Comparação entre os métodos dos quadrantes e Prodan para análises florística, fitossociológica e volumétrica

• Autor(a) principal: Brito, Alan de
• Data de Publicação: 2007
• Outros Autores: Ferreira, Maria Zélia, Mello, José Márcio de, Scolforo, José Roberto Soares, Oliveira, Antônio Donizette de, Acerbi Júnior, Fausto Weimar
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UFLA
• Texto Completo: http://repositorio.ufla.br/jspui/handle/1/11988
• topic: Métodos de amostragem; Método dos quadrantes; Método de Prodan; Análise florística; Fitossociologia; Sampling methods; Quadrants method; Prodan method; Floristic analysis; Phytosociology

The objective of this study was to compare the exactness of the estimates of the floristic composition, of the phytosociologic and volumetric analyses, using the quadrants and Prodan (1968) methods. Moreover, it objectified to compare for the quadrants method the estimators considered for Cottan & Curtis (1956) and for Pollard (1971). The study was carried out in a Montane Semideciduous Seasonal Forest patch located in Lavras, Minas Gerais. For the floristic analysis, the Prodan (1968) method identified a larger number of families (33), genera (64) and species (79), revealing to be more efficient than the quadrants method (28 families, 52 genera and 63 species). Considering the phytosociologic analysis, both methods were representative for the species that had higher importance value index (IVI). Moreover, they presented similar diversity and equability indices when compared with the parametric values. For floristic and phytosociologic analyses, the estimators of Cottan & Curtis (1956) e Pollard (1971) presented the same results. The quadrants method, underestimate the total volume for the estimators of Cottan & Curtis (1956) e Pollard (1971), and the first one presented results closer to the parametric value. The same happened for the volumes calculated per species. The Prodan (1968) method presented the worst performance, underestimating the total volume, and overestimating the volume per species, that presented low dominance.