ECOLOGICAL BASELINE REPORT FOR MABIRA

Transcription

1 REPUBLIC OF UGANDA MINISTRY OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENT WATER MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Updating the Ecological Baseline and the Socio-economic Data for Six Central Forest Reserves (Mabira, Namukupa, Nandagi, Kalagala Falls, Namawanyi and Namananga) and Updating the Management Plan for Mabira Central Forest Reserve ECOLOGICAL BASELINE REPORT FOR MABIRA PROJECT ID NO. P23204 PROC. REF.: MWE/SRVCS/3-4/00285 AUGUST 207 Joseph Bahati and Associates

2 FOREWORD This report is written to update the ecological baseline information for the Mabira ecosystem. Inevitably, the bulk of the ecological baseline data is comprised of biodiversity data. Biodiversity is a word that is now more common than it was at the time of the first Forest Department Biodiversity inventories in the 990s. It describes the variety of life at all levels of organisation from ecosystems to species/organisms and genes. Whereas the Uganda Forest Department carried out a comprehensive inventory of Uganda s biodiversity in the 990 s, there is a realization that the baseline data generated then, needed to be updated. The reasons may range from improvements in methods of inventory of different taxa to the discovery of additional taxa due to more detailed inventories of critical habitats. In addition, the impact of management activities and humans on the different ecological components of the forest reserves needed to be assessed. These tasks have been achieved and the information is presented this report. It is our belief that the ecological information presented in report will benefit many stakeholders within the Mabira area and beyond. i

3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We acknowledge the funding for this project from the World Bank funding to the Ministry of Water and Environment for implementing the Water Management and Development Project (ID NO. P23204EU). We also acknowledge the contribution of various people that have contributed in various ways to the success of thia study. The appointed key experts (KE), namely Dr Joseph Bahati (KE Forest Ecologist), Dr. Gerald Eilu (KE Taxonomist), Dr. Mary Namaganda (KE Botanist), and Dr. Robert Kityo (KE Zoologist). These have been the main personnel in the different components. The field teams are built around these Key Experts.These include mostly field staff of the National Forestry Authority and staff of the Ministry of Water and Environment attached to this work. ii

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD...I ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...II TABLE OF CONTENTS...III LIST OF ACRONYMS... V CHAPTER ONE... VI.0. SUMMARY... VI CHAPTER TWO INTRODUCTION OVERVIEW OF THE WORK USE OF BIOLOGICAL INDICATORS SITE DESCRIPTION CONCLUSION REFERENCES CHAPTER THREE FLORA SUMMARY INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS CONCLUSION REFERENCES CHAPTER FOUR BIRDS SUMMARY INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS CONCLUSION REFERENCES CHAPTER FIVE SMALL MAMMALS SUMMARY INTRODUCTION METHODS RODENTS AND SHREWS BATS CONCLUSION REFERENCES CHAPTER SIX BUTTERFLIES SUMMARY iii

5 6.2 INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS CONCLUSION REFERENCES CHAPTER SEVEN AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES SUMMARY INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS CONCLUSION REFERENCES CHAPTER EIGHT WATER QUALITY AND BENTHIC MACRO-INVERTEBRATES SUMMARY INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS CONCLUSION REFERENCES iv

6 LIST OF ACRONYMS CFR CMG CSC EI KOSMP NEMA NFA PSP QAAT TORs UNCST UWA WIS WMDP Central Forest Reserve Consultancy Management Group Consultancy Steering Committee Exploratory Inventory Kalagala Offset Sustainable Management Plan National Environment Management Authority National Forestry Authority Permanent Sampling Plots Quality Assurance and Advisory Team Terms of Reference Uganda National Council of Science and Technology Uganda Wildlife Authority Water Information System Water Resources Management and Development Project v

7 CHAPTER ONE.0. SUMMARY Aim and Scope This report covers the work undertaken by M/S Joseph Bahati and Associates to update, among others, the ecological baseline data of six Central Forest Reserves of the Mabira ecosystem, including Mabira, Namakupa, Nadagi, Kalagala Falls, Namawanyi and Namananga. The findings in this report have subsequently been used in the review of the Management Plan for Mabira Forest Reserves to guide monitoring the effectiveness of implementing the Kalagala Offset Sustainable management plan and the health of the Mabira ecosystem. The objective was to establish the current ecological status of the six Central Forest Reserves. Following presentation of the Inception Report in January 206, the data collection tools were finalized and tested in the field. These were used to collect data. Concurrently, there were ongoing reviews of literature and other data sources, to generate an update of the current state of knowledge. The outcome of these reviews and additional data collected during this assignment are presented in this report. The National Forestry Authority assigned staff to the different components of this work. Participation of assigned staff in the field activities has enabled the realization of the knowledge exchange and capacity building plan. This was aimed at ensuring that the knowledge generated and skills utilized in the accomplishment of this assignment are passed over to relevant stakeholders. Gender Issues have been taken care of in constituting the field teams. The major findings are highlighted in this summary. Plants The total number of plant species now known from the Mabira Forest Reserve is 636. The trees, shrubs and climbers (woody plants) contribute 450 species (32 were recorded in the previous Forest Department Biodiversity inventory in the 990s while 38 are new additions from this work). The herbs contribute 86 species. The rest of the reserves have fewer species: 87 (Namakupa), 92 (Namawanyi), 39 (Nandagi) and 68 (Kalagala), and 68 (Namananga). In the case of Mabira Forest Reserve, the climbers and herbaceous species were previously not included, and also data for the smaller forest reserves are here newly presented in this report. Inclusion of data from the five smaller reserves (Namakupa, Namawanyi, Nandagi, Kalagala and Namananga) gives a total of 732 species recorded from the Mabira ecosystem (this includes 252 species of herbs and 480 woody species). Data on Epiphytes, Mistletoes and Stranglers and other non-vascular taxa such as Bryophytes, Licherns and Fungi are required to enhance the knowledge. Birds A total of 54 species was recorded across the whole survey, 97 in Mabira Central Forest Reserve and 00 in the five small reserves. The results show that there were more bird species in the main forest than the five small reserves combined. There was little overlap between the surveyed forest sites, with 54 species unique to the Mabira CFR, 58 species unique to the five small CFRs and 42 species occurring in both forests. Most of the bird species recorded during the surveys are classified as Least Concern according to the IUCN redlist criteria. Seven of the species recorded are classified as threatened either at global or regional level. These include the Nahan's Francolin, Grey Parrot, Cinnamon-chested Bee-eater, White headed saw-wing, Toro Olive-Greenbul, White-browed Crombec and Green tailed Bristlebill. There were more forest visitors and other non-forest bird vi

8 species recorded in the small CFRs than in the main forest block. Forest related bird species (FF & F) were much more in the main forest than in the small CFRs. Mammals The small mammals constitute 22 species (5 shrews and 7 rodents). An additional 9 species are added to these, from records, to make 3 known species. Three closed forest dependent species Deomys ferrugineus, Malacomys longipes and Scutisorex somereni were recorded albeit in small numbers. A forest dependent species, Deomys ferugineus was captured in Namananga and Namakupa forests that have previously been encroached and opened up. In total 2 species of bats were captured with more species captured in Namananga, although historical records available show Mabira CFR to have a higher number of species. A total of 22 medium to large sized mammal species were also recorded for the 6 forests all together. Mabira CFR has the richest number of species compared to the rest. Amphibians and Reptiles Up to 42 species of amphibiansi n 3 genera and 9 families were recorded. They belong to the Order Anura. The family Hyperoliidae had the highest number of genera (3) and species (). The waterconfined families of Dicroglossidae, Hemisotidae, Pyxicephalidae and Pipidae were represented by single species. A total of 32 reptile species belonging to 4 orders, 3 families and 23 genera was recorded. Butterflies All together 207 species of butterflies were recorded -4 species in Mabira, 64 in Namukupa, 63 in Namananga, 82 Nandagi, 45 in Namawanyi, and 54 in Kalagala. A reasonably high proportion of forest dependent species was found in all the forests although Mabira CFR had the largest number of such species. Kalagala and Namananga had the highest proportion of more open environment species, which would symbolize the heavy level of impact by humans opening up these forests. Conclusion and recommendation The data suggest that the small forests ( Namukupa, Namananga, Nandagi, Namawanyi, and Kalagala) do support reasonable numbers of species, although the numbers of interior species remain a small subset of those found in the main forest. The relatively high turnover of species across sites implies that a series of such forests could, collectively, hold a significant number of forest species. Hence, their integrity and health must be emphasized in management planning and ecological monitoring. vii

9 CHAPTER TWO 2.0. INTRODUCTION 2.. OVERVIEW OF THE WORK This work involved collection, analysis and documentation of ecological data and information on the Mabira ecosystem to produce deliverable 2 of the TORs. Six Centra Forest Reserves (CF Rs), namely Mabira, Namakupa, Nandagi, Namawanyi, Namananga and Kalagala Falls were covered. The baseline data updated were derived from the Forest Department Biodiversity Inventories carried out between 994 and 996. These included: species data of selected taxa (trees and shrubs, birds, small mammals, and butterflies/as well as moths). Additional to these, data on ground herbs, lianas, primates, other larger forest mammals, reptiles, amphibians and Benthic Macro-Invertebrates were collected to enhance the value of this biodiversity assessment. Data on large mammals have a more direct bearing on human-forest interactions and human-wildlife conflicts. Other taxa of conservation concern especially those on IUCN red list are included on a case-by-case basis. The ecological data include selected environmental variables, specifically on water quality. In addition, secondary data from various literature sources and databases have been checked and incorporated. These data will be stored in an appropriate easy to use database (being developed within this assignment). It is worh noting that the Forest Department Biodiversity reports mainly presented species data that act as good baselines updated in this report. The ecological components of the Forest Department Biodiversity reports are rather limited, and therefore, this report provides environmental data that should be treated as baseline. The baseline inventory of flora, fauna and other components of the Mabira Forest ecosystem therefore, provide the benchmark against which any future changes will be measured. The current inventory entails detailed descriptions of the surrounding areas to identify unique features and evaluate any potential threats. Future monitoring activities will reveal changes and trends in the ecosystem health. The following steps were used: Step :Review of information/data that has been collected over the years on the Mabira forest ecosystem. Specifically, we accessed the following datasources: Forest Department biodiversity inventory data Permanent Sample Plot data We have accessed other secondary data sources and published/unpublished literature e.g. EIA reports, the Important Bird Area (IBA) data from Nature Uganda (NU) or the National Biodiversity Data Bank (NBDB) at Makerere University. We accessed other datasets on flora and fauna from Makerere University (Herbarium and Museum), as well as other projects such as FOREAIM and BIOTA, among others). These enabled a thorough update of baseline data for the Mabira ecosystem. Step 2: We conducted field studies to assess the status of taxa targeted by the FD inventories (trees and shrubs, birds, small mammals, and butterflies) as well as other taxa of conservation concern (e.g. red listed species and endemics). Alongside these data, selected environmental variables were assessed. 8

10 Step 3: The data generated have been checked for accuracy and will form part of a comprehensive database developed (later linked to the Water Information System (WIS)). Strategies will be put in place to ensure that the database is regularly used and where possible updated. Step 4: Analyzing the threats to the integrity of the Mabira forest ecosystem has been done mainly through field observations and the socioeconomic surveys (reported elsewhere). Potential sources of threats to flora and fauna from overexploitation, encroachment, invasive alien species, and pollution; and climate change, among others, have been documented. Step 5: The conservation importance of each forest and the relative conservation value of the different habitats within each forest are highlighted mainly based on disturbance history. Step 6: Training has been carried out for several field staff to ensure that the client and key stakeholders are able to conduct field surveys for trees and other taxa that are non-traditional for Foresters. The trainees have been re-tooled with some skills to conduct inventories of various taxa, analyze biodiversity data and write up the reports. Step 7: Recommending Low cost procedures for subsequent monitoring and regular update of the database to ensure usability will be recommended. Relevant staff will, thereafter, be trained to carry out this task. Step 8: The various elements will be incorporated in the updated Management Plan. The process is ongoing Technical Approach and Methods. Updating the ecological baseline data Step : Reviewing information/data A review of the existing ecological baseline data was used to define the information gaps; and establish the basis for searching for new information as well as changes in the ecosystem functioning. It also involved examining databases existing in various places that contain relevant information on the CFRs and target taxa. Step 2: Conducting field studies to assess the status of selected taxa and environmental variables: We conducted field studies to assess the status of taxa selected (i.e. trees and shrubs, birds, small mammals, and butterflies) and environmental variables. Where possible, the inventories involved participation of members from the local communities and field staff of MWE and NFA. The methods of assessing the different taxa are explained in the following sections. Sampling design First, all Permanent Sample Plots (PSPs) located in Mabira Forest Reserve (and the smaller reserves, if any) were assessed. In case they have been assessed recently, the data were accessed and used. Second, additional sampling points were selected by a stratified random approach based on the current management zones where compartments selected within -km2 grid squares superimposed on a zone of each disturbance/management category. The whole of the Mabira management plan area (composed of six central forest reserves covering a total area of 3,293 hectares; Mabira (29,974), Namakupa (280) Nandagi (479), Namawanyi (325), Namananga (3) Kalagala falls (04) was covered. 9

11 The sites that have undergone different intensities of disturbance (particularly in the case of Mabira Forest Reserve, Figure ) as well as different sizes of the target reserves) were taken into consideration to achieve a desired intensity of sampling giving a proportionate number of samples. The zones with different disturbance histories are summarized in table 2.. Table 2.. Disturbance categories to be used as strata for sampling Mabira Forest Reserves Main Vegetation Type Description Site Category (Years since abandonment of disturbance) A: Encroached Plots in site less than 3 years after the last 0-3 years encroachment B: Encroached Vegetation types in plots abandoned 3-0 years between 3 and 0 years C: Encroached Vegetation types in plots abandoned 0-30 years between 0 and 30 years ago D: Logged Plots in selectively harvested or mechanically logged (pre and post 950) >30 years ago E: Essentially Undisturbed old growth Plots that lie in areas that were never harvested or encroached (nature reserve) 0 Undisturbed Conservation importance and the relative conservation value of the Forest Reserves Based on the diversity and distribution of species present as well as the conservation status of those species, assessment of the conservation importance of each forest and the relative conservation value of the different habitats within each forest will be achieved. The population index (i.e. relative numbers) and location of each species will then be usedas baselines for future monitoring. 2.2 USE OF BIOLOGICAL INDICATORS Maintaining healthy ecosystems in tropical rain forests like Mabira is a prerequisite for conserving biodiversity and involves the use of ecological/biological indicators. These indicators help to detect and track changes in integrity of a community. Ecological indicators are used to communicate information about ecosystems and the impact of human activity on ecosystems. Ecosystems are complex and ecological indicators can help describe them in simpler terms that can be understood and used by nonscientists to make management decisions. Indicator species are also known as sentinel organisms, the organisms that are ideal for bio-monitoring. An indicator species is any biological species that defines a trait or characteristic of the environment. For example, a species may indicate an environmental condition such as a disease outbreak, pollution, species competition or climate change. Indicator species can be among the most sensitive species in a region, and sometimes act as an early warning to monitoring biologists. The complexity of ecosystems has forced conservation biologists to relay on indicator taxa, which are species or higher taxonomic groups whose parameters, such as density, presence or absence, or infant survivorship, are used as proxy measures of ecosystem conditions. Previous efforts and current strategy NatureUgand compiled the accessible biodiversity information on Mabira and produced what at the time were the most comprehensive lists for birds, mammals, amphibians, reptiles and butterfly species for the reserve. Davenport et al (996) whose data formed part of the NatureUganda report conducted systematic surveys in Mabira to document diversity of birds, small mammals, butterflies and large moths. These authors in their report detail the methods used including the effort invested in the

12 surveys. It is apparent that many parts of the forest were not accessed given the fact that surveys for animal groups rely a lot on trapping techniques that are time intensive methods and were not necessarily possible at that time. For this report similar approaches to those of Davenport et al (996) have been used including surveying for the same taxa except for the large moths. In addition, for this report we surveyed amphibians, reptiles and medium and large sized mammals that were not done by Davenport et al (996). These additional taxa give a broader view of the richness of Mabira. This aims to increase the objective evaluation of the reserve s worth for conservation. Where the specific field methods have varied from Davenport et al (996), the method used is detailed in the appropriate taxa specific section. The attempt was made to spread the sampling locations throughout the different small forest blocks associated with Mabira CFR. Re-surveying of the same taxa as done by Davenport (996) has enabled us to make comparisons for species richness at least for Mabira CFR. 2.3 SITE DESCRIPTION 2.3. Introduction to the Forest Reserves of the Mabira Ecosystem Mabira Forest Reserve The study was conducted in Mabira Central Forest Reserve and five other smaller reserves of the Mabira Ecosystem. Mabira forest islocated in Buikwe District, Uganda ( N E) and has an area of 306 km 2 (Davenport et al.996), Figure 2.. Mabira has tropical rain forest communities of medium altitude, described as moist semi-deciduous and moist evergreen. The altitude ranges between 070 and 340 m above sea level, with gently undulating plains of numerous flat-topped hills and wide shallow valleys. The mean annual precipitation of the forest is between mm while the annual mean minimum and maximum temperatures range from 6 to 7 C and 27 to 29 C, respectively. The reserve supports a high diversity of biota including mammals, birds, butterflies ( Davenport, 996), and plants, typical of Afro-tropical forest ecosystems. Two main vegetation sub-types are represented in the forest reserve namely; young and colonizing forest covering 2.7% and mature mixed forest which is the largest covering 52% of the forest area. About 32 trees and shrubs exist in Mabira forest of which nine are restricted range species and three Mahogany species listed as globally threatened (Dav enport 996). Forest birds are over 50 species, two species of diurnal forest primates and 28 species of butterflies. The forest has some species of global conservation importance for example Francolinus nahani (Nahan s Francolin), found in the list of globally endangered species. Already by 996, Davenport et al (996) reported, Mabira Forest Reserve was subject to extensive encroachment, pitsawing, charcoal burning and hunting formany years. And that in the 970's and 80's politicians encouraged many people to leave their homes and re-establish inspecially cleared areas of the forest. These immigrants came from many parts of Uganda, in particular from eastof the Nile. This single act caused much disturbance to the forest and it is estimated that 25% of the reserve was cleared to accommodate the settlers. The encroachers were evicted in 988 after a much-publicized action by the Forest Department.

13 Figure 2.. Mabira CFR with the other 5 CFRs surveyed for this report Despite steady recovery from disturbances caused by encroachment of the 980 s, the forest remains heavily degraded mainly at the edges. Enclaves exist in the Mabira Forest Reserve with 27 villages where subsistence farming is the primary economic activity for the 3,506 families within. The secondary economic activities include; charcoal burning, pit sawing, collection of poles for construction, collecting medicinal and other non-timber forest products needed to supplement the incomes of enclave residents. Despite the worrying levels of degradation, the forest remains an important biodiversity reserve and an important tourist destination, receiving more than 62% of all tourists visiting forest reserves in Uganda. 2

14 History of Disturbance in Mabira Forest Reserve A lot of habitat change has been recorded in many areas of the world and Uganda in particular. The extent and quality of forests, woodlands, wetlands and other terrestrial land cover types have been greatly impacted and changed through anthropogenic pressure in the search of resources and land for settlement and agriculture. Large sections of the forests of Mabira, Nandagi, Namananga, Namakupa, Namawanyi and Kalagala over the years experienced massive but varying levels of human incursions on the forest estates and in some cases converting more than 80% (in the case of Nandagi, Namananga, Namakupa, Namawanyi and Kalagala) for cultivation. Large sections of the previously encroached forests have since been reclaimed and some restoration action taken place, although in some section natural regeneration is now observed. While the local sugar works (Sugar Corporation of Uganda Limited) is replanting areas of the forest for their own consumption, they are also responsible for releasing effluent waste into the River Musambya which appears to bepolluting this river that runs into the Reserve. The Management zones The Mabira forest was in divided into Management zones consisting of Strict Nature reserve, Recreation/eco-tourism zone, zone for low impact use and the production zone (Davenport, 996) these are shown in Figure 2.2. The Strict Nature Reserve: This is located almost in the centre of the forest and was set aside mainly for species and habitat protection. The only activities allowed in this management zone are education and research with extraction limited to only meet the requirements of these two activities. Studies in this zone were carried out from Wanende beat. The Recreational/Buffer Zone/eco-tourism: This Management zone surrounds the strict nature reserve and is meant to offer protection from undue human pressure from outside. Allowed in this zone are ecotourism and harvesting of local herbs by inhabitants from surrounding communities. This zone was established within the Forest department as a tourism development project. Studies in this zone were carried out from Najjembe beat. The low-impact use zone: This zone occurs outside the buffer and on average appears to be the largest. Local inhabitants are allowed to collect firewood and medicine from this zone. Studies in this zone were carried out from Lwankima beat. 3

15 Fig. A 6. LOCATION M AP T o K iko m a Kilometres To B ukolo to N Scale : 240, 000 NTENJE RU COU N TY Na dagi T o K MUK ONO COU N TY 235 # T o K NA KIF U M A COU N TY Namu laba Statio n 230 Ö # % 229 ñ ñ # # Ö 220 % Na gojje Sta tion LUG AZI TOW N COU N C IL Ö à # # R. M usa mya Wane nde Sta tion # # # # # Lw ankima Sta tion ñ Ö 20 % % Naluvule 95 % à # Buwool a # # à ñ ñ ñ ³ # Ö 83 % % M aligit a Sta tion Na jje mbe Sta tion BUIK WE COU N TY 72 ñ 74 T o # Kyaba ana Sta tion To Jinja Man age men t Z ones Strict Nature Reserve Buffer Zone Prod uctio n Z one Recreation/Buffer Zone Infr astruc tu re à Campsite/recreation facility ñ Guard's h ouse (occupied) Departmental O ffices (o ccup ied) Ö Guard's h ouse (un der co nstru ction ) # Officer/ranger house (occupied) ³ Officer/ranger house (under construction ) Motorable Track Riv er/stream Figure 2.2. Management zoning of Mabira Central Forest Reserve The production zone: This occurs within the zone of low impact use and is part of the overall forest management programme. Here silvicultural practices are used to enrich stands for extractive use by private companies while other activities include enrichment planting of trees and salvage operations (MWE, 2009; Kizza et al, 203). Studies in this zone were carried out from Nagojje beat. Namukupa forest reserve Namukupa forest reserve (Figure 2.3) is located in Namukupa village. Fields of cultivation fringe the forested area with small-scale gardens on the larger side. The other side is fringed by Learsia hexandra and Cyperus papyrus dominated swamp. The forest still retains her natural vegetation in its centre although the boarders and some sections of the interior are dominated by the invasive Brousonetia papyrifera. 4

16 Figure 2.3. Namakupa Forest Reserve which is one of the study sites Namananga Forest reserve Namananga Forest reserve (Figure 2.4) is located in Namananga Village. One section of the reserve is in a swamp dominated by Learsia hexandra and the forested expanse is dominated by Brousonetia papyrifera. Fields of cultivation and areas of human settlement fringe the reserve. 5

17 Figure 2.4. Namananga and Namawanyi Forest Reserves 6

18 Namawanyi Forest reserve Namawanyi Forest reserve (Figure 2.4) is located in Namawanyi Village. The reserve is dominated by Brousonetia papyrifera with very few indigenous trees and is fringed by fields of cultivation. The forest is contiguous with Namananga and both reserves are regenerating with average tree height below 5m. Nandagi forest reserve Nandagi forest reserve is composed of forested expanses, fields of cultivation and fallow lands. The sampling sites outside the Forested part of the reserve are located in Nama 2 village (Figure 2.5) and those inside the forest reserve are located in Nandagi village. Mostof the points in Nama 2 village were within fields of cultivation and fallow lands. Nandagi forest reserve is composed mainly of plantations from trees of Terminalia spp, Eucalyptus sp. and Pinus spp. The reserve is bordered by a long wetland stretch from one end of lower elevation, small-scale agriculture fields from the other and sugar cane plantation from the end of higher elevation. 7

19 Figure 2.5. Nandagi Forest Reserve which is one of the study sites 8

20 Kalagala forest reserve Kalagala forest reserve (Figure 2.6) is along one section of river Nile in Kalagala village. Parts of the reserve are cultivated with small-scale gardens and tree plantations of Terminalia sp. while the natural vegetation forms a stretch of about 3km. On this stretch is a mosaic of bushed thickets and forested patches. Figure 2.6. Kalagala Falls, one of the study sites within the Mabira Ecosystem 9

21 2.4. CONCLUSION It is therefore evident that the coverage of this task was adequate in recording the key ecological aspects of the Mabira Ecosystem for purposes of updating the baseline data. The findings have been used to develop a database of the ecological data, for management planning and for developing a plan for monitoring the ecosystem health. REFERENCES Davenport T, Howard P, Baltzer M (996) Mabira Forest Biodiversity Report, Report No. 3. Forest Department, Kampala, Uganda Kronstad T. (2009). The value of forest matrix habitats for conservation: Butterfly distribution on a landuse gradient from mature forest to small-scale agriculture in Mabira Forest Reserve, Uganda. University of Bergen, Department of Biology. 20

22 CHAPTER THREE 3.0. FLORA 3. SUMMARY The total number of plant species now known from Mabira Forest Reserve is 636 with the trees, shrubs and climbers contributing 450 species (32 were recorded in the previous Biodiversity inventory and 38 are new additions from this study) and herbs contributing 86 species. The rest of the reserves have fewer species: 87 (Namakupa), 92 (Namawanyi), 39 (Nandagi) and 68 (Kalagala), and 68 (Namananga). In the case of Mabira Forest Reserve, the climbers and herbaceous species were previously not included, and also data for the smaller forest reserves (Namakupa, Namawanyi, Nandagi, Kal agala and Namananga) are here newly presented in this report. In total, we have 732 species recorded for the Mabira ecosystem, including 252 herbs and 480 woody species. 3.2 INTRODUCTION 3.2. Aims and rationale The rationale for the work on flora is that several changes have occurred thereby affecting the plant species. The composition and diversity of plants is crucial for the survival of components such as fauna and for ensuring the ecosystem health. Data from the inventories conducted within this project will be crucial for contributing towards a better understanding of the Mabira flora and implications for the value of the forest including contribution to local livelihoods Previous work Herbaceous species In the past, data collection in Ugandan forests has not documented the herbaceous plant composition, yet herbs are important constituents of forest vegetation because they can be used to indicate the level of disturbance from human interaction with the forest. Organized forest surveys intended for biomass inventories have focused on documenting only woody species (trees and shrubs). Available information on forest herbs therefore lies scattered in reports (theses) that focused on documenting plant species of ethnobotanical importance to the local communities. Other data occurs as herbarium collections randomly made by various plant collectors. Data for this report was generated from old plant collections housed at the Makerere University Herbarium, from literature and also from fieldwork executed for this purpose. Data collection Herbarium data: The Makerere University Herbarium was visited and collections made from Mabira forest were filtered out. The collections have accumulated over years by various collectors, some of which were chance collections or were made during organized surveys. Unfortunately, herbarium data sheets did not give the sampling procedures employed by the different collectors. Statements on the abundance of species have also often neglected by collectors. Most of the collectors probably referred to the whole Mabira forest ecosystem as Mabira forest because searches of collection localities of the smaller forest reserves (Namakupa, Namawanyi, Namananga, Nandagi, and Kalagala) were not successful. 2

23 Generation of data from research reports: A PhD research conducted in 203 and 204 on the ethnobotanical survey of plants used by communities around Mabira Central Forest Reserve largely contributed to the generated list. For the purpose of this activity, the resourceful parts of this research are those that focused on medicinal, cultural, wild food plants and other products of plants e.g., baskets and crafts. Parts of the plant list are published in Tugume et al. 206, yet others that were kindly provided by the researcher are not yet published. These lists were generated following key informant interviews with renowned traditional healers and resource users (including primary collectors and vendors) in villages lying within 5 Km from the forest. Field excursions were then conducted with the key informants as guides; following forest trails and collecting voucher specimens of cited plants. The voucher specimens were identified at Makerere University Herbarium.Other published works e.g. Lwanga et al. (998) did not publish their species lists and possibly their specimens were not deposited at the herbarium. 3.3 METHODS 3.3. Field methods All the selected but accessible grids were visited and sampled. The plants were assessed within demarcated plots of 5 x 30 m or 5 x 5 m established randomly within each selected grid. Inventories of trees, shrubs, lianas and herbs were done within the nested plots. The four corners of plots were marked with the ID of the vegetation category. The positions of each plot were marked as accurately as possible on maps of the study sites. For each plot the following data were obtained: i) GPS reading and Altitude at the centre of the plot; ii) Slope: measured by a clinometer. Plot size considered the history of disturbance. In previously encroached areas the plots of 5 x 30 m were used. In mechanically logged sites and in essentially undisturbed mature forest the plot size will be 0 x 30 m (twice the plot size in the encroached areas). Concentric Circular Plots that are mostly used by the NFA may be considered if appropriate in some cases. Each plot of 5 x 30 m will be divided it into six sub-plots of 5 x 5 m; plots of 0 x 30 m will be similarly divided into 0 sub-plots of 5 x 5 m. Each 5 x 5 m sub-plot will be divided further into x m quadrats located at the centre. 5x30 5 x 5 m Figure 3.: Design and outline of inventory plots to be used in all sites The teams of botanists walked within and assessed the plots. They took records of previously unrecorded as well as recorded species to determine abundance. All individuals with more than half the base rooted in the plot were included. i. Large trees>0 cm DBH: All trees >0 cm DBH were enumerated by species and size in the 5 x 30 m and 0 x 30 m plots. ii. Saplings: Saplings are considered to be trees with diameter between 0. mm 0 cm. Saplings were enumerated in x 5 m sub-plots. We shall have three x 5 m sub-plots in the 5 x 30 m plot and six x 5 m sub-plots in the 0 x 30 m plot. 22 x m

24 iii. Lianas and Shrubs: The lianas (woody climber s) and shrubs (woody plants with multiple branching below.3m high) were enumerated within the 5 x 5 subplots. Their diameters were measured at the base or ground level. iv. Seedlings: These are young trees.3 m tall. They were enumerated in all x m quadrats (i.e. six seedlings plots in 5 x 30 m plot and 2 in 0 x 30 m plot). v. Herbaceous species: These are annual or perennial, and do not produce woody stems. Data were collected in the same plots used for woody species. At the center of each 5 5 m quadrat (used for sampling saplings and shrubs), a smaller quadrat of m was nested for the enumeration of herbaceous species (and seedlings of woody species). All the herbs found in these quadrats were recorded and the percent cover value for each species was visually estimated. Where possible, counts of individual plants were made to estimate species abundance. In the case of creeping plants, cover was estimated. Species found outside the sampled quadrats were recorded as present although no estimates of abundance or cover were made for them Specimen collection and identification Those plants that could not be named in the field were collected and identified at Makerere University Herbarium. Identification was aided by the use of identification books such as the Forest Trees of Uganda (by Hamilton A.C.), Indigenous Trees of Uganda (By Eggeling, W.J.) and the Flora of Tropical East Africa (various authors). If a plant could not be identified to the species level during surveys, specimens were preserved and identified at the herbarium in Makerere University. The classification system used is that of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group III (APG III) Personnel, dates and areas sampled The appointed key experts (KE), namely Dr Joseph Bahati (KE Forest Ecologist), Dr. Gerald Eilu (KE Taxonomist), Dr. Mary Namaganda (KE Botanist), and Dr. Robert Kityo (KE Zoologist). These have been the main personnel in the different components. The field teams are built around these Key Experts Data analysis Species richness and diversity The data have been used to calculate Species richness and diversity. Diversity is based on the Shannon- Wiener diversity index and Fisher s Alpha index within the SDR computer programme. Similarity is also calculated and dendrograms displayed within the Community Analysis Package (CAP). 3.4 RESULTS 3.4..Plant Species Richness The total number of plant species now known from Mabira Forest Reserve is 636 (Table 3.) with the trees, shrubs and climbers contributing 450 species (32 were recorded in the previous Biodiversity inventory and 38 are new additions from this study) and herbs contributing 86 species. Red listed woody plant are listed in table 3.2 Table 3.. Numbers of plant species recorded in Central Forest Reserves of the Mabira Ecosystem Plant form Mabira Kalagala Namakupa Namananga Namawanyi Nandagi Woody species Herbaceous species

25 Totals The rest of the reserves have fewer species: 87 (Namakupa), 92 (Namawanyi), 39 (Nandagi) and 68 (Kalagala), and 68 (Namananga). In the case of Mabira Forest Reserve, the climbers and herbaceous species were previously not included, and also data for the smaller forest reserves (Namakupa, Namawanyi, Nandagi, Kalagala and Namananga) are here newly presented in this report. In total, we have 732 species recorded for the Mabira ecosystem, including 252 herbs and 480 woody species Herbaceous Plants A total of 86 herbaceous species was recorded for Mabira Central Forest Reserve (Table 3.3). Most of these were grasses (Poaceae; 3.2 %) and members of the Asteraceae (0.5 %). Two of the grasses are uncommon species in Uganda; Isachne mauritianum, a species of forest clearings known only from four other forests namely, Kashyoha-Kitomi, Bwindi Impenetrable, Rwenzori and Mpanga. The wild species of rice, Oryza eichingeri, is also uncommon in Uganda and is known from four other forests namely, Zoka, Semuliki, Maramagambo and Budongo. It was last collected from Bugoma forest in 942 and efforts to trace it in 204 were futile because all possible habitats had been opened and drained as much of the forest was highly degraded. Wild species of cultivated crops need special protection, especially those in fragile habitats like forests. These species can be possible progenitors of important traits, through breeding experiments, in the development of improved varieties of crops. Two species of ground orchids were recorded; the fairly common Corymborkis corymbis and Zeuxine elongata. Orchids are a CITES protected group of plants. The invasive Mimosa pudica has also been recorded for Mabira. This species needs to be observed to monitor if it spreads further into the forest. Factors like forest clearing can hasten the spread of alien invasive species, as they are usually heavy seeders that will quickly colonize disturbed areas. Other potentially invasive species found in Mabira are Ricinus communis and Nicotiana tabaccum. In terms of numbers of individuals, the most abundant herbs were synedrella nodiflora and Bidens pilosa, with relative abundances of 25.5 and 8.4. Species with the highest relative cover values included: Paspalum conjugatum (.4 %), Panicum sp. (5.7 %), Bidens pilosa (5.7 %), Synedrella nodiflora (4.8 %), and Leptaspis zeylanica (4.6 %). The cover values appear low because the forest floor has more litter or bare patches than ground plant cover. The annual Bidens pilosa and Synedrella nodiflora are indicative of areas that have been disturbed, whereas the perennial grasses Leptaspis zeylanica and Paspalum conjugatum are indicative of stable forest cover that has not been exposed to disturbances in the recent past. The most commonly encountered herbaceous species (present is most quadrats) included, Leptaspis zeylanica, Culcasia falcifolia, Aframomum mildbraedii, Oplismenus hirtellus and Marantochloa leucantha, with the following relative frequencies; 26.2, 2.9, 8.7, 4.4 and 3.6 respectively. Leptaspis zeylanica has high values for relative frequency and cover, implying that it can be used to monitor the quality of the forest over time. It is a species of shade and decline in its occurrence and coverage would imply reduction in the forest cover. Namananga, a secondary forest dominated by Brussonetia papyrifera tree species has 30 herbaceous species (Table 3.2 ). Based on number of individuals, Whitfieldia elongata is the most abundant (53.8 relative abundance) and has the highest relative cover (35 %). Its relative frequency is 0, coming second to Oplismenus hirtellus (25), which has a relative cover of 34.2 %. These two species, Whitfieldia elongata and Oplismenus hirtellus are shade-loving species, which can be used to monitor changes in the forest cover quality by observing changes in their relative cover values. It would be expected that a reduction in forest cover would result in more light reaching the ground and hence a decline in the coverage of dominating shade loving species. 24

26 Namawanyi, another Brussonetia papyrifera dominated secondary forest had 3 hebaceous species recorded. Of these, Whitfieldia elongata and Oplismenus hirtellus are the most common ones, with highest relative frequency (27.6) and relatively high cover values. Kalagala forest had 37 herbaceous species of which Justicia flava was the most common with relative frequency of 2.2 and with the highest relative cover of 32.7 %. The fairly high number of herbs in Kalagala is possibly because this forest is greatly degraded, the low density of trees creating open areas that favour growth of herbs. Only one shade loving species, Setaria megaphylla, was recorded. The invasive Mimosa pudica also occurs in this forest, hence a need to monitor it. A few herbaceous species (27) were recorded from Namakupa. The shade loving forest grass Leptaspis zeylanica was the most common herb (relative frequency = 4.7). Dracaena fragrans was also fairly common (relative frequency = 25). Like Namananga and Namawanyi, Namakupa is also dominated by Brossonetia papyrifera, but the dominating herbaceous species differ. This difference could be a result of varying intensities of disturbance between Namakupa and the former two forests. Nandagi is fairly rich in herbaceous species composition. A total of 54 herbs were recorded. The dominating herbs were Paspalum conjugatum and Marantochloa leucantha both having a relative frequency of 3, and 2.7 % and 7. % relative covers respectively. Leptaspis zeylanica was relatively frequent (3) alth ough it had a low relative cover value (2.2). Although Paspalum conjugatum and Marantochloa leucantha are shade loving species, they can also tolerate conditions with high amounts of light and so cannot be used as indicator species in this forest. Instead, we recommend the less frequent Leptaspis zeylanica to be used to monitor the state of Nandagi Trees, Shrubs and Climbers In total, 450 species of woody plants (480 including those recorded from the previous Forest Department Biodiversity inventory of trees, shrubs and climbers were recorded ( 3.4). The following introduced species are excluded from the list: Brousonetia payrifera, Lantana camara, Senna hirsuta, Capiscum frutescens, Carica papaya, Coffea arabica, Musa sapientum, Passiflora edulis, Solanum mauritianum, Terminalia superba, Thevetia peruviana and Artocarpus heterophyllus. The first two of these species are invasive in Uganda with B. papyrifera dominating the small reserves. Mabira Forest Reserve, as would be expected from the size and attention given for its protection, has the highest number of species (450). This is followed in order, by Nandagi (85), Namawanyi (6), Namakupa (60), Namananga (38), and Kalagala (3). Namananga and Namawanyi are the most similar of the forests in terms of their species composition (Figure 3.2). These two, with Namakupa, form a cluster of closely related forests in terms of species composition. This cluster is linked to Nandagi. This leaves out Mabira and Kalagala Falls as the least similar to this cluster. The dominance of B. papyrifera, relative to the rest of the species, seems to be the major factor responsible for this pattern. 25

27 Figure 3.2. Dendrogram showing clustering of forest based on presence-absence matrix The taxa recorded, include some red listed species such as the Mahoganies ( Entandrophragma angolense, Entandrophragma cylindricum, and Entandrophragma utile. Others include Prunus africana, Warbugia ugandensis and Milicia excelsa CONCLUSION The inclusion of 86 herbaceous plant species to the list of Mabira CFR is a major contribution derived from this work. In the case of the smaller reserves, this team has seen no previous lists. The lists for these reserves therefore, are enriched with species. This work has provided an additional species of woody plants recorded for the Mabira CFR. This is a big contribution towards a proper documentation of the flora of Mabira central Forest Reserve. Considering that there were no species lists of woody plants for the smaller reserves of the Mabira ecosystem, the present work has yielded the following numbers of species that can now be used as baseline. The key herbaceous species that could be used to monitor the status of the forests are Leptaspis zeylanica, Oplismenus hirtellus and Whitfieldia elongata. Occurrence of the invasive herb, Mimosa pudica, should be noted for future monitoring against further spread. The Red Listed Species as well as the invasive species should be monitored to keep track of trends in their status. Occurrence of the invasive herb, Mimosa pudica, should be noted for future monitoring against further spread. The Red Listed Species as well as the invasive species should be monitored to keep track of trends in their status. 26

28 The current surveys have added new records of woody species for Mabira CFR, notable of which is the invasive Broussonetia papyrifera, but these were probably introduced after the biomass surveys. Not all the 98 new records are new species to the forest. Differences in species richness and diversity from surveys are often dependent on sampling intensity and sample location. In addition, the current survey included woody climbers in the definition of woody species and was not limited to trees and shrubs like the 996 Forest Department surveys. However, the epiphytes, mistleoes and stranglers are not included. Hence, a complete list of the plants of the Mabira Forest Reserves is still far from complete. The Mabira ecosystem should be regarded as being of high conservation value because of the presence of several threatened plant species. Twenty-one of the woody species are of conservation concern and are distributed in the different forests in the ecosystem as shown in Table 3.2. None of the herbs is IUCN Redlisted. Table 3.2. IUCN Redlisted woody plant species in the Mabira Forest Reserves Species National Global threat Mbr Ndg Kgl Nmg Nwy Nkp threat status status Entandrophragma angolense EN VU E. cylindrica EN VU E. utile EN VU Lovoa swynnertonii EN NT L. trichilioides EN VU Beilschmiedia ugandensis VU VU Calamus deeratus VU NE Cordia millenii EN LC Milicia excelsa EN NT Warburgia ugandensis VU NE Albizia ferruginea EN VU Chrysophyllum albidum VU NE C. muerense VU NE C. perpulchrum VU NE Erythrophleum suaveolens VU NE Mondia whytei VU NE Prunus africana VU VU Citropsis articulata VU NE Fagaropsis angolensis VU NE Olea welwitschii VU NE Khaya anthotheca EN VU Mbr = Mabira, Ndg = Nandagi, Kgl = Kalagala, Nmg = Namananga, Nwy = Namawanyi, Nkp = Namakupa EN = Endangered, VU = Vulnerable, NT = Near Threatened, NE = Not Evaluated All the threatened 2 species occur in Mabira, followed by Namananga and Namawanyi respectively with 4 and 3 species of conservation concern. Although Nandagi, Kalagala and Namakupa have a few threatened species (respectively 2, and ), the value of these forests should not be overlooked. They need to be given equal priority for conservation like the rest of the forests in the landscape, restocked with the native species and the dominating invasive Broussonetia papyrifera controlled. 27

29 TABLES Table 3.3. Herbaceous species recorded in the 996 and 206 surveys of the Mabira Reserves Family Species Mabira Namananga Namawanyi Kalagala Namakupa Nandagi Acanthaceae Asystasia gangetica (L) T. Anderson Acanthaceae Barleria brownii S. Moore Acanthaceae Barleria sp. Acanthaceae Berleria ventricosa Hochst. ex Nees Acanthaceae Crossandra sp. Acanthaceae Dicliptera laxata C. B. Cl. Acanthaceae Dyschoriste radicans Nees Acanthaceae Justicia anseliana (Nees) T. Anders. Acanthaceae Justicia betonica L. Acanthaceae Justicia flava Vahl Acanthaceae Justicia heterocarpa T. Anders Acanthaceae Justicia scandens Vahl Acanthaceae Mendoncia sp. Acanthaceae Nelsonia smithii Oerst. Acanthaceae Thunbergia alata Sims Acanthaceae Whitfieldia elongata (P. Beauv.) C.B.Cl. Adiantaceae Adiantum sp. Amaranthaceae Achyranthes aspera L. Amaranthaceae Aerva lanata (L.) Schultes Amaranthaceae Amaranthus dubius Mart. ex. Thell. Amaranthaceae Amaranthus graecizans L. Amaranthaceae Amaranthus spinosus L. Amaranthaceae Celosia trigyna L. Amaranthaceae Cyathula achyranthoides (Kunth) Moq. Amaranthaceae Cyathula prostata (L.) Blume Amaranthaceae Psilotrichum elliotii Bak. Amaranthaceae Psilotrichum majus Peter Amaryllidaceae Scadoxus multiflorus Raf. Anthericaceae Chlorophytum filipendulum Baker Apiaceae Centella asiatica (L.) Urb. Apocynaceae Gongronema angolense (N. E. Er.) Bullock Apocynaceae Pergularia daemeri Apocynaceae Unidentified sp. Araceae Amorphophallus abyssinicus (A. Rich.) N.E.Er. Araceae Arisaema mildbraedii Engl. Araceae Culcasia falcifolia Engl. Araceae Culcasia scandens Beauv. Araceae Rhaphidophora africana N.E. Br. Aristolochiaceae Aristolochia elegans Mast. 28

30 Aspleniaceae Asplenium emerginatum P. Beauv. Aspleniaceae Asplenium monanthes L. Aspleniaceae Asplenium pocsii Pichi-Serm. Asteraceae Achyranthes aspera L. Asteraceae Acmella caulirhiza Delile Asteraceae Ageratum conyzoides L. Asteraceae Aspilia africana C. D Adams Asteraceae Bidens pilosa L. Asteraceae Conyza adolfi-fridericii (Msch.) H. Wild Asteraceae Conyza sumatrensis (Retz.) E. Walker Asteraceae Crassocephalum crepidioides (Benth) S. Moore Asteraceae Crassocephalum picridifolium (DC) S. Moore Asteraceae Crassocephalum sarcobasis (DC.) S. Moore. Asteraceae Dicrocephala integrifolia (L.F.) Kuntze Asteraceae Erlangea tomentosa S. Moore Asteraceae Helichrysum sp. Asteraceae Melanthera scandens (Schumach & Thonn.) Roberti Asteraceae Mikania cordata (Burm. f.) B.L. Rob. Asteraceae Senecio syringifolius O. Hoffm. Asteraceae Sigesbeckia orientalis L. Asteraceae Sonchus oleraceus L. Asteraceae Synedrella nodiflora (L.) Gaertn. Asteraceae Tagetes minuta L. Asteraceae Tridax procumbens L. Asteraceae Vernonia campanea S. Moore Asteraceae Vernonia sp. Basellaceae Basella alba L. Brassicaceae Cardamine trichocarpa Hochst. Ex. Rich Cannabaceae Cannabis sativa L. Capparaceae Cleome gynandra L. Capparaceae Cleome monophylla L. Chenopodiaceae Chenopodium ambrosiodes L. Chenopodiaceae Chenopodium opulifolium Koch & Ziz Chenopodiaceae Chenopodium procerum Moq. Commelinaceae Aneilema benieniense (P.Beauv.) Kunth. Commelinaceae Aneilema sp. Commelinaceae Buforestia imperforata C.B. Cl. Commelinaceae Coleotrype laurentii K.Schum. Commelinaceae Commelia foliosa Chiov. Commelinaceae Commelina africana L. Commelinaceae Commelina benghalensis L. Commelinaceae Commelina diffusa Burm.f. Commelinaceae Commelina foliosa Chiov. Commelinaceae Commelina latifolia A. Rich. Commelinaceae Palisota barteri Hook.f. 29

31 Commelinaceae Palisota mannii C.B. Clarke Commelinaceae Polia condesata C. B. Cl. Commelinaceae Polyspatha paniculata Benth. Commelinaceae Stanfieldiella imperforata (C.B.Clarke) Brenan Convolvulaceae Hewittia sp. Convolvulaceae Hewittia sublobata L. O Katze Convolvulaceae Ipomoea cairica (L.) Sweet Costaceae Costus afer Ker Gawl. Costaceae Costus lucanusianus J. Braun Crassulaceae Kalanchoe crenata (Andrews). Haw Crassulaceae Kalanchoe glaucescens Planch. ex. benth Cucurbitaceae Kedrostis foetidissima (Jacq.) Cogn. Cucurbitaceae Momordica foetida Schumach Cucurbitaceae Zehneria minutiflora (Coga.) C. Jeffrey Cyperaceae Cyperus cyperoides (L.) Kuntze Cyperaceae Cyperus sp. Cyperaceae Kyllinga elatior Kunth Cyperaceae Kyllinga sp. Dioscoreaceae Dioscorea bulbifera L. Dioscoreaceae Dioscorea sp. Dracaenaceae Dracaena fragrans (L.) Ker Gawl. Dracaenaceae Dracaena laxissima Engl. Dryopteridacaeae Dryopteris sp. Dryopteridaceae Dryopteris kirkii (Hook.) Alston Euphorbiaceae Acalypha brachystachya Hornem. Euphorbiaceae Acalypha ornata Hochst. ex A. Rich. Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia hirta L. Euphorbiaceae Micrococca mercurialis (L.) Benth. Euphorbiaceae Phyllanthus amarus Schum. & Thonn. Euphorbiaceae Ricinus communis L. Euphorbiaceae Tragia benthamii Baker Fabaceae Adenodolichos paniculatus Hutch. & Dalz. Fabaceae Crotalaria spinosa Hochst. ex. Benth Fabaceae Desmodium adscendens (SW.) DC Fabaceae Desmodium drageanum Kunth. Fabaceae Desmodium giganteum(l.) DC. Fabaceae Desmodium repandum (Vahl) DC. Fabaceae Desmodium sp. Fabaceae Desmodium tortuosum (Sw.) DC Fabaceae Desmodium triflorum (L.) DC Fabaceae Desmodium uncinatum (Jacq.) DC. Fabaceae Indigofera congesta Welw.ex. Bak. F Fabaceae Indigofera drepanocarpa Taub. Fabaceae Indigofera emarginella A. Rich. Fabaceae Indigofera spicata Forssk 30

32 Fabaceae Mimosa pudica L. Fabaceae Tephrosia sp. Fabaceae Teramnus labialis (L. f.) Spreng. Fabaceae Teramnus uncinatus (L.) Sw. Fabaceae Vigna parkeri Baker Fabaceae Vigna unguiculata L Lamiaceae Coleus latifolius Hochst. Ex. Benth. Lamiaceae Hoslundia opposita Vahl Lamiaceae Leonotis nepetifolia (L) R. Br. Lamiaceae Leucas martinicensis (Jacq. ) R. Br. Lamiaceae Mentha Sp. Lamiaceae Ocimum basilicum L. Lamiaceae Ocimum gratissum L Lamiaceae Oenanthe palustris (Chiov.) Norman Lamiaceae Plectranthus barbartus Andr. Lycopodiaceae Lycopodium sp. Malvaceae Sida acuta Burm. f. Malvaceae Sida alba L. Malvaceae Sida cuneifolia Roxb. Malvaceae Sida rhombifolia L. Malvaceae Triumfetta rhomboidea Jacq. Malvaceae Urena lobata L. Marantaceae Marantochloa leucantha (K.Schum.) Milne-Redh. Marantaceae Marantochloa purpurea (Ridl.) Milne-Redh. Melastomataceae Tristemma maritianum A. Juss. Menispermaceae Cissampelos mucronata A. Rich Moraceae Dorstenia hildebrandtii Engl. Nephrolepidaceae Nephrolepis biserrata (Sw.) Schott Nyctaginaceae Boerhavia diffusa L. Nyctaginaceae Commicarpus sp. Orchidaceae Corymborkis corymbis Thouars Orchidaceae Zeuxine elongata Rolfe. Oxalidaceae Oxalis corniculata L. Phyllanthaceae Cleistanthus sp. Phyllanthaceae Phyllanthus amarus Schum. & Thonn. Phyllanthaceae Phyllanthus pseudoniruli Müll. Arg. Phytolaccaceae Hilleria latifolia L. Phytolaccaceae Phytolaca dodecandra L'Hér. Phytolaccaceae Rivina humilis L. Piperaceae Peperomia molleri C. DC. Piperaceae Piper guineense Schumach. & Thonn. Piperaceae Piper umbellatum L. Piperaceae Pothomorphe umbellata (L.) Miq. Plantagonaceae Plantago palmata Hook.f. Poaceae Andropogon schirensis A. Rich. Poaceae Brachiaria decumbens Stapf 3

33 Poaceae Brachiaria jubata (Fig. & De Not.) Stapf Poaceae Cynodon dactylon (L) Pers. Poaceae Cyrtococcum multinode (Lam.) Clayton Poaceae Digitaria abysinnica (A. Rich.) Stapf Poaceae Digitaria velutina (Forssk.) P. Beauv. Poaceae Eleusine africana Kenn. O'Byrne Poaceae Eragrostis tenuifolia (A. Rich.) Steud. Poaceae Hyparrhenia cymbaria (L.) Stapf Poaceae Imperata cylindrica (L) P. Beauv Poaceae Isachne mauritianum Kunth Poaceae Leersia hexandra Sw. Poaceae Leptaspis zeylanica Steud. Poaceae Melinis minutiflora P. Beauv. Poaceae Olyra latifolia L. Poaceae Oplismenus hirtellus L. P. Beauv. Poaceae Oryza eichingeri Peter Poaceae Panicum brevifolium L. Poaceae Panicum calvum Stapf Poaceae Panicum maximum Jacq. Poaceae Panicum robynsii A. Camus Poaceae Panicum sp. Poaceae Panicum trichocladum K. Schum. Poaceae Paspalum conjugatum Berg. Poaceae Paspalum scrobiculatum L. Poaceae Pennisetum purpureum Schumach Poaceae Pseudechinolaena polystachya (Kunth) Stapf Poaceae Setaria megaphylla (Steud.) Th. Dur. & Schinz Poaceae Setaria poiretiana (Schult.) Kunth Poaceae Sorghum arundinaceum (Desv.) Stapf Poaceae Sporobolus pyramidalis P. Beauv. Polygonaceae Oxygonum sinuatum (Meissn.) Dammer Polygonaceae Polygonum setulosum A. Rich Polygonaceae Rumex abyssinicus Jacq. Portulacaceae Portulaca oleracea L. Portulacaceae Talinium paniculatum (Jacq.) Primulaceae Primula sieboldii E. Morren Pteridaceae Pteris burtoni Bak. Pteridaceae Pteris catoptera Kunze var. catoptera Pteridaceae Pteris dentata Forssk. Pteridaceae Pteris hamulosa (Christ.) Christ. Pteridaceae Pteris preussii Hieron. Rubiaceae Chassalia subochreata (Hiern) Hepper 32

34 Rubiaceae Geophila hirsuta Benth. Rubiaceae Geophila repens (L.) I.M.Johnst. Rubiaceae Geophilla repens (L.) I.M.Johnst. Rubiaceae Hymenocoleus hirsutus (Benth.) Robbr. Rubiaceae Rubia cordifolia L. Sapindaceae Cardiospermum grandiflorum Sw. Sinopteridaceae Pellaea doniana Hook Solanaceae Capsicum frutescens L. Solanaceae Datura stramonium L. Solanaceae Nicotiana tobaccum L Solanaceae Physalis peruviana L. Solanaceae Solanum aculeastrum Dunal Solanaceae Solanum anguivii Mill Solanaceae Solanum campylacanthum Hochst. ex A. Rich. Solanaceae Solanum dasyphyllum Schumach. & Thonn. Solanaceae Solanum micrantha Schltdl. Solanaceae Solanum nigrum L. Tectariaceae Arthropteris orientalis (J.F. Gmel.) Posth. Thelypteridaceae Christella dentata (Forssk.) Brownsey & Jermy Thelypteridaceae Thelypteris sp. Urticaceae Pilea sp. Verbanaceae Priva flabelliformis (Mold.) R. Fernand Vitaceae Cissus oliveri (Engl.) Gilg ex Engl. Vitaceae Cissus petiolata Hook.f. Vitaceae Cissus sp. Vitaceae Cissus sp.2 Vitaceae Cyphostemma adenocaule (Steud. ex A.Rich.) Desc. ex Wild & R.B.Drumm. Vitaceae Cyphostemma cyphopetalum (Fresen.) Desc. ex Wild & R.B.Drumm. Zingiberaceae Aframomum angustifolium (Sonn.) K. Schum Zingiberaceae Aframomum mildbraedii Loes. Zingiberaceae Aframomum zambesiacum (Baker) K. Schum. Zingiberaceae Renealmia congesta Maas Zingiberaceae Renealmia congolana De Wild. & T.Durand Zingiberaceae Renealmia speciosus Zingiberaceae Zingber officinale Roscoe Totals

35 Table 3.3. Woody plants recorded in Forest Reserves of the Mabira Ecosystem in Central Uganda Mabira 996 surveys Mabira 206 surveys Kalagala Namakupa Namananga Namawanyi Nandagi Mabira ecosystem 206 surveys Abrus canescens Abrus precatorius Abuitilon africana Abutilon mauritianum Acacia brevispica Acacia hecatophylla Acacia hockii Acacia monticola Acacia pentagona Acacia polyacantha Acalypha acrogyna Acalypha bipartita Acalypha neptunica Acalypha ornata Acalypha racemosa Acalypha volkensii Acanthus arborescens Adenia abyssinica Adenia reticulata Adenia schweinfurthii Aeglopsis eggelingii Agelaea hirsuta Agelaea pentagyna Aidia micrantha Alafia grandis Alafia lucida Alafia microstylis Alafia schumannii Alangium chinense Albizia coriara Albizia ferruginea Albizia glaberrima Albizia grandibracteata Albizia gummifera Albizia zygia Alchornea cordifolia Alchornea floribunda Alchornea hirtella Alchornea laxiflora Allophylus africanus 34

36 Allophylus dummeri Allophylus macrobotrys Alstonia boonei Antiaris toxicaria Antidesma laciniatum Antidesma membranaceum Antrocaryon micraster Aphania senegalensis Argomuellera macrophylla Aristolochia elegans Artabotrys likimensis Baikiaea insignis Balanites wilsoniana Balsamocitrus dawei Baphiopsis parviflora Basella alba Beilschmiedia ugandensis Belonophora hypoglauca Bequaertiodendron oblanceolatum Bersama abyssinica Blighia unijugata Blighia welwitschii Bombax buonopozense Bridelia atroviridis Bridelia micrantha Bridelia scleroneura Byttneria catalpifolia Caesalpina volkensii Calamus deeratus Campylostemon angolense Campylostemon bequaertii Canarium schweinfurthii Canthium schweinfurthii Canthium vulgare Capparis erythrocarpos Capparis tomentosa Cardiospermum grandiflorum 35

37 Cardiospermum halicacabum Casearia engleri Casine buchananii Cassipourea congensis Cassipourea gummiflua Cassipourea ruwensorensis Cedrela ordorata Celtis adolfi-fridericii Celtis africana Celtis gomphophylla Celtis mildbraedii Celtis philipensis Celtis wightii Celtis zenkeri Chaetacme aristata Chassalia cristata Chassalia subochreata Chrysophyllum albidum Chrysophyllum delevoyi Chrysophyllum gorungosanum Chrysophyllum muerense Chrysophyllum perpulchrum Cissus olivieri Cissus petiolata Citropsis articulata Clausena anisata Cleistanthus polystachyus Clematis hirsuta Clerodendrum capitatum Clerodendrum formicarum Clerodendrum rotundifolium Clerodendrum silvanum Cnestis ugandensis Coccinea barteri Coccinea grandis Coccinia mildbraedii Coffea canephora 36

38 Coffea eugenioides Coffea spathicalyx Cola gigantea Combretum molle Commelina diffusa Connarus longistipitatus Cordia africana Cordia millenii Craibia brownii Crassocephalum mannii Craterispermum schweinfurthii Craterosiphon beniense Croton macrostachyus Croton megalocarpus Croton sylvaticus Cryptolepis sanguinolenta Culcasia falcifolia Cussonia holstii Cyphostemma adenocaule Cyphostemma cyphopetalum Dalbergia lactea Dasylepis eggelingii Desplatsia dewevrei Dichapetalum angolense Dichapetalum ugandense Dichrostachys cinerea Dictyandra arborescens Dioscorea abyssinica Dioscorea bulbifera Diospyros abyssinica Dombeya goetzenii Dombeya kirkii Dombeya mukole Dovyalis macrocalyx Dracaena fragrans Dracaena laxissima Dracaena steudneri Drypetes bipindensis Drypetes gerrardii 37

39 Drypetes ugandensis Ehretia cymosa Ekebergia capensis Elaeis guineensis Elaeophorbia drupifera Englerophytum oblanceolatum Entada abyssininca Entandrophragma angolense Entandrophragma cylindrica Entandrophragma utile Erythrina abyssinica Erythrina excelsa Erythrococca atrovirens Erythrococca bongensis Erythrococca mildbraedii Erythrococca trichogyne Erythrophleum suaveolens Euadenia eminens Eugenia bukobensis Fagaropsis angolensis Ficus asperifolia Ficus barteri Ficus conraui Ficus craterostoma Ficus cyathistipula Ficus dicranostyla Ficus exasperata Ficus ingens Ficus lingua Ficus mucuso Ficus natalensis Ficus ovata Ficus polita Ficus pseudomangifera Ficus sansibarica Ficus saussureana Ficus sur Ficus thonningii 38

40 Ficus trichopoda Ficus vallis-choudae Ficus variifolia Flacourtia indica Flueggea virosa Funtumia africana Funtumia elastica Glenniea africana Glycine whitteri Glyphaea brevis Gongronema angolense Gouania longispicata Greenwayodendron suaveolens Grewia mollis Grewia pubescens Grewia trichocarpa Guarea cedrata Gymnema sylvestris Hallea stipulosa Harrisonia abyssinica Harungana madagascariensis Hibiscus calyphyllus Hibiscus canescens Holoptelea grandis Hugonia platysepala Hymenocardia acida Illigera pentaphylla Ipomea schupangensis Ipomoea cairica Ipomoea obscura Ipomoea wightii Irvingia gabonensis Jasminum eminii Jasminum fluminense Jasminum pauciflorum Keetia purseglovei Khaya anthotheca Kigelia africana Klainedoxa gabonensis Landolphia buchananii Landolphia dawei Landolphia landolphioides 39

41 Landolphia owariensis Lannea barteri Lannea welwitschii Lantana trifolia Lasiodiscus mildbraedii Lecaniodiscus fraxinifolius Lepidotrichilia volkensii Lepistemon owariensis Leptaulus daphnoides Leptonychia mildbraedii Lindackeria bukobensis Lindackeria mildbraedii Lindackeria schweinfurthii Linociera johnsonii Loeseneriella africana Loeseneriella apiculata Loeseneriella crenata Loseneriella clematoides Lovoa swynnertonii Lovoa trichilioides Lychnodiscus cerospermus Macaranga barteri Macaranga monandra Macaranga schweinfurthii Macaranga spinosa Maerua duchesnei Maesa lanceolata Maesa welwitschii Maesopsis eminii Majidea fosteri Mallotus oppositifolius Manilkara dawei Manilkara multinervis Manilkara obovata Margaritaria discoideus 40

42 Markhamia lutea Masdenia rubicunda Maytenus gracilipes Maytenus heterophylla Maytenus senegalensis Maytenus serratus Maytenus undata Melanodiscus sp. Memecylon jasminoides Memecylon myrianthum Mesoneurum angolense Mikania cordata Mildbraediodendron excelsum Milicia excelsa Mimosa pigra Mimusops bagshawei Momordica foetida Monanthotaxis angolense Monanthotaxis buchananii Monanthotaxis littoralis Monanthotaxis welwiscthii Mondia whytei Monodora myristica Morinda lucida Morus mesozygia Motandra guineensis Mukia maderaspatana Musanga cecropioides Myrianthus arboreus Myrianthus holstii Neoboutonia macrocalyx Neuropeltis velutina Newtonia buchananii Ochna afzelii Ochna bracteosa Ochna holstii Ochna membranacea Ocimum suave 4

43 Olax gambecola Olea welwitschii Oncinotis erlangezi Oncinotis glabrata Oncinotis tenuiloba Oncoba spinosa Oreobambos buchwaldii Ouratea densiflora Ouratea hiernii Oxyanthus formosus Oxyanthus speciosus Oxyanthus unilocularis Pachystela brevipes Pancovia turbinata Pappea capensis Pararistolochia triactina Parkia filicoidea Paropsia guineensis Paulinia pinnata Pavetta molundensis Pavetta oliveriana Peddiea fischeri Pergularia daemia Periploca nigrescens Phoenix reclinata Phyllanthus amarus Phyllanthus ovalifolius Phytolacca dodecandra Picralima nitida Piper capensis Piper guineense Piptadeniastrum africanum Pisonia aculeata Pittosporum mannii Pleiocarpa pycnantha Polyscias fulva Popowia lucidula Popowia sp. Pothomorphe umbellata Pouteria adolfifriederici Pouteria altissima Premna angolensis 42

44 Pristimera sp. Prunus africana Psedrella odorata Pseudarthria hoockeri Pseudograstistachys ugandensis Pseudospondias microcarpa Psilotrichum ellioti Psorospernum febrifugum Psychotria appendicularis Psychotria kirkii Psychotria parvistipulata Psychotria peduncularis Psydrax parviflora Pterolobium stellatum Pterygota mildbraedii Pycnanthus angolensis Pyrenacantha sylvestris Pyrenacantha ugandense Raphia farinifera Rauvolfia oxyphylla Rauvolfia vomitoria Rawsonia lucida Reissantia parviflora Rhaphidophora africana Rhaphiostylis beniniensis Rhus natalensis Rhus ruspolii Rhus vulgaris Rhytigynia butanguensis Ricinodendron heudelotii Rinorea ardisiiflora Rinorea beniensis Rinorea dentata Rinorea ilicifolia Rinorea oblongifolia Ritchiea albersii Rothmania whitfieldii 43

45 Rothmannia longiflora Rothmannia urcelliformis Rourea thomsonii Rubus apetalus Rutidea orientalis Rutidea smithii Rytigynia beniensis Saba comorensis Salacia elegans Salacia erecta Schefflera barteri Schrebera alata Schrebera arborea Scolopia rhamniphylla Scutia myrtina Secamone africana Secamone punctulata Securidaca welwistchii Senna petersiana Sericostachys scandens Sesbania sesban shirakiopsis elliptica Sida rhombifolia Solanum incanum Solanum indicum Spathodea campanulata Spondianthus preussii Staudtia kamerunensis Steganotaenia araliacea Sterculia dawei Stereospermum kunthianum Strombosia scheffleri Strychnos mitis Suregada procera Symphonia globulifera Syzygium cuminii Syzygium guineense Tabanaemontana odoratissima Tabernaemontana holstii 44

46 Tabernaemontana usambarensis Tapura fischeri Tarenna pavettoides Teramnus labialis Terminalia glaucescens Tetracera litoralis Tetracera potatoria Tetrapleura tetraptera Tetrorchidium didymonstemon Thecacoris lucida Tiliacora funifera Toddalia asiatica Tragia brevipes Tragia petiolaris Treculia africana Trema orientalis Tricalysia bagshawei Tricalysia niamniamensis Trichilia dregeana Trichilia martineaui Trichilia prieureana Trichilia rubescens Trilepisium madagascariensis Triumfetta diversifolia Triumfetta macrophylla Turraea floribunda Turraea robusta Turraea vogelioides Uncaria africana Urera trinervis Uvaria angolensis Uvaria welwitschii Uvariopsis congensis Vangueria apiculata Ventilago africana Ventilago diffusa Vepris eggelingii Vepris grandifolia Vepris nobilis Vernonia adoensis Vernonia amygdalina Vernonia auriculifera 45

47 Vernonia myrianthum Vitex amboniensis Vitex doniana Voacanga thouarsii Warburgia ugandensis Warneckea jasminoides Whitfieldia elongata Xylopia eminii Xymalos monospora Zanha golungensis Zanthoxylum gilletii Zanthoxylum leprieurii Zanthoxylum rubescens Zehneria scarbra Totals REFERENCES WCS Nationally Threatened Species for Uganda. Unpublished Report. 46

48 CHAPTER FOUR 4.0. BIRDS 4.. SUMMARY A total of 54 species was recorded across the whole survey, 97 in Mabira CFR and 00 in the five small CFRs. The results show that there were more bird species in the main forest than the five small CFRs combined. There was little overlap between the surveyed forest sites, with 54 species unique to the Mabira CFR, 58 species unique to the five small CFRs and 42 species occurring in both forests. Most of the bird species recorded during the surveys are classified as Least Concern according to the IUCN criteria. However, seven of the species recorded are classified as threatened either at global or regional level according to the IUCN criteria. These include Nahan's Francolin (Francolinus nahani), Grey Parrot (Psittacus erithacus), Cinnamon-chested Bee-eater ( Merops oreobates), White headed saw-wing (Psalidoprocne albiceps), Toro Olive-Greenbul ( Phyllastrephus hypochloris), White-browed Crombec (Sylvietta leucophrys) and Green tailed Bristlebill (Bleda eximius). The number of bird species in the small CFRs combined was higher than that in the main forest. There were more forest visitors and other nonforest bird species recorded in the small CFRs than in the main forest block. On the other hand, forest related bird species (FF & F) were much higher in the main forest than in the small CFRs INTRODUCTION Overview The birds of Mabira Central Forest Reserve are slowly being documented through a number of studies, which means that this taxon is now better known than when Davenport et al. (996) completed the biodiversity The records so far known for Mabira CFR comprise over 300 species of birds of which 09 were recorded during the Forest Department Biodiversity Inventory (Davenport et al, 996). The bird species record includes three species listed as threatened in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version i.e. the Blue swallow (Hirundo atrocaerulea), the Papyrus Gonolek (Laniarius mufumbiri) and Nahan s Francolin (Francolinus nahani) Aims and rationale Birds have been described as arguably the best known, most conspicuous and in many ways most easily studied inhabitants of tropical forest, and are therefore well suited to the role of biological indicators (Davenport et al 996). These authors quoting various other sources emphasized facts that make birds a favorable group for study including: - i. Their well known and stable taxonomy, ii. Well understood ecology comparatively. iii. They occur across a broad geographical range and in a large number of habitat types; and some species specialise within narrow habitat bands and are thus sensitive to habitat change. iv. Birds are readily observed in the field and relatively easy to capture. Uganda's has an impressively rich avian fauna of 0 species (Pomeroy, 993 & Carswellet al 205) that compares quite well with about 850 species recorded on the African main land s a whole (Brown et al., 47

49 982). This high diversity is, however, countered by low levels of endemism. Only two country endemic species of bird occur, a similarly limited pattern being exhibited in most other vertebrate taxa. The purpose of sampling the bird fauna (as with other taxa) was to compile species list for Kalagala, Namukupa, Nandagi, Namawanyi and Namananga CFRs and in addition update that of Mabira CFR. Mabira forest reserve (referred to as MFR hereafter) is an important bird area (IBA) comprising about 30% (over 300) species of the total number of birds found in Uganda and is also habitat to globally endagered specie Nahans Francolin ( Francolinus nahani). More than half of the Guinea-Congo forest biome bird species (74 of 44) that are found in Uganda are present in MFR Previous work More than one researcher has conducted studies on birds of MFR in previous years and records of avian diversity for the reserve can be found in Briton (980), Hamel (980), Howard (99), Davenport et al (996), Byaruhanga et al (200), Carswell et al. (2005) and others. Hence the avian diversity of MFR is fairly well known. According to Howard (99), MFR consisted of 5 species of forest birds, which represented 46% of the country s total. During that time, the threatened or near threatened species were the Nahan s Francolin (Francolinus nahani) and Blue Swallow (Hirundo atrocaerulea). Studies were conducted in Kalagala CFR as part of the wider area of impact for Bujagali dam while for the other 4 CFRs we have not found studies that were conducted within them. The four (Nandagi, Namukupa, Namawanyi and Namananga) are therefore poorly known as no known studies have previously been conducted on the fauna of these reserves. 4.3 METHODS 4.3. Field methods Two survey methods were used: Timed species counts (TSCs) and mistnetting. Both these methods have been deemed suitable for bird surveys in forested landscapes where visibility is normally poor (Nalwanga et al., 202). Timed species counts: For all the sites visited, 0 to 20 stations were established at intervals of 00m. Due to access limitations, stations were placed along km of existing trails, foot paths or motorable roads. The, transects, used for bird surveys in the main forest are shown in Figure below. For each sampling period, stations were visited within a 3hr period from sunrise and a 3hr period towards sunset. Hence, each station was visited twice. Two trained researchers collected the data. During the surveys, the observers arrived at each station and for 0mins, recorded and counted birds heard or seen within the 00m radius of each station before moving on to the next station. Birds in flight such as raptors were considered as opportunistic observations. Birds were identified according to the bird guide by Stevenson et al. (2005). Mist-netting. Since there is scanty or no information about the avifauna in the other five CFRs (Kalagala, Nandagi, Namukupa, Namawanyi and Namananga), we conducted mist netting in an attempt to capture the shy, elusive, understory bird species which are normally forest specialists. The same transects/trails used for TSCs were used for mistnetting. Birds captured, were identified and released in the same area. In order to avoid double counting, each site was mistnetted once. 48

50 Data analysis The bird field records were analysed in three ways: a) Compilation of species lists. This enabled comparison with other forests and provided a basis for highlighting species that are of particular biogeographical or conservation significance. b) Ecological characteristics. Each species was assigned an ecological (or habitat) type according to Bennun et al. (996). This is designed to assist in classifying forests, and also to assess the importance of an individual forest to a defined group of bird species with a known habitat requirement. Since the survey was mainly focused on forest birds, the emphasis was placed particularly on forest habitat-type divisions. Hence, birds were divided into the following three categories: Forest-dependent species (FF -species) are forest interior birds often uncommon even at the forest edge. Forest generalists (F -species) are generalists in their ecology, occasionally occurring outside forests. Forest non-dependent species (f-species) are sometimes seen in forests, usually at the edge or in large gaps, but are better thought of as forest visitors. Non-forest (open habitat) species. The divisions of species found in non-forest habitats are less fine grained with several habitats being lumped together. For example open woodland, bushland, and grassland are all grouped under the single heading of open habitats (O). Birds were further grouped into other categories such as: ) water specialists or generalists (water birds), i.e. species adapted to aquatic/swamp habitats (Water birds), 2) migratory species (PM) which occur seasonally, or 3) according to their conservation or endemic status. A degree of caution needs to be exercised if including migratory species in analysis as their inclusion on a forest list may depend more on the time of year that the forest was visited than their actual presence or absence. 4.4 RESULTS Species diversity A total of 54 species was recorded across the whole survey, 97 in Mabira CFR and 00 in the five small CFRs. Table 4. summarises the number of bird species found in each forest, these numbers partly reflect differences in effort, which complicates interpretation, but they clearly show that bird species were higher in the main forest than all the five small CFRs combined. Table 4.: Number of bird species recorded in the different forests and survey method used Forest Sampling site Number of species Sampling method used Mabira CFR Ecocentre-Najjembe 56 TSC north Buwola Trail 30 TSC Nature Reserve 52 TSC Nsamya Trail 38 TSC Najjembe south 43 TSC Small CFR Kalagala 42 TSC and mist-nets Namakupa 63 TSC and mist-nets Namananga 56 TSC and mist-nets Namwanyi 4 TSC and mist-nets Nandagi 33 TSC and mist-nets 49

51 A full list of species and their occurrence rates across the main forest and the small CFRs survey sites is given in Table 4.2. There was little overlap between the study sites, with 54 species unique to the Mabira CFR, 58 species unique to the five small CFRs and 42 species occurring in both forests. Overall, the number of bird species in the small CFRs combined was higher than that in the main forest mainly because there were more forest visitors and other non-forest bird species recorded in the small CFRs than in the main forest block. On the other hand, forest related bird species (FF & F) were much higher in the main forest than in the small CFRs. This is an indicator that the small CFRs are highly degraded compared to the main forest because forest dependant species are very sensitive to any forms of anthropogenic disturbance. It is also important to note that within the MFR, bird species richness was highest in the ecotourism regenerating forest and not the nature reserve that is considered an intact forest. This concurs with some of the findings from previous researchers (e.g.naidoo, 2004). Bird surveys in the five small CFRs were conducted in April which is a rainy season and when some of migratory bird species are still around. This might partly account for the high number of migratory bird species observed in the small CFRs as opposed to the main forest where no migratory species were recorded because surveys were conducted early June. Nonetheless, there was a higher proportion of forest dependant species in the main forest (Mabira CFR) than in all the small CFRs (Figure 4. ). Figure 4.: Propotion of bird species in the different habitat categories A total of 37 forest specialist species were recorded from the six forest reserves even after using two sampling methods. There are about 90 FF species in Uganda (Carswell et al., 2005) and 80 in the remaining lakeside forest, Mabira, (Dranzoa, 990) which is about 300 km 2, hence we recorded 4% of FF species known to exist in Mabira. This is a good representative of existing FF species in Mabira. The water birds were mainly recorded along water bodies (rivers, swamps or ponds). The non-forest birds recorded are due to the fact that some forests were surrounded by non-forested landscapes (farmlands) and some transects were near the forest edge. For instance, one transects in the main forest reserve traversed a grassland which is found within the forest. Hence most of the bird species recorded in this section were mainly savanna woodland species. 50

52 Table 4.2. List of species of birds recorded in each Forest Reserve Species Habitat guild IUCN Status Ecocentre Buwola trai Najjembe South Namusa Nsamya River Trail Kalagala Namakupa Namananga Namwanyi Nandagi African crowned Eagle Stephanoaetus coronatus FF LC African Dwarf Kingfisher Ispidina lecontei FF LC African emerald Cuckoo Chrysococcyx cupreus F LC African Fish Eagle Haliaeetus vocifer W LC African Harrier Hawk Polyboroides typus f LC African Open billed stock Anastomus lamelligerus W LC African Paradise-Flycatcher Terpsiphone viridis f LC African Pied Hornbill Tockus fasciatus F LC African Reed-Warbler Acrocephalus baeticatus M LC African Thrush Turdus pelios f LC African yellow White-eye Zosterops senegalensis f LC Ashy Flycatcher Muscicapa caerulescens F LC Augur Buzzard Buteo augur O LC Baglafecht Weaver Ploceus baglafecht f LC Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica O LC Black & white casqued Ceratogymna subcylindricus F LC Hornbill Black & white Mannikin Spermestes bicolor f LC Black bellied Seed-cracker Pyrenestes ostrinus F LC Black billed Turaco Tauraco schuetti FF LC Black Bishop Euplectes gierowii O LC Black crowned Waxbill Estrilda nonnula f LC Black headed Heron Ardea melanocephala W LC Black headed Weaver Ploceus melanocephalus O LC Black Kite Milvus migrans O LC

53 Species Habitat guild IUCN Status Ecocentre Buwola trai Najjembe South Namusa Nsamya River Trail Kalagala Namakupa Namananga Namwanyi Nandagi Black necked Weaver Ploceus nigricollis f LC Black shouldered Kite Elanus caeruleus O LC Black throated Apalis Apalis jacksoni FF LC Black throated Wattle eye Platysteira peltata F LC Blue breasted Kingfisher Halcyon malimbica F LC Blue shouldered Robin-chat Cossypha cyanocampter F LC Broad billed Roller Eurystomus glaucurus f LC Bronze Mannikin Lonchura cucullata f LC Brown Illadopsis Illadopsis fulvescens FF LC Brown throated Wattle-eye Platysteira cyanea f LC Buff spotted Woodpecker Campethera nivosa FF LC Buff throated Apalis Apalis rufogularis FF LC Cameroon sombre Greenbul Andropadus curvirostris FF LC Cardinal woodpecker Dendropicos fuscescens f LC Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis W LC Chestnut Wattle-eye Platysteira castanea FF LC Cinnamon chested Bee-eater Merops oreobates F R-RR Collared Sunbird Hedydipna collaris F LC Common Bulbul Pycnonotus barbatus f LC 0 0 Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus O LC Crested Guinefowl Guttera pucherani F LC Crowned hornbill Tockus alboterminatus f LC Diederik cuckoo Chrysococcyx caprius f LC Double toothed Barbet Lybius bidentatus O LC Dusky blue Flycatcher Muscicapa comitata F LC Dusky long tailed Cuckoo Cercococcyx mechowi FF LC Eurasian Reed-Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus M LC

54 Species Habitat guild IUCN Status Ecocentre Buwola trai Najjembe South Namusa Nsamya River Trail Kalagala Namakupa Namananga Namwanyi Nandagi Fan tailed Widowbird Euplectes axillaris O LC Fire crested Alethe Alethe castanea FF LC Forest Robin Stiphrornis erythrothorax FF LC 0 0 Garden Warbler Sylvia borin f LC Great blue Turaco Corythaeola cristata F LC Great Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo W LC Greater Blue-eared Glossychalybaeus Starling Lamprotornis O LC Greater Honeyguide Indicator indicator f LC Green headed Sunbird Cyanomitra verticalis F LC Green Hylia Hylia prasina F LC Green sunbird Anthreptes rectirostris FF LC Green tailed Bristlebill Bleda eximius FF R-NT Grey backed Cameroptera Camaroptera brachyura f LC 0 Grey crowned Crane Balearica regulorum W LC Grey headed Negro-finch Nigrita canicapillus F LC Grey Heron Ardea cinerea W LC Grey Parrot Psittacus erithacus FF R-NT Grey throated Barbet Gymnobucco bonaparte F LC Grey throated Flycatcher Myioparus griseigularis FF LC Hadada Ibis Bostrychia hagedash O LC Hairy breasted Barbet Tricholaema hirsuta F LC Hamerkop Scopus umbretta W LC Icterine Warbler Hippolais icterina M LC Klaas' Cuckoo Chrysococcyx klaas f LC Lead coloured Flycatcher Myioparus plumbeus f LC Lesser striped Swallow Cecropis abyssinica O LC

55 Species Habitat guild IUCN Status Ecocentre Buwola trai Najjembe South Namusa Nsamya River Trail Kalagala Namakupa Namananga Namwanyi Nandagi Little Green Sunbird Anthreptes seimundi F LC Little Greenbul Andropadus virens F LC Little swift Apus affinis O LC Little Weaver Ploceus luteolus O LC Lizard Buzzard Kaupifalco monogrammicus f LC Long-crested Eagle Lophaetus occipitalis f LC Nahan's francolin Ptilopachus nahani FF G-EN/G-VU Narina Trogon Apaloderma narina F LC Northern Black-Flycatcher Melaenornis edolioides O LC Olivaceous Warbler Hippolais pallida M LC Olive bellied Sunbird Cinnyris chloropygia F LC Olive green Cameroptera Camaroptera chloronota FF LC Olive Sunbird a Cyanomitra olivace FF LC Palmnut Vulture Gypohierax angolensis W LC Pin tailed Whydah Vidua macroura O LC Plain backed Pipit Anthus leucophrys O LC Purple banded Sunbird Cinnyris bifasciatus f LC Purple throated Cuckoo-shrike Campephaga quiscalina FF LC Pygmy Kingfisher Ispidina picta f LC Red bellied Paradise Flycatcher Terpsiphone rufiventer FF LC Red capped Robin-chat Cossypha natalensis F LC 0 0 Red cheeked Cordon-blue Uraeginthus bengalus O LC Red chested Cuckoo Cuculus solitarius F LC 0 0 Red faced Cisticola Cisticola erythrops O LC Red headed Blue-bill Spermophaga ruficapilla F LC Red tailed Bristlebill Bleda syndactylus FF LC Red tailed Greenbul Criniger calurus FF LC

56 Species Habitat guild IUCN Status Ecocentre Buwola trai Najjembe South Namusa Nsamya River Trail Kalagala Namakupa Namananga Namwanyi Nandagi Red-billed Firefinch Lagonosticta senegala O LC Red-chested Sunbird Cinnyris erythrocerca O R-RR Red-eyed Dove Streptopelia semitorquata f LC Ring-necked Dove Streptopelia capicola f LC Ross' Turaco Musophaga rossae F LC Rufous Flycatcher-Thrush Stizorhina fraseri FF LC Scaly breasted Illadopsis Illadopsis albipectus FF LC Senegal Coucal Centropus senegalensis O LC Shinning blue Kingfisher Alcedo quadribrachys FF LC Singing Cisticola Cisticola cantans O LC Slender billed Weaver Ploceus pelzelni f LC Snowy capped Robin-chat Cossypha niveicapilla F LC Sooty Boubou Laniarius leucorhynchus FF LC Speckled Mousebird Colius striatus O LC Speckled Tinkerbird Pogoniulus scolopaceus F LC Spectacled Weaver Ploceus ocularis f LC Splending glossy Starling Lamprotornis splendidus F LC Superb Sunbird Nectarinia superba F LC Tambourine Dove Turtur tympanistria F LC Tawny flanked Prinia Prinia subflava O LC Toro Olive Greenbul Phyllastrephus hypochloris FF R-VU/RR Velvet mantled Drongo Dicrurus modestus F LC Vieillot's Black Weaver Ploceus nigerrimus O LC Western black headed Oriole Oriolus brachyrhynchus F LC Western Nicator Nicator chloris F LC Whinchat Saxicola rubetra M LC White breasted Negrofinch Nigrita fusconotus F LC

57 Species Habitat guild IUCN Status Ecocentre Buwola trai Najjembe South Namusa Nsamya River Trail Kalagala Namakupa Namananga Namwanyi Nandagi White browed Coucal Centropus superciliosus O LC White browed Crombec Sylvietta leucophrys FF R-RR White browed Robin-Chat Cossypha heuglini f LC White headed Saw-wing Psalidoprocne albiceps f R-RR White rumped Swift Apus caffer O LC White spotted Flufftail Sarothrura pulchra F LC White throated Bee-eater Merops albicollis f LC White throated Greenbul Phyllastrephus albigularis FF LC 0 0 Willow Warbler Phylloscopus trochilus f LC Winding Cisticola Cisticola galactotes f LC Woodland Kingfisher Halcyon senegalensis O LC Yellow Bill Pogoniulus bilineatus F LC Yellow billed Barbet Trachyphonus purpuratus FF LC Yellow browed Cameroptera Camaroptera superciliaris FF LC Yellow crested Woodpecker Dendropicos xantholophus FF LC Yellow Longbill Macrosphenus flavicans FF LC Yellow rumped Tinkerbird Pogoniulus bilineatus F LC Yellow spotted Barbet Buccanodon duchaillui FF LC Yellow throated Greenbul Chlorocichla flavicollis f LC Yellow throated Tinkerbird Pogoniulus subsulphureus FF LC 0 Yellow whiskered Greenbul Andropadus latirostris F LC Yellow-throated Longclaw Macronyx croceus O LC Zitting Cisticola Cisticola juncidis O LC G-EN: Globally endangered, G-VU: Globally Vulnerable, R-VU: Regionally Vulnerable, R-NT: Regionally Near Threatened, R-RR: Regionally restricted 56

58 Despite the small area of the small CFRs and the long history of anthropogenic pressures on these five CFRs, they still have a level of importance for conservation of biodiversity at the species level as evidenced by a relatively good number of FF species recorded. 8 7 Namukupa Namananga Nandagi Height Kalagala Namwanyi Figure 4.2 Cluster diagram comparing the birds species composition of the five small CFRs Figure 4.2 plots a comparison of species composition for the five small forest reserves. Not surprisingly they share species but also have elements of the fauna different from one forest to another. The avian fauna in Namukupa CFR was mostly different from that of the other small CFRs while Kalagala and Namawanyi share the most number of species. Species of conservation concern Majority of the bird species recorded during the surveys are classified as Least Concern according to the IUCN criteria. However, seven of the species recorded are classified as threatened either at global or regional level according to the IUCN criteria (Table 4.3). 57

59 Table 4.3. Threatened species of birds recorded in MFR and the five small CFRs Name habitat preference Global/regional threat Nahan's Francolin Francolinus nahani FF G-EN, R-VU 0 Grey Parrot Psittacus erithacus FF R-NT Cinnamon-chested Bee-eater 0 Merops oreobates F R-RR White headed saw-wing Psalidoprocne albiceps F R-RR Toro Olive-Greenbul Phyllastrephus 0 hypochloris FF R-VU/RR White-browed Crombec Sylvietta 0 leucophrys FF R-RR Green tailed Bristlebill Bleda eximius R-NT The Mottle-throated Spinetail (Telacanthura ussheri) that is considered LC and Cassin's Spinetail (Neafrapus cassini) that is NT were not encountered during this study. These species are considered Data Deficient. Efforts are required to ascertain their current status. The records of these species show that threatened/vulnerable species occurred in each of the CFRs. This is a good indicator that the main forest and even the small CFRs are of great ecological importance to some of these endangered species that are normally sensitive to habitat modifications or may have large habitat requirements. The different CFRs have from two to four threatened species of birds, suggesting a moderate level of importance for the conservation of threatened species of birds in the face of alarming deforestation rates in the country CONCLUSION Bennun et al (996) and Carswell et al (2005) reported that Uganda had over 300 species of birds that are forest dependent (FF & F). Owing to the continued loss of forest cover, the conservation of such species is under a lot of pressure. The data suggest that small forests do support reasonable numbers of forest birds, although the numbers of interior (FF) species remain a small subset of those found in the main forest. The relatively high turnover of species across sites implies that a series of such forests could, collectively, hold a significant number of forest species. REFERENCES Bennun, L., Dranzoa, C., Pomeroy, D., 996. The Forest Birds of Kenya and Uganda. J. East Afr. Nat. Hist. 85, doi:0.2982/ (996)85[23:tfboka]2.0.co;2 Carswell, M., Pomeroy, D.E., Reynolds, J., Tushabe, H., 2005.The Bird Atlas of Uganda. British Ornithologists Union, Tring. Davenport T., Howard P. and Baltzer M. 996 Mabira Forest Reserve Biodiversity Report Dranzoa, C Survival of forest birds in formerly forested areas around Kampala (MSc. Thesis). Makerere University, Kampala. Mabira Kalagala Nandagi Namukupa Namananga Namwanyi 58

60 Howard, C.P. 99. Nature Conservation in Uganda s Tropical Forest Reserves.IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. Naidoo, R Species richness and community composition of songbirds in a tropical forestagricultural landscape. Anim. Conserv. 7, Nalwanga, D., Pomeroy, D., Vickery, J., Atkinson, P.W A comparison of two survey methods for assessing bird species richness and abundance in tropical farmlands. Bird Study 59, doi:0.080/ Stevenson, T., Fanshawe, J., Stevenson, T Birds of East Africa: Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Rwanda, and Burundi, Princeton field guides. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J. 59

61 CHAPTER FIVE 5.0. SMALL MAMMALS 5.. SUMMARY The small mammals were sampled using a combination of break back and Sherman traps. Altogether 66 rodents and shrews were captured (449 in Mabira CFR, 5 in Kalagala, 59 in Namananga, 5 in Namawanyi, 5 in Namukupa and 73 in Nandagi). These represent 22 species (5shrews and 7rodents). With an additional 9 species recorded earlier, these make the species richness of the Mabira ecosystem to 3 species. Three closed forest dependent species Deomys ferugineus, Malacomys longipes and Scutisorex somereni were recorded albeit in small numbers. The surprise in these records was capturing Deomys ferugineus in Namananga and Namakupa forests. These reserves have previously been encroached and opened up but are now regenerating. Species accumulation rates were plotted independently for each forest reserve, and neither of them was a asymptotic, indicating that further survey would result in new records. Surveys for bats were also conducted but these are considered very preliminary. In total 2 species of bats were captured with more species captured in Namananga, although historical records available show Mabira CFR to have an even higher species richness. A total of 22 medium to large sized mammal species were also recorded for the 6 resrves. Mabira CFR has the highest number of species compared to the rest that are much more degraded INTRODUCTION NatureUganda in 20 reported a total of 50 large and small mammal species for Mabira Forest Reserve. This been increased through additional research in the main Mabira CFR. Kityo et al. (2009), for example, reported a total of 6 species of bats including a new species of bat for Uganda only known from Mabira Forest. These were not previously reported in the NatureUganda (20). Waswa (206 unpublished MSc dissertation, Makerere University) found shrew, rodent and bat species that are all new for Mabira CFR. Together these suggest that the mammal fauna of the forest may be far from being completely documented. This report presents biodiversity data on butterflies, dragonflies, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals. Mabira CFR is important for the conservation of mammal species, as it contains a high proportion of forest-dependent species. These include Deomys ferrugineus and Scutisorex somereni both closed forest-dependent specialists that are highly sensitive indicators of forest disturbance. Of the five primate species reported for Mabira, the Grey Cheeked Mangabey ( Cercocebus albigena) was subsequently upgraded to an independent species, the Ugandan Crested Mangabey Lophocebus ugandae that we recognize for this report. L. ugandae is endemic to Uganda that makes Mabira CFR and the four other locations it is known to occur in, very critical for its long-term survival. The field exercises for this report concentrated on surveying the diversity, distribution and relative numeracy of the different species of mammals surviving in the forests. Small mammals can be safely used to reflect changes in community composition by human habitat modification, due to the fact that they animals are very rarely directly poisoned or hunted by humans so disturbance tends to be through indirect sources. The surveys for this report aimed at inventorying the mammal biodiversity of the different forest reserves and and to initiate a checklist of species for Nandagi, Namananga, Namukupa, Namwanyi CFRs as well as update the list for Mabira CFR. 60

62 The following taxa were assessed: - i. Rodents and shrews ii. Bats iii. Medium and large sized mammals Before these surveys were commissioned, no mammal surveys had been conducted in Nandagi, Namananga, Namukupa, and Namwanyi. Surveys had been conducted in the Kalagala area for the ESIA as part of the Bujagali Hydro Power Project. Mabira CFR on the other hand was a focus for surveys in the 990s that resulted into the Biodiversity report for the forest (see Davenport et al 996). In subsequent years, additional studies have been conducted on small mammals of Mabira by various researchers whose work is however unpublished but still accessed in the unpublished records. Owing to the immense pressures on the forests in the previous years, it may be safe to assume that l mammal fauna of these reserves has suffered from the intensive disturbances of habitats and modifications including deforestation, agriculture, timber harvesting, charcoal burning, grazing, and movement of livestock. 5.3 METHODS Field methods Survey points for small mammal work conducted in Mabira forest are shown in Figure 5.. The surveys were concentrated in Nagojje, Najembe and Lwankima simply because of accessibility. Results of additional surveys conducted along the route traversed through the forest by the Bujagali transmission line have been assembled and included to give a more comprehensive picture of distribution of mammal species in the forest. Figure 5.. Distribution of areas (triangles on map) where surveys for mammals have previously been conducted in Mabira CFR Data are presented for the six forest reserves ( Mabira, Namakupa, Nandagi, Namawanyi, Namananga and Kalagala Falls). The reserves lie in an area of heavy human presence and activity with the growing of sugarcane and tea being the major large-scale activities. Subsistence farming 6

63 and a wide variety of extractive resource use activities such as charcoal making also occur. These have major implications for the mammal diversity. The field methods were aimed at obtaining qualitative rather than quantitative data, with emphasis on species richness, rather than on population densities. The numbers of individuals captured are used here as a relative indices of abundance of species. Species that are very numerous will be captured more times than species that are not. A combination of trap types (Sherman and break back traps) was used. Each forest was surveyed with up to four trap lines each with 40 traps, with the trap lines separated by a distance of approximately 00 m to achieve a wide coverage. Traps were left in place for three consecutive nights before they were moved to a different survey location. Mist nets and acoustic techniques (with the SM2 bat detector) for recording presence and relative abundance of insectivorous bats) were used. A variety of bait types was used in order to catch the full range of rodent and shrew species, and traps were set in different habitat types and locations Specimen collection, identification and taxonomy Preliminary identification of the rodents and shrews was undertaken in the field, following the taxonomic nomenclature in Delany (975). Each specimen was identified, where possible, weighed (to the nearest gram), sexed, the state of the vagina or position of the testes noted, and the following measurements taken: head and body length, tail, hind foot, and ear length (to the nearest millimetre). All specimens have been retained at Makerere UniversityZoology Museum for further examination and reference. The detailed measurement data accompany the specimens in the herbarium but are not presented in this report Personnel, dates and areas sampled Robert Kityo headed the field team that included Betty Nalikka, Sadic Waswa and Solomon Sebuliba. 5.4 RODENTS AND SHREWS 5.4. General small mammal occurrence All together 2 species of bats and 2 of rodents and shrews were recorded. Table 5. summarizes the species richness and numbers of individuals captured (here interpreted as an index of relative abundance of species captured). The numbers of the individuals captured altogether suggest that Praomys jacksoni is the most abundant species in all forest reserves, with a supra-abundance in Nandagi CFR. Praomys jacksoni is a forest species that may also be recorded in dense woodlands. This suggests therefore that it may survive even in heavily degraded forest. Most of all the other species of rodents and shrews captured are of typically forest habitat affinity. The notable exceptions include Mastomys natalensis and Lemniscomys striatus. These are typically savanna species of which Mastomys natalensis was recorded in Kalagala and Namananga while Lemniscomys striatus was recorded in Kalagala CFR albeit in very small numbers. The records in Kalagala should not be very surprising given that rainforest cover is now completely lost. Namananga on the other hand has a relatively much dense cover of regenerating forest. The occurrence of this species in Namananga would suggest a modification of the forest cover habitat, now allowing non-forest small mammal species to range into the area. The very low numbers of this species, which is usually very numerous in savanna habitats, may suggest that the area was not suitable for its occurrence in large numbers. 62

64 Table5.: Relative frequency of small mammal species recorded in different forests Order Megachiroptera (Fruit bats) Microchiroptera (Insect bats) Insectivora Shrews Rodentia mice and rats Species Epomophorus labiatus Epomophorus wahlbergi Epomops franqueti Megaloglossus woermanni Rousettus angolensis Chaerephon pumilus Hipposideros caffer Nycteris thebaica Pipistrellus nanus Pipistrellus tenuipinis Rhinolophus alcyone Scotoecus hirundo Crocidura fuscomurina Crocidura hildegardae Crocidura olivieri Scutisorex somereni Crocidura sp Deomys ferrugineus Grammomys dolichurus Hybomys univitatus Kalagala Hylomyscus stella Lemniscomys striatus Lophuromys aquilus Lophuromys sikapusi Malacomys longipes Mastomys natalensis Mus bellus Mus Mahomet Mus setulosus Oenomys hypoxanthus Praomys jacksoni Praomys misonnei Rattus rattus Total rodent & shrew individuals Mabira Namananga Namawanyi Namukupa Nandagi Total captured Number of species of bats Number of spp. of rodents/ shrews

65 Mabira CFR had a different community composition compared to the other five CFRs (Figure 5.2). The difference is partly due to the larger overall numbers of individuals and species recorded for Mabira CFR. This is really the case since more survey effort was invested in Mabira CFR that is many times larger than the other five CFRs and has much more relatively intact forest. It is expected however that the other 5 CFRs should have a similar community composition to that of Mabira CFR. However perhaps due to the history of disturbance they have faced, the small reserves now represent only subsets of the community known for Mabira. Namawanyi had the poorest rodent and shrew community with only three species compared to 6 for Mabira. Namananga is comparatively richer with species recorded. In all cases, the numbers of individuals captured in the five forest reserves are small in comparison to those of Mabira. This again, is in part due to the greater survey effort used in Mabira, but there is no reason to believe that a greater survey effort might have produced as large numbers in the small reserves as recorded for Mabira. Human impacts and changes imparted on the forest cover have changed these to a great extent and therefore affected the community structure of the small mammals Mabir Nandag 0 Heigh Namanang Namawany Kalagal Namukup Figure 5.2 Cluster diagram comparing species richness for the six forest CFRs using rodents and shrews 64

66 Ecological characteristics Forest specialist species: A number of species of rodents are usually forest interior species and can therefore only be found in fairly intact forest. Such species can indicate the condition of the forest and hence the relative impact of human pressures on the habitats. Because of the location of the six Mabira Forest Reserves, it ispossible that they werepreviously contiguous and forming a single forest block and that therefore they should have a similar mammalian fauna. It has been noted elsewhere in this report that the smaller forest reserves now have a small subset of the fauna known for Mabira CFR. In addition, the following four species Deomys ferrugineus, Hylomyscus stella, Malacomys longipes and Praomys misonnei were captured in Mabira in fairly large numbers but not in the other forests or at worst in very low numbers in the other forests. These four species are forest interior specialists dependent on the presence on an intact forest cover and that would disappear in degraded forest. Praomys misonnei is a species only recently reported for Uganda (in Lecompte 2002), it is very similar to Praomys jacksoni from which it can only be identified in the field based on details of its palate. It is very likely that the biodiversity surveys reported in Davenport et al (996) also encountered this species but then wrongly identified it as Praomys jacksoni. Praomys misonnei has only been recorded in Mabira CFR. 5.5 BATS A total of 2 species of bats (Table 5.2) was recorded. This is most likely not a complete inventory of the bat fauna richness of the six forest reserves. The acoustics data for micro-chiropteran activity are not completely analyzed and are excluded from this report. Previous work (Kityo 2009) reported 9 species. Table 5.2: Bat species diversity previously reported for Mabira Central Forest Reserve Family Species Casinycteris argynnis Epomophorus labiatus Epomops franqueti Pteropodidae Megaloglossus woermanni Myonycteris torquata Rousettus angolensis Nycteridae Hiposideridae Rhinolophidae Verseprtilionidae Molosidae Nycteris argae Nycteris nana Hipposideros caffer Hipposideros Cyclops Hipposideros ruber Rhinolophus alcyone Kerivoula cuprosa Nycticeinops schliefenni Pipistrellus capensis Pipistrellus nanus Scotophilus nux Chaerophon pumila Mops major 65

67 This survey recorded two additional species of bats (Epomophorus wahlbergi and Pipistrellus tenuipinis) for Mabira CFR. An additional species Scotoecus hirundo is recorded for Namukupa and Namananga. Together these results suggest that the greater Mabira forest system will have at least 22 species. Threatened Species Five threatened species (Table 5.3) were recorded. An additional two species are indicated as Data Deficient. These are: Rhynchocyon cirnei (Chequered Elephant Shrew) that is recorded as Near Threatened on the IUCN redlist; the other is Saccolaimus peli (Pel's Pouched Bat) that is indicated as Least Concern on the IUCN redlisd. Table 5.3: Threatened Mammal Species Species Name Crocidura selina Common Name Iucn Global Status National Threat Status Endemic- Uganda Ugandan Forest Musk Shrew, Ugandan Lowland Shrew DD EN B2ab(iii) Endemic Casinycteris argynnis Short-palated Fruit Bat LC Hipposideros cyclops EN B+2ab(iii,iv) No Cyclops Leaf-nosed Bat, Cyclops Roundleaf Bat LC VU C No Phataginus tricuspis Tree Pangolin, White-bellied Pangolin VU VU A2d No Lophocebus ugandai Uganda Mangabey LC VU A2c Endemic 5.6 CONCLUSION The results suggest that the small forest reserves associated with Mabira CFR have much more depauperate fauna but that they are still important for the survival of some species. The five small forest reserves except Namananga have a small subset of the diversity in Mabira but several species easily hang on even in degraded forest or that they easily recolonize when the forest is restored. Because we have no baseline on the previous mammalian fauna of the five small forest reserves we are hard placed to say if the community structure we recorded is a recovery or not. REFERENCES Davenport T., Howard P. and Baltzer M. 996 Mabira Forest Reserve Biodiversity Report Isingoma J 206 (unpublished MSc dissertation) Response of amphibian communit ies to forest degradation in Mabira forest reserve Kityo R. M 2009 Bat communities in selected disjunct-forested areas of Uganda: implications for conservation Kityo, R.M., J.C. Kerbis Peterhans, M. Huhndorf and R. Hutterer 2009 New records of Bats (Mamma lia: Chiroptera) from central Africa. Bonner Zoologiche Monographien The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.Version < Downloaded on 5 August 206. Waswa S. B 206 (unpublished MSc dissertation) Assessment of small mammal communities in Mabira and Kibale forest reserves of Uganda. 66

68 CHAPTER SIX 6.0. BUTTERFLIES AND DRAGON FLIES 6. SUMMARY Butterflies of Mabira, Namukupa, Namananga, Nandagi, Namawanyi, Kalagala Forest reserves were inventoried using sweep nets. Sampling was conducted at 80 sites in Mabira Central Forest Reserve, 20 sites each in the small forest reserves. Standard baited butterfly traps were also used. All together 207 species of butterflies were recorded -4 species in Mabira, 64 in Namukupa, 63 in Namananga, 82 Nandagi, 45 in Namawanyi, and 54 in Kalagala. A reasonably high proportion of forest dependent species was found in all the forests although Mabira CFR had the largest number of such species. Kalagala and Namananga had the highest proportion of relatively more open environment species, which would symbolize the level of degradation of the forests. 6.2 INTRODUCTION Biodiversity studies in tropical forest systems are important for understanding patterns of species diversity and community structure. The increasing global habitat destruction (de Vries & Walla, 999) has made such studies vital. However, due to extra ordinary species richness and complexity of tropical forest ecosystems (de Vries, 997) very few studies have documented species distributions as would be required in time and space. Butterflies are probably the best taxonomic group for assessing and monitoring patterns of terrestrial arthropods diversity (Caldas & Robins, 2003). They have relatively widely studied biology and taxonomy with an estimated 90% species already studied (Midgley, 2002). They derive most of their nutritional and some non-nutritional resources from plants. Tropical butterflies occur in all habitats ranging from pristine to disturbed (Hammer at al, 2003). In the field they are probably the most visually accessible and easily quantifiable representatives of the invertebrate world (Foottit & Adler, 2009). Butterflies exhibit vertical stratification ( into canopy and understorey dwellers) as well as horizontall stratification (with regard to habitat complexity), de Vries (997). Stratification contributes to tropical diversity among butterflies. The spatial variation in vegetation structure and the butterflies response to different plant communities is probably the genesis of ecological characteristics, restrictions in range and endemism among butterflies. Davenport et al (996) have previously carried out the most comprehensive record of lepidopterans (butterlies -99 species and moths 97 species) for Mabira forest. Like is the case for other fauna, more recent studies have continued to survey the lepidopteran fauna of Mabira. The aim of this study was to describe butterfly species diversity and community richness in the Mabira Ecosystem forests. Butterflies were recorded from scattered forest reserves that were many years ago part of a single Mabira forest. This report provides data from these surveys. 6.3 METHODS 6.3. Sampling sites The study sampled 80 sites in Mabira Central Forest Reserve, 20 sites in each of the four management zones. The sites were chosen on the basis of their plant community structure evident on ground. Some 67

69 samples were also taken within the mixed gardens in the village enclaves. Also sampling was done in Bush lands where the indigenous forest cover was degraded or fallow areas abandoned for a long time or both. Definitely there is overlap in species between these habitats and degraded forest. The relatively intact forest was sampled as well Field methods Standard butterfly traps (35cm diameter with 25cm tubular net) baited with a mixture of mashed and rotting fruits of banana and pineapple (De Vries, 997; Hill et al., 200) were used to lure and capture butterflies. Twenty understorey and canopy traps were placed alternately to sample from two vertical levels of stratification. Canopy traps were placed between 0-5m above the ground level while understorey traps were placed.5-2 from the ground (Molleman et al., 2006). Traps were suspended on thin nylon ropes running over branches of trees to make them easy to lower and raise. The bait was placed on small plastic plates placed inside each trap. These were replenished with fresh bait each subsequent trapping day for five consecutive trapping days. Trap stations were established at 50m intervals and in different habitats. Species that do not usually get attracted to the traps were sampled using sweep nets. This was done by walking along the 2km long transects through the forest at a slow and even pace of ~km/h. Each Butterfly seen within a virtual 5 m observation cube projected ahead of the observer was recorded (Pellet, 2007) Identifications and Taxonomy Butterflies that could be identified from the field were released after taking a record of their capture and abundance from each trap. Others were collected as voucher specimens and carefully kept in paper envelopes and taken to Makerere University Museum at the department of Zoology for identification. Butterflies were identified to species level with the use of standard guides (Carder et al, 2004; Larsen, 99) Data analysis Species lists were generated from field identifications. For purposes of avoiding confusion and maintaining consistency with previous assessments, Acraeinae, Charaxinae, Danainae, Libytheinae, Nymphalinae, Riodininae and Satyrinae that have been promoted to family level (Davenport, 996) were retained as sub families was retained. Ecological characterization: Each butterfly was categorised into one of the ecological types according to Davenport et al (996) and Kronstad (2009). Forest ( F ) and lowland forest species ( FL ) were combined under forest dependant species ( F ). Other categories are: forest edge species ( f ), Open habitat species ( O ), migratory species ( M ), wide spread species ( W ), species of unknown habitat preference (U), and taxa that were not identified to species level ( U ). Forest dependants (F -species) are those butterfly species that occur only in closed canopy forest habitats. Forest non-dependant species (f-species) are butterflies that may be recorded from closed canopy habitats of the forest but are not dependent upon them. Non-forest butterfly species are those that are either characteristic of open savannah, semi-arid areas, grasslands (O) or swampy/wetland habitats (S). Species describe d in literarure as widespread were denoted with (W). Restricted Range species: Restricted range species are species found in 5 or fewer reserves (out of the 64) sampled under the biodiversity survey programme of 993 (Davenport et al., 996). Together with forest specialists, restricted range species are of great conservation value (Kronstad, 2009) thus analysis of these species in the sample was done. 68

70 Vertical stratification: This was based on field observations as well literature e.g. Fermon (2002). Butterflies were characterised as canopy or understorey species. Understorey species were those captured below 2m heights while Canopy species those captured in traps placed at least 5m high. 6.4 RESULTS Species Richness The numbers of species of butterflies recorded, range beween 45 and 4 (Table 6. ). In terms of families, Nymphalidae are the most diverse of the butterflies of Uganda (Table 6.2). The full list of species is presented in Appendix. Table 6.. Numbers of butterfly species recorded in Central Forest Reserves of the Mabira Ecosystem Mabira Kalagala Namakupa Namananga Namawanyi Nandagi Species Individuals Restricted Range Species Table 6.2. Number of butterfly species by Family in Forest reserves of the Mabira Ecosystem Family Mabira Kalagala Namakupa Namananga Namawanyi Nandagi Nymphalidae Hesperiidae Pieridae Lycaenidae Papilionidae (swallowtails) Species of Conservation Concern Up to 0 butterfly species encountered during the study and others obtained from literature, are included on the IUCN redlist for Mabira Forest (Table 6.3). An additional species Epitola ceraunia is indicated on the Ugandan Redlist as Near Endemic but data deficient and Unknown but presumed to occur in Mabira forest. Efforts should be made to search for this species. 69

71 Table 6.3: Threatened Butterfly Species recorded in Forest Reserves of the Mabira Ecosystem Species Name IUCN Global Status National Threat Status Caenides dacena NE EN B+2ab(ii,iii) NO Epitola catuna NE EN B2ab(iii) NO Tanuetheira timon NE EN B2ab(ii,iii,iv) NO Euryphura albimargo NE EN B2ab(ii,iii,iv) NO Acraea rogersi NE VU B+2ab(ii,iii,iv,v) NO Euryphura chalcis NE VU B2ab(ii,iii,iv) NO Neptis trigonophora NE VU B2ab(iii,iv) NO Pseudathyma plutonica LC VU B+2ab(ii,iii,iv) NO Belenois victoria NE VU B2ab(i,ii,iii,iv) NO Pseudopontia paradoxa NE VU D2 NO Endemic Uganda Based on literature, two Dragonfly species are redlisted for Mabira as Least Concern (Table 6.4). It was not possible to include this taxon in the surveys undertaken. Table 6.4: Threatened Dragonfly Species in Mabira Forest Reserve Species Name Common Name Iucn Global Status National Threat Status Endemic- Uganda Gynacantha nigeriensis Yellow-legged Duskhawker LC VU B2ab(iii) NO Malgassophlebia bispina LC VU B2ab(iii) NO Each of the reserves had a record of restricted range species. The restricted range species, by forest, are as follows: Namakupa: Amauris hecate (F) and Euphaedra rex (F) Namananga: Amauris hecate (F) and Acraea rogersi (F) Namawanyi: Amauris hecate (F). Kalagala: Dixeia orbona (W) and Amauris hecate (F) Ecological characterization The butterflies in the majority of reserves were dominated by forest specialists ( F ), followed by forest edge/bush dwellers ( f ) and then wide spread species ( W ). Swamp specialist ( S ) were generally few. All ecotypes were represented (Table 6.5). True understory butterflies recorded are given in Table 6.6. In Namakupa, the forest specialists ( F ) were followed by wide spread species ( W ) and then forest 70

72 edge/bush dwellers ( f ). The re were also species of unknown habitat preference. Namananga, Namawanyi, and Nandagi had generally similar patterns. Kalagala forest reserve was, however, dominated by species of wide spread occurrence ( W ) and followed by forest specialists ( F ). Despite the reserve s location on the banks of river Nile, species that prefer swamps (S) were represented by only one species just like those whose preferred habitat is not well known (U). Table 6.5. Proportionate distribution of butterfly species by their ecological characteristics in the six forest reserves Ecotype Mabira Nandagi Namananga Namukupa Namawanyi Kalagala No of species % No of species % No of species % No of species % No of species % No of species % F F M O S U W Notes: F Forest dependent. f Forest edge/woodland species, S Swamp species, M Migratory species, U Unknown habitat preference, W Widespread species, O Open habitat species Vertical Stratification A total of six species qualified as true canopy species (Table 6.6) and the majority of canopy species were Charaxes. There was some true understory species recorded (Table 6.6) Table 6.6. Relative numbers of true understorey butterflies recorded in three of the forest reserves Species Ecotype Namawanyi Nandagi Namananga Aterica galena F Bebearia cocalia f Bicyclus sandace F 2 Bicyclus vulgaris W Elymnias bamakoo F 3 Euphaedra medon F 2 5 Harma theobene F 2 3 Notes: Ecotype codes are defined below Appendix The true canopy species include Charaxes cynthia, Charaxes eupale, Charaxes Lucretius, Charaxes pleione, Charaxes zingha and one none Charaxes species Cymothoe caenis. Up to 2 Nymphalidae butterflies, qualified as typical understorey species. True understory butterflies include Aterica galena, Bebearia cocalia, Catuna crithea, Bicyclus sandace, Bicyclus sambulos, Bicyclus vulgaris, Euphaedra harpalyce, Euphaedra medon, Harma theobene, Gnophodes betsimena, Gnophodes chelys, and 7

73 Hypolimnas salmacis. Bicyclus vulgaris had the highest number of individuals (62) and Catuna crithea followed with 34 individuals. In Namakupa, one true canopy species Charaxes etheocles (F) that had one individual in the total sample was recorded. Three true understorey species Bebearia cocalia (f), Bicyclus vulgaris (W) and Euphaedra medon (F) were represented by 3,4 and 8 individuals in the sample. No true canopy species was registered from Namananga forest reserve while five true understorey species were recorded. In Nandagi, one individual of the true canopy species Charaxes etheocles was captured while five understorey butterflies were recorded. One of these Bicyclus vulgaris was encountered much more frequently than the rest although none can be said to have been very numerous. No true canopy species was recorded from Namawanyi forest reserve while five true understorey butterflies were recorded. One true understorey species Bicyclus vulgaris (W) with seven individuals in the sample and no true canopy species was recorded from Kalagala forest reserve CONCLUSION The results presented in this report for the smaller forest reserves associated with Mabira CFR, represent the first scientific documentation of butterfly data. In Mabira forest where only one family of butterflies (Nymphalidae) was recorded, a total of 4 species was recorded, which represents 57% of the (97 species) recorded by Davenport et al (996). The record is however still consistent with a rich butterfly diversity. For the species reported in Davenport et al (996) and that were not recorded, this could be an artefact of season or indeed the spatial context of our sampling strategy. On the basis of the effort we used it is apparent more species would be added to the list through further surveying. Consistently for all the forest reserves, we recorded more Nymphalids than other species from other families. Therefore, like is the case for Mabira, we can conclude these forests are also important for conservation of Nymphalids. Based on the species of restricted range or those of particular Conservation Concern occurring in the small er reserves, we emphasize the importance of the different forests for different species of butterflies. REFERENCES Caldas A, Robbins R K (2003) Modified Pollard transects for assessing tropical butterfly abundance and diversity, Biological Conservation0: 2 29 Carder N, Tindibona L, Twesigye C K (2004) Butterflies of Uganda: Afield to Butterflies and Silk Moths from the collections of the Society (2 nd Edn), The Uganda Butterfly Society, Kampala. Davenport T, Howard P, Baltzer M (996) Mabira Forest Biodiversity Report, Report No. 3. Forest Department, Kampala, Uganda De Vries P J (997) Species diversity in vertical, horizontal, and temporal dimensions of a fruit-feeding butterfly community in an Ecuadorian rainforest. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 62: De Vries P J, Walla T R (999) Species Diversity and Community Structure in Neotropical fruit-feeding butterflies, Biological journal of the Linnean society, 74: 5 Fermon V V (2002) The butterfly community of a managed West African rainforest: patterns of habitat specificity, diversity, stratification and movement, aus Aalst, Belgien 72

74 Foottit R G, Adler P H (2009) Insect Biodiversity, Science and SocietyA John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Publication, UK Hammer K, Hill J K, Benedict S, Mustaffa N, Sherratt N T, Maryati M, Chey V K (2003) Ecology of butterflies in natural and selectively logged forests of northern Borneo: the importance of habitat heterogeneity. Journal of Applied Ecology, 40: Hill J K, Hamer C, Tangah J, Dawood M (200) Ecology of tropical butterflies in rainforest gaps Oecologia 28: Kronstad T (2009).The value of forest matrix habitats for conservation: Butterfly distribution on a landuse gradient from mature forest to small-scale agriculture in Mabira Forest Reserve, Uganda. University of Bergen, Department of Biology Larsen T B (99).The Butterflies of Kenya: And their Natural History, Oxford University Press, New York Midgley G F, Hannah L, Miller D, Thuiller W, Booth A ( 2002) Developing regional and species-level assessments of climate change impacts on biodiversity in the Cape Floristic Region, Biological Conservation2: Molleman F (2006) Vertical and Temporal patterns of Biodiversity of fruit feeding butterflies, Biodivers conserve 4: 07-7 Pellet J (2007) Seasonal variation in detectability of butterflies surveyed with Pollard walks. J Insect Conserv :

75 Appendices Appendix Species of butterflies recorded in the different forests surveyed Fam Ecol Mab Namuk Naman Sub-family Species ily type ira upa anga Coeliades W forestan Coeliadinae Eurema W desjardinsi Acleros F HESPERIIDAE LYCAENIDAE Hesperiinae Pyrginae Lipteninae Polyommatin ae Theclinae Nand agi mackenii Borbo fatuellus W Borbo gemella W Caenides F Namaw anyi Kalag ala dacena Ceratrichia F mabirensis Metisella midas S Monza cretacea W Pardaleodes incerta F Parnara naso W Eagris lucetia F Eretis lugens W Sarangesa bouvieri F Spialia dromus W Spialia ploetzi F Pentila pauli f Pentila F tachyroides Anthene O amarah Anthene ligures F Anthene F schoutedeni Anthene sp Cacyreus W lingeus Lampides M boeticus Uranothauma W falkensteini Zzula hylax W Axiocerses O harpax Deudorix W 74

76 Fam ily NYMPHALIDAE Sub-family Acraeinae Charaxinae Species antalus Hypolycaena pachalica Ecol type O Mab ira 75 Namuk upa Naman anga Nand agi Namaw anyi Kalag ala Acraea acerata O Acraea aganice F Acraea alicia W Acraea S ancedada Acraea aubyni F Acraea aurivilli F Acraea egina W Acraea U elgonense Acraea epaea F Acraea eponina W Acraea grosvenori U Acraea jodutta F Acraea f leucographa Acraea lycoa F Acraea macaria F Acraea F macarista Acraea natalica W Acraea orina F Acraea peneleos F Acraea pharsalus f Acraea poggei F Acraea W pseudegina Acraea quirina U Acraea quirinalis F Acraea rogersi F Acraea servona F Acraea sp U Acraea uvui f Acraea viviana F Acraea zetes W Charaxes brutus F Charaxes candiope W

77 Fam ily Sub-family Danainae Labytheinae Nymphalinae Species Ecol type Mab ira Namuk upa Naman anga Nand agi Namaw anyi Kalag ala Charaxes Cynthia F Charaxes F etheocles Charaxes eupale F Charaxes fluvescens F Charaxes Lucretius F Charaxes F numenes Charaxes pleione F Charaxes pollux F Charaxes varanes F Charaxes zingha F Euxanthe F crossleyi Amauris albimaculata F Amauris hecate F Amauris niavius W Amauris sp U Amauris tartarea F Danaus chrysippus M Tirumala f formosa Abisara neavei F Labythea M labdaca Ariadne U albifascia Ariadne enotrea F Aterica galena F Bebearia chriemhilda F Bebearia cocalia f Bebearia dealbata F Bebearia sp F 76

78 Fam ily Sub-family Species Ecol Mab Namuk Naman Nand Namaw Kalag type ira upa anga agi anyi ala Byblia anvatara F Catuna crithea F Cyrestis camillus F Elymnias bamakoo F Elymnias F bammakoo Euphaedra eleus F Euphaedra harpalyce F Euphaedra medon F Euphaedra F paradoxa Euphaedra F preussi Euphaedra rex F Euphaedra sp U Eurephene F ribensis Eurytela dryope W Eurytela hiarbas W Harma F theobene Hypolimnas F anthedon Hypolimnas dinarcha F Hypolimnas M misippus Hypolimnas salmacis F Junonia chorimene O Junonia oenone W Junonia sophia W Junonia styga W Junonia terea F Junonia westermani F Neptidopsis f ophione 77

79 Fam ily Sub-family Species Ecol type Mab ira Namuk upa Naman anga Nand agi Namaw anyi Neptis conspicua F Neptis melicerta F Neptis metella F Neptis nemete F Neptis F Kalag ala nicomedes Neptis saclava W Neptis serena O Neptis trigonophora F Phalanta eurytis M Phalanta W phalantha Precis archesia O Pseudoneptis F bougandensis Salamis f parhassus Antanartia deleus F Ariadne albifascia U Ariadne enotrea F Cymothoe caenis F Cymothoe herminia F Cymothoe sangrias U Eurytela hiarbas F Lechnoptera anticlia F Neptidopsis ophione F Phalanta eurytis M Pseudacraea boisduvali F Pseudacraea sp U Pseudogynnis hegemone F Pseudoneptis bougandensis F Salamis cacti F 78

80 Fam ily Sub-family Satyrinae Species Ecol type Mab ira Salamis parhassus F Sallya boisduvali F Sallya garega M Sallya natelensis M Sallya occidentalium M Vanessula milca O Bicyclus auricrudus F fulgidus Namuk upa Naman anga Nand agi Namaw anyi Kalag ala Bicyclus buea F Bicyclus f campinus Bicyclus ena O Bicyclus F funebris Bicyclus golo F Bicyclus jefferyi f Bicyclus kenia F Bicyclus F mandanes Bicyclus F mesogena Bicyclus mollitia F Bicyclus safitza W Bicyclus F sambulos Bicyclus sandace F Bicyclus sebetus F Bicyclus smithii F Bicyclus sophrosyne F Bicyclus sp U Bicyclus uniformis U Bicyclus vulgaris W Gnophodes betsimena F Gnophodes chelys F 79

81 Fam ily PAPILIONIDAE PIERIDAE Sub-family Papilioninae Coliadinae Pierinae Species Ecol Mab Namuk Naman Nand Namaw Kalag type ira upa anga agi anyi ala Melanitis leda W Melanitis leda W Neocoenyra gregorii W Ypthima albida f Ypthima O antenatta Ypthima O asterope Ypthima baldus U Ypthimomorpha O itonia Ypyhima albida F Papilio W dardanus Papilio M demodocus Papilio F ophidicephalus Papilio phorcas F Papilio f zoroastress Catopsilia M florella Eurema U desjardinsi Eurema hecabe M Eurema hepale O Eurema F senegalensis Appias sabina F Belenois calypso F Belenois O solilucis Belenois f subeida Dixeia charina O Dixeia orbona W Dixeia spilleri F Leptosia F hybrida Leptosia nupta F Leptosia F wigginsi 80

82 Fam ily Sub-family Species Ecol type Mab ira Namuk upa Naman anga Nand agi Namaw anyi Kalag ala Mylothris F continua Mylothris F schumanni Nepheronia F argia Nepheronia F pharis Nepheronia sp Nepheronia f thalassina Total number of species Notes: F Forest dependent. f Forest edge/woodland species, S Swamp species, M Migratory species, U Unknown habitat preference, W Widespread species, O Open habitat species 8

83 CHAPTER SEVEN 7.0. AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES 7. SUMMARY Up to 42 species of amphibiansin 3 genera and 9 families were recorded in the Mabira ecosystem. All of them belong to the Order Anura. The family Hyperoliidae had the highest number of genera (3) and species (). The water-confined families of Dicroglossidae, Hemisotidae, Pyxicephalidae and Pipidae were represented by single species. A total of 32 reptile species belonging to 4 orders, 3 families and 23 genera were recorded. 7.2 INTRODUCTION Herpetofauna surveys provide information on habitat requirements and the environmental variables that control their diversity. Being a tropical rain forest, Mabira and its associated forest reserves provide a wide range of habitats that favor the existence of a huge diversity of Herpetofauna. A number of studies on floor-dwelling anurans and reptiles in the Old and New World tropics demonstrate that their species composition and abundance are influenced by a environmental factors, such as vegetation type (Allmon, 99), elevation (Fauth et al, 989), and seasonality (Vonesh, 200a). Human induced factors most especially those related to forest management influence Herpetile distributions (Vonesh, 200b). Declines in populations, including population crashes and mass localized extinctions, have been noted since the 980s from tropical rain forests all over the world (McCallum, 2007). These decline s are perceived as one of the most critical threats to global biodiversity, and several causes are involved, including disease, habitat destruction and modification, exploitation, pollution, pesticide use, introduced species, and increased ultraviolet-b radiation (Vonesh, 200a). However, many of the cause s of amphibian and reptile declines are still poorly understood, and the topic is currently a subject of much on-going research (McCallum, 2007). Herpetofauna could provide an early warning system signaling imbalances or degradation in the environment, an ultimate guide to Ecosystem monitoring. However, these organisms can be threatened if they are not prioritized in the management of the forest since they are prone to almost all human activities (Schmuck, 994). Relative to other vertebrate groups, amphibians and reptiles in East Africa have been poorly studied, and future opportunities may be limited by the threats facing East Africa s forests. The need for baseline herpetological research in tropical Africa has been pointed out by a number of authors (e.g., Lawson, 993; Drewes & Vindum, 997). These authors discussed the difficulty in conserving fauna on which we have so little information. The herpetofauna of the East African coastal areas have been reviewed recently by Howell (993), however, few studies have examined the herpetofauna of the Central African relict forests in East Africa since Loveridge (935). Such relicts include the Budongo Forest Reserve, Bwamba, Kibale, Bwindi, Mabira, and Mt. Elgon forests in Uganda. Of these forests, only Bwindi-Impenetrable Forest in southwestern Uganda has been inventoried. A NatureUganda (20) report has listed in total 5 amphibian and 23 reptile species for Mabira CFR that again as more current evidence suggests does not represent a comprehensive checklist of species. An unpublished Masters dissertation by Isingoma (206) has for example recorded up to five additional species of amphibians for Mabira. All the five are species that until now were considered Albertine Rift endemics. These findings further emphasize the importance of additional inventories. 82

84 Aims, objectives and rationale The aim of this survey was to determine the Herpetofauna composition of Mabira forest Reserve and its associated 6 forests, with a view of contributing to their conservation. The specific objectives of the study were to; i. Determine the diversity and distribution of amphibians within Mabira Central forest Reserve. ii. Determine the diversity and distribution of Reptiles within Mabira Central forest Reserve. iii. Establish the conservation status of the target taxa in accordance to IUCN Redlist of species. Ecological significance of the study This study provides knowledge on the diversity and distribution of Herpetiles in Mabira forest Reserve and its associated five smaller forests. This information is useful in assessing biodiversity status of this forest ecosystem. Also Mabira Forest Reserve is subjected to a multitude of management practices that could be detrimental to the herpetofauna. Such practices include; the application of chemicals from surrounding plantations especially tea and sugarcanes, charcoal making and logging. Amphibians are regarded as good ecological indicators. Amphibians are excellent bio-indicators of broader ecosystem health because of their intermediate position in food webs, their permeable skins, and their typically biphasic life (aquatic larvae and terrestrial adults). Beginning in the early 980s, biologists began to realize that amphibians such as frogs are extremely sensitive to pollution and other environmental stresses. Declines in amphibian numbers and increases in the number of deformed bodies led scientists to investigate the role of habitat loss, increased ultraviolet radiation and chemical pollution in these important changes. Pollutants have varying effects on frogs. Some alter the central nervous system while others cause a disruption in the production and secretion of hormones. Besides their high degree of sensitivity, either during tadpole stage or adults, which makes them, respond to very slight changes in the environment (Hayes, 2002), the following factors make amphibians ultimate ecological indicators: iv. Their population parameters like abundance can easily be assessed v. Amphibians are very easy to identify due to well established taxonomical knowledge vi. They occur over wide geographical areas, knowledge can be globally shared vii. Their life cycle is well documented (Hayes 2002) Richness of reptile species (rainforest-dependent and mixed-habitat species), varied significantly between site types (Kanowski, et al, 2006). This makes reptiles significant indicator taxa of habitat change. 7.3 METHODS 7.3. Field methods Several methods are applied in these studies and their choice is determined by variety of factors, especially the nature of the habitat and behavior of the target species. However, their effectiveness also depends much on the weather conditions and the time of the day as most success is registered during the nights (at dusk) and early mornings (at dawn). Terrestrial Sampling methods used 83

85 The methods applied in the terrestrials included: Pitfall traps with a drift fence, the Visual Encounter Surveys (VES) and Advertisement calls. Pitfall traps and drift fence This method involved making pits to interrupt the movement of target organisms that got trapped. This method was preferred because amphibians are low jumpers, and most reptiles are ground dwellers. However it requires a lot of investment in terms of time and materials (Lunney & Ayres, 20). Visual Encounter Survey (VES) Observers walked through a designated area for a prescribed duration, visually searching (in a systematic way, e.g. along transects), for herpetiles. The number of individuals encountered were noted along with time elapsed during the survey. This method involved a searching the ground in the leaf litter. It was done during the late hours with the aid of the flashlights. This was the most effective method since it coincides with herpetiles most active period of the day. Advertisement calls This was used specifically during amphibian identification. Within the amphibian fauna, each species has a unique call. Some species have adapted to calling at specific hours of the day to avoid competition that comes out of noise of cluster species. With the advertisement call method of assessment, calls were identified in the field while others were recorded for future reference. 7.4 RESULTS 7.4. Amphibian species diversity A total of 42 amphibian species belonging to 3 genera and 9 families was recorded. All recorded species belonged to the Order Anura of class Amphibia. The family Hyperoliidae had the highest number of genera recorded (Table 7.). The families Ranidae and Arthroleptidae followed this. The waterconfined families of Dicroglossidae, Hemisotidae, Pyxicephalidae and Pipidae were represented by single species. Table 7. Amphibian species richness by families and genera for the Mabira ecosystem Family Number of genera Number of species Dicroglossidae Hemisotidae Pyxicephalidae Pipidae 3 Phrynobatrachidea 3 Bufonidae 4 Arthroleptidae 2 7 Ranidae 2 7 Hyperoliidae 3 Total 3 38 All species recorded were checked against the IUCN list of threatened species, and all are listed as least concern or a few have not been assessed. 84

86 There were statistically significant (Global R ANOSIM = -, p= 0.00) variations in amphibian species composition among the 6 forests sampled, though pairwise comparison of all forests suggests no significant difference (Glo bal R ANOSIM = -, p= 0.5). However; Mabira had the highest species diversity, followed by Namakupa and Nandagi (Figure 7.) Shanon indices Kalagala Namawanyi Namananga Nandagi Namukupa Mabira Central forest reserves Figure 7.Comparisons of Shannon indices for amphibian species richness in the six CFRs Not surprisingly, Kalagala CFR had the lowest and Mabira the highest species diversity. Namukupa CFR is only separated from Mabira CFR by a road, which therefore means that in principal they are the same ecosystem and therefore will share a large number of species. The individual forest level species richness ranged from 20 to 33, Table 7.2. Based on these results, Mabira CFR has more species than the other 5 CFRs although its species richness compared fairly well with that of Nandagi and Namukupa CFRs. Because amphibians have a very temporal pattern of activity, it is very possible that species could be missed and would therefore the complete inventory list would benefit from much longer-term. 85

87 Table 7.2 Species of amphibians recorded in the different CFRs Family Species IUCN status Kalagala Namakupa Namananga Nandagi Namawanyi Mabira Arthroleptis sp 0 0 Arthroleptis sp Arthroleptis sp Arthroleptidae Arthroleptis stenodactylus LC 0 Leptopelis bocage LC Leptopelis christyi Leptopelis kivuensis LC 0 0 Amietophrynus gutturalis LC 0 0 Bufonidae Amietophrynus maculatus LC Amietophrynus regularis LC 0 Amietophrynus vittatus LC 0 0 Dicroglossidae Hoplobatrachus occipitalis LC Hemisotidae Hemisus sp Afrixalus cf laevis 0 0 Afrixalus fulvovittatus LC Afrixalus langi LC Afrixalus osorioi LC 0 0 Hyperolius acuticeps LC Hyperolius cf frontalis Hyperolius cinnamomeoventris LC Hyperoliidae Hyperolius kivuensis Hyperolius kivuensis LC 0 0 Hyperolius senegalensis Hyperolius sp 0 Hyperolius sp 2 0 Hyperolius sp Hyperolius viridiflavus LC Kassina senegallensis LC

88 Family Species IUCN status Kalagala Namakupa Namananga Nandagi Namawanyi Mabira Phrynobatrachus auritus Phrynobatrachidea Phrynobatrachus mababiensis LC 0 Phrynobatrachus natalensis LC 0 0 Xenopus muelleri LC 0 0 Pipidae Xenopus victorianus LC Xenopus sp LC Pyxicephalidae Amietia angolensis Hylarana albolabris LC Hylarana galamensis LC Ptychadena anchietae LC 0 Ranidae Ptychadena chrysogaster LC 0 Ptychadena mascareniensis LC Ptychadena oxyrhynchus LC Ptychadena porosissima LC Total numbers of species A few species in Table 7.2 remain incompletely determined, however their taxonomy is continuing to be worked upon to establish their exact identity. 87

89 Height Kalagala Namawanyi 3.5 Mabira 3.0 Namananga Namakupa Nandagi Figure 7.2 Dendrogram comparing the community composition of amphibians in the six CFRs Kalagala and Namawanyi CFRs have a relatively similar amphibian community that is a little different from that of the four other forest reserves (Figure 7.2). The amphibian community structure of Nandagi, Namukupa and Namananga also closely resembling that of Mabira CFR, each of these forests holds different subsets of species that are found in Mabira CFR. In Kalagala, a fairly high diversity of amphibian species (Table 7.3) was recorded but mostly within the riverside vegetation. Most of the forest was in previous years heavily encroached and converted to farmlands. Deforestation, as reported elsewhere, alters amphibian species assemblages and reduces species diversity (Jansen & Healey, 2003). Namukupa CFR is fringed by papyrus-wetland that creates a favourable micro-envirnment for the amphibian fauna. 88

90 Table 7.3. Numbers of butterfly species recorded in Central Forest Reserves of the Mabira Ecosystem Mabira Kalagala Namakupa Namananga Namawanyi Nandagi Species Genera Families Shannon Diversity H Namananga CFR is a very much-degraded forest and like the other CFRs, experiences human pressures. The forest was not as rich as the others. Most of Nandagi CFR is converted for plantation forestry. At the time of conducting these surveys it was evident that parts of the replanted forests were helping recovery of the forest cover. Hence, Nandagi Forest is relatively less degraded. Namawanyi forest has relatively low diversity attributed to human impacts on the forest quality (e.g. frequent and illegal charcoal burning and deforestation). Mabira CFR with the highest amphibian diversity is a much larger forest and may therefore present many more opportunities for species of animals to occur. Twelve species of the amphibians recorded were found in one or two of the survey forests while the rest were found in 3 or more of the CFRs. Ten of the species were widely occurring and were recorded in all six CFRs. Some of the species are shown in Figure

91 Figure 7.3: Pictures of some of the amphibian species that were encountered in the Mabira ecosystem Ptychadena anchietae Hyperolius osorioi Hyperolius sp. Hyperolius cinnamomeoventris Afrixalus fulvovittatus Hylarana albolabris Hyperolius langi Phrynobatrachus auritus Amietophrynus gutturalis Hyperolius sp. Hylarana galamensis Amietophrynus regularis 90

92 Amietophrynus maculatus Amietophrynus vittatus Phrynobatrachus mababiensis Arthroleptis sp. Ptychadena mascareniensis Ptychadena chrysogaster Phrynobatrachus natalensis Ptychadena porosissima Arthroleptis sp. 2 Xenopus muelleri Hyperolius viridiflavus Afrixalus fulvovittatus 9

93 7.4.2 Reptile species diversity A total of 32 reptiles species belonging to 4 orders, 3 families and 23 genera were recorded altogether from the area surveyed in the six CFRs of the Mabira ecosystem. In total sampled sites of Mabira Forest Ecosystem (Table 7.4 and 7.5). The Order Sauria had the highest number of families recorded (Table 7.4). According to Harold (992), most lizards have well-developed limbs; the head is normally held high off the ground, and they are agile predators. This increases their colonization success unlike the limbless Serpentes (Savage 992). With its family Scincidae having the highest number of species; according to (Gerlach, 2005) many Scincidae species are generalists with a wide ecological tolerance, although there are several more specialized species. The other two orders Chelonii and Crocodylia did not have as many species as suaria and serpents. Table 7.4 summarizes the distribution of species of the Mabira ecosystem in the genera and families recorded. The majority of the species recorded are according to the IUCN Red list of threatened species considered as not evaluated (NE). This reference to a species is usually because there is no sufficient ecological data on the species for it to be meaningfully evaluated. Table 7.4 Reptile species richness for different Orders and Families recorded Order Family Number of species SAURIA Agamidae 2 Gekkonidae 3 3 Lacertidae 4 Scincidae 6 5 Varanidae 6 Chamaeleonidae 2 CROCODYLIA 7 Crocodylidae CHELONII 8 Pelomedusidae 2 9 Testudinidae SERPENTES 0 Viperidae 3 Typhlopidae 2 Colubridae 0 3 Elapidae Total 33 Table 7.5 lists all reptile species recorded in the six CFRs with an indication of the IUCN conservation status. The p in the column signifies presence of a record while a blank is for no record. It may well be that additional species could be found for each of the CFRs. The data presented here therefore represents a baseline as no previous studies have been found to form a basis for comparisons. Several species have therefore been recorded in one or two of the forest reserves while many were found to be widely occurring. At the moment we are hard pressed to conclude that any of the species is restricted to one or the other of the CFRs. Crocodiles which are very linked with a water body may be restricted in or along the river Nile and therefore Kalagala CFR, but they can extend their range into other water course such as those through Mabira and therefore it maybe just a matter of time before they are recorded there. 92

94 Table 7.5 Distribution reptiles species recorded in the different forest reserves Order Family Species IUCN Namananga Namawanyi Mabira Namakupa Nandagi Kalagala Chelonii Pelomedusid ae Testudinidae Pelomedusa subrufa Marsh terrapin NE p p p p Pelusios williamsi William's Hinged Terrapin NE p D Kinixys erosa Serrated Hinge-back Tortoise D p Crocodylia Sauria Serpentes Crocodylidae Crocodylus niloticus Nile Crocodile NE p Agamidae Acanthocercus atricollis Common Tree Agama LC p P p p p p Chamaeleon idae Gekkonidae Chamaeleo gracilis Gracile Chameleon NE p p Rhampholeon boulengeri Boulengeri Pygmy NE p Chameleon p Hemidactylus brookii Brook's House Gecko NE p P p p p p Hemidactylus mabouia Tropical House Gecko NE p P p p p p Lygodactylus gutturalis Chevron-throated Dwarf NE p Gecko p p p p Lacertidae Adolfus africanus Multi-scaled forest Lizard NE P p Scincidae Lygosoma fernandi Fire skink NE p p p Trachylepis maculilabris Speckled Lipped Skink LC p P p p p p Trachylepis megalura LC p p Trachylepis quinquetaeniata Rainbow Skink NE p Trachylepis striata Common Striped Skink LC p P p p p p Trachylepis varia Variable Skink LC p P p p p p Varanidae Varanus niloticus Nile Monitor LC P p p Colubridae Boiga blandingii Blanding's Tree snake NE p Colubridae Grayia smythii Smyth's Water Snake NE p p Colubridae Hapsidophrys smaragdina Emerald Snake NE p Colubridae Lampropis fuliginosus Brown House Snake NE p P p p p p Colubridae Philothamnus bequaerti Uganda Green Snake NE p P p p p p Colubridae Philothamnus nitidus Brilliant Green-snake NE p p p p Colubridae Philothamnus semivariegatus Spotted Bush Snake NE p p Colubridae Psammophis sp. NE p Colubridae Psammorphis mossambicus Olive sand snake NE p p p Elapidae Naja melanoleuca Forest Cobra NE p P p p p p Typhlopidae Typhlops sp. NE p Viperidae Atheris nitschei Great Lakes Bush-viper NE p P p p p p Viperidae Bitis arietans Puff Adder NE p p p 93

95 Order Family Species IUCN Namananga Namawanyi Mabira Namakupa Nandagi Kalagala VIPERIDAE Bitis sp. NE P Total numbers of species Reptile diversity within the sampled sites There was no statistically significant (Global R ANOSIM = -, p= 0.0) differences in Reptile species composition among the 6 forests, However, Kalagala had the highest species diversity (Figure 7.4), that may be attributed to the variety of exposed habitat types including Rocky outcrops, River Nile, Papyrus wetlands, and Farmlands in which it is easier to find reptiles than in closed forest. However the species richness recorde may be an under represention due to habitat modification experienced already in this CFR as is the case with the other small CFRs that form part of the wider Mabira ecosystem. Reptiles have relatively limited dispersal abilities making them susceptible to the effects of habitat fragmentation. They cannot cross-large expanses of unsuitable terrain to move from one patch of habitat to another favourable, but distant, site (Leuteritz et al, 2005). Shanon indices Namukupa Namananga Namawanyi Mabira Nandagi Kalagala Central forest reserves Figure 7.4. Comparisons of Shannon indices for Reptile species richness in the six Central Forest Reserves Mabira, Namananga and Nandagi have a more similar fauna than the other 3 CFRs that also share a large number of species amongst themselves (Figure 7.5). The richest CFR was Kalagala while the CFR with the least number of species was Namawanyi.A total of 24 reptile species belonging to 0 families and 8 genera were recorded for the Kalagala CFR. 94

96 Mabira and Nandagi had the second highest diversity indices, the former although impacted upon by humans, still has a reasonable forest cover and Nandagi CFR has a section of relatively good cover. According to Vitt et al. (998), disturbances that maintain the structural integrity of the habitat may favour species that benefit from lower-intensity disturbances like the forest ecosystem habitats that had a canopy and significant tree structure Kalagala Nandagi Height Namawanyi Namakupa 0 Namananga Mabira Figure 7.5. Cluster diagram to compare reptile species richness in the six CFRs We recorded a toal of 5 species of reptiles in Namakupa CFR that also returned a low diversity ( H = 2.565). Like most every other of the small CFRs, this forest continues to face anthropogenic pressures including Illegal charcoal burning, logging, farming and cattle grazing. According to Mushinsky (985), habitat disturbances have the potential to affect reptile species in a variety of manners. High intensity disturbances initially tend to favour reptile species that require characteristics of open, early successional habitats (Greenberg, 200) and leads to loss of the vulnerable ones. Namananga CFR is extensively degraded through anthropogenic activities especially charcoal burning leading to regeneration of invasive floral species. The degradation is associated with a reduction in fauna diversity within. This CFR had one of lowest reptile diversity amongst the 6 sampled sites (Shannon W index = 2.565) but a total of only 8 reptiles species were recorded (Table 7.4). 95

97 Despite having large parts of Nandagi CFR under plantation forestry, we a firly high shanon diversity index for reptiles ( H =2.89). A total of 8 reptile species (Table 7.4) was also recorded in this forest, belonging to 3 Orders, 9 families and 4 genera. Namawanyi CFR is a highly degraded forest due to frequent charcoal burning and and other human activities that lead to forest cover loss. A total of 3 reptile species, belonging to 2 Orders (Sauria and Serpentes), 8 Families and 9 genera were recorded. Mabira CFR faces similar anthropogenic pressures like the other 5 CFRs, however it is larger in extent and therefore we have not surveyed it satisfactorily. It is therefore likely that more species remain to be discovered for this reserve. A total of 8 species belonging to 3 Orders, 8 families and 2 genera was recorded for this reserve a figure that we consider to be on the lower side given its extent. In terms of the conservation status, one Data Deficient Reptile Species (Dipsadoboa weileri - Blacktailed Tree Snake was recorded. On the IUCN Redlist, its status is indicated as Near Threatened (NE), but on the National Status is Data Deficient. 96

98 Figure 7.6: Some of the Reptile species that were encountered Lygosoma fernandi Hapsidophrys smaragdina Naja melanoleuca Philothamnus nitidus Psammophis mossambicus Kinixys erosa 97

99 7.5. CONCLUSION The data obtained on theherpetiles in the forests of the Mabira Ecosystem shows that the forests are extremely important for the survival of several species. Whereas the main block (Mabira CFR) is important, the smaller reserves are equally important. Efforts should be made to improve their management and halt further degradation. REFERENCES Allmon W.D. 99. A plot study of forest floor litter frogs, Central Amazon, Brazil, Journal of Tropical Ecology 7: Bertollo L. A. Moreira-Filho, O. & Fontes, M. S. 997, Karyotypic diversity and distribution in Hoplias malabaricus (Pisces, Erythrinidae): Cytotypes with 2n = 40 chromosomes. Brazilian Journal of Genetics, 20: Brooks T. M., Mittermeier C. G, Mittermeier, Konstant P, Flick, J. Pilgram, S. Olfield, G. Magin, & Hilton- Taylor C Habitat loss and extinction in the hotspots of biodiversity. Conservation Biology Byaruhanga A., Kasoma P. M. B., Pomeroy D. E. 200 Important bird areas in Uganda Nature Uganda, the East African Natural History Society Carswell M., Pomeroy D., Reynolds J. & Tushabe H., The Bird Atlas of Uganda.Oxford: British Ornithologists' Club & British Ornithologists' Union. Davenport T., Howard P. and Baltzer M. (Eds) 996 Mabira Forest Reserve Biodiversity Report.Forest Department Uganda Dodd, C. K., Jr., and L. L. Smith Habitat destruction and alteration: Amphibian conservation. R. D. Semlitsch, editor. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C Drewes, R. C. and J. V. Vindum Amphibians and reptiles of Bwindi-Impenetrable National Park. Unpublished report to the Uganda Wildlife Authority. Edgar, P., Foster, J. & Baker, J Reptile Habitat Management Handbook, Amphibian and Reptile Conservation, Bournemouth. Farr & Daniel Indicator Species in Encyclopedia of Environmetrics (eds. A H El-Sharaawi and W W Piegorsch), John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Fauth, J. E. et al Elevational patterns of species richness, evenness, and abundance of the Costa Rican leaf litter herpetofauna. Biotropica 2: Greenberg, C.H Response of reptile and amphibian communities to canopy gaps created by wind disturbance in the southern Appalachians, Forest Ecology Management 48: Harold G. C. 992 General Description and Definition Of The Squamata Hayes, T., Collins, A., Lee, M., Mendoza, M., Noriega, N., Stuart, A. A. and Vonk, A Hermaphroditic, demasculinized frogs after exposure to the herbicide atrazine at low ecologically relevant doses. Proceedings of Natural Academic Science: USA99, Howell.993. Reptiles, Amphibians and Juvenile structure: National Geographical Society, Washington D.C ISBN Jansen, A. & Healey, M Frog communities and wetland condition: relationships with grazing by domestic livestock along an Australian floodplain river. Biological Conservation 09: Kanowski, J., Reis, T., Catterall, C.P. & Piper, S Factors affecting the use of reforested sites by reptiles in cleared rainforest landscapes in tropical and subtropical Australia. Restoration Ecology 4, Kityo R. M Bat Communities in some disjunct areas of central and western Uganda: Implications for the conservation. PhD Thesis Makerere University 98

100 Landres P. B., Verner J. & Thomas J. W Ecological uses of vertebrate indicator species: a critique. Conservation Biology. 2, Lawson, D. P The reptiles and amphibians of the Koup National Park Project, Cameroon. Herpetological Natural History : Lecompte É., Granjon L., Kerbis J. P. and Denys C.2002 Cytochrome b-based phylogeny of the Praomys group (Rodentia, Murinae): A new African radiation?c.r.biologies325: Leuteritz, T.E.J., Lamb T., Limberaza J.C Distribution, status, and conservation of radiated tortoises (Geochelone radiata) in Madagascar. Biological Conservation 24: Loveridge, A Scientific results of an expedition to rain forest regions in Eastern Africa.. New reptiles and amphibians from East Africa. Zoology: Harvard 79: - 9. Lunney, D., Curtin, A.L., Ayers, D., Cogger, H.G., Dickman, C.R., Maitz, W., Law, B. & Fisher, D. 2000, 'The threatened and non-threatened native vertebrate fauna of New South Wales: status and ecological attributes', Environmental and Heritage Monograph Series, No. 4., pp. 32, NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Hurstville McCallum, M. L., and J. L. McCallum Publication trends of natural history and field studies in herpetology. Herpetological Conservation and Biology :62 67 Mushinsky, H.R, 985. Fire and the Florida Sandhill herpetofaunal community with special attention to responses of Cnemidophorus sexlineatus, Herpetologica, 4: Noss & Reed "Indicators for monitoring biodiversity. A hierarchical approach"conservation Biology 4 (4): Schmuck, R., W. Geise, and K. E. Linsenmair.994.Life cycle strategies and physiological adjustments of Reedfrog tadpoles. Journal of Physiology: A 70: Vitt, L. J., Avila-Pires, T.C.S, Caldwell, J.P., Oliveira, V.R.L. 998 The impact of individual tree harvesting on thermal environments of lizards in Amazonian rain forests, Conservation Biology 2 (3): Vonesh, J. R. 200a. Patterns of richness and abundance in a tropical African leaf-litter herpetofauna. Biotropica, 33, Vonesh, J. R. 200b. Natural history and biogeography of the amphibians and reptiles of Kibale National Park, Uganda. Contemporary Herpetology. Whitmore, T. C Tropical forest disturbance, disappearance, and species loss. Pages 3-2 in W. F. Laurance and R. O. Bierregaard, editors. Tropical forest remnants: ecology, management, and conservation of fragmented communities. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois. 99

101 CHAPTER EIGHT 8.0. WATER QUALITY AND BENTHIC MACRO-INVERTEBRATES 8. SUMMARY In terms of water quality of boreholes within and around Mabira Forest Reserve, the ph is relatively lower than the WHO required limits for drinking water. All the other parameters are within the limits for drinking water. In the rivers, the ph of all the sample sites was near neutral except, Mutumbwe as the river flows out of the sugarcane, and Musambya (as it flows into and out of the Sugarcane plantation). Relatively high values of EC, TDS, TSS and TP were observed in Musambya (under Sugarcane plantation), Musamya (under rice cultivation), Mutumbwe (under sugarcane) and Sezibwa (under Tea plantation). Up to 9 benthos families were recorded with the Chironomidae as the most abundant. The findings there demonstrate the impacts of the largescale plantation activities on water quality. 8.2 INTRODUCTION The objective of water quality assessment is to justify the ecosystem functions and services in terms of water provisioning from the reserves; to track the extent of pollution of water resources from activities inside and outside the reserves;; and to track changes in river flows. The Mabira ecosystem is an important water catchment providing several ecosystem functions and services to aquatic biota and local communities living around the reserves. Water quality can change frequently over time (years and seasons), necessitating frequent, repeated measurements to adequately characterize variations in quality. For the Mabira catchment where water quality will be assessed after a fairly long period, a monitoring framework is required to be implemented at specific sites within and around reserves. Temperature and conductivity are true physical properties of water bodies, whereas OD and ph are concentrations, and turbidity is an expression of the optical properties of water (ASTM International, 2003). For the purposes of this report, all of these properties or constituents are analysed from the samples collected from the Mabira catchment. Benthic macro-invertebrates can be used as bioindicators of watershed condition and water quality in streams and rivers. This is because various taxa have varying tolerances to different types of disturbances. Various variables such as number of taxa and their relative abundances can be used as indicators of water quality. Aims and rationale The Mabira Forest Reserve has rivers flowing through it and it is therefore a major water catchment. In order to ensure sufficient flow of water of good quality for the benefit of riparian communities it is necessary to ascertain the water quality of the various rivers and streams. In addition, Mabira Forest Ecosystem is habitat to diverse range of flora and fauna s. It is important to ensure that Mabira Forest Reserve is managed in such a way that it continues to perform its water catchment and ecological functions. The data collected during this assignement will be useful as baseline to monitor pollution of water resources in and around the Mabira ecosystem. 00

102 8.3. METHODS Field methods for water quality assessment Water quality parameters were determined in surface water within and outside Mabira Forest Reserve (Fig. 8.). Physical chemical parameters determined included (TN, TP, PO3, NO3, and NH4, ph, DO, turbidity, temperature, electrical conductivity, total dissolve sediment and total suspended solids). These parameters were measured twice in the May 206. Figure 8.. Water quality sampling sites within and outside Mabira Forest Reserve A total of 24 water samples were collected and analysed at Makerere University. In addition water quality information was collected from National Water and Sewage Corporation (NWSC) located in Kayunga Assessment Methodsfor Aquatic Benthic Macroinvertebrates A 00-meter assessment section containing a mixture of habitats (fast and slow riffle/runs, deep and shallow riffle/runs, shaded and exposed riffle/runs) was established as a sampling site along the river and all benthic macroinvertebrate samples was done within the designated reach. A rectangular Dip net was used collect the benthos. The net was positioned on the stream bottom so as to eliminate gaps under the frame with the net opening upstream. The net was held securely while kicking the substrate vigorously for 30 seconds in an area of approximately 0.25 m 2. The bottom substrate was destabilized so that dislodged organisms flow into the net. The net was removed from the water with a quick upstream motion to wash the organisms to the bottom of the net and the emptied the contents of the net into a bucket with water. The process was replicated four times at each sampling section to cover approximately m 2 (4 x 0.25 m 2 ) of stream substrate. After compositing all four kicks into the bucket, all large objects were removed, inspected for organisms and discarded the residue to reduce laboratory 0

103 sorting time and limit the crushing and grinding that damages benthic specimens. The four replicates at each site constituted into one sample.the samples were then preserved using 20% ethanol solution and transferred to the laboratory for analysis. The characteristics of sites sampled for Benthic Macroinvertebrates are described in the following sections: Site (River Musamya) The section of River Musamya studied is approximately.8 km below the Griffin forest camp. This section of the River has the following characteristics (Figure 8.2): The section has a fast and uniform flow; There is a relatively straight line flow of a river; Unstable river bank with signs of recent flooding; In-stream is artificial, characterised by dark smelly water with waste from Sugar Cooperation Uganda Limited; Siltation of the river banks and riverbed; The riparian vegetation is dominated by trees; and The canopy cover is a mixture of shade, direct light and filtered light. a) Siltation of the river bank b) Riverine vegetation Figure 8.2: River Musamya characteristics Site 2 (River Sseziwa) The point along River Sseziwa (Figure 8.2) is located below the bridge along Mukono-Kayunga road. The section of the river has the following characteristics: The section had slow and uniform flow; There is a straight line flow of a river; Unstable river bank, signs of recent bank collapsing and flooding; In-stream is natural, characterised by brown water; Siltation of the river bed; The riparian vegetation is modified on one slide of the bank dominated by grasses; and The canopy cover is a mixture of shade, direct light and filtered light. 02

104 Unstable bank Modified riparian vegetation Figure 8.3: River Sseziwa characteristics Site 3 (River Mabugwe) This river section had the following characteristics (Figure 8.4): River flow was relatively fast, and uniform; The river bed is caracteristiced by a mixture boulders, cobbles, gravel and silt; The riparian vegetation is dorminated by trees; The river banks were stable; The instream conditions were natural characteristed by clear waters; and The canopy cover is a mixture of shade and filtered light. a) Boulders and cobbles b) Riparian vegetation along River Mabugwe Figure 8.4. River Mabugwe characteristics River Waliga This section of the River Waliga had the following characteristics ( Figure 8.5) The river flow was relatively fast, straight and unifirm with brown waters; In-stream was clear with no accumulation of substrate; The riparian vegetation was dorminated by trees; The river banks were not stable with recent modification due bank collapse; Signs of recent floods (Silt deposition in some parts of the riparian zone);and Canopy cover was a mixture of shade, direct light and filtered light. 03

105 Unstable banks Silt deposition in the riparian zone Figure 8.5. River Waliga characteristics at the sampled site 8.4. RESULTS Water quality of boreholes The water quality of boreholes within and around Mabira Forest Reserve is shown in Table 8.. The ph is relatively lower than the WHO required limits for drinking waters. All the other parameters are within the limit for drinking water. Water ph, TP, PO 4---, NO 3- and ECwere relatively higher in Kyabazala compared to Nagojje. Both are located in settlement areas with sugarcane plantation around them. Table 8.. Waer quality of selected boreholes within and around Mabira Forest Reserve Subcounty Name ph PO4--- (µmol/l) TSS (g/l) NO3- (µmol/l) TN (µmol/l) Temperat ure (oc) EC (µs/cm) TP (µmol/l) Kyabazala Nagojje Water quality in River within and around Mabira Forest Reserve Table 8.2 summarises selected water quality parameters in rivers within and around Mabira Forest Reserve. Generally ph of the all the sites were water samples were collected was near neutral except, Mutumbwe as the river flows out of the sugarcane, Musambya (as it enters the Sugarcane), Musambya as it flows out of the sugarcane. Relatively high values of EC, TDS, TSS and TP were observed in Musambya (under Sugarcane plantation), Musamya (under rice cultivation), Mutumbwe (under sugarcane) and Sezibwa (under Tea plantation). 04