4.0 Article

WHY CONTINUE WITH FLORISTIC CHECKLISTS IN MEXICO? THE CASE OF THE TACANA-BOQUERON PRIORITY TERRESTRIAL REGION, IN THE MEXICAN STATE OF CHIAPAS

期刊

BOTANICAL SCIENCES
卷 97, 期 4, 页码 741-753

出版社

SOC BOTANICA MEXICO
DOI: 10.17129/botsci.2174

关键词

Endemic species; plant distribution; Sierra Madre de Chiapas; threatened species

资金

  1. CONABIO [JF092]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Some regions of Mexico have been relatively well explored floristically and estimates of the vascular plant richness they contain have been obtained. However, there are still regions that require effort to obtain the most appropriate lists of flora possible that consider both systemization of the information and that benefit from recent botanical explorations. Questions: What is the species richness of vascular plants in the Tecami-Boqueree Priority Terrestrial Region? What proportion of the species are endemic or included in risk categories? Study sites and dates: Tacana-Boqueren Priority Terrestrial Region, Chiapas State, Mexico. This region is on the Guatemala border and covers an area of 57,400 ha. Between 1920 and 2015. Methods: A database of 14,487 vascular plant records was integrated. Two sources of information were compared: systematization of data-bases, and recent botanic expeditions. Results: We found 2,485 native species belonging to 185 families. Both data sources were complementary in order to obtain a more complete floristic checklist (systematization of database: 1,774 spp., recent botanic expeditions: 1,514 spp.). As novelties, we found three new species and seven new reports for Mexico. Approximately 14 % of the species documented are included in risk categories or are endemic to the study site. Conclusions: Our checklist is one of the largest in the region (Mexico and Central America) in terms of species count. Our study shows the importance of conducting botanical explorations to complement the information on vascular plant richness in relatively well-explored areas of Mexico.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据