Baleba1,2 Laurent Justinien, Moumbagna Mboutngam3 Mouhamadou, Mahot1 Hermine Claudine, Essono3 Damien Marie, Beyegue-Djonko1 Honoré, Koga Mang’Dobara3, Nkobe Keghe1 Martin, Ngansop4 Eric, Mvondo Awono2 Jean Pierre, and Mahob3* Raymond Joseph
1Institute of Agricultural Research for Development (IRAD), P.O Box 2067, Yaoundé, Cameroon, 2 Department of Crop Sciences, University of Dschang, P.O Box 222, Dschang, Cameroon, 3Faculty of Science, University of Yaoundé I, P.O Box 812, Yaoundé, Cameroon, 4National Herbarium of Cameroon (HNC), IRAD, P.O Box 1601, Yaoundé
*Corresponding author E-mail: raymondmahob@gmail.com; Tel.: (+237) 679 18 76 46/695 92 62 00
Abstract
The study aimed to assess the biodiversity, ecological status and farmers’ use/perception of non-coffee plants species (NCPS) in contrasting locations, due to the lack of these valuable data regardless of agroecological services and/or environmental conservation. Thus, investigations through the transverse study have been carried out within 17 Robusta coffee plantations, 7 villages and 3 sub-divisions of Noun Division. NCPS were identified using relevant dichotomous keys whereas their recovery rate was estimated via Braun-Blanquet method. Biodiversity of NCPS was estimated using the specific richness and/or diversity indices while their ecological status and farmers’ use/perception were determined through Dajoz (1982) modified method and structured questionnaires respectively. In total, 48 NCPS divided into 38 genera and 17 families were inventoried. Elaeis guineensis revealed most frequent species, with 30.85% of occurrence while Albizia adianthifolia, A. glaberrima, Antidesma laciniatum, Citrus medica, C. sinensis, Erythrophleum suaveolens, Ficus mucuso, F. polita, F. umbellata, Macaranga sp., Mangifera foetida, Piptadeniastrum africana, Pterocarpus erinaceus, P. milbraedii, Pycnanthus angolensis, Sarcocephalus diderrichii, Sterculia tragacantha, Trilepisium madagascariense and Voacanga africana, were found scarce, with 0.25% of occurrence each. NCPS circumference and recovery rate varied significantly (p<5%) between the studied plots, from 64.75 ± 3.17 to 181.86 ± 43.81 cm and 8% to 100% respectively. Plants abundance and specific richness/diversity also varied between plots, villages and sub-divisions, with respective values of 2 to 44 individuals, 28 to 117 and 91 to 177 (for abundance) versus 0.00 to 3.34, 0.57 to 5.04 and 0.58 to 7.54 (for specific richness/diversity). 66.66% of inventoried NCPS were abundant and 33.34% were extremely rare. According to the respondents, NCPS have different status/functions: 89.47%, 34.21%, 23.68 and 7.89% serve as shade trees, timber, therapeutic purposes/food, and soil enrichment respectively. Our findings revealed the need to take appropriate measures to preserve endangered species for sustainability environmental conservation of the studied agrosystems.
Keywords: Specific richness/diversity, associated perennial trees, Robusta Coffee Agrosystems, environmental conservation, ecosystem services