Diversity, preference, and conservation priority of woody plant species in coffee agroforestry system in southwest Ethiopia

The natural forest in southwest Ethiopia is progressively modified to coffee agroforest. To this effect forest composition and diversity is simplified to local preferred coffee shade trees. Woody plant species that are less managed require the conservation priority in coffee agroforest. The study aims at assessing diversity of plant species, investigating local people preference and finally identify woody plants for conservation priority in coffee agroforest in southwest Ethiopia. Data were collected on ecological and ethnoecological information through field assessment and individual interview. Vegetation data were collected from 63 plots distributed across five sites. Ethnoecological data were collected from 96 individuals across five villages living adjacent to the forest through semi-structured interview. The result showed that 48 different woody plant species belonging to 27 families were recorded. Most of the families were represented by single species. The regeneration status of these woody plant species are unsatisfactory or poor. Three species; Cordia africana, Croton macrostachyus, and Milletia ferruginea were accounting for 41 percent of the total number of woody plant species in coffee agroforest. The aggregate relative preference score showed 15 most preferred woody plant species in coffee agroforest. The use value of these species were cited mainly for timber, hanging beehive and beehive making than coffee shade. The findings suggest that 12 woody plants need high conservation priority, 19 species need moderate conservation priority and 17 woody plants need low priority for conservation. The Spearman correlation showed negative correlation between woody plant abundance and conservation priority [r_s (46) = −0.681, p = 000]. The study findings suggest that woody plant conservation priority in coffee agroforest should take into consideration local preference of woody plant species.

1 Introduction

Coffee agroforest is human modified natural forest where the local people progressively manage wild coffee inside the natural forest leading to the development of coffee agroforest (Senbeta and Denich, 2006; Schmitt et al., 2010; Aerts et al., 2011; Hundera et al., 2015; Mertens et al., 2018). The experience is more practiced over the last two to three decades in southwest Ethiopia (Cheng et al., 1998; Schmitt et al., 2010; Mertens et al., 2018; Kefalew et al., 2021). Rapid forest cover change assessment has shown 26.1% of the Belete Gera forest is modified to coffee agroforest (Cheng et al., 1998). As forest modification to coffee production continue, coffee agroforest plays an important role in conservation of woody plant species in southwest Ethiopia (Senbeta and Denich, 2006; Hernandez et al., 2013; Hundera et al., 2013; Tadesse et al., 2014; Valencia et al., 2016).

Coffee management intensification simplify forest composition and structure through selective removal of woody plant species (Senbeta and Denich, 2006; Schmitt et al., 2010; Aerts et al., 2011; Hundera et al., 2013; Hwang et al., 2020). A study from Bonga region southwest Ethiopia has shown that coffee management activities roughly remove 30% of the canopy tree species in coffee agroforest (Schmitt et al., 2010). Under large canopy size, light demanding woody plant species take an advantage over shade tolerant species. Likewise continuous coffee management such as weeding and slashing undergrowth plants hamper the regeneration of late successional woody plant species in coffee agroforest (Aerts et al., 2011; Hundera et al., 2013, 2015; Valencia et al., 2016). Moreover, the response of pioneer and late successional woody plants to coffee management intensity resulted in a change of woody plant species composition and structure (Hundera et al., 2015; Valencia et al., 2015; Shumi et al., 2019).

Regeneration status of woody plants indicate the population structure of an individual and woody plant composition of coffee agroforest (Tadese et al., 2021). Seedlings and saplings are the indicators of woody plant regeneration status (Siraji and Balemaly, 2021; Tadese et al., 2021). Woody plant species with poor regeneration or absence of seedling and sapling require effective conservation priority (Teketay et al., 2018; Tadese et al., 2021).

Ecological and sociocultural value determine the local people preference of woody plants (Tabuti et al., 2009; Kalanzi and Nansereko, 2014; Valencia et al., 2015; Tumuhe and Nyamaizi, 2020). A study has shown that locally preferred woody plants are dominant in coffee agroforest (Valencia et al., 2015). The shade value of woody plants are the primary criteria for woody plant management in coffee agroforest in southwest Ethiopia (Albertin and Nair, 2004; Kalanzi and Nansereko, 2014; Ordoñez-Jurado et al., 2021). Despite diversity of woody plant species in coffee agroforest, only a few species are preferred to coffee shade (Soto-Pinto et al., 2007; Muleta et al., 2011; Hundera et al., 2015; Hundera, 2016). Woody plants such as Millettia ferruginea, Albizia spp., and Acacia spp. are the most preferred coffee shade trees in southwest Ethiopia (Muleta et al., 2011).

Some woody plant species in coffee agroforest provide products such as construction materials, fuelwood, medicinal and timber, and heavily utilized (Albertin and Nair, 2004). Although these uses are known, the general picture of how people use these trees is unknown.

Overexploitation of woody plant species obviously lead to the concern of conservation priority for sustainable utilization (Lokonon et al., 2019). Woody plant composition and diversity is manipulated in coffee agroforest due to local people preference for specific uses (Senbeta and Denich, 2006; Valencia et al., 2015, 2016). Effective conservation in coffee agroforest among others requires identifying managed woody plant species and their local uses (Senbeta and Denich, 2006; Tabuti et al., 2009; Valencia et al., 2014).

Coffee management activities and local uses raises the concern for conservation of woody plant species in coffee agroforest in southwest Ethiopia. It is obvious that coffee management activities and local uses hamper woody plant species conservation effort in coffee agroforest (Hundera et al., 2015). Woody plant species conservation should follow the priority for conservation. Nevertheless, there is limited information on woody plants that require priority for conservation in coffee agroforest in southwest Ethiopia. Less known is the local people priority and the status of woody plant species in coffee agroforest. To contribute to this knowledge gap, the study was undertaken with the following objectives; (1) to assess the diversity of woody plant species maintained; (2) to investigate the local preference of woody plant species; (2) identify priority woody plant species for conservation in coffee agroforest in southwest Ethiopia.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Study area

The study was conducted at Belete forest southwest Ethiopia. Geographically, it is found between 36° 15′ E and 36° 45′E and 7°30′ N and 7°45′N (Figure 1). Belete forest belongs to the moist evergreen Afromontane forest of southwest Ethiopia. The forest is one of a few remnant Afromontane moist evergreen forests in southwest Ethiopia. Belete forest, together with Gera forest, was designated as one of 58 national forest priority areas in Ethiopia in 1989 (Cheng et al., 1998). The study area is characterized by a mosaic of forest, cultivated land and settlements. The most accessible area is managed for coffee production involving planting of wild coffee taken from coffee forest and intensive (under growth removal and canopy reduction) management for coffee agroforest. The forest has been under participatory forest management for the last two decades. The forest is divided into blocks of forest among the forest user groups. Forest is a source of livelihoods for people living in and adjacent to the forest. The present study worked with five forest user groups namely: Dabbiyee, Gurrattii, Qartammee, Mexxii-Caffee, and Sokii forest user groups. The total number of households within a village are in the hundreds. The dominant ethnic group are the Oromo, most of whom are Muslim with a few Christians. The local people organized into forest user groups and signed an agreement with Oromia Forest and Wildlife Enterprises to be entitled in accessing and using forest resources. Forest resource use pattern of the local people changes with time. Currently, the tradition of forest resources use is dominated by coffee production.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Map of Ethiopia with Oromia region, Jimma zone, location of study villages.

2.2 Data collection and analysis

Both ecological and ethnoecological data were collected (Lucena et al., 2013; Lokonon et al., 2019; Ribeiro et al., 2019; Korach et al., 2020). The data were collected in two steps. First coffee agroforest inventory was carried out to collect ecological data in five sites (Dabbiyee, Gurrattii, Qartammee, Mexxii-Caffee, and Sokii) and then coffee agroforest owners were interviewed on the use and preference of woody plant species in coffee agroforest. A total of 63 plots (400 m²) (Dabbiyee = 15, Gurrattii = 12, Qartammee = 11, Mexxii-Caffee = 12, Sokii = 13) were selected for woody plant species inventory. It covered a total area of 2.52 ha. The plots were laid systematically along the transect in coffee agroforest in each site. Within 20 m × 20 m, all woody plant species with diameter at breast height ≥ 10 cm were identified and recorded. The researcher identified woody plant species in the field by their local names with the help of local people and cross-checked using available literature (Bekele-Tesemma, 2007; Eyasu et al., 2020). The specimen of woody plants difficult to identify in the field were collected and taken to lab for further identification with the help of botanist. Plant specimens were deposited at Jimma University Department of Biology. For regeneration assessment, seedlings and saplings were identified, counted and recorded within a sub-plot of 10 m × 10 m and 5 m × 5 m, respectively. All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations. Plant identification was done following the flora of Ethiopia and Eritrea.

Ethnoecological data were collected through semi-structured interview. A checklist for an interview was prepared focusing on the use and preference of woody plant species in coffee agroforest. All woody plant species recorded in the field were included in the semi-structured questionnaire. Free listing technique was used to record the use of each woody plants. Coffee owners list as much as they can remember the use of the plant (Martin, 1995). The use of woody plant mentioned by interviewees were grouped into different use categories. Moreover, coffee owners were asked to mention the most preferred coffee shade trees and their management practices. The ethnoecological data were collected from 96 individuals (11 females) (Dabbiyee = 20, Gurrattii = 18, Qartammee = 17, Mexxii-Caffee = 21, Sokii = 20). The age of interviewees ranges from 20 to 80. Permissions were obtained from Oromia Forest and Wildlife Enterprises, Shabe Sombo district office and the lowest administrative Office (kebele) to undertake the study. All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations. The interviewees gave their consent on verbal than written form for an interview. To minimize the bias due to peer interference, an interview was carried out on an individual based on the convenient time and place to interviewee.

Alpha diversity and other indices were computed for diversity assessment using PAST version 4.03 software. Alpha diversity is expressed as the total number species (species richness) in coffee agroforest (Manaye et al., 2021; Marzialetti et al., 2021).

Species richness was computed using the formula:

$\mathrm{S}=\sum \mathrm{n}\mathrm{i}$

where ni is the number of species in a coffee agroforest.

Woody plant species preference in coffee agroforest was analyzed using the number of citation given to each woody plant species for the respective use categories. Citation refers the number of use of wood plants the interviewee mentioned (Lucena et al., 2013; Lokonon et al., 2019). Literature has stated that more preferred woody plant species are more cited (Lokonon et al., 2019). Woody plant preference in coffee agroforest was estimated using the equation adopted from Duguma and Hager (2010) as follow:

$MScspp\left(x\right),\mathit{use}\left(y\right)=\frac{\sum \mathit{score}spp\left(x\right),\mathit{use}\left(y\right)}{n}$

$\mathit{ARPS}spp\left(x\right),\mathit{use}\left(y\right)=\frac{MScspp\left(x\right),\mathit{use}\left(y\right)}{\sum Mscspp\left(\mathit{all}\right),\mathit{use}\left(y\right)}\times 100$

$\mathit{AGRPS}spp\left(x\right),\mathit{use}\left(y\right)=\frac{\sum \mathit{ARPS}spp\left(x\right)}{\sum \mathit{APRS}spp\left(\mathit{all}\right),\mathit{use}\left(\mathit{all}\right)}\times 100$

Where $MScspp\left(x\right),\mathit{use}(y$ ) stands for mean citation score of species x for use type y, n stands for the total number of interviewees (n = 96); $\mathit{ARPS}spp\left(x\right),\mathit{use}\left(y\right)$ stands for the adjusted relative preference score of species x for use type y in % and $\mathit{AGRPS}spp\left(x\right),\mathit{use}\left(y\right)$ stands for the aggregate relative preference score of a species across all types in percentage. Aggregate relative preference score was computed for multiple use and shade value of recorded woody plant species in coffee agroforest.

The woody plant conservation priority (CP) analysis adopted with some modification the technique that was employed by scholars (Dzerefos and Witkowski, 2001; Oliveira et al., 2007; de Albuquerque et al., 2011; Lokonon et al., 2017; Kafoutchoni et al., 2018; Ribeiro et al., 2019; Oliveira et al., 2021). Table 1 portrays the criteria and score employed in the analysis. Woody plant species is calculated using the formula:

$CP=0.5\left(BS\right)+0.5\left(UR\right)$

Where CP corresponding to Conservation Priority, BS corresponding to biological score estimated based on relative density (D) as BS = D × 10. The usage risk (UR) is estimated based on management risk and use value (U) as UR = [0.5(H) + 0.5(U)] × 10. Use value is estimated as the average of the sum of the local importance (L) and the diversity of use (V) (Ribeiro et al., 2019). For woody plants that have timber and construction value additional value of 10 points were added as additional usage pressure (Ribeiro et al., 2019). Finally woody plants divided into three categories, category 1 with high priority species for conservation (CP ≥ 85), category 2 with moderate priority species for conservation (60 ≤ CP < 85) and category 3 with low priority for conservation (CP < 60). Spearman correlation was computed to test the relationship between woody plant species preference and conservation priority.

Table 1

Table 1. Criteria and scores used to determine woody plant species conservation priority in coffee agroforest.

3 Results and discussion

3.1 Diversity of woody plant species

Findings on ecological data showed that many woody plant species associated with coffee agroforest in southwest Ethiopia. The result showed that 48 different woody plant species belonging to 27 families were recorded in 63 plots (Table 2). Most of the families were represented by a single species. Only a few family consists of a maximum of four species. Among the recorded woody plants three woody plant species, Cordia africana, Croton macrostachyus, Milletia ferruginea were more abundant compared to the other species accounting for 41 percent of the number of woody plants. Forty five woody plants had contributed each less than 5 percent of the total abundance. The lower abundance of many woody plants were the outcome of coffee management that resulted in stem reduction. Muleta et al. (2011) have reported the family Fabaceae dominate coffee agroforest in southwest Ethiopia. Aerts et al. (2011) reported Croton macrostachyus and Milletia ferruginea dominate coffee agroforest in southwest Ethiopia. This is attributed to the regeneration characteristics of individuals (Aerts et al., 2011). A Study from Dallo Mena district, southeast Ethiopia has reported 10 different tree species in shade grown coffee (Mengistu and Asfaw, 2016). Another study from Jimma area southwest Ethiopia have reported 38 different tree species in coffee agroforest (Worku et al., 2015).

Table 2

Table 2. Woody plant species recorded in coffee agroforest.

Higher species diversity with Fisher alpha 12 and Shannon Weiner diversity (H) 3.08 were found in coffee agroforest (Table 3). Previous studies categorized Shannon Weiner diversity as high with a value ≥3, medium with a value between 2 and 3, low with a value between 1 and 2, very low with a value <1 (Atsbha et al., 2019; Fentaw et al., 2022). A Shannon Weiner diversity value of 3.08 of the present study belongs to a high diversity category. The individual based rarefaction curve showed the estimated number of species as more number of individuals recorded (Figure 2). The Choa-1 value of 51.5 showed the maximum species richness estimated with more sampling effort (Table 3). Worku et al. (2015) have reported Fisher alpha diversity of 8.53 in coffee agroforest in Yayu southwest Ethiopia. Kewessa et al. (2019) have found a Shannon diversity of 1.74 in coffee agroforest Bale Eco-Region, southeastern Ethiopia. Senbeta and Denich (2006) have reported a Shannon diversity of 2.82 at Bebeka southwest Ethiopia. Rigal et al. (2018) has reported a Shannon diversity of 3.42 with 30.57 effective number species in coffee agroforest from southwest China.

Table 3

Table 3. Diversity indices of woody plant species in coffee agroforest.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Individual based rarefaction curve.

Coffee agroforest is a source of livelihoods for the local people. It provided ecosystem services that benefit the forest users (Bukomeko et al., 2019). The present study showed that woody plants maintained in coffee agroforest provide diversity of uses. Ten uses such as fuelwood, charcoal, Construction, medicinal, coffee shade, bee forage, beehive, farm tool, hanging beehive and timber that determine the management of woody plants species in coffee agroforest were frequently mentioned. These uses can be destructive (timber, beehive, construction, charcoal, farm tool), partial destruction (fuelwood, medicinal) and non-destructive (coffee shade, bee forage, hanging beehive). Ecological and economic reasons are the driving factors for woody plant management in coffee agroforest. In coffee agroforest the shade value of woody plant species are the priority for tree selection and management. Nevertheless, the present study findings showed that coffee agroforest owners obtain multiple benefits from the managed woody plants. Girma et al. (2019) have stated that local people manage woody plants for construction, fuelwood and honey production. A study from Bangladesh showed that local people manage woody plants for multiple uses and the major uses are fruit, fuelwood, pole, timber, medicinal etc. (Tarit et al., 2015).

3.2 Preferred woody plants in coffee agroforest

The aggregate relative preference score (ARPS) showed 15 most preferred woody plant species in coffee agroforest (Table 4). Each woody plant species provided multiple uses and the relative importance differ between the species. Based on the all uses, P. adolfi-friederici, C. africana, P. fulva, E. candelabrum were the most preferred woody plants. The use value of these woody plants were mentioned more for timber, hanging beehive, beehive than coffee shade. A. gummifera and M. ferruginea were the most preferred coffee shade trees. The abundance of P. adolfi-friederici, C. africana, P. fulva, E. candelabrum were lower than M. ferruginea a well-known coffee shade tree in southwest Ethiopia. A study from Tanzania has shown local people give priority for the tree species that provide food, fodder and fuelwood (Wagner et al., 2019). Bukomeko et al. (2019) have studied the relationship between tree diversity and farmers need for the benefit of trees and found that farmers need did not match with tree diversity in coffee agroforest in Uganda. Lamond et al. (2016) have investigated underpinning factors for tree preference in coffee agroforest and reported that multiple uses (both ecological and socioeconomic) determine the tree selection in coffee agroforest. Albertin and Nair (2004) a have studied farmers’ perspective on the role of shade tree in coffee production systems in Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica and have found tree species that are not preferred for coffee shade still maintained in coffee agroforest for the benefits they provided for the local people. The same author highlighted the need for incorporating more trees and fruit trees in coffee agroforest in the region. A study by Hundera (2016) has shown local people maintain Schefflera abyssinica and Olea welwitschii in coffee agroforest for honey production in southwest Ethiopia. Valencia et al. (2015) have reported bulk of tree species that have not been valued for coffee shade in coffee in Chiapas, Mexico. Reinforcing reasons that encourage tree management in coffee agroforest are the need for additional benefits such as timber, fuelwood, medicinal and other non-timber forest products (Valencia et al., 2015). A study by Kalanzi and Nansereko (2014) has shown local people in Bukomansimbi district of Uganda prefer tree species that provide multiple products in coffee agroforest.

Table 4

Table 4. Uses and relative value of 15 most preferred woody plant species in coffee agroforest.

3.3 Local priority for conservation of woody plant species

The present study findings showed that the conservation priority (CP) varies between woody plants. Three types of categories were identified for local conservation priority that took into account the management practices, utilization and regeneration status of each woody plant (Table 5). Category 1 indicates woody plant species that need high conservation priority and accordingly category 2 and category 3, moderate and low priority, respectively. As indicated in Table 5, 12 species are represented under category 1, 19 species are represented under category 2 and 17 species are represented under category 3. Woody plants that are destructively utilized and removed from coffee agroforest during slashing under growth plants belongs to category 1. These woody plants had a few individuals and insufficient regeneration. Local people do not value these woody plants for coffee shade and totally remove, if possible, from the system. Likewise woody plant species under category 2 are utilized destructively that resulted in low number of individuals leading to loss of the plants in the long run. The Spearman correlation showed negative correlation between abundance and conservation priority [r_s(46) = −0.681, p = 000]. Most preferred woody plants such as Cordia africana, Polyscia fulva, Pouteria adolfi-friederic and Olea welwitschi belongs to category 3, Euphorbia candelabrum, Ekebergia capensis, and Fagaropsis angolensis belongs to category 2 and known coffee shade tree species Milletia ferruginea and Albizia gummifera belongs to category 3. This work is the first attempt to classify woody plant species in coffee agroforest in southwest Ethiopia. It highlights the status of woody plants under coffee management practices. The study findings complement the notion coffee agroforest is tree diversity conservation hotspot (Valencia et al., 2014). Local farmers knowledge plays a decisive role in conservation of tree species in coffee agroforest (Valencia et al., 2015). Joshi et al. (2019) has stated that woody plant species recognized as useful are under pressure for utilization and need attention for conservation. In the present study Cordia africa which is extracted for timber is exceptional due to the nature of plant regeneration characteristics. Cordia africana is found in low abundance but withstand timber utilization. Joshi et al. (2019) has reported tree species require high conservation priority compared to shrubs. But, the present study showed that shrubs require more attention than trees as coffee management remove under growth including shrubs through slashing. The study also support Lokonon et al. (2017) that state most used species are not top priority for conservation. For instance, in this study Cordia africana is highly utilized for timber but categorized under category 3. Rytigynia neglecta, Maytenus arbutifolia and Ilex mitis are among the species with high diversity of uses but totally discouraged in coffee agroforest in southwest Ethiopia.

Table 5

Table 5. List of woody plant species for local conservation priority in coffee agroforest.

4 Conclusion and implication to conservation

Coffee management activities and local uses raises the concern for conservation of woody plant species in coffee agroforest in southwest Ethiopia. The study findings highlight the diversity, local preference and conservation priority of woody plant species. We conclude that the most useful woody plants are not the most abundant in coffee agroforest. As most woody plants need high conservation priority, the presence of woody plants in coffee agroforest necessarily does not imply sustainability. Local preference determine woody plant species management and conservation in coffee agroforest. Woody plants are maintained in coffee agroforest for multiple uses than a single shade value. Non-coffee shade trees are the most preferred tree species in coffee agroforest. The study findings suggest that promotion of woody plant species management in coffee agroforest should include the multiple uses and preference of woody plant species.

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Ethics statement

Ethical review and approval was not required for the study on human participants in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent from the participants was not required to participate in this study in accordance with the national legislation and the institutional requirements.

Author contributions

ZK: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Writing – original draft. CO: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing – original draft.

Funding

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the local people and coffee agroforest owner who willingly give permission to undertake vegetation assessment in their coffee farm and for their consent for an interview.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

Aerts, R., Hundera, K., Berecha, G., Gijbels, P., Baeten, M., Van Mechelen, M., et al. (2011). Semi-forest coffee cultivation and the conservation of Ethiopian Afromontane rainforest fragments. For. Ecol. Manag. 261, 1034–1041. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2010.12.025

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Albertin, A., and Nair, P. K. R. (2004). Farmers’ perspectives on the role of shade trees in coffee production systems: an assessment from the Nicoya peninsula, Costa Rica. Hum. Ecol. 32, 443–463. doi: 10.1023/B:HUEC.0000043515.84334.76

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Atsbha, T., Desta, A. B., and Zewdu, T. (2019). Woody species diversity, population structure, and regeneration status in the Gra-Kahsu natural vegetation, southern Tigray of Ethiopia. Heliyon 5:e01120. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01120

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Bekele-Tesemma, A. , (2007). Useful trees of Ethiopia: Identification, propagation and management in 17 agroecological zones. Nairobi: RELMA in ICRAF Project.

Google Scholar

Bukomeko, H., Jassogne, L., Tumwebaze, S. B., Eilu, G., and Vaast, P. (2019). Integrating local knowledge with tree diversity analyses to optimize on-farm tree species composition for ecosystem service delivery in coffee agroforestry systems of Uganda. Agrofor. Syst. 93, 755–770. doi: 10.1007/s10457-017-0172-8

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Cheng, S., Hiwatashi, Y., Imai, H., Naito, M., and Numata, T. (1998). Deforestation and degradation of natural resources in Ethiopia: forest management implications from a case study in the Belete-Gera Forest. J. For. Res. 3, 199–204. doi: 10.1007/BF02762193

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

de Albuquerque, U. P., Soldati, G. T., Sieber, S. S., de Medeiros, P. M., de Sá, J. C., and de Souza, L. C. (2011). Rapid ethnobotanical diagnosis of the Fulni-ô indigenous lands (NE Brazil): floristic survey and local conservation priorities for medicinal plants. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 13, 277–292. doi: 10.1007/s10668-010-9261-9

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Duguma, L. A., and Hager, H. (2010). Woody plants diversity and possession, and their future prospects in small-scale tree and shrub growing in agricultural landscapes in central highlands of Ethiopia. Small Scale Forestry 9, 153–174. doi: 10.1007/s11842-009-9108-0

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Dzerefos, C. M., and Witkowski, E. T. F. (2001). Density and potential utilization of medicinal grassland plants from Abe bailey nature reserve, South Africa. Biodivers. Conserv. 10, 1875–1896. doi: 10.1023/A:1013177628331

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Eyasu, G., Tolera, M., and Negash, M. (2020). Woody species composition, structure, and diversity of homegarden agroforestry systems in southern Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. Heliyon 6:e05500. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05500

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Fentaw, G., Mezgebu, A., Wondie, A., and Getnet, B. (2022). Ecological health assessment of Ethiopian wetlands: review and synthesis. Environ. Sustainab. Indicat. 15:100194. doi: 10.1016/j.indic.2022.100194

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Girma, S., Ine, D., Jannik, S., Kristoffer, H., Feyera, S., Jan, H., et al. (2019). Woody plant use and management in relation to property rights: a social-ecological case study from southwestern Ethiopia. Ecosyst. People 15, 303–316. doi: 10.1080/26395916.2019.1674382

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Hernandez, S. M., Mattsson, B. J., Peters, V. E., Cooper, R. J., and Carroll, C. R. (2013). Coffee agroforests remain beneficial for Neotropical bird community conservation across seasons. PLoS One 8:e65101. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0065101

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Hundera, K. (2016). Shade tree selection and management practices by farmers in traditional coffee production Systems in Jimma Zone, Southwest Ethiopia. Ethiop. J. Educ. Sci. 11, 91–107.

Google Scholar

Hundera, K., Aerts, R., Fontaine, A., Mechelen, M. V., Gijels, P., Honney, O., et al. (2013). Effects of coffee management intensity on composition, structure, and regeneration status of Ethiopian moist evergreen Afromontane forests. Environ. Manag. 51, 801–809. doi: 10.1007/s00267-012-9976-5

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Hundera, K., Honnay, O., Aerts, R., and Muys, B. (2015). The potential of small exclosures in assisting regeneration of coffee shade trees in South-Western Ethiopian coffee forests. Afr. J. Ecol. 53, 389–397. doi: 10.1111/aje.12203

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Hwang, B., Hundera, K., Mekuria, B., Wood, A., and Asfaw, A. (2020). Intensified management of coffee forest in Southwest Ethiopia detected by Landsat imagery. Forests 11:422. doi: 10.3390/f11040422

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Joshi, B. C., Rawal, R. S., Chandra Sekar, K., and Pandey, A. (2019). Quantitative ethnobotanical assessment of woody species in a representative watershed of west Himalaya, India. Energ. Ecol. Environ. 4, 56–64. doi: 10.1007/s40974-019-00114-9

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kafoutchoni, K. M., Idohou, R., Egeru, A., Salako, K. V., Agbangla, C., Adomou, A. C., et al. (2018). Species richness, cultural importance, and prioritization of wild spices for conservation in the Sudano-Guinean zone of Benin (West Africa). J. Ethnobiol. Ethnomed. 14:67. doi: 10.1186/s13002-018-0267-y

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kalanzi, F., and Nansereko, S. (2014). Exploration of farmers’ tree species selection for coffee agroforestry in Bukomansimbi district of Uganda. Int. J. Res. Land Use Sustainab. 1, 9–16.

Google Scholar

Kefalew, T., Betemariyam, M., and Tolera, M. (2021). Conversion of natural forests to farmlands and its associated woody species diversity and carbon stocks in a span of 33 years (1984 to 2016): in the case of southwestern Ethiopia. F1000Res. 10:227. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.28336.2

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kewessa, G., Tiki, L., Nigatu, D., and Datiko, D. (2019). Effect of Forest coffee management practices on Woody species diversity and composition in bale eco-region, southeastern Ethiopia. Open J. For. 9, 265–282. doi: 10.4236/ojf.2019.94015

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Korach, J., Herrera, P., and Myers, C. (2020). Linking locally valued plants and places for conservation, community baboon sanctuary, Belize. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 23:e01065. doi: 10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e01065

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Lamond, G., Sandbrook, L., Gassner, A., and Sinclair, F. L. (2016). Local knowledge of tree attributes underpins species selection on coffee farms. Exp. Agric. 55, 35–49. doi: 10.1017/S0014479716000168

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Lokonon, B. E., Mangamana, E. T., Gnonlonfoun, I., Akpona, T. J. D., Assogbadjo, A. E., Kakaï, R. G., et al. (2019). Knowledge, valuation and prioritization of 46 woody species for conservation in agroforestry systems along Ouémé catchment in Benin (West Africa). Environ. Dev. Sustain. 21, 2377–2399. doi: 10.1007/s10668-018-0142-y

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Lokonon, B. E., Mangamana, E. T., Kakaï, R. G., and Sinsin, B. (2017). Assessing local conservation priorities of useful woody species within agroforestry systems along Ouémé catchment in Benin (West Africa). Ethnobiol. Conserv. 6, 1–19. doi: 10.15451/ec2017-04-6.4-1-19

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Lucena, R. F., Lucena, C. M., Araújo, E. L., Alves, A. G., and de Albuquerque, U. P. (2013). Conservation priorities of useful plants from different techniques of collection and analysis of ethnobotanical data. Ana. Acad. Bras. Cienc. 85, 169–186. doi: 10.1590/s0001-37652013005000013

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Manaye, A., Tesfamariam, B., Tesfaye, M., Worku, A., and Gufi, Y. (2021). Tree diversity and carbon stocks in agroforestry systems in northern Ethiopia. Carbon Balance Manag. 16:14. doi: 10.1186/s13021-021-00174-7

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Martin, G. J. (1995). Ethnobotany: a people and plants’ conservation manual. London: Chapman & Hall.

Google Scholar

Marzialetti, F., Cascone, S., Frate, L., Di Febbraro, M., Acosta, A. T. R., and Carranza, M. L. (2021). Measuring alpha and Beta diversity by field and remote-sensing data: a challenge for coastal dunes biodiversity monitoring. Remote Sens. 13:1928. doi: 10.3390/rs13101928

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Mengistu, B., and Asfaw, Z. (2016). Woody species diversity and structure of agroforestry and adjacent land uses in Dallo Mena District, south-East Ethiopia. Nat. Resour. 7, 515–534. doi: 10.4236/nr.2016.710044

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Mertens, J., Emsens, W.-J., Jocqué, M., Geeraert, L., and De Beenhouwer, M. (2018). From natural forest to coffee agroforest: implications for communities of large mammals in the ethiopian highlands. Oryx 54, 715–722. doi: 10.1017/S0030605318000844

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Muleta, D., Assefa, F., Nemomissa, S., and Granhall, U. (2011). Socioeconomic benefits of shade trees in coffee production systems in Bonga and Yayuhurumu districts, southwestern Ethiopia: farmers’ perceptions. Ethiop. J. Educ. Sci. 7, 39–56.

Google Scholar

Oliveira, R. L., Lins Neto, E. M., Araújo, E. L., and Albuquerque, U. P. (2007). Conservation priorities and population structure of Woody medicinal plants in an area of Caatinga vegetation (Pernambuco state, NE Brazil). Environ. Monit. Assess. 132, 189–206. doi: 10.1007/s10661-006-9528-7

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Oliveira, S. F., Rangel, J., Macedo, J., Silva, S. L., Ribeiro, D. A., Macedo, M. S., et al. (2021). Priority conservation of medicinal woody plants from protected forests based on ecological and ethnobotanical data. Ana. Acad. Bras. Cienc. 93:e20201769. doi: 10.1590/0001-3765202120201769

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ordoñez-Jurado, H., Martínez, D., and Cerón, M. (2021). Woody species associated with coffee production systems in southern Colombia. Rev. Cienc. Agríc. 38, 4–16. doi: 10.22267/rcia.213802.155

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ribeiro, D. A., Macedo, D. G., Oliveira, L. G. S., de Almeida, B. V., Macedo, J. G. F., Macêdo, M. J. F., et al. (2019). Conservation priorities for medicinal woody species in a cerrado area in the Chapada do Araripe, North-Eastern Brazil. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 21, 61–77. doi: 10.1007/s10668-017-0023-9

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Rigal, C., Vaast, P., and Xu, J. (2018). Using farmers’ local knowledge of tree provision of ecosystem services to strengthen the emergence of coffee-agroforestry landscapes in Southwest China. PLoS One 13:e0204046. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0204046

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Schmitt, C. B., Senbeta, F., Denich, M., Preisinger, H., and Boehmer, H. J. (2010). Wild coffee management and plant diversity in the montane rainforest of southwestern Ethiopia. Afr. J. Ecol. 48, 78–86. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2028.2009.01084.x

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Senbeta, F., and Denich, M. (2006). Effects of wild coffee management on species diversity in the Afromontane rainforests of Ethiopia. For. Ecol. Manag. 232, 68–74. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2006.05.064

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Shumi, G., Rodrigues, P., Schultner, J., Dorresteijn, I., Hanspach, J., Hylander, K., et al. (2019). Conservation value of moist evergreen Afromontane forest sites with different management and history in southwestern Ethiopia. Biol. Conserv. 232, 117–126. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2019.02.008

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Siraji, M., and Balemaly, S. (2021). Population structure and regeneration status of Woody species in Kenech Forest, Southwest Ethiopia. Int. J. For. Res. 2021, 1–14. doi: 10.1155/2021/6640285

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Soto-Pinto, L., Villalvazo-López, V., Jiménez-Ferrer, G., Ramírez-Marcial, N., Montoya, G., and Sinclair, F. L. (2007). The role of local knowledge in determining shade composition of multistrata coffee systems in Chiapas, Mexico. Biodivers. Conserv. 16, 419–436. doi: 10.1007/s10531-005-5436-3

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Tabuti, J., Ticktin, T., Arinaitwe, M., and Muwanika, V. (2009). Community attitudes and preferences towards woody species: implications for conservation in Nawaikoke, Uganda. Oryx 43, 393–402. doi: 10.1017/S0030605309001847

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Tadese, S., Soromessa, T., Bekele, T., and Gebeyehu, G. (2021). Woody species composition, vegetation structure, and regeneration status of Majang Forest biosphere reserves in southwestern Ethiopia. Int. J. For. Res. 2021, 1–22. doi: 10.1155/2021/5534930

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Tadesse, G., Zavaleta, E., and Shennan, C. (2014). Coffee landscapes as refugia for native woody biodiversity as forest loss continues in Southwest Ethiopia. Biol. Conserv. 169, 384–391. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2013.11.034

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Tarit, K. B., Mohammad, M. R., Md, M., and Raj, A. N. (2015). Status, utilization, and conservation of agrobiodiversity in farms: a case study in the northwestern region of Bangladesh. Int. J. Biodiv. Sci. Ecosyst. Serv. Manag. 11, 318–329. doi: 10.1080/21513732.2015.1050456

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Teketay, D., Kashe, K., and Madome, J. (2018). Enhancement of diversity, stand structure and regeneration of woody species through area exclosure: the case of a mopane woodland in northern Botswana. Ecol. Process 7:5. doi: 10.1186/s13717-018-0116-x

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Tumuhe, C. L., and Nyamaizi, S. (2020). Analysis of tree species, preferences by farmers in Albertine rift, Uganda. Environ. Earth Ecol. 4, 7–14. doi: 10.24051/eee/130756

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Valencia, V., García-Barrios, L., West, P., Sterling, E. J., and Naeem, S. (2014). The role of coffee agroforestry in the conservation of tree diversity and community composition of native forests in a biosphere reserve. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 189, 154–163. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2014.03.024

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Valencia, V., Naeem, S., García-Barrios, L., West, P., and Sterling, E. J. (2016). Conservation of tree species of late succession and conservation concern in coffee agroforestry systems. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 219, 32–41. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2015.12.004

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Valencia, V., West, P., Sterling, E. J., García-Barrios, L., and Naeem, S. (2015). The use of farmers’ knowledge in coffee agroforestry management: implications for the conservation of tree biodiversity. Ecosphere 6, 1–17. doi: 10.1890/es14-00428.1

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Wagner, S., Rigal, C., Liebig, T., Mremi, R., Hemp, A., Jones, M., et al. (2019). Ecosystem services and importance of common tree species in coffee-agroforestry systems: local knowledge of small-scale farmers at Mt. Kilimanjaro, Tanzania. Forests 10:963. doi: 10.3390/f10110963

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Worku, M., Lindner, A., and Berger, U. (2015). Management effects on woody species diversity and vegetation structure of coffee-based agroforestry systems in Ethiopia. Small Scale For 14, 531–551. doi: 10.1007/s11842-015-9305-y

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar