minas Gerais State, Brazil. A) Map of Brazil. B) Map from Minas Gerais State. C) Sampling area at Bom Sucesso municipality. The black dot in figures B and C represent where this study was carried, at Morro das Almas, Bom Sucesso, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Figure 1.
Map and coordinates of a serpentine soil area and the associated flora at Bom Sucesso municipality, Minas Gerais State, Brazil. A) Map of Brazil. B) Map from Minas Gerais State. C) Sampling area at Bom Sucesso municipality. The black dot in figures B and C represent where this study was carried, at Morro das Almas, Bom Sucesso, Minas Gerais, Brazil.

Floristic survey

We performed the floristic survey utilizing the rapid survey sampling method. This method consists in walking through an area and identifying the arboreal species, making a presence/absence list. When the same species appears several times in the same area, we continue to walk to try to find new species. Our sampling was complete when we covered the whole area of the Morro das Almas hill. We covered a 352 ha area and identified some species in the field. Species were sampled and identified by a dendrology specialist (Prof. Rubens Santos, from UFLA), since most of the species were not flourish. The plants which the specialist could not identify in the field were collected and checked using the Brazilian Flora Group (BFG, 2015) virtual herbarium. Plants were identified by using their vegetative characteristics and their names were checked in The Plant List (2018), Reflora 2015 virtual herbarium.

Results

We recorded 249 arboreal species, located in 61 botanical families (Table 1). The most representative family in this study was Fabaceae, holding 31 species, an equivalent to 12.60% of the total richness in the community, followed by Myrtaceae with 33 species (11.38%) and Melastomataceae with 12 species (4.87%) (Figure 2). Those families hold 10.37% of the total floristic richness. Copaifera L. and Bowdichia Kunth were the most representative genera in Fabaceae, followed by Myrcia and Eugenia in Myrtaceae and Miconia and Tibouchina in Melastomataceae. Myrcia splendens, Pera glabrata and Ocotea pulchella were commonly found in all the area.

Table 1. List of the species from a neotropical serpentine site in Bom Sucesso, Minas Gerais State, Brazil.

Table 1
List of the species from a neotropical serpentine site in Bom Sucesso Minas Gerais State Brazil
Botanical Families/SpeciesConservation Status (IUCN)Endemic Species of BrazilProtected by Law
Anacardiaceae
Astronium fraxinifolium SchottLow concernNoNo
Lithrea molleoides (Vell.) Engl.Not evaluatedNoNo
Schinus terebinthifolius RaddiNot evaluatedNoNo
Tapirira guianensis Aubl.Not evaluatedNoNo
Tapirira obtusa (Benth.) J.D.Mitch.Not evaluatedNoNo
Annonaceae
Annona cacans Warm.Low concernNoNo
Annona cornifolia A.St.-Hil.Not evaluatedNoNo
Annona emarginata (Schltdl.) H.RainerLow concernNoNo
Annona neolaurifolia H.RainerNot evaluatedNot evaluatedNo
Annona sylvatica A.St.-Hil.Not evaluatedYesNo
Duguetia furfuracea (A.St.-Hil.) Saff.Not evaluatedYesNo
Duguetia lanceolata A.St.-Hil.Low concernYesNo
Guatteria australis A.St.-Hil.Low concernYesNo
Xylopia brasiliensis Spreng.Near ThreatenedYesNo
Xylopia sericea A.St.-Hil.Not evaluatedNoNo
Apocynaceae
Aspidosperma australe Müll.Arg.Low concernNoNo
Aspidosperma cylindrocarpon Müll.Arg.Low concernNoNo
Aspidosperma sp.Not evaluatedNot evaluatedNo
Aspidosperma spruceanum Benth. ex Müll.Arg.Low concernYesNo
Aspidosperma tomentosum Mart. & Zucc.Low concernYesNo
Aquifoliaceae
Ilex cerasifolia ReissekNot evaluatedYesNo
Ilex conocarpa ReissekNot evaluatedYesNo
Araliaceae
Dendropanax cuneatus (DC.) Decne. & Planch.Low concernNoNo
Schefflera macrocarpa (Cham. & Schltdl.) FrodinNot evaluatedYesNo
Arecaceae
Syagrus flexuosa (Mart.) Becc.Not evaluatedNoNo
Syagrus romanzoffiana (Cham.) GlassmanLow concernYesNo
Asteraceae
Baccharis brachylaenoides DC.Not evaluatedNot evaluatedNo
Baccharis dentata (Vell.) G.M.BarrosoNot evaluatedNoNo
Eremanthus erythropappus (DC.) MacLeishNot evaluatedYesNo
Gochnatia paniculata (Less.) CabreraNot evaluatedNot evaluatedNo
Gochnatia polymorpha (Less.) CabreraLow concernNot evaluatedNo
Piptocarpha macropoda (DC.) BakerNot evaluatedYesNo
Vernonanthura divaricata (Spreng.) H.Rob.Not evaluatedNoNo
Vernonanthura fagifolia (Gardner) H.Rob.VulnerávelYesNo
Bignoniaceae
Cybistax antisyphilitica (Mart.) Mart.Not evaluatedNoNo
Handroanthus aureus MattosNot evaluatedNot evaluatedNo
Handroanthus ochraceus (Cham.) MattosNot evaluatedNoNo
Handroanthus serratifolius (Vahl) S.O.GroseNot evaluatedNoNo
Jacaranda caroba (Vell.) DC.Not evaluatedYesNo
Jacaranda macrantha Cham.Low concernYesNo
Boraginaceae
Cordia sellowiana Cham.Not evaluatedYesNo
Cordia trichotoma (Vell.) Arrab. ex Steud.Not evaluatedNoNo
Burseraceae
Protium spruceanum (Benth.) Engl.Not evaluatedNoNo
Protium widgrenii Engl.Not evaluatedYesNo
Trattinnickia ferruginea Kuhlm.EndangeredYesYes
Calophyllaceae
Calophyllum brasiliense Cambess.Not evaluatedNoNo
Kielmeyera coriacea Mart. & Zucc.Not evaluatedNoNo
Kielmeyera speciosa A.St.-Hil.Not evaluatedYesNo
Cannabaceae
Celtis brasiliensis (Gardner) Planch.Not evaluatedNoNo
Trema micrantha (L.) BlumeNot evaluatedNoNo
Cardiopteridaceae
Citronella paniculata (Mart.) R.A.HowardNot evaluatedNoNo
Caryocaraceae
Caryocar brasiliense Cambess.Low concernNoNo
Celastraceae
Monteverdia evonymoides (Reissek) BiralNot evaluatedNoNo
Maytenus gonoclada Mart.Not evaluatedNoNo
Plenckia populnea ReissekNot evaluatedNoNo
Salacia elliptica (Mart. ex Schult.) G.DonNot evaluatedNoNo
Chrysobalanaceae
Hirtella glandulosa Spreng.Not evaluatedNoNo
Clethraceae
Clethra scabra Pers.Low concernNoNo
Clusiaceae
Garcinia brasiliensis Mart.Not evaluatedYesNo
Combretacea
Terminalia argentea Mart.Low concernNoNo
Terminalia glabrescens Mart.Not evaluatedNoNo
Cunoniaceae
Lamanonia ternata Vell.Not evaluatedYesNo
Dilleniaceae
Curatella americana L.Not evaluatedNoNo
Davilla rugosa Poir.Not evaluatedNoNo
Ebenaceae
Diospyros burchellii HiernNot evaluatedNot evaluatedNo
Erythroxylaceae
Erythroxylum citrifolium A.St.-Hil.Not evaluatedNoNo
Erythroxylum cuneifolium (Mart.) O.E.SchulzNot evaluatedNoNo
Erythroxylum deciduum A.St.-Hil.Not evaluatedNoNo
Erythroxylum pelleterianum A.St.-Hil.Low concernNoNo
Erythroxylum suberosum A.St.-Hil.Not evaluatedNoNo
Erythroxylum tortuosum Mart.Not evaluatedNoNo
Euphorbiaceae
Croton floribundus Spreng.Not evaluatedNoNo
Pera glabrata (Schott) Baill.Not evaluatedNoNo
Sebastiania brasiliensis Spreng.Not evaluatedNoNo
Fabaceae
Albizia polycephala (Benth.) Killip ex RecordNot evaluatedYesNo
Andira anthelmia (Vell.) Benth.Not evaluatedYesNo
Andira fraxinifolia Benth.Not evaluatedYesNo
Bauhinia rufa (Bong.) Steud.Not evaluatedNoNo
Bowdichia virgilioides KunthNear ThreatenedNoNo
Copaifera langsdorffii Desf.Not evaluatedNoNo
Copaifera magnifolia DwyerNot evaluatedYesNo
Dalbergia miscolobium Benth.Not evaluatedYesNo
Dalbergia villosa (Benth.) Benth.Not evaluatedNoNo
Enterolobium gummiferum (Mart.) J.F.Macbr.Not evaluatedYesNo
Hymenaea courbaril L.Low concernNoNo
Hymenaea stigonocarpa Mart. ex HayneNot evaluatedNoNo
Inga vera Willd.Not evaluatedNoNo
Leptolobium dasycarpum VogelNot evaluatedNoNo
Leptolobium elegans VogelNot evaluatedNoNo
Leucochloron incuriale (Vell.) Barneby & J.W.GrimesNot evaluatedYesNo
Machaerium hirtum (Vell.) StellfeldNot evaluatedNoNo
Machaerium nyctitans (Vell.) Benth.Low concernNoNo
Machaerium villosum VogelLow concernNoNo
Ormosia fastigiata Tul.Not evaluatedYesNo
Piptadenia gonoacantha (Mart.) J.F.Macbr.Low concernNoNo
Platypodium elegans VogelNot evaluatedNoNo
Senna aversiflora (Herbert) H.S.Irwin & BarnebyNot evaluatedYesNo
Senna macranthera (DC. ex Collad.) H.S.Irwin & BarnebyNot evaluatedNoNo
Senna multijuga (Rich.) H.S.Irwin & BarnebyNot evaluatedNoNo
Stryphnodendron adstringens (Mart.) Cov.Low concernYesNo
Stryphnodendron obovatum Benth.Not evaluatedNot evaluatedNo
Stryphnodendron occhionianum E.M.O.MartinsNot evaluatedYesNo
Tachigali denudata (Vogel) Oliveira-FilhoNear ThreatenedYesNo
Tachigali rugosa (Mart. ex Benth.) Zarucchi & PipolyNear ThreatenedYesNo
Vatairea macrocarpa (Benth.) DuckeNot evaluatedNoNo
Hypericaceae
Vismia guianensis (Aubl.) ChoisyNot evaluatedNoNo
Lacistemaceae
Lacistema hasslerianum ChodatNot evaluatedNoNo
Lamiaceae
Aegiphila lhotzkiana Cham.Not evaluatedNot evaluatedNo
Hyptidendron asperrimum (Spreng.) HarleyLow concernYesNo
Hyptidendron canum (Pohl ex Benth.) HarleyNot evaluatedNoNo
Hyptidendron sp.Not evaluatedNot evaluatedNot evaluated
Vitex megapotamica (Spreng.) MoldenkeNot evaluatedNoNo
Vitex polygama Cham.Not evaluatedYesNo
Lauraceae
Aniba canelilla (Kunth) MezNot evaluatedYesNo
Aniba firmula (Nees & Mart.) MezNot evaluatedYesNo
Endlicheria paniculata (Spreng.) J.F.Macbr.Not evaluatedNoNo
Nectandra grandiflora NeesLow concernYesNo
Nectandra megapotamica (Spreng.) MezNot evaluatedNoNo
Nectandra nitidula NessNot evaluatedYesNo
Nectandra oppositifolia NessNot evaluatedNoNo
Ocotea corymbosa (Meisn.) MezNot evaluatedNoNo
Ocotea odorifera (Vell.) RohwerEndangeredYesYes
Ocotea pulchella (Nees & Mart.) MezLow concernNoNo
Persea major (Meisn.) L.E.KoppNot evaluatedYesNo
Lecythidaceae
Cariniana estrellensis (Raddi) KuntzeNot evaluatedNoNo
Lythraceae
Lafoensia pacari A.St.-Hil.Low concernNoNo
Malpighiaceae
Byrsonima coccolobifolia KunthLow concernNoNo
Byrsonima intermedia A.Juss.Not evaluatedYesNo
Byrsonima sericea DC.Not evaluatedNoNo
Byrsonima verbascifolia (L.) DC.Not evaluatedNoNo
Heteropterys byrsonimifolia A.Juss.Not evaluatedYesNo
Malvaceae
Eriotheca candolleana (K.Schum.) A.RobynsNot evaluatedYesNo
Luehea candicans Mart. & Zucc.Low concernNoNo
Luehea divaricata Mart.Not evaluatedNoNo
Luehea grandiflora Mart. & Zucc.Not evaluatedNoNo
Luehea paniculata Mart. & Zucc.Not evaluatedNoNo
Pseudobombax grandiflorum (Cav.) A.RobynsLow concernYesNo
Pseudobombax longiflorum (Mart. & Zucc.) A.RobynsNot evaluatedNoNo
Pseudobombax tomentosum (Mart.) A.RobynsLow concernNoNo
Melastomataceae
Miconia albicans (Sw.) TrianaNot evaluatedNoNo
Miconia burchellii TrianaNot evaluatedYesNo
Miconia pepericarpa DC.Not evaluatedYesNo
Miconia sellowiana NaudinNot evaluatedYesNo
Miconia trianae Cogn.Not evaluatedYesNo
Miconia tristis SpringNot evaluatedNoNo
Miconia willdenowii Klotzsch ex NaudinLow concernYesNo
Pleroma candolleanum (Mart. ex DC.) TrianaNot evaluatedYesNo
Tibouchina estrellensis (Raddi) Cogn.Not evaluatedYesNo
Pleroma fissinervium Schrank et Mart. ex DC.Not evaluatedYesNo
Pleroma fothergillii (Schrank et Mat. ex DC.) TrianaNot evaluatedYesNo
Pleroma granulosum (Desr.) D. DonNot evaluatedYesNo
Meliaceae
Cabralea canjerana (Vell.) Mart.Not evaluatedNoNo
Cedrela fissilis Vell.VulnerávelNoNo
Trichilia pallens C.DC.Low concernYesNo
Monimiaceae
Mollinedia argyrogyna PerkinsLow concernYesNo
Moraceae
Brosimum gaudichaudii TréculNot evaluatedNoNo
Ficus pertusa L.f.Not evaluatedNoNo
Ficus adhatodifolia Schott ex Spreng.Not evaluatedNoNo
Maclura tinctoria (L.) D.Don ex Steud.Not evaluatedNoNo
Myrtaceae
Blepharocalyx salicifolius (Kunth) O.BergLow concernNoNo
Calyptranthes clusiifolia O.BergNot evaluatedNoNo
Campomanesia guazumifolia (Cambess.) O.BergNot evaluatedNoNo
Campomanesia velutina (Cambess.) O.BergNot evaluatedYesNo
Campomanesia xanthocarpa (Mart.) O.BergLow concernNoNo
Eugenia bimarginata DC.Not evaluatedNoNo
Eugenia discolorans C.WrightNot evaluatedNot evaluatedNo
Eugenia florida DC.Low concernYesNo
Eugenia hiemalis Cambess.Low concernNoNo
Eugenia sonderiana O.BergNot evaluatedYesNo
Eugenia verticillata (Vell.) AngelyNot evaluatedYesNo
Eugenia discolorans C. Wright & SauvalleNot evaluatedNot evaluatedNo
Myrceugenia miersiana (Gardner) D.Legrand & KauselLow concernYesNo
Myrcia guianensis (Aubl.) DC.Low concernNoNo
Myrcia hebepetala DC.Not evaluatedYesNo
Myrcia multiflora (Lam.) DC.Not evaluatedNoNo
Myrcia obovata (O.Berg) Nied.Low concernYesNo
Myrcia subcordata DC.Not evaluatedYesNo
Myrcia retorta Cambess.Not evaluatedYesNo
Myrcia splendens (Sw.) DC.Not evaluatedYesNo
Myrcia tomentosa (Aubl.) DC.Not evaluatedNoNo
Myrcia variabilis DC.Low concernYesNo
Myrcia venulosa DC.Low concernYesNo
Pimenta pseudocaryophyllus (Gomes) LandrumNot evaluatedYesNo
Plinia cauliflora (Mart.) KauselNot evaluatedYesNo
Psidium rufum Mart. ex DC.Not evaluatedYesNo
Siphoneugena densiflora O.BergLow concernYesNo
Siphoneugena widgreniana O.BergLow concernNot evaluatedNo
Nyctaginaceae
Guapira opposita (Vell.) ReitzNot evaluatedNoNo
Ochnaceae
Ouratea castaneifolia (DC.) Engl.Not evaluatedNoNo
Pentaphylacaceae
Ternstroemia brasiliensis Cambess.Low concernYesNo
Phyllanthaceae
Hieronyma alchorneoides AllemãoNot evaluatedNot evaluatedNo
Piperaceae
Piper gaudichaudianum KunthNot evaluatedNoNo
Polygonaceae
Ruprechtia laxiflora Meisn.Not evaluatedNoNo
Primulaceae
Myrsine coriacea (Sw.) R.Br. ex Roem. & Schult.Not evaluatedNoNo
Myrsine gardneriana A.DC.Not evaluatedNoNo
Myrsine guianensis (Aubl.) KuntzeNot evaluatedNoNo
Myrsine lineata (Mez) Imkhan.Not evaluatedYesNo
Myrsine umbellata Mart.Not evaluatedNoNo
Proteaceae
Euplassa rufa (Loes.) SleumerNot evaluatedYesNo
Roupala montana Aubl.Not evaluatedNoNo
Rubiaceae
Amaioua guianensis Aubl.Not evaluatedNoNo
Amaioua intermedia Mart. ex Schult. & Schult.f.Not evaluatedNoNo
Chomelia sericea Müll.Arg.Not evaluatedYesNo
Cordiera concolor (Cham.) KuntzeNot evaluatedNoNo
Cordiera sessilis (Vell.) KuntzeNot evaluatedNoNo
Faramea latifolia (Cham. & Schltdl.) DC.Not evaluatedYesNo
Guettarda uruguensis Cham. & Schltdl.Not evaluatedNoNo
Guettarda viburnoides Cham. & Schltdl.Not evaluatedYesNo
Ixora brevifolia Benth.Not evaluatedNot evaluatedNo
Machaonia brasiliensis (Hoffmanss. ex Humb.) Cham. & Schltdl.Not evaluatedNoNo
Rudgea viburnoides (Cham.) Benth.Not evaluatedNoNo
Rutaceae
Zanthoxylum caribaeum Lam.Not evaluatedNoNo
Zanthoxylum fagara (L.) Sarg.Not evaluatedNoNo
Zanthoxylum rhoifolium Lam.Not evaluatedNoNo
Zanthoxylum riedelianum Engl.Not evaluatedNoNo
Salicaceae
Casearia arborea (Rich.) Urb.Not evaluatedNoNo
Casearia decandra Jacq.Not evaluatedYesNo
Casearia lasiophylla EichlerLow concernYesNo
Casearia sylvestris Sw.Not evaluatedNoNo
Sapindaceae
Allophylus edulis (A.St.-Hil. et al.) Hieron. ex Niederl.Not evaluatedNoNo
Cupania zanthoxyloides Radlk.Not evaluatedYesNo
Matayba guianensis Aubl.Not evaluatedNoNo
Sapotaceae
Chrysophyllum marginatum (Hook. & Arn.) Radlk.Not evaluatedNoNo
Pouteria gardneri (Mart. & Miq.) BaehniNot evaluatedNoNo
Siparunaceae
Siparuna brasiliensis (Spreng.) A.DC.Low concernYesNo
Siparuna guianensis Aubl.Not evaluatedNoNo
Smilacaceae
Smilax brasiliensis Spreng.Not evaluatedYesNo
Solanaceae
Cestrum axillare Vell.Not evaluatedNoNo
Solanum bullatum Vell.Low concernYesNo
Solanum cernuum Vell.Not evaluatedYesNo
Solanum lycocarpum A.St.-Hil.Not evaluatedNoNo
Styraceae
Styrax camporum PohlNot evaluatedNoNo
Styrax ferrugineus Nees & Mart.Not evaluatedNoNo
Styrax latifolius PohlNot evaluatedYesNo
Styrax pohlii A.DC.Not evaluatedNoNo
Symplocaceae
Symplocos pubescens Klotzsch ex Benth.Not evaluatedNoNo
Symplocos sp.Not evaluatedNoNo
Thymelacaceae
Daphnopsis coriacea Taub.Not evaluatedYesNo
Urticaceae
Cecropia pachystachya TréculNot evaluatedNoNo
Verbenaceae
Aloysia virgata (Ruiz & Pav.) A.Juss.Not evaluatedNoNo
Vochysiaceae
Qualea grandiflora Mart.Not evaluatedNoNo
Qualea multiflora Mart.Not evaluatedNoNo
Vochysia magnifica Warm.Not evaluatedYesNo
Vochysia rufa Mart.Not evaluatedYesNo
Vochysia thyrsoidea PohlNot evaluatedYesNo
Vochysia tucanorum Mart.Not evaluatedNoNo
Zygophyllaceae
Kallstroemia minor Hook.f.Not evaluatedNot evaluatedNo

From the 249 species recorded in our study, 91 are native from Brazil. Four of the species are recorded as Near Threatened, two are Vulnerable and two are Endangered according to the IUCN Red List (International Union for Conservation of Nature [IUCN], 2019).

Discussion

Serpentine environments provide peculiar conditions, resulting in a strong selective pressure, specialized flora to adverse conditions and holding many degrees of soil toxicity and endemism (Cano et al., 2014). Due to the many degrees of nutritional imbalance and inhospitable physicochemical conditions on soils, it is usual to find a depauperate flora on serpentine areas (Branco & Ree, 2010). In some surveys regarding flora associated to serpentine soils in the tropics, it is usual to find a low number of species (Cano et al., 2014), counterpointing the high species number found in our survey. The highest species number found for the Americas in a serpentine soil area was 219 species in Dominican Republic (Cano et al., 2014) and recently 135 species in Philippines (Sarmiento, 2018), reinforcing the importance of the Morro das Almas area as one of the most diverse serpentine areas from the Tropics.

Most representative families (> than 5 species) in a serpentine soil area in Bom Sucesso, Minas Gerais State, Brazil.
Figure 2.
Most representative families (> than 5 species) in a serpentine soil area in Bom Sucesso, Minas Gerais State, Brazil.

The amount of species found in our study points to the existence of some kind of adaptation by the plants present in Morro das Almas, making explicit that despite the stress caused by toxic metals in soil, vegetation might present morphological and anatomical adaptations to deal with those effects. Despite the proposal that serpentine soils are limiting factors to vegetation diversification, in our study it doesn't seem to be the key factor influencing this community’s plurality, as the high species number can evidence. Fabaceae, Myrtaceae and Melastomataceae, the families with higher species richness, also characterize the neighboring region flora (Guimarães, Almeida, Carneiro, Souza, & Siqueira, 2012; Terra et al., 2018), foregrounding its adaptive power facing edaphic variations.

Fabaceae is frequently associated with nodule systems that benefit not only the plants from this family, but also induces changes in the soil fertility, nitrogen fixation and enhances the variability of microbes (Saad, Kobaissi, Amiaud, Ruelle, & Benizri, 2018), characteristics that might explain the higher representativeness of this family in our study. It is also possible that the soil microbes found in the area might be highly adapted to the excess of toxic heavy metals, as the soil microbes activity can affect the fertility, carbon storages and growth patterns from the plants (Malik et al., 2018).

From the 249 species recorded, two (Trattinnickia ferruginea and Ocotea odorifera) are classified as endangered according to the IUCN Red List (IUCN, 2019) and protected by the Brazilian law as priority for the conservation in the country (Brasil, 2008). The fact that we could found species that are protected by law at Morro das Almas reinforces the need to pay better care for this area. Morro das Almas hill has already been studied by MMX Mineração e Metálicos S.A., a company from the Eike Batista group, as a possible location to exploit minerals, but the business didn’t continue due to the fact that the company experienced a bankrupt. The fact that a mining company already had the license to exploit this region makes the need to study this place urgent. Since the State of Minas Gerais is already dealing with a series of environmental contamination due to the disrupts of the damn in Mariana and Brumadinho that killed two important rivers for the state (Rio Doce and Rio Paraopeba), it is vital to study and comprehend the flora from places with natural excess of heavy metal, using them as potencial phytoremediators and vegetation management projects for areas impacted by ore extractions (Ali, Kahn, & Sajad, 2013).

As our results demonstrate from the high number of species found on the area, it seems that the presence of serpentine soil is not enough to restrict the local flora biodiversity, which reinforces that there might be some anatomical and physiological adaptations on the plants from the studied community to deal with the environmental adversity provided by the high levels of iron-magnesium compounds found on the local soil. As those soils are only found in less than 1% of the Earth’s exposed surface (Vithanage, Rajapaksha, Oze, Rajakaruna, & Dissanayake, 2014), further investigations on the area might explore the biochemical, ecological and resistance to stress aspect of the plants (Echevarria et al., 2018) to help understand the functioning aspect of this single community. Investigating the relationships between the plants from serpentine areas and the soil might assist on phytostabilization projects, as it’s been successfully used in other countries (Boisson et al., 2018; Mizuno, Nakahara, Fujimori, & Yoshida, 2018).

Conclusion

Species substitution and environmental heterogeneity found in this study reinforce serpentine environments importance to conservation as they act as refugee to those species providing a specific habitat for the vegetation.

Acknowledgements

We thank Universidade Federal de Lavras and Departamento de Ciências Florestais for all their support. We thank Capes (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior) and CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico) for the concession of study scholarship. We also thank for our lab colleagues, especially Nay Alecrim, Paula Eveline and professor Carla Rodrigues Ribas, for collaborating on discussions. We thank Eduardo de Paiva Paula for his help with species identification and fieldwork. This paper was partially produced in PEC 527 - Scientific Publication, from Applied Ecology post-graduation discipline at UFLA. We also thank Professor Ludmila Guimarães for her enthusiasm and revision. We thank the two peer reviewers and the editor for their contributions on the manuscript.

References

Ali, H., Khan, E., & Sajad, M. A. (2013). Phytoremediation of heavy metals—concepts and applications. Chemosphere, 91(7), 869-881. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.01.075

Almeda, F., & Martins, A. B. (2015). Pterolepis haplostemona (Melastomataceae): a new serpentine endemic from Goiás, Brazil. Phytotaxa, 201(3), 233-238. doi: 10.11646/phytotaxa.204.2.10

Anacker, B. L. (2014). The nature of serpentine endemism. American Journal of Botany, 101(2), 219-224. doi: 10.3732/ajb.1300349

Araujo, M. A., Pedroso, A. V., Amaral, D. C., & Zinn, Y. L. (2014). Paragênese mineral de solos desenvolvidos de diferentes litologias na região sul de Minas Gerais. Revista Brasileira de Ciências do Solo, 38(1), 11-25. doi: 10.1590/S0100-06832014000100002

Boisson, S., Séleck, M., Le Stradic, S., Collignon, J., Garin, O., Malaisse, F., … Mahy, G. (2018). Using phytostabilisation to conserve threatened endemic species in southeastern Democratic Republic of the Congo. Ecological Research, 33(4), 789-798. doi: 10.1007/s11284-018-1604-2

Brady, K. U., Kruckeberg, A. R., & Bradshaw Jr., H. D. (2005). Evolutionary ecology of plant adaptation to serpentine soils. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 36, 243-266. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.35.021103.105730

Branco, S., & Ree, R. H. (2010). Serpentine soils do not limit mycorrhizal fungal diversity. Plos One, 5(7), e11757. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0011757

Brasil. (2008). Ministério do Meio Ambiente. Instrução Normativa nº 6 de 23 de setembro de 2008. Brasília, DF: Diário Oficial da União.

Brazil Flora Group [BFG]. (2015). Growing knowledge: an overview of seed plant diversity in Brazil. Rodriguésia, 66(4), 1085-1113. doi: 10.1590/2175-7860201566411

Cano, E., Cano-Ortiz, A., Del Río, S., Ramirez, A. V., & Ruiz, F. J. E. (2014). A phytosociological survey of some serpentine plant communities in the Dominican Republic. Plant Biosystems - An International Journal Dealing with all Aspects of Plant Biology, 148(2), 200-212. doi: 10.1080/11263504.2012.760498

Chiarucci, A., & Baker, A. J. (2007). Advances in the ecology of serpentine soils. Plant and Soil, 293(1), 1-2. doi: 10.1007/s11104-007-9268-7

Echevarria, G., Baker, A. J., Boyd, R. S., van der Ent, A., Mizuno, T., Rajakaruna, N., & Bani, A. (2018). A global forum on ultramafic ecosystems: from ultramafic ecology to rehabilitation of degraded environments. Ecological Research, 33(3), 1-6. doi: 10.1007/s11284-018-1627-8.

Guimarães, J. C. C., Almeida, H. S., Carneiro, V. M. C., Souza, C. M., & Siqueira, F. F. (2012). Diversidade e estrutura de um fragmento florestal no planalto de Poços de Caldas, Andradas, MG. Enciclopédia Biosfera, 8(14), 1201-1215.

Hseu, Z. Y., & Iizuka, Y. (2013). Pedogeochemical characteristics of chromite in a paddy soil derived from serpentinites. Geoderma, 202-203, 126-133. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2013.03.021

Hseu, Z. Y., Zehetner, F., Fujii, K., Watanabe, T., & Nakao, A. (2018). Geochemical fractionation of chromium and nickel in serpentine soil profiles along a temperate to tropical climate gradient. Geoderma, 327, 97-106. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.04.030

Institudo Brasileiro de Geografia Estatística [IBGE]. (2012). Manual técnico da vegetação Brasileira. Rio de Janeiro, RJ: IBGE.

Institudo Brasileiro de Geografia Estatística [IBGE]. (2013). Mapeamento das unidades territoriais. Rio de Janeiro, RJ: IBGE.

International Union for Conservation of Nature [IUCN]. (2019). The IUCN red list of threatened species. Version 2018-2. Retrieved from http://www.iucnredlist.org

Jacobi, C. M., & Carmo, F. F. (2008). Diversidade dos campos rupestres ferruginosos no Quadrilátero Ferrífero, MG. Megadiversidade, 4(1-2), 24-32.

Jacobi, C. M., Carmo, F. F., & Campos, I. C. (2011). Soaring extinction threats to endemic plants in Brazilian metal-rich regions. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment, 40(5), 540-543. doi: 10.1007/s13280-011-0151-7

Kazakou, E., Adamidis, G. C., Baker, A. J., Reeves, R. D., Godino, M., & Dimitrakopoulos, P. G. (2010). Species adaptation in serpentine soils in Lesbos Island (Greece): metal hyperaccumulation and tolerance. Plant and Soil, 332(1-2), 369-385. doi: 10.1007/s11104-010-0302-9

Malik, A. A., Puissant, J., Buckeridge, K. M., Goodall, T., Jehmlich, N., Chowdhury, S., Chowdhury, Somak., Gweon, Hyun Soon., Peyton, J. M., Mason, K. E., Agtmaal, M., Blaud, A., Clarck, I. M., Whitaker, J., Pywell, R. F., Ostle, N., Gleixner, G. & Griffiths, R. I. (2018). Land use driven change in soil pH affects microbial carbon cycling processes. Nature communications, 9(1), 3591. doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-05980-1

Mizuno, T., Nakahara, Y., Fujimori, T., & Yoshida, H. (2018). Natural revegetation potential of Japanese wild thyme (Thymus quinquecostatus Celak.) on serpentine quarries. Ecological Research, 33(4), 777-788. doi: 10.1007/s11284-018-1575-3

Nagajyoti, P. C., Lee, K. D., & Sreekanth, T. V. M. (2010). Heavy metals, occurrence and toxicity for plants: a review. Environmental Chemistry Letters, 8(3), 199-216. doi: 10.1007/s10311-010-0297-8

Salihaj, M., Bani, A., & Echevarria, G. (2016). Heavy metals uptake by hyperaccumulating flora in some serpentine soils of Kosovo. Global Nest Journal, 18(1), 214-222. doi: 10.30955/gnj.001804

Saad, R. F., Kobaissi, A., Amiaud, B., Ruelle, J., & Benizri, E. (2018). Changes in physicochemical characteristics of a serpentine soil and in root architecture of a hyperaccumulating plant cropped with a legume. Journal of soils and sediments, 18(5), 1994-2007. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-017-1903-1

Sarmiento, R. T. (2018). Vegetation of the Ultramafic Soils of Hinatuan Island, Tagana-An, Surigao Del Norte: an Assessment as Basis for Ecological Restoration. AMBIENT SCIENCE, 5(2), 44-50. doi:10.21276/ambi.2018.05.2.aa01

Terra, M. D. C. N. S., Teodoro, G. S., Pifano, D. S., Fernandes, F. B., Silva, T. M. C., & Berg, E. V. D. (2018). Tree responses to soil and edge effects in a semideciduous forest remnant. Floresta e Ambiente, 25(3), e20160542. doi: 10.1590/2179-8087.054216

The Plant List. (2018). Plantas do Brasil: Resgate histórico e herbário virtual para conhecimento e conservação da flora brasileira. Rio de Janeiro, RJ: Instituto de Pesquisas Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro.

Vithanage, M., Rajapaksha, A. U., Oze, C., Rajakaruna, N., & Dissanayake, C. B. (2014). Metal release from serpentine soils in Sri Lanka. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 186(6), 3415-3429. doi: 10.1007/s10661-014-3626-8

HTML generated from XML JATS4R by