Printer Friendly

Economic valuation of plant diversity storage service provided by Brazilian rupestrian grassland ecosystems/Valoracao economica do servico de estocagem da diversidade de plantas fornecido pelos ecossistemas de campos rupestres brasileiros.

Abstract

The rupestrian grassland ecosystems provide various goods and services to society and support a significant amount of biological diversity. Notably the rich plant diversity has high levels of endemism and a variety of uses among the local communities and general society. Despite the socio-ecological importance of these ecosystems, they are subjected to significant anthropogenic pressures. The goal of this study is to perform economic valuation of the plant diversity storage service provided by rupestrian grassland ecosystems to provide grounds for the development of conservation policies and encourage sustainable practices in these ecosystems. Given the intense human disturbances and unique flora, the Serra do Cipo (southern portion of the Espinhaco Range in southeast Brazil) was selected for the study. We estimate the monetary value related to the plant diversity storage service provided by the study area using the maintenance costs of native plants in the living collections of the botanical garden managed by the Zoobotanical Foundation-- Belo Horizonte (located 97 km from Serra do Cipo). The plant diversity storage value provided by Serra do Cipo ecosystems is significant, reaching US$25.26 million [year.sup.-1]. This study contributes to the development of perspectives related to the conservation of rupestrian grassland ecosystems as well as others threatened tropical ecosystems with high biodiversity

Keywords: biodiversity, conservation, economic valuation, valuation methods.

Resumo

Os ecossistemas de campos rupestres fornecem diversos bens e servicos a sociedade, alem de abrigar uma significativa diversidade biologica. Particularmente, a rica biodiversidade vegetal apresenta altas taxas de endemismo e uma grande variedade de usos entre a comunidade local e a sociedade como um todo. Apesar da importancia socio-ecologica desses ecossistemas, eles estao submetidos a significativa pressao antropica. O objetivo desse estudo e realizar a valoracao economica do servico de estocagem da diversidade de plantas fornecido pelos ecossistemas de campos rupestres para fornecer subsidios para o desenvolvimento de politicas conservacionistas e estimular praticas sustentaveis nesses ecossistemas. Diante dos intensos disturbios antropicos e sua flora unica, a Serra do Cipo (porcao sul da Cadeia do Espinhaco, Sudeste do Brasil) foi selecionada para este estudo. Estimamos o valor monetario relacionado ao servico de estocagem da diversidade de plantas fornecido pela area de estudo, utilizando os custos de manutencao de plantas nativas em colecoes vivas do jardim botanico da Fundacao Zoo-Botanica de Belo Horizonte (localizado a 97 km da Serra do Cipo). O valor do estoque da diversidade de plantas fornecido pelos ecossistemas da Serra do Cipo e significativo, atingindo US$25,26 milhoes [ano.sup.-1]. Esse estudo contribui para o desenvolvimento de perspectivas relacionadas a conservacao dos ecossistemas de campos rupestres assim como outros ecossistemas ameacados e com alta biodiversidade nos tropicos.

Palavras-chave: biodiversidade, conservacao, valoracao economica, metodos de valoracao.

1. Introduction

Changes in biological diversity negatively impact ecosystem processes (Chapin et al., 2000; Loreau et al., 2002), and the benefits and services provided by natural ecosystems are diminished by environmental degradation. Ecosystems benefit society in numerous ways, including by providing i) provisioning services, such as those related to food, water, wood, and fiber; ii) regulatory services, such as the regulation of flooding, disease, climate, and air and water quality; iii) cultural services, such as recreation, aesthetic pleasure, and spiritual satisfaction; and iv) support services, such as soil formation, photosynthesis, and nutrient cycling (MA, 2003). Although these services are extremely important to human welfare, they remain undervalued by society (Daily, 1997). Approximately 60% of these ecosystem services provided by biosphere have been degraded over the last 50 years, and human impacts are considered to be the main cause of this decline (MA, 2005).

Valuation of ecosystem services may help to address the current biodiversity crisis. Various methods have been developed to measure the economic contributions of natural ecosystems (Daily, 1997; CBD, 2007), allowing monetary values to be addressed to these ecosystem services (e.g., Balmford et al., 2002; Costanza et al., 1997). Given the incredible diversity of species and the broad range of services provided by ecosystems, these concepts remain under-researched in many parts of the tropical world, where high levels of biodiversity (and the associated arrays of ecosystem services) are subjected to significant anthropogenic pressures.

Among the tropical biomes, the Brazilian savanna (Cerrado) is one of the most threatened. Despite the high biodiversity levels (there are more than 11,600 species taking into account only the native plants) (Mendonca et al., 2008), the Cerrado has been transformed at a rapid pace (Klink et al., 2008). More than half of the Cerrado's area has been lost in only four decades (Sano et al., 2001; Klink and Machado, 2005). Whereas Cerrado areas located on relatively flat terrain have been devastated (primarily by livestock and agricultural intensification), patches of Cerrado on rocky outcroppings and mountains have been impacted at lower rates.

Rupestrian grasslands ecosystems occur at high altitudes (generally above 900 metres above sea level) and are found on areas characterised by shallow soils with high acidity and low nutritional levels and are primarily associated to the Cerrado located in the Espinhaco Range, eastern Brazil (Giulietti et al., 1997; Benites et al., 2007). The plant community in the rupestrian grasslands is mainly composed of an herbaceous stratum with small shrubs and subshrubs which supports high biodiversity and endemism levels (Giulietti et al., 1997). The most common plant families in rupestrian grasslands include Cyperaceae, Poaceae, Asteraceae, Eriocaulaceace, Velloziaceae, and Melastomataceae (Giulietti et al., 1987). More than 30% of the species found in these rupestrian grasslands are endemic, while some taxa display a rate of endemism that exceeds 80% (Giulietti et al., 1987, 1997). During sampling of a ca. 200 [km.sup.2] corridor composed mostly of rupestrian grasslands in Serra do Cipo, about 1,600 plant species were reported (Giulietti et al., 1987).

The flora of Serra do Cipo has a variety of uses among the rural communities close to the area and also for society in general. Reports of the use of these plants date back to the early colonisers. The plants found in the region are used as a source of natural fibres (e.g., Guadua sp. and Attalea oleifera), food (e.g., Catyocar brasiliensis, Acrocomia aculeata), resins and oils, and for ornamental purposes (ICMBio, 2009). Ranieri et al. (2003) reported the potential use of the genus Lavoisiera (Melastomataceae) as an ornamental species, and dozens of other species are currently being propagated to meet consumer demand, whereas Brandao et al. (1996) listed 134 medicinal plant species in the rupestrian grasslands of Serra do Cipo (Ventura et al., 2007). Therefore, despite not having been the focus of any previous valuation study, the rupestrian grasslands provide a valuable service of storing rich plant diversity, a source of several benefits to local communities and society in general.

The value of ecosystem services can be estimated by assessing the cost to replicate a particular service under artificial conditions. Considering the maintenance of plant species, the use of live plant collections from botanical gardens stands out as a well-established global practice and is usefirl for ex situ plant maintenance (e.g., Mistretta et al., 1991; Stevens 2007); there are over 6 million live plants in 2,500 botanical gardens worldwide (Golding et al., 2010). The objective of this study is to perform the economic valuation of the plant diversity storage service provided by rupestrian grasslands ecosystems. Given its diverse and unique flora. Serra do Cipo was selected as the study area for this research. Hence, we estimate the monetary value related to the plant diversity storage service provided by the study area using the maintenance costs of native plants in the living collections of the botanical garden managed by the Zoobotanical Foundation--Belo Horizonte (located 97 km from the Serra do Cipo). We expect that determining the relative value of the plant diversity storage service will encourage conservation and sustainable practices in Serra do Cipo and serve as a model for other ecosystems in need of conservation in the tropics.

2. Methods

2.1. Study area

Serra do Cipo is located in the central region of Minas Gerais state, southeast Brazil, in the southern portion of the Espinhaco Range. The Espinhaco Range is a predominantly quartzitic range of mountains that is approximately 1,100 km in length and extends from the city of Ouro Branco in Minas Gerais state to the northern boundary of Bahia state. Serra do Cipo divides the Sao Francisco river basin to the west and the Rio Doce river basin to the east. Following the Koppen (1931) classification, the predominant climate is Cwb type at a tropical altitude with a pronounced dry season and wet summers. The annual average rainfall ranges from 1,300 to 1,600 mm and is concentrated between November and January (Madeira and Fernandes, 1999).

The vegetation of Serra do Cipo is primarily influenced by components from two major Brazilian biomes: Atlantic rain forest (on the east side) and Cerrado (on the west side). The Cerrado is represented primarily by rupestrian grasslands, which cover more than half of Serra do Cipo's area and support most part of the plant diversity described to the whole region (Madeira et al., 2008). Other formations are also found in Serra do Cipo, such as Cerrado sensu stricto, gallery forests, and seasonally dry tropical forests on limestone outcrops (Giulietti et ah, 1987; Coelho et ah, 2012). Serra do Cipo ecosystems support a highly complex vegetation matrix that sustains high biodiversity and endemism levels. Although the high levels of biodiversity in Serra do Cipo have been described in many studies, the underlying conditions that produce such diversity have yet to be determined, as the soil matrix, topography, and climate may all play a role (Carvalho et ah, 2012; Giulietti et ah, 1987).

2.2. Economic valuation

To estimate the value of the plant diversity storage at Serra do Cipo, we calculated the maintenance cost of native plants in the living collections of the botanical garden managed by the Zoobotanical Foundation--Belo Florizonte (BG-ZBF). The BG-ZBF is located ca. 100 km of Serra do Cipo, in the city of Belo Horizonte, and is nationally recognised for its contributions related to the cultivation of native plant species and their conservation. The BG-ZBF is a reference centre for botanists and maintains a large collection of flora endemic to the state of Minas Gerais, including significant living plant collections. The stock of living collections is comprised of approximately 3,300 specimens, including plants from rupestrian grasslands, succulents, Araceaes, and bromeliads, among other species. The BG-ZBF's collection of plants from rupestrian grasslands consists of various taxonomic groups, such as Xyris, Cipocereus, Rhynchospora, Vetlozia, Dyckia, Laelia, Lavoisieira, Coccoloba, Lychnophora (Da Costa, 2004). The BGZBF was considered to offer an adequate and conservative source of data for this study due the practical knowledge of BG-ZBF in the maintenance of plants from rupestrian grasslands, and its proximity from Serra do Cipo. If a different botanical garden or institution were chosen the costs to maintain the plant species would have been much higher due to the increased distance, and lack of know-how to maintain the collection, which would ultimately lead to increased value of the ecosystem service evaluated.

For cost estimation, we conducted several technical visits to the BG-ZBF in 2010. Information was obtained from the Coordination Section of Applied Botany and other members of the technical team at the BG-ZBF. We also consulted documents used by managers, including a survey of the property under the stewardship of the BGZBF and the supplies requested by the BG-ZBF for 2010. Primarily we calculated the costs in Brazilian currency (Real--R$) and then we converted into 2010 US$ using the exchange rate of 1US$ = R$l,75. We only evaluated activities strictly linked to the living collections; therefore, the specific costs of other activities (e.g., maintenance of the herbarium and other collections) were not taken into account.

We identified the main costs associated with the maintenance of the living collections to determine the annual maintenance cost of one specimen in the nursery. To this end, we analysed a wide range of variables, including expenses related to i) specimen acquisition in the field (e.g., fuel expenses and costs/day); ii) the physical structure used for packaging plants; iii) area associated with technical/administrative activities and nurseries for living collections, iv) acquisition of permanent material (e.g., furniture and electronic equipment); v) acquisition of supplies (e.g., fertilisers, pesticides, and garden tools); vi) human resources (e.g., biologists, technicians and gardeners); vii) electricity, communication and water consumption (see Appendices 1-7 for the evaluation parameters and additional information regarding how the calculations were performed for different categories Appendices are available only in the electronic version).

In this study, we also considered the opportunity cost of the values related to the maintenance of the living collections using the 2010 annual mean value (9.93%) of the basic interest rate--the SELIC rate--decided by the Brazilian Central Bank.

After calculating the maintenance costs for one plant specimen in the living collections, we inventoried the plant species richness from Serra do Cipo based on an extensive literature review (analysis of 544 scientific papers published between 1831 and 2005) carried out by Madeira et al. (2008). We separated the total species richness into the following four categories: i) plants endemic to Serra do Cipo, ii) plants endemic to the Espinhaco Range, iii) plants identified as threatened in Minas Gerais, and iii) plants not endemic to the Espinhaco Range and not threatened. Among the 2,157 plant species found in the study region, 72 are endemic to Serra do Cipo; 86 are endemic to Espinhaco Range; 113 are listed as threatened in Minas Gerais state; and the remaining 1,958 are widely distributed and are not threatened (Madeira et al., 2008). The calculations were performed considering the different taxonomic groups found in Serra do Cipo. Appendix 8 presents the species composition organised by taxonomic group (Appendices are available only in the electronic version).

We estimated the maintenance value for all species considering the minimum number of individuals necessary to maintain genetic variability in an isolated population without significant manipulation according to the definition of the minimum viable population theory (DeSalle and Amato, 2004). This theory suggests that a population requires at least 50 individuals (short-term maintenance) and preferably 500 (long-term maintenance) to support the conservation of genetic diversity (e.g., Franklin, 1980; Gandara and Kageyama, 1998). For species with a greater conservation value due to their conservation status and/or biogeographical characteristics (i.e., restricted range or threatened species), an upper estimate of 500 individuals was used for subsequent calculations. For native species that are not threatened and exhibit wide distribution, only 50 individuals were considered in the calculations. The population size considered in this study is much smaller than the size of populations found in Serra do Cipo, as discussed below.

There are not sufficient available data to calculate the precise area occupied by the species in our study. A great deal of the biodiversity inventory has been conducted in areas adjacent to Serra do Cipo National Park, but much of the protected area has not been adequately sampled (Madeira et al., 2008). Nevertheless, to establish a monetary value per area unit (US$ [ha.sup.-1]) for the plant diversity storage service, we assumed that all of the plant species from Serra do Cipo occur within the conservation unit boundaries. Serra do Cipo National Park covers an expansive area (31,618 hectares) and supports many habitats and environment types.

3. Results

3.1. Acquisition and maintenance costs

The acquisition and maintenance costs related to a plant specimen from Serra do Cipo under ex situ conditions were approximately US$109.95, including US$33.92 for specimen acquisition (assuming collection was carried out in the study area) and US$76.02 for the annual maintenance of a specimen in the collection. The largest maintenance costs are associated with human resources (US$58.80 [specimen.sup.-1] [year.sup.-1]), as well as the physical structure and area required (US$11.15 [specimen.sup.-1] [year.sup.-1])) (Table 1). The sum of these two categories represents over 90% of the maintenance expenses. Other activities, including permanent material, water consumption and communication expenses, presented relatively low values.

3.2. Plant diversity storage value

The annual storage value related to one plant species with the greatest conservation value (endemic and/or threatened species) was US$54,974.03 (Table 2). This value was significantly higher than the storage value of one non endemic and/or not threatened species (US$5,497.40).

Dicotyledoneae (1,465 species) and Monocotiledoneae (609 species) presented the greatest numbers of species in Serra do Cipo (Appendix 8) and exhibited higher storage service, with a value of US$15,376 million attributed to the collective storage of the first group and US$9,334 million attributed to the second (Table 3). When combined, the values of these two groups accounted for 97% of the annual plant diversity storage value provided by Serra do Cipo ecosystems.

Plants that were not restricted to Serra do Cipo and not under the threat of extinction presented a higher collective storage value (US$10,368 million) than other groups (Table 3). The remaining categories of plants are listed in descending order according to their storage service value: plants threatened in Minas Gerais (US$6,212 million), plants endemic to the Espinhaco Range (US$4,727 million), and plants endemic to Serra do Cipo (US$3,958 million).

Thus, the plant diversity storage value provided by Serra do Cipo ecosystems is significant, with a value of US$25.26 million [year.sup.-1] (Table 3). Considering the estimated area of species occurrence, the average value of the plant diversity storage service of Serra do Cipo is US$799.11 [ha.sup.-1] [year.sup.-1]. The total value attributed to the plant diversity storage service of Serra do Cipo is primarily associated with rupestrian grasslands. The greatest number of plants was found to be associated with rupestrian grasslands (84.1%), with the remaining species originating from other Cerrado physiognomies (3.4%) and Atlantic Rain Forest (12.5%) (Madeira et al., 2008).

4. Discussion

Valuation of ecosystem services is a strategic approach to biodiversity conservation and provides important data that allows decision making to be more consistent with conservation efforts (Daily et al., 2000; Costanza, 2006; Andrade et al., 2012). In the present study, we estimated the economic value related to the plant diversity storage service provided by Serra do Cipo ecosystems. Biodiversity plays an important role in the functioning of ecosystem (Naeem et al., 1999) and in the provisioning of several ecosystem services. Some of the ecosystem services intrinsically linked with the biodiversity are related to food security (provisioning of food, pollination, pest control), provisioning of water and erosion control, provisioning of medical plants and pharmaceutical compounds and cultural values (UNEP, 2007). In this way the biodiversity storage service underpins a myriad of other ecosystem services essential for the human welfare.

Unfortunately, we have witnessed a large reduction of ecosystem services in Serra do Cipo (as well in other regions in the Espinhaco Range region), which has been caused by distinct anthropogenic pressures. In Serra do Cipo, fires are used to clear land for livestock grazing; timber is harvested for use as firewood; ornamental plants are collected; and urban expansion, highway construction, and the presence of invasive species all negatively impact the landscape (Viana et al., 2005; Madeira et al., 2008; ICMBio 2009; Barbosa et al., 2010). Now, the new mining frontier in the municipalities northern of Serra do Cipo may cause even further impacts. The anthropogenic pressures have intensified due to the proximity of Serra do Cipo to Belo Horizonte, which is the capital of Minas Gerais state and one of Brazil's largest cities. This study suggests that for every degraded hectare, an equivalent of US$799.11 [year.sup.-1] is lost by society, and this figure only considers the plant diversity storage service. Hence, other services provided by the ecosystems of Serra do Cipo, including carbon sequestration, water purification, and pollination, are omitted from this figure. Therefore, other impacts, such as road construction, mining, urban expansion, and certain forms of tourism, may incur huge losses that ought to be taken into account.

We are not aware of other research that has analysed the service value of biodiversity storage in the Brazilian context. Indeed, very few studies have assessed this service provided by natural ecosystems anywhere in the world. Although the service values are dependent on time and location (De Groot et al., 2012), Higgins et al. (1997) reported similar values for the plant diversity storage service provided by South African fynbos ecosystems. In current values (Consumer Price Index), the annual storage value of one native species calculated by Higgins et al. (1997) ranged from US$74.72 to US$7,472.32. Using another approach, the aforementioned authors found a value for the storage service related to one endemic species ranging between US$37,225.76 and US$372,257.60 (Cowling et al., 1997). Some variation in the values reported by different economic valuation studies is common in the literature and can be attributed to several reasons, including distinct ecological and socio-economic characteristics between the locations and countries and different approaches and methodology utilized in the studies (De Groot et al., 2012).

The highest values found in the present study for storage service of one endemic and/or threatened species (US$54,974.03) reflect the higher valuation of species with the greatest importance for conservation objectives assumed in our approach. This approach assumes that ecosystems that support endemic and threatened species are of greater importance to society than those supporting species with a wide distribution and, therefore, under a lower threat of extinction. When endemic species go extinct, representing a unique evolutionary process, certain type of molecules and biochemical compounds are lost forever, and these qualities could have important uses in the future.

Although the total value calculated for plant diversity storage service (US$25.26 million [year.sup.-1]) may be considered high, we argue that it is lower than the actual value of the storage services offered by Serra do Cipo. The plant population size used in the calculations (for a minimum viable population, i.e., 50 to 500 individuals/species --see Methods) is less than the size of the natural populations found in the study area. If all of the plant individuals present in Serra do Cipo were included in our calculations, the projected figures would be much higher. For example, in an area of only 1,440 [m.sup.2] (equivalent to 0.14 hectares), Pereira (1994) reported finding 7,049 individuals (equivalent to ~50,000 individuals [ha.sup.-1]) when surveying the composition of the flora in Serra do Cipo's rupestrian grasslands. This density is substantially greater than that used in our study, of approximately seven individuals per hectare. Furthermore, the region most likely supports a significant number of plant species that have yet to be discovered. The vegetation of Serra do Cipo has been studied since the first half of the nineteenth century; however, expeditions often find species unknown to science. Zappi et al. (2002) estimated that between 1997 and 2002, a quarter of the new taxonomic descriptions made in Brazil came from rupestrian grasslands.

In the present study, only one biodiversity dimension was analysed for Serra do Cipo, i.e., plant diversity. If other groups of organisms were to be considered, including bacteria and fungi, the storage value of biodiversity would be extraordinary. For instance, on only two plant species (Bacharis dracimculifolia and Cocoloba cereifera), a total of 52 and 104 morphospecies of endophytic fungi were recorded, respectively (Oki et al., 2008; Fernandes et al., 2011). Moreover, recent studies have shown that Serra do Cipo ecosystems are also relevant in terms of soil microorganisms. Carvalho et al. (2012) identified forty-nine arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi species in the rupestrian grasslands from Serra do Cipo (41% of described species in Brazilian ecosystems and 23% of known species in the world), suggesting that the area is a hotspot for glomeromycetes.

In addition to the services already mentioned in this report (e.g., supplying fibre and food as well as ornamental and genetic resources), the ecosystems of Serra do Cipo provide other important benefits to society. The numerous headwaters located in Serra do Cipo feed into many rivers of importance in the state, such as the Santo Antonio River (Rio Doce river basin) and the Velhas River (Sao Francisco river basin). The Cipo River, which is the most significant water resource of Serra do Cipo, provides pure water to numerous local (human) communities. The Cipo River also acts as a biodiversity reserve for the basin of the Velhas River (ICMBio, 2009), which is severely impacted by the waste generated from the metropolitan region of Belo Horizonte. Serra do Cipo also stands out as an important natural tourist attraction (Campos et al., 2011). The demand for areas where extreme sports, camping, and adventure tourism can be conducted has attracted large numbers of domestic and foreign tourists to the region, being recreation another significant service that this region provides. Thus, the rupestrian field ecosystems provide many other benefits to society beyond the plant diversity storage calculated in this study.

The plant diversity storage service provided by Serra do Cipo ecosystem reaches a value of US$25.26 million [year.sup.-1], and this figure could be substantially higher given that the value of other ecosystem services has yet to be investigated. We expect that our study will contribute to the development of new approaches and perspectives related to the conservation of threatened ecosystems in tropics.

DOI: 10.1590/S1519-69842013000400005

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the staff of the Botanical Garden of the Zoobotanical Foundation--Belo Horizonte, especially MSc. Miriam P. Mendonca for the useful help in the data collection. We would also like to thank the Pro-Reitoria de Pesquisa of the Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais for English editing costs, as well as Serra do Cipo National Park for logistical support. The study was supported by CNPq (403781/2012-4, 479485/20127, 457519/2012-6, 303352/2010-8, CAPES (DRCI 002/2009), FAPEMIG (RDP-00048-10, APQ-04105-10) and ComCerrado/MCT.

Appendices

Appendix 1--Cost associated with acquisition of one native plant
specimen in Serra do Cipo related to 2010.

Item                  Quantity       Unit cost         Total cost
                                       (US$)      (USS [year.sup.-1])

Car rental (a)         24 days        117.48            2,819.43
Fuel (b)             160 liters        1.51              241.23
Food and            96 costs/day       62.82            6,030.86
accommodation (c)

Total

Item                  No of       Cost per specimen
                    specimens    (USS [year.sup.-1])

Car rental (a)         268              10.52
Fuel (b)               268               0.90
Food and               268              22.50
accommodation (c)

Total                                   30.86

(a) 3 days/month, 8 months/year. No of specimen/day = 11.5.

(b) 12 litres/month, 8 months/year. No of specimen/day = 11.5.

(c) 4 technicians, 3 days/month, 8 months/year. No of
specimen/day = 11.5.

Source: BG-ZBF database; personal information (staff).

Appendix 2--Costs associated to the physical structure used for
packaging plants in the living collections of the BG-ZBF related to
2010.

Item                          Total cost        Lifetime
                         (US$ [year.sup.-1])

Nurseries with                82,924.29         20 years
irrigation system (a)

Total

Item                      Cost per specimen
                         (US$ [year.sup.-1])

Nurseries with                   1.26
irrigation system (a)

Total                            1.26

(a) Current structure.

Source: BG-ZBF database.

Appendix 3--Costs related to the areas associated with technical/
administrative activities and nurseries for living collections related
to 2010.

Utilisation                 Area            Unit cost
                        ([m.sup.2])    (US$ [month.sup.-1])

Technical                  103.8               3.96
  Administrative (a)
Nurseries (b)              1,500               1.54

Total

Utilisation                  Total cost             Total cost
                        (US$ [month.sup.-1])   (US$ [month.sup.-1])

Technical                      410.81                4,929.77
  Administrative (a)
Nurseries (b)                 2,308.69              27,704.25

Total

Utilisation              Cost per specimen
                        (US$ [month.sup.-1])

Technical                       1.49
  Administrative (a)
Nurseries (b)                   8.40

Total                           9.89

(a) Cost related to the rental rate for commercial properties near the
BG-ZBF. We assumed that the rental rate is 0.7% of the property value
and that the value of [m.sup.2] is US$529.41. The cost of the building
was not considered.

(b) Cost related to the property rental near the BG-ZBF. We assumed
that the rental rate is 0.7% of the property value and that the
[m.sup.2] value is US$ 205.88.

Obs: Tax costs were not considered.

Appendix 4--Expenses for the acquisition of permanent materials in the
BG-ZBF for 2010.

Sector                Item          Cost       Lifetime
                                 (US$) (a)      (year)

Applied Botany     Furniture      2,674.91        10
                   Electronic    15,162.69        5
                   equipment
                     Other         892.31        5-10
                   equipment

Trainees           Furniture       153.79         10
                   Electronic      28.77          5
                   equipment

Laboratory         Furniture       804.62         10
                   Equipment      4,184.19      10-15

Boardroom          Furniture      1,594.66        10
                   Electronic     2,522.51        5
                   equipment

Technicians        Furniture       674.95         10
room               Electronic     3,000.73        5
                   equipment
                     Others       2,289.34       5-10
                   equipment

Meeting room       Furniture       377.85         10

Accessory          Furniture       808.36         10
                   Electronic     7,062.07        5
                   equipment
                     Others        555.34         20
                   equipment

Refectory          Furniture       283.95         10
                   Electronic      266.36         5
                   equipment
                     Others        231.18         5
                   equipment

Kitchen            Furniture       220.88         10
                   Electronic      804.11         5
                   equipment                      5

Lobby              Electronic     2,774.19
                   equipment

Reception          Furniture       244.59         10
                   Electronic     5,071.36        5
                   equipment
                     Others        64.83          15
                   equipment
Total

Sector                Item            Total cost
                                 (US$ [year.sup.-1])

Applied Botany     Furniture            267.49
                   Electronic          3032.54
                   equipment
                     Other              141.73
                   equipment

Trainees           Furniture            15.38
                   Electronic            5.75
                   equipment

Laboratory         Furniture            26.55
                   Equipment            86.32

Boardroom          Furniture            52.62
                   Electronic           166.49
                   equipment

Technicians        Furniture            22.27
room               Electronic           198.05
                   equipment
                     Others             79.79
                   equipment

Meeting room       Furniture            12.47

Accessory          Furniture            26.68
                   Electronic           466.10
                   equipment
                     Others              9.16
                   equipment

Refectory          Furniture             9.37
                   Electronic           17.58
                   equipment
                     Others             15.26
                   equipment

Kitchen            Furniture             7.29
                   Electronic           53.07
                   equipment            183.10

Lobby              Electronic
                   equipment

Reception          Furniture             8.07
                   Electronic           304.45
                   equipment
                     Others              1.43
                   equipment
Total

Sector                Item             Cost per           Additional
                                       specimen         information (b)
                                 (US$ [year.sup.-1])

Applied Botany     Furniture             0.08                100%
                   Electronic            0.92                100%
                   equipment
                     Other               0.04                100%
                   equipment

Trainees           Furniture             0.00                100%
                   Electronic            0.00                100%
                   equipment

Laboratory         Furniture             0.01                100%
                   Equipment             0.03                100%

Boardroom          Furniture             0.02                33.3%
                   Electronic            0.05                33.3%
                   equipment

Technicians        Furniture             0.01                33.3%
room               Electronic            0.06                33.3%
                   equipment
                     Others              0.02                33.3%
                   equipment

Meeting room       Furniture             0.00                33.3%

Accessory          Furniture             0.01                33.3%
                   Electronic            0.14                33.3%
                   equipment
                     Others              0.00                33.3%
                   equipment

Refectory          Furniture             0.00                33.3%
                   Electronic            0.01                33.3%
                   equipment
                     Others              0.00                33.3%
                   equipment

Kitchen            Furniture             0.00                33.3%
                   Electronic            0.02                33.3%
                   equipment             0.06                33.3%

Lobby              Electronic
                   equipment

Reception          Furniture             0.00                33.3%
                   Electronic            0.09                33.3%
                   equipment
                     Others              0.00                33.3%
                   equipment
Total                                    1.58

(a) Refers to 80% of the total expenditures. This rate (80%) was
chosen because it represents the amount of resources allocated to the
living collections of the BG-ZBF. The remaining 20% was allocated to
the reference collections (e.g., herbarium, fruit collection, seed
collection) and was not considered in this study.

(b) We used 100% of the calculated value for costs directly associated
with the Applied Botany Section. Other expenses were calculated at
33.3% of their total expenditure. The BG-ZBF has three departments,
and only one is responsible for living collections.

Source: BG-ZBF database.

Appendix 5--Costs related to the supplies costs for the living
collections of the BG-ZBF for 2010.

Item                                    Total cost
                                    (US$ [year.sup.-1)

Computer materials                         67.85
Electronic materials                       69.81
Cleaning supplies                         243.60
Fertilisers, Pesticides and               876.24
  Substrates
Laboratory--Chemicals products            298.09
Ropes/Chains                               15.58
Construction materials                    458.39
Medicines                                 499.50
Safety equipment                          319.30
Wrapping and packaging                    169.37
Office supplies                           287.76
Manual tools                              215.52
Communication and                         110.57
  identification items
Garden tools                             2,147.40
Home materials                            273.64
Refectory and kitchen                      19.85
Processing materials                       19.00
Metallic uniforms                         845.54
Bibliographic collections                 644.46

Total

Item                                 Cost per specimen     Additional
                                    (US$ [year.sup.-1)    information

Computer materials                         0.02               100%
Electronic materials                       0.02               100%
Cleaning supplies                          0.07               100%
Fertilisers, Pesticides and                0.27               100%
  Substrates
Laboratory--Chemicals products             0.09               100%
Ropes/Chains                               0.00               100%
Construction materials                     0.14               100%
Medicines                                  0.15               100%
Safety equipment                           0.10               100%
Wrapping and packaging                     0.05               100%
Office supplies                            0.09               100%
Manual tools                               0.07               100%
Communication and                          0.03               100%
  identification items
Garden tools                               0.65               100%
Home materials                             0.08               100%
Refectory and kitchen                      0.01               100%
Processing materials                       0.01               100%
Metallic uniforms                          0.26               100%
Bibliographic collections                  0.20              33.3%

Total                                      2.30

(a) Refers to 80% of the total expenditures. This rate (80%) was
chosen because it represents the amount of resources allocated to the
living collections of the BG-ZBF. The remaining 20% was allocated to
the reference collections and was not considered in this study.

Source: BG-ZBF database.

Appendix 6--Human resource costs associated with the living
collections at the BG-ZBF for 2010.

Post                            Quantity         Unit cost
                                            (US$ [month.sup.-1])

Director (a)                        1             1,172.67
Biologist                           4             2,035.41
Gardner                             4             1,010.17
Gardner assistant                   2              712.86
Trainee                             1              293.40
Administrative assistant (a)        2              310.11
General assistant (a)               2              475.24

Total

                                   Total cost       Cost per specimen
Post                                  (US$                (US$
                                 [month.sup.-1])     [month.sup.-1])

Director (a)                        14,072.00             4.26
Biologist                           97,699.89             29.61
Gardner                             48,488.09             14.69
Gardner assistant                   17,108.58             5.18
Trainee                             3,520.81              1.07
Administrative assistant (a)        7,442.72              2.26
General assistant (a)               5,702.86              1.73

Total                                                     58.80

(a) Professional shared with the other two departments of the BG-ZBF.
When this occurred, one-third of the total salary was calculated.

(b) Refers to 80% of the total expenditures. This rate (80%) was
chosen as it represents the amount of resources allocated to the
living collections of the BG-ZBF. The remaining 20% was allocated to
the reference collections and was not considered in this study.

Source: BG-ZBF database

Appendix 7--Electricity, communication (internet and telephone) and
water consumption costs associated with the living collections of the
BG-ZBF for 2010.

Category              Total cost             Total cost
                 (US$ [month.sup.-1])   (US$ [month.sup.-1])
                         (a)

Electricity             241.23                2,894.81
Communication           75.39                  904.63
Water                   289.65                3,475.75

Category          Cost per specimen
                 (US$ [month.sup.-1])

Electricity              0.88
Communication            0.27
Water                    1.05

(a) Refers to 80% of the total expenditures. This rate (80%) was
chosen as it represents the amount of resources allocated to the
living collections of the BG-ZBF. The remaining 20% was allocated to
the reference collections and was not considered in this study.

Source: BG-ZBF database.

Appendix 8--Taxonomic groups included in the valuation of the plant
diversity storage service provided by Serra do Cipo ecosystems.

                                           Category

Taxa                   No of       Endemic--     Endemic--
                      species      Serra do      Espinhaco
                                     Cipo          Range

Bryopsida               20             0             0
Coniferopsida            2             0             0
Dicotyledoneae         1,465          20            55
Lycopsida                5             0             0
Monocotiledoneae        609           51            30
Pteropsida              56             1             1
Total                  2,157          72            86

                             Category

Taxa                               Non endemic
                    Threatened--     and not
                      MG state     threatened

Bryopsida                0             20
Coniferopsida            0              2
Dicotyledoneae           73           1,337
Lycopsida                0              5
Monocotiledoneae         40            539
Pteropsida               0             55
Total                   113           1,958


Source: Modified from Madeira et al. (2008).


References

ANDRADE, DC., ROMEIRO, AR., FASIABEN, MCR. and GARCIA, JR., 2012. Dinamica do uso do solo e valoracao de servicos ecossistemicos: notas de orientacao para politicas ambientais. Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente, vol. 25, p. 53-71.

BALMFORD, A., BRUNER, A., COOPER, P., COSTANZA, R., FARBER, S., GREEN, RE., JENKINS, M., JEFFERISS, P., JESSAMY, V., MADDEN, J., MUNRO, K., MYERS, N., NAEEM, S., PAAVOLA, J., RAYMENT, M., ROSENDO, S., ROUGHGARDEN, J., TRUMPER, K. and TURNER, RK., 2002. Economic reasons for conserving wild nature. Science, vol. 297, p. 950-953.

BARBOSA, NU., FERNANDES, GW., CARNEIRO, MAA. and JUNIOR, LAC., 2010. Distribution of non-native invasive species and soil properties in proximity to paved roads and unpaved roads in a quartzitic mountainous grassland of southeastern Brazil. Biological Invasions, vol. 12, p. 3745-3755.

BENITES, VM., CAIAFA, AN., MENDONCA, ES., SCHAEFER, CE. and KER, JC., 2003. Solos e vegetacao nos complexos rupestres de altitude da Mantiqueira e do Espinhaco. Floresta e Ambiente, vol. 10, p. 76-85.

BRANDAO, M., GAVINALES, ML. and LACA-BUENDIA, JP., 1996. Plantas medicamentosas de uso popular dos Campos Rupestres de Minas Gerais. Daphne, vol. 6, no. 2, p. 7-9.

CAMPOS, RF. and FILETTO, F., 2011. Analise do perfil, da percepcao ambiental e da qualidade da experiencia dos visitantes da Serra do Cipo (MG). Revista Brasileira de Ecoturismo, vol. 4, no.l, p. 69-94.

CARVALHO, F., SOUZA, FA., CARRENHO, R., MOREIRA, FMS., JESUS, EC. and FERNANDES, GW., 2012. The mosaic of habitats in the high-altitude Brazilian rupestrian fields is a hotspot for arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Applied Soil Ecology, vol. 52, p. 9-19.

CHAPIN, FS., ZAVALETA, ES., EVINER, VT., NAYLOR, RL., VITOUSEK, PM., REYNOLDS, HL., HOOPER DU., LAVOREL, S., SALA, OE., HOBBIE, SE., MACK MC. and DIAZ, S., 2000. Consequences of changing biodiversity. Nature, vol. 405, p. 234-242.

COELHO, MS., ALMADA, ED., QUINTINO, AN., FERNANDES, GW., SANTOS, RM., SANCHEZ-AZOFE1FA, A. and ESPIRITO-SANTO, MM., 2012. Floristic composition and structure of a tropical dry forest at different successional stages in the Espinhaco Mountains, Southeastern Brazil. Interciencia, vol. 37, no. 3, p. 190-196.

COSTANZA, R., D'ARGE, R., DE GROOT, R. S., FARBER, S., GRASSO, M., HANNON, B., LIMBURG, K., NAEEM, S., O'NEILL, R. V., PARUELO, J., RASKIN, R. G., SUTTON, P. and VAN DEN BELT, M., 1997. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, vol. 387, p. 253-260.

COSTANZA, R., 2006. Nature: ecosystems without commodifying them. Nature, vol. 443, p. 749.

COWLING, RM., COSTANZA, R. and HIGGINS, SI., 1997. Services supplied by South African Fynbos ecosystems. In Daily, GC. (Ed). Nature's services: societal dependece on natural ecosystems, p. 345-362. Washington, DC: Island Press.

DA COSTA, MLMN., 2004. Diversidade biologica nos jardins botanicos brasileiros. Rio de Janeiro: Rede Brasileira de Jardins Botanicos. 99p.

DAILY, GC., 1997. Nature's services: societal dependence on natural systems. Washington DC: Island Press. 392 p.

DAILY, GC., SODERQVIST, T., ANIYAR, S., ARROW, K., DASGUPTA, P., EHRLICH, PR., FOLKE, C., JANSSON, AM., JANSSON, BO., KAUTSKY, N., LEVIN, S., LUBCHENCO, J., MALER, KG., SIMPSON, D., STARRETT, D., TILMAN, D. and WALKER, B., 2000. The Value of Nature and Nature of Value. Science, vol. 289, no 5478, p. 395-396.

DE GROOT, R., BRANDER, L., VAN DER PLOEG, S., COSTANZA, R., BERNARD, F., BRAAT, L., CHRISTIE, M., CROSSMAN, N., GHERMANDI, A., HEIN, L., HUSSAIN, S., KUMAR, P., MCVITTIE, A., PORTELA, R., RODRIGUEZ, LC., TEN BRINK, P. and VAN BEUKERING, P., 2012. Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units. Ecosystem Services, vol. 1, p. 50-61.

DESALLE, R. and AMATO, G., 2004. The expansion of conservation genetics. Nature Reviews Genetics, vol. 5, p. 702-712.

FERNANDES, GW., OKI, Y., SANCHEZ-AZOFEIFA, A., FACCION, G. and AMARO-ARRUDA, HC., 2011. Hail impact on leaves and endophytes of the endemic threatened Coccoloba cereifera (Polygonaceae). Plant Ecology, vol. 212, p. 1687-1697.

FRANKLIN, IR., 1980. Evolutionary change in small populations. In Soule, ME. and Wilcox, BA. (Eds). Conservation Biology: an Evolutionary-Ecological Perspective. Sunderland: Sinauer. p. 135-140.

GANDARA, FB. and KAGEYAMA, PY., 1998. Indicadores de sustentabilidade de florestas naturais. Serie Tecnica Ipef vol. 12, no. 31, p. 79-84.

GIULIETTI, AM., PIRANI, JR. and HARLEY, RM., 1997. Espinhaco range region, eastern Brazil. In DAVIS, SD., HEYWOOD, VH., HERRERA-MACBRYDE, O., VILLA-LOBOS, J. and HAMILTON, AC. (Eds.). Centres of plant diversity: a guide and strategy for they conservation. p. 397-404. Cambridge: WWF/IUCN.

GIULIETTI, AM., MENEZES, NL., PIRANI, JR., MEGURO, M. and WANDERLEY, MGL., 1987. Flora da Serra do Cipo, Minas Gerais: caracterizacao e lista de especies. Boletim de Botanica, vol. 9, p. 1-151.

GOLDING, J., GUSEWELL, S., KREFT, H., KUZEVANOV, VY., PARMENTIER, SLI. and PAUTASSO, M., 2010. Species-richness patterns of the living collections of the world's botanic gardens: a matter of socio-economics? Annals of Botany, vol. 105, p. 689-696.

HIGGINS, SI., TURPIE, JK., COSTANZA, R., COWLING, RM., LE MAITRE, DC., MARAIS, C. and MIDGLEY, GF., 1997. An ecological economic simulation model of mountain fynbos ecosystems - dynamics, valuation and management. Ecological Economics, vol. 22, p. 141-156.

Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservacao da Biodiversidade-ICMBio, 2009. Plano de Manejo do Parque Nacional da Serra do Cipo. Brasilia: Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservacao da Biodiversidade.

KLINK, CA. and MACHADO, RB., 2005. Conservation of the Brazilian Cerrado. Conservation Biology, vol. 19, no. 3, p. 707-713.

KLINK, CA., SANTOS, HG., CAMPARI, JRJS., MATSUMOTO, MH., FREITAS, GK. and BAUMGARTEN, L., 2008. Conservacao dos recursos naturais em terras privadas: o papel das reservas legais no arranjo funcional das paisagens produtivas do bioma Cerrado. In SANO SM., ALMEIDA SP. and RIBEIRO JF. (Eds.). Cerrado: Ecologia e Flora, vol. 1, p. 399-406. Embrapa Cerrados.

KOPPEN, W., 1931. Klimakarte der Erde. Grundriss der Klimakunde. 2nded. Berlin and Leipzig: Walter de Gruyter.

LOREAU, M., NAEEM, S. and INCHAUSTI, P., 2002. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: synthesis and perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

MADEIRA, JA. and FERNANDES, GW., 1999. Reproductive phenology of sympatric taxa of Chamaecrista (Leguminosae) in Serra do Cipo, Brazil. Journal of Tropical Ecology, vol. 15, p. 463-479.

MADEIRA, JA., RIBEIRO, KT., OLIVEIRA, MJRO., NASCIMENTO, JS. and PAIVA, CL., 2008. Distribuicao espacial do esforco de pesquisa biologica na Serra do Cipo, Minas Gerais: subsidios ao manejo das unidades de conservacao da regiao. Megadiversidade, vol. 4, no. 1-2, p. 233-247.

MENDONCA, RC., FELFILI, JM., WALTER, BMT., SILVA JUNIOR, MC., REZENDE, AV., FILGUEIRAS, TS., NOGUEIRA, PE. and FAGG, CW., 2008. Flora vascular do bioma Cerrado: checklist com 12.356 especies. In SANO SM., ALMEIDA SP. and RIBEIRO JF. (Eds.). Cerrado: Ecologia e Flora, vol. 2, p. 423-1279. Embrapa Cerrados.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment - MA, 2003. Ecosystems and human well-being: a framework for assessment. Washington, DC: Island Press.

--, 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.

MISTRETTA, O., RIESEBERG, LH. and ELIAS. TS., 1991. Botanical gardens and the preservation of biological diversity. Evolutionary Trends in Plants, vol. 5, p. 19-22.

NAEEM, S., CHAPIN III, FS., COSTANZA, R., EHRLICH, PR., GOLLEY, FB., HOOPER, DU., LAWTON, JH., O'NEILL, RV., MOONEY, HA., SALA, OE., SYMSTAD, AJ., TILMAN, D., 1999. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: Maintaining natural life support processes. Issues in Ecology Ecological Society of America , vol. 4, p. 1-11.

OKI, Y., FERNANDES, GW. and CORREA JUNIOR, A., 2008. Fungos: amigos ou inimigos? Ciencia Hoje, vol. 42, no. 252, p. 64-66.

PEREIRA, MCA., 1994. Estrutura das comunidades vegetais de afloramentos rochosos dos campos rupestres do Parque Nacional da Serra do Cipo, MG. Belo Horizonte: Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. 163p. Dissertacao de Mestrado em Ecologia, Conservacao e Manejo de Vida Silvestre.

RANIERI, BD., LANA, TC., NEGREIROS, D., ARA JO, LM. and FERNANDES, GW, 2003. Germinacao de sementes de Lavoisiera cordata cogn. e Lavoisiera francavillana cogn. (Melastomataceae), especies simpatricas da Serra do Cipo, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica, vol. 17, no. 4, p. 523-530.

SANO, EE., JESUS, ET. and BEZERRA, HS., 2001. Uso de um sistema de informa o geogrfica para quantifica o de reas remanescentes do Cerrado. Comunicado Tecnico 62. Planaltina: Embrapa Cerrados.

Convention on Biological Diversity--CBD, 2007. An exploration of tools and methodologies for valuation of biodiversity and biodiversity resources and functions. Technical Series n 28. Montreal: Convention on Biological Diversity.

STEVENS, AD., 2007. Botanical gardens and their role in ex situ conservation and research. Phyton--Annales Rei Botanicae, vol. 46, p. 211-214.

United Nations Environment Programme--UNEP, 2007. Biodiversity and poverty reduction the importance of biodiversity for ecosystem services. Cambridge: United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC).

VIANA, LR., FERNANDES, GW. and SILVA, CA., 2005. Ecological road threatens endemic Brazilian plant with extinction. Plant Talk, vol. 41, p. 15.

VENTURA, CP., OLIVEIRA, AB. and BRAGA, FC., 2007. Antimicrobial activity of Trembleya lanfiora, Xyris platystachia and Xyris pterygoblephara. Brazilian Journal of Pharmacognosy, vol. 17, no. 1, p. 17-22.

ZAPPI, DC., LUCAS, E., STANNARD, BL., LUGHADHA, E., PIRANI, JR., QUEIROZ, LP., ATKINS, S., HIND, N., GIULIETTI, AM., HARLEY, RM., MAYO, SJ. and CARVALHO, AM., 2002. Biodiversidade e conservacao na Chapada Diamantina, Bahia: Catoles, um estudo de caso. In ARAJO, EL., MOURA, AN., SAMPAIO, EVSB., GESTINRI, LMS. and CARNEIRO, JMT. (Eds). Biodiversidade, conserva o e uso sustent vel da flora do Brasil. Recife: SBB/UFRPE. p. 87-89.

Resende, FM., Fernandes, GW. and Coelho, MS.

Ecologia Evolutiva & Biodiversidade--DBG, CP 486, ICB--Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, 30161-970 Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil

e-mail: gw.fernandes@gmail. com

Received July 16, 2012--Accepted November 12, 2012--Distributed November 29, 2013

Table 1--Distribution of costs associated with acquisition
and annual maintenance of one native plant specimen from
Serra do Cip[o'] in the living collections of the BG-ZBF related
to 2010.

Category                                   Cost per specimen
                                          (US$ [year.sup.-1])

Acquisition                                      33.92
Maintenance    Physical structure and            11.15
                 area required
               Permanent material                 1.58
               Supplies                           2.30
               Human resources                   58.80
               Electricity                        0.88
               Communication                      0.27
               Water consumption                  1.05
Total                                            109.95

Table 2--Plant diversity storage service provided by Serra
do Cipo ecosystems per categories of plant diversity.

Service                           Value per one species
                                   (US$ [year.sup.-1])

Storage service of endemic              54,974.03
and/or threatened species
Storage service of non endemic           5,497.40
and/or not threatened species

Table 3--Distribution of values of the plant diversity storage service
provided by Serra do Cip[o'] ecosystems per categories of plant diversity
and taxonomic group. Values in the table are in 2010 US$x 103.

Taxa                  Relative       Total for taxa
                    richness (%)   (US$ [year.sup.-1])

Bryopsida               0.9              109.95
Coniferopsida           0.1               10.99
Dicotyledoneae          67.9            15,376.24
Lycopsida               0.2               27.49
Monocotiledoneae        28.2            9,334.59
Pteropsida              2.6              406.81
Total                   100%            25,266.06

                                  Categories

Taxa                  Endemic--Serra      Endemic--Espinhaco
                          do Cipo                Range
                    (US$ [year.sup.1])    (US$ [year.sup.1])

Bryopsida                   --                    --
Coniferopsida               --                    --
Dicotyledoneae           1,099.48              3,023.57
Lycopsida                   --                    --
Monocotiledoneae         2,803.68              1,649.22
Pteropsida                 54.97                 54.97
Total                    3,958.13              4,727.77

                                  Categories

Taxa                  Threatened--MG        Non-endemic and
                           state            not threatened
                    (US$ [year.sup.1])    (US$ [year.sup.1])

Bryopsida                   --                  109.95
Coniferopsida               --                   10.99
Dicotyledoneae           4,013.10              7,240.08
Lycopsida                   --                   27.49
Monocotiledoneae         2,198.96              2,682.73
Pteropsida                  --                  296.86
Total                    6,212.07              10,368.10
COPYRIGHT 2013 Association of the Brazilian Journal of Biology
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2013 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:ECOLOGY
Author:Resende, F.M.; Fernandes, G.W.; Coelho, M.S.
Publication:Brazilian Journal of Biology
Article Type:Report
Date:Nov 1, 2013
Words:7764
Previous Article:Life history, distribution and abundance of the giant earthworm Rhinodrilus alatus RIGHI 1971: conservation and management implications/Historia de...
Next Article:How does the Taquari River influence in the cladoceran assemblages in three oxbow lakes?/Qual a influencia do rio Taquari nas assembleias de...
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2021 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters |