Paper · 2014

Plant species Richness and Phytosociological attributes of the Vegetation in the cold temperate zone of Darjiling Himalaya, India

Saurav Moktan

20
claims
27
verbatim quotes
2
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The present study deals with the species richness and phytosociology in cold temperate zone vegetation of Darjiling Himalaya. The diversity indices represented the dominant species like Rhododendron arboreum Smith, Daphne bholua var. glacialis (Smith and Cave) Burtt and Fragaria nubicola (Lindley ex Hooker f.) Lacaita and rare species like Gamblea ciliata C.B. Clarke, Sambucus adnata Wallich ex DC., Treutlera insignis Hooker f., Arisaema concinuum Schott and Codonopsis affinis Hooker f. and Thomson. The maximum species diversity (Shannon-Weaver Index) was marked for herbs (4.332) followed by shrubs (3.577) and lowest for trees (3.131). The highest species richness (Menhinick's Index) was estimated for herb layer (3.568) and least for the canopy (1.799). The concentration of dominance was 0.056, 0.032 and 0.014 respectively for the three layers. The species evenness was greater for herb layer (0.980) and least for the canopy (0.911). Soil parameters exhibited acidic property, the correlation between diversity and importance value indicated positive relation.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 20

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rhododendron arboreum was identified as a dominant species.

Taxon
Rhododendron arboreum SmithRhododendron arboreume0
Outcome
dominant speciese0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Rhododendron arboreum
Rhododendron arboreum · TaxonMarcus334 · CC BY 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The diversity indices represented the dominant species like Rhododendron arboreum Smith”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 126–213 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Daphne bholua var. glacialis was identified as a dominant species.

Taxon
Daphne bholua var. glacialis (Smith and Cave) BurttDaphne bholua var. glacialise0
Outcome
dominant speciese0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Daphne bholua var. glacialis
Daphne bholua var. glacialis · Taxon · picture of the speciesRohit · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The diversity indices represented the dominant species like Rhododendron arboreum Smith, Daphne bholua var. glacialis (Smith and Cave) Burtt”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 126–266 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fragaria nubicola was identified as a dominant species.

Taxon
Fragaria nubicola (Lindley ex Hooker f.) LacaitaFragaria nubicolae0
Outcome
dominant speciese0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Fragaria nubicola
Fragaria nubicola · TaxonWoudloper · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The diversity indices represented the dominant species like Rhododendron arboreum Smith, Daphne bholua var. glacialis (Smith and Cave) Burtt and Fragaria nubicola (Lindley ex Hooker f.) Lacaita”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 126–319 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Gamblea ciliata was identified as a rare species.

Taxon
Gamblea ciliata C.B. ClarkeGamblea ciliatae0
Outcome
rare speciese0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“rare species like Gamblea ciliata C.B. Clarke”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 324–369 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sambucus adnata was identified as a rare species.

Taxon
Sambucus adnata Wallich ex DC.Sambucus adnatae0
Outcome
rare speciese0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Sambucus adnata
Sambucus adnata · TaxonVinayaraj · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“rare species like Gamblea ciliata C.B. Clarke, Sambucus adnata Wallich ex DC.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 324–401 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Treutlera insignis was identified as a rare species.

Taxon
Treutlera insignis Hooker f.Treutlera insignise0
Outcome
rare speciese0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“rare species like Gamblea ciliata C.B. Clarke, Sambucus adnata Wallich ex DC., Treutlera insignis Hooker f.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 324–431 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Arisaema concinuum was identified as a rare species.

Taxon
Arisaema concinuum Schotte0
Outcome
rare speciese0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“rare species like Gamblea ciliata C.B. Clarke, Sambucus adnata Wallich ex DC., Treutlera insignis Hooker f., Arisaema concinuum Schott”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 324–458 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Codonopsis affinis was identified as a rare species.

Taxon
Codonopsis affinis Hooker f. and Thomsone0
Outcome
rare speciese0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“rare species like Gamblea ciliata C.B. Clarke, Sambucus adnata Wallich ex DC., Treutlera insignis Hooker f., Arisaema concinuum Schott and Codonopsis affinis Hooker f. and Thomson.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 324–504 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Herbs had maximum Shannon-Weaver species diversity of 4.332.

Taxon
herbse0
Outcome
species diversity (Shannon-Weaver Index)e0
Direction
maximume0
Value
4.332e0

Verbatim

e0

“The maximum species diversity (Shannon-Weaver Index) was marked for herbs (4.332) followed by shrubs (3.577) and lowest for trees (3.131).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 505–643 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Shrubs had Shannon-Weaver diversity of 3.577, intermediate between herbs and trees.

Taxon
shrubse0
Outcome
species diversity (Shannon-Weaver Index)e0
Value
3.577e0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“The maximum species diversity (Shannon-Weaver Index) was marked for herbs (4.332) followed by shrubs (3.577) and lowest for trees (3.131).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 505–643 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Trees had the lowest Shannon-Weaver diversity, 3.131.

Taxon
treese0
Outcome
species diversity (Shannon-Weaver Index)e0
Direction
loweste0
Value
3.131e0

Verbatim

e0

“The maximum species diversity (Shannon-Weaver Index) was marked for herbs (4.332) followed by shrubs (3.577) and lowest for trees (3.131).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 505–643 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The herb layer had highest Menhinick species richness of 3.568.

Taxon
herbe0
Outcome
species richness (Menhinick's Index)e0
Direction
higheste0
Value
3.568e0

Verbatim

e0

“The highest species richness (Menhinick's Index) was estimated for herb layer (3.568) and least for the canopy (1.799).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 644–763 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The canopy had least Menhinick species richness of 1.799.

Taxon
treese1
Organ / stage
canopye0
Outcome
species richness (Menhinick's Index)e0
Direction
leaste0
Value
1.799e0

Verbatim

e0

“The highest species richness (Menhinick's Index) was estimated for herb layer (3.568) and least for the canopy (1.799).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 644–763 · show in text ↑
e1

“lowest for trees (3.131)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 618–642 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Concentration of dominance was 0.056 for the first of the three vegetation layers.

Taxon
Vegetationt0
Outcome
concentration of dominancee0
Value
0.056e0
Qualifier
three layerse0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“The concentration of dominance was 0.056, 0.032 and 0.014 respectively for the three layers.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 764–856 · show in text ↑
t0

“Vegetation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 63–73 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Concentration of dominance was 0.032 for the second vegetation layer.

Taxon
Vegetationt0
Outcome
concentration of dominancee0
Value
0.032e0
Qualifier
three layerse0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“The concentration of dominance was 0.056, 0.032 and 0.014 respectively for the three layers.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 764–856 · show in text ↑
t0

“Vegetation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 63–73 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Concentration of dominance was 0.014 for the third vegetation layer.

Taxon
Vegetationt0
Outcome
concentration of dominancee0
Value
0.014e0
Qualifier
three layerse0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“The concentration of dominance was 0.056, 0.032 and 0.014 respectively for the three layers.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 764–856 · show in text ↑
t0

“Vegetation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 63–73 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Species evenness was greater in the herb layer, at 0.980.

Taxon
herbe0
Outcome
species evennesse0
Direction
greatere0
Value
0.980e0

Verbatim

e0

“The species evenness was greater for herb layer (0.980) and least for the canopy (0.911).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 857–946 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Species evenness was least in the canopy, at 0.911.

Taxon
treese1
Organ / stage
canopye0
Outcome
species evennesse0
Direction
leaste0
Value
0.911e0

Verbatim

e0

“The species evenness was greater for herb layer (0.980) and least for the canopy (0.911).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 857–946 · show in text ↑
e1

“lowest for trees (3.131)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 618–642 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil parameters indicated acidic conditions.

Outcome
acidic propertye0

Not reportedTaxonDirection

Verbatim

e0

“Soil parameters exhibited acidic property”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 947–988 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Vegetation diversity and importance value were positively related.

Taxon
Vegetationt0
Outcome
diversitye0
Direction
positive relatione0
Comparator
importance valuee0
Setting
Darjiling Himalayae1

Verbatim

e0

“the correlation between diversity and importance value indicated positive relation.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 990–1073 · show in text ↑
t0

“Vegetation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 63–73 · show in text ↑
e1

“cold temperate zone vegetation of Darjiling Himalaya”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 72–124 · show in text ↑