Explore the vast range of titles available.

In Mexico, coffee is cultivated on the coastal slopes of the central and southern parts of the country in areas where two or more types of vegetation make contact. Based on management level and vegetational and structural complexity, it is possible to distinguish five main coffee production systems in Mexico: two kinds of traditional shaded agroforests (with native trees), one commercially oriented polyspecific shaded system, and two “modern” systems (shaded and unshaded monocultures). Traditional shaded coffee is cultivated principally by small‐scale, community‐based growers, most of whom belong to some indigenous culture group. Through an exhaustive review of the literature, we found that traditional shaded coffee plantations are important repositories of biological richness for groups such as trees and epiphytes, mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and arthropods. We evaluated the conservation role of these traditional shaded systems by estimating the percentage of the whole coffee area under traditional management, by reviewing the ecological and geographical distribution of coffee areas in Mexico, and by connecting the geographical distribution of these coffee areas with recognized centers of species richness and endemism. The assesment revealed that in Mexico, coffee fields are located in a biogeographically and ecologically strategic elevational belt that is an area of overlap between the tropical and temperate elements and of contact among the four main types of Mexican forests. We also found that between 60% and 70% of these coffee areas are under traditional management and that at least 14 of 155 priority regions selected by experts as having high numbers of species and endemics overlap with or are near traditional coffee‐growing areas. En México, el café se cultiva sobre las vertientes del Golfo de México y del Pacífico en el centro y sur del país, ahí donde dos o más tipos de vegetación se ponen en contacto. De acuerdo al nivel de manejo y a la estructura de la vegetación, es posible distinguir cinco principales sistemas de producción de café en México: dos tradicionales donde el café se produce bajo la sombra de la vegetación original, uno intermedio donde la sombra la proveen árboles no nativos, y dos “modernos” (monocultivos con y sin sombra). El café cultivado bajo la sombra del dosel original de los bosques o selvas predomina en México, y es producido fundamentalmente por pequeños productores, muchos de los cuales pertenecen a alguna cultura indígena. A partir de una revisión exhaustiva de la literatura, el presente artículo muestra la riqueza biológica de las plantaciones tradicionales de café bajo sombra, en grupos tales como árboles y epífitas, mamíferos, aves, reptiles, anfibios y artrópodos. Para ponderar la importancia conservacionista de estos sistemas agroforestales, las secciones finales del artículo se dedican a estimar el porcentaje de las áreas cafetaleras bajo manejo tradicional, y a revisar la distribución geográfica de las zonas cafetaleras en relación con las áreas ricas en especies o endemismos. El análisis reveló que en México las áreas productores de café se localizan en porciones de gran importancia biogeográfica y ecológica, ahí donde se ponen en contacto los elementos tropicales y templados; que entre el 60 y 70% de las áreas cafetaleras se encuentran bajo manejo tradicional; y que por lo menos 14 de 155 regiones prioritarias recomendadas para su conservación se sobreponen o están próximas a áreas con café bajo sombra y manejo tradicional.

The Monteverde Cloud Forest Reserve has captured the worldwide attention of biologists, conservationists, and ecologists and has been the setting for extensive investigation over the past 30 years. Roughly 40,000 ecotourists visit the Cloud Forest each year, and it is often considered the archetypal high-altitude rain forest. This volume brings together some of the most prominent researchers of the region to provide a broad introduction to the biology of the Monteverde and cloud forests in general. Collecting and synthesizing vital information about the ecosystem and its biota, the book also examines the positive and negative effects of human activity on both the forest and the surrounding communities. Ecologists, tropical biologists, and natural historians will find this volume an indispensable resource as will all those who are fascinated by the magnificent wonders of the tropical forests.

This study examines whether birds and butterflies may be used as surrogates for one another in assessing biodiversity at the community level. To do this, I compared the distribution and abundance of bird and butterfly species across an urban gradient by surveying six sites near Palo Alto, California, USA (all former oak woodlands) to see if these taxa have responded similarly to urbanization. The sites represent a gradient of urban land use ranging from relatively undisturbed to highly developed and include nature preserves, recreational areas, golf courses, residential neighborhoods, office parks, and business districts. At the community level, the two taxa displayed similar patterns across the gradient: species richness and Shannon diversity peak at intermediate levels of development, and the oak-woodland species gradually drop out at more developed sites. These measures are highly correlated between the two groups. The two taxa differed in their patterns of total abundance, however. Butterfly abundance was highest at the preserve and decreased as the sites became more urbanized, while bird abundance peaked at a site of intermediate development. These results suggest that, on spatial scales from 1 to 10 km, the two taxa display similar patterns with regard to urbanization and that one group can be used to infer the response of the other in assessing biodiversity with these measures at the community level.

Crop loss to wildlife impedes local support for conservation efforts at Kibale National Park, Uganda. Systematic monitoring of crop loss to wildlife (mammals larger than 3 kg) and livestock was conducted in six villages around Kibale over a 2-year period. Five wildlife species accounted for 85% of crop damage events: baboons, bushpigs, redtail monkeys, chimpanzees, and elephants. Marked variation in frequency and extent of damage is reported within villages, between villages, and between wildlife species. Fields lying within 500 m of the forest boundary lost 4-7% of crops per season on average, but the distribution of damage was highly skewed such that maize and cassava fields were on occasion completely destroyed. Multivariate analysis was used to test predictors of damage, including human population density, guarding, hunting, sight distance, and distance from the forest. Tests were performed at two levels of analysis, field and village. Distance from the forest edge explained the greatest amount of variation in crop damage, although hunting also influenced the extent of crop damage. Elephants inflicted catastrophic damage to farms but their forays were rare and highly localized. Livestock caused considerable damage to crops but farmers seldom complained because they had institutionalized modes of restitution. Although most of the crop damage by wildlife is restricted to a narrow band of farmers living near the forest edge, risk perception among these farmers has been amplified by legal prohibitions on killing wild animals. Elevating local tolerance for wildlife will require diverse approaches, including channeling economic benefits to Kibale's neighbors and providing compensation in limited cases.

Northern Latin America presents a declining shelter for rich tropical biodiversity owing to changes in its method of planting coffee. Conventional coffee plantations in the form of shade trees are replaced by high-yield sun plantation systems that make use of chemicals and pruning.

Patterns of habitat use by breeding birds were studied in cottonwood riparian forests along 100 km of the South Fork of the Snake River in southeastern Idaho, United States, from 1991 to 1994. A hierarchical approach was used to examine habitat use at three spatial scales: microhabitat (local vegetation characteristics), macrohabitat (cottonwood forest patch characteristics), and landscape (composition and patterning of surrounding [matrix] vegetation types and land uses). This paper addresses a series of predictions about species' distributions that incorporate the different spatial scales. Bird distribution and abundance and vegetation data were collected on 57 cottonwood forest patches ranging in size from 0.40 ha to 205 ha. The surrounding landscape changed from a valley surrounded by mountains, on the upstream end of the study area, to a narrow canyon adjacent to natural upland vegetation in the middle section, and to a wide, open floodplain dominated by agriculture on the downstream end. The best predictors of high species richness (r2= 0.71) were natural and heterogeneous landscapes, large cottonwood patches, close proximity to other cottonwood patches, and microhabitats with relatively open canopies. Distribution and frequency of occurrence were evaluated for 32 species of small land birds. The most frequent significant predictor of species occurrence was the landscape component: increases in upland natural vegetation with decreases in agriculture. Both interior and edge specialists were found in arid land, cottonwood riparian forests that are linear in nature, with large amounts of edge. Nest predators, brood parasites, and exotic species responded positively to human-altered landscapes. Landscape patterns were the primary influence on distribution and occurrence of most bird species, whereas macrohabitat and microhabitat were of secondary importance. Thus, surrounding landscape (matrix) features should be a primary consideration for selecting riparian reserve areas.