Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 April 2023 | 15(4): 22955–22967

ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print)

https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.4722.15.4.22955-22967

#4722 | Received 26 December 2018 | Final received 03 February 2023 | Finally accepted 08 March 2023

Plant species diversity in the riparian forests of the Moyar River in southern India

Muthu Karthick Nagarajan ¹ &Avantika Bhaskar²

¹Department of Botany and Research Centre, Scott Christian College, Nagercoil, Tamil Nadu 629003, India.

^1,2Care Earth Trust, No. 3, Sixth Street, Thillaiganga Nagar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600061, India.

¹ nmk.sam@gmail.com (corresponding author), ² avantikabhaskar@gmail.com

Editor: Vijayasankar Raman, The University of Mississippi, MS, USA. Date of publication: 26 April 2023 (online & print)

Citation: Nagarajan, M.K. & A. Bhaskar (2023). Plant species diversity in the riparian forests of the Moyar River in southern India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 15(4): 22955–22967. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.4722.15.4.22955-22967

Copyright: © Nagarajan & Bhaskar 2023. Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproduction, and distribution of this article in any medium by providing adequate credit to the author(s) and the source of publication.

Funding: Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (2009-2011).

Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Author details: Muthu Karthick Nagarajan is pursuing his PhD and works largely in the landscape of Western Ghats on various aspects like riparian forests and invasive alien species. Avantika Bhaskar, project manager (R&D) is a researcher working on various aspects of ecological conservation in Tamil Nadu.

Author contributions: NMK did the floristic assessments and data analyses, and AB wrote the manuscript.

Acknowledgements: We are thankful to the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) for funding the project. We express our sincere gratitude to Dr. R.J. Ranjit Daniels and Dr. J. Vencatesan, Care Earth Trust, and Dr. A.E. Dulip Daniels, Scott Christian College for their valuable inputs during preparation of this manuscript. We are grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on the manuscript. We also thank the Tamil Nadu Forest Department for granting us permission and providing help to carry out the assessment. The results are part of a study titled ‘Building a grassroots constituency to conserve River Moyar in the Mysore-Nilgiri corridor’ carried out by Care Earth Trust.

Abstract: Riparian forests are among the most rapidly disappearing vegetation types throughout the world. River Moyar cascades through gorges and links the Western Ghats with the southernmost segments of the Eastern Ghats. Considering the relatively well-preserved state of the Moyar riparian vegetation and being amongst the least explored forests in southern India, an assessment of angiosperm diversity was undertaken. The study used an array of belt transects along and perpendicular to the river course so that the entire elevation gradient of the gallery could be covered. A total of 172 species representing 126 genera belonging to 47 families, including 100 monotypic genera and 17 monotypic families, were recorded from both the transects in the study area. 131 woody angiosperm species representing 100 genera in 41 families were recorded along the river. The perpendicular gallery transects recorded 111 woody angiosperm species representing 86 genera in 36 families. Thirteen monotypic families were found in both transects, and 70 species were found in both transects. The dominant families with the maximum species were Fabaceae, Rubiaceae and Phyllanthaceae. Shannon diversity index ranged between 2.0 to 3.27 along the river transects and 1.51 to 2.67 along the galleries. The study concludes that Moyar riparian zone merits high conservation value as it supports significant species diversity, including red-listed species and habitat-specific plants, and functions as a vital wildlife corridor in the landscape.

Keywords: Angiosperm diversity, flora, gallery, Nilgiris, riparian vegetation, Tamil Nadu, Western Ghats.

INTRODUCTION

Riparian forests are among the most rapidly-disappearing vegetation community types, largely owing to direct human actions and the indirect effects of modifying river courses for navigation and building of dams (Kauffman et al. 1997). Riparian forests are directly adjacent to rivers and streams, including active floodplains and nearby terraces (Naiman et al. 2001), and their vegetation interacts with terrestrial as well as aquatic ecosystems (Nilsson et al. 1994). Riparian communities are structurally and compositionally diverse, and vary from patchy forests with dense moss in cold regions, to deciduous trees and shrubs in floodplains, to well-developed forests with distinct plant zonation in the deltas (Nilsson & Svedmark 2002). The riparian zone is inhabited by specialist plants that are resilient to frequent disturbances like flooding, sedimentation, abrasion, breakage, etc. (Naiman et al. 1993). Riparian vegetation performs various ecological functions, such as providing food, organic matter, shelter and habitat, regulating stream water temperature, filtering sediments and nutrients, dissipating stream energy, preventing erosion and regulating the flow of litter from the forest floor into the stream (Gregory et al. 1991; Naiman & Decamps 1997; Naiman et al. 2001; Bowler et al. 2012; Jackson et al. 2015).

Rivers in India have historically seen the flourishing of human cultures, and in recent times they have been dammed and transformed considerably, with major consequences for riparian vegetation. While riparian vegetation structure is fairly similar along free-flowing rivers, it varies along regulated rivers due to changing water level conditions (Nilsson et al. 1997). High rates of disturbances make the riparian zone susceptible to invasions by alien species that are generally early seral species (Richardson et al. 2007). Studies have shown that riparian plant community structure is related to land use, and areas adjacent to agricultural and urban stretches have been found to have high invasive species cover and richness, respectively (Meek et al. 2010; Méndez-Toribio et al. 2014).

Our study is focused on the river Moyar that flows eastwards from the Western Ghats, a global biodiversity hotspot (Myers et al. 2000). River Moyar originates in the higher elevation zones of Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve, the first UNESCO recognized biosphere reserve in India. The riparian vegetation of the Moyar River is heterogeneous, and is undergoing gradual degradation owing to the construction of hydroelectric projects, pollution from factory effluents, local tourism pressure, widespread agriculture and excessive use of pesticides. An integrated conservation plan that includes participatory micro-plans has been made for the entire course of the river. As one of the first steps of this plan, we explored the riparian vegetation and enumerated the angiosperm species. The preliminary results of the study are presented in the sections below.

STUDY AREA AND METHODS

The Moyar River originates (11.5143⁰N 76.5353⁰E) in the upper reaches of the Niligiri Biosphere Reserve and meanders about 90 km through the Mudumalai and Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserves before joining Bhavani River at Bhavanisagar reservoir (11.4760⁰N; 77.0553⁰E). Pykara and Sigur are the major streams that feed the Moyar River. To the south, a few smaller streams like Kukkulthorai, Kedrahalla, and Kahanhalla drain into the river (Sukumar 1989; Lannerstad & Molden 2009) (Figure 1). Moyar River is also important, as it is a part of the larger Cauvery River basin.

Moyar River is known for its rich biodiversity, especially the large threatened animals such as Asian Elephants, Gaurs, feral water buffalos, Bengal Tigers, Marsh Crocodiles, Indian Rock Pythons, and vultures. The riparian vegetation sustains a small nesting colony of the ‘Critically Endangered’ Indian White-rumped Vulture. Around 90 species of fish have been reported from this river (Sukumar 1989; CEPF Project Report 2012), which contributes enormously to both fisheries in the state of Tamil Nadu and also local subsistence fishing throughout its length. The total study area falls under the protected area network of India. The Tamil Nadu Forest Department gave permission to carry out this research in the landscape.

The 90 km long Moyar River was sampled (during the period 2010–2011, spanning the wet and dry seasons) for angiosperm species richness and diversity using 20 transects, each of 4 km in length, along the river course (longitudinal transects). To capture the variations in species composition caused by the gallery (Yang et al. 2011), 24 supplementary or perpendicular transects (1 km each) were laid such that they cut across the lateral slopes. The supplementary transects were perpendicular to the river course transects. The width of the belt along transects was limited to five metres on either side. The elevation of the study area ranged 267--–947 m.

Woody plants were identified and enumerated within the belts. Woody plants with girth at breast height (GBH) of more than one centimetre were enumerated. Plants were identified using available guides, Floras and with the help of reference photographs. Hand-held lenses and measuring scales were used in the field and lab for plant identification. Some flowers from tall trees were observed and identified with the help of binoculars. In cases where field identification was not possible, voucher specimens were collected, preserved and identified using standard references such as Bentham & Hooker (1862–1883), Gamble & Fischer (1915–1936), and Mathew (1983). Nomenclature and classification were adopted from the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group IV system (Stevens 2001). Nomenclatural information was verified with online portals such as Tropicos (http://www.tropicos.org/), Plants of the World Online (POWO 2022), International Plant Names Index (IPNI 2022), and World Flora Online (WFO 2022). The nomenclature and distribution information were further verified using Flowering Plants of Tamil Nadu: A Compendium (Narasimhan & Irwin 2021). The erstwhile traditionally recognized families of Caesalpinaceae and Mimosaceae were reduced to the subfamily level and included under the family Fabaceae with the recent phylogenetic analyses by the Legume Phylogeny Working Group (LPWG 2017).

Vegetation classification was done using ‘Map of the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve (1/100,000): land use and vegetation’ (Prabhakar & Pascal 1996) and ‘A Revised Survey of Forest Types of India’ (Champion & Seth 1968). The extent of each vegetation type in the study area was visually interpreted using Google Earth software. The woody angiosperm species were classified based on their life form into trees, shrubs and lianas.

Diversity was calculated using Shannon’s diversity index (Shannon & Weaver 1949), and Pielou’s index was used to determine evenness in the community (Pielou 1966).

RESULTS

River Moyar flows from west to east. Following is the vegetation types from its origin to towards the reservoir; Southern Moist Mixed Deciduous Forests (3B/C2), Dry Savannah Forests (5/DS3), Southern Dry Mixed Deciduous Forests (5A/C3), and Southern Thorn Scrub Forests (6A/DS1). The forest types are classified based on Champion & Seth (1968).

From the East to west, the vegetation along the Moyar River course, according to Champion & Seth (1968), is composed of Southern Thorn Scrub Forests (6A/DS1), Southern Dry Mixed Deciduous Forests (5A/C3), Dry Savannah Forests (5/DS3), Southern Moist Mixed Deciduous Forests (3B/C2) vegetation, Southern Tropical Riverine Forest (5/B1) and Tropical Riparian Fringing Forests (4E/RS1).

The manual visual interpretation of the study area in Google Earth software reveals that vegetation of the Moyar River valley is heterogeneous and largely composed of riparian (32%), scrub (25%), deciduous (14%), plantation (13%), savanna (11%), and infested (5%) vegetation (Figure 2). Based on the dominance of certain species, the riparian vegetation of the Moyar River could be broadly classified into three types, namely Terminalia–Pongamia–Syzygium type, Prosopis-infested type, and Bamboo–Mangifera type (Images 1–3).

Life-form composition of angiosperm species was trees (78.6%), shrubs (15.3%), and lianas (6.1%) along the river-bank, and correspondingly, 73%, 24.3% and 2.7%, along the perpendicular transects, suggesting an overall dominance of trees. A higher percentage of shrubs was however observed in the galleries.

When analyzing the family richness, it was found that there are no significant differences in families representing different species in both types of transects, suggesting the dominance of few families in both zones (Figure 3). The families dominating the river course transects included Fabaceae (20 species and 16 genera), Phyllanthaceae (nine species and seven genera) and Rubiaceae (nine species and nine genera). In comparison, the perpendicular gallery transects were dominated by Fabaceae (21 species and 18 genera) Rubiaceae (eight species and eight genera), and Malvaceae (six species and three genera) families. Fabaceae has been the dominant family in Tamil Nadu state and it includes four clades, viz., Caesalpinioideae (including Mimosoid group), Cercidoideae, Detarioideae, and Faboideae (Narasimhan & Irwin 2021).

A total of 172 species representing 126 genera belonging to 47 families, including 100 monotypic genera and 17 monotypic families, were recorded from all the transects in the entire study area (Table 1); 131 woody species representing 100 genera belonging to 41 families, including 82 monotypic genera and 13 monotypic families, were enumerated in the longitudinal transects along the river course. Additionally, 111 species representing 86 genera belonging to 36 families, including 68 monotypic genera and 13 monotypic families, were recorded in the perpendicular gallery transects. Seventy species were found in both the transects, dominated by Fabaceae with 10 genera and 12 species alone. In the case of riverine vegetation, the Shannon diversity index ranged 2.0–3.27 and evenness (Pielou-index) was of the order of 0.59–0.85; whereas, in perpendicular gallery transects, the diversity was 1.5–2.67 with an evenness of 0.53–0.86. This data indicates that the riparian zone was more diverse. However, the variations in the number of species between the two communities were not very different.

Species like Filicium decipiens (Wight & Arn.) Thwaites, Homonoia riparia Lour., Salix tetrasperma Roxb., Vitex leucoxylon L.f., and Walsura trifoliolata (A.Juss.) Harms were predominantly riparian. Dominant tree species found along the river-course transects included Terminalia arjuna (Roxb. ex DC.) Wight & Arn., Pongamia pinnata (L.) Pierre and Syzygium cumini (L.) Skeels, Diospyros malabarica (Desr.) Kostel., while Catunaregam spinosa (Thunb.) Tirveng., Albizia amara (Roxb.) Boivin, Prosopis juliflora (Sw.) DC. and Cordia monoica Roxb. were the common trees observed in the perpendicular gallery transects (Photographs of a few representative species are shown in Images 4–6). Seventy-two species in both communities are categorised as ‘Least Concern’, while seven species are assigned with ‘Vulnerable’ status in the IUCN global Red List data (IUCN 2022). Pterocarpus marsupium Roxb. and Swietenia mahagoni (L.) Jacq. are the ‘Near Threatened’ species found in both the transects (http://www.iucnredlist.org) (Table 1). The taxa observed in both transects included 160 indigenous species and 12 non-native woody plant species.

Non-native species found in the riparian zone included Bixa orellana L., Delonix regia (Bojer ex Hook.) Raf., Jatropha curcas L., Ricinus communis L., and Senna didymobotrya (Fresen.) H.S.Irwin & Barneby. The predominant invasive species commonly observed here were Chromolaena odorata (L.) R.M.King & H.Rob., Lantana camara L., Opuntia monocantha Haw., Prosopis juliflora, and Senna spectabilis (DC.) H.S.Irwin & Barneby.

DISCUSSION

Riparian vegetation studies conducted earlier along the Chalakudy River (Bachan 2003), the Pamba River (Paul & George 2010) and the Benin River (Natta 2003), revealed Euphorbiaceae (including Phyllanthaceae), Fabaceae and Rubiaceae as the dominant families, as in this study. The dominance of these families along the rivers has been attributed to the thriving of these species in flooded and highly humid regions and improved adaptation of legume trees to waterlogged conditions owing to symbiotic nitrogen-fixing organisms (Koponen et al. 2004; Bognounou et al. 2009; Sambaré et al. 2011).

The high value of woody species richness, similar to the present study, has been previously reported in many riparian forests (Pither & Kellman 2002; Suzuki et al. 2002; Ward et al. 2002; Natta 2003; Tiegs et al. 2005; Sambaré et al. 2011). The Shannon diversity index of angiosperms in riparian forests along the Cauvery River basin has been reported to be 2.7±0.51 (Sunil et al. 2010). It ranged 1.0–2.95 in the case of the Meenachil River basin, Kerala, southern India (Vincy et al. 2015). The diversity index of angiosperms in Moyar is comparable to those of the riverine forests in Indonesia (Richter 2000), the southeastern United States (Burton et al. 2005), and Burkina Faso (Sambaré et al. 2011). The observed heterogeneity in vegetation along the gallery can be attributed to variations in geomorphology, soil drainage, moisture availability and light conditions (Gregory et al. 1991).

The long history of human interference has made the riparian zone a corridor for invasion and spread of invasive species (Johansson et al. 1996; Hood & Naiman 2000; Tockner & Stanford 2002). Many non-native and invasive species were observed along Moyar River which can be a potential threat to the riparian forest in the future. Succession is usually fast in riparian zones but is often slowed by invasive species. Invasive species also alter watershed hydrology and riparian ecology (Richardson et al. 2007). For instance, the invasion of Tamarix ramosissima Ledeb. in North America caused an increase in channel roughness and trapping of sediments, eventually narrowing the streams (Zavaleta 2000).

Riparian vegetation along the Moyar River remains intact in some stretches, and needs to be preserved as it supports high biodiversity. This forest serves as a habitat and corridor for many wildlife, especially threatened species such as Asian Elephants, tigers, otters, vultures, and over a hundred species of birds. However, the areas that have been extensively invaded by alien species such as Prosopis juliflora and Senna spectabilis need to be restored using the scientific approach. Studies have shown that the loss of riparian vegetation can have far-reaching effects on the ecosystem as they support high biodiversity (Sabo et al. 2005).

Moyar riparian vegetation is gradually degrading due to many factors. The river is dammed at the Bhavanisagar reservoir, where it is joined by river Bhavani, in addition to the upstream hydroelectric projects causing degradation. The construction of dams affects seed dispersal and alters the extent and composition of riparian communities (Jansson et al. 2000). Other anthropogenic activities such as cultivation, logging, grazing, water extraction and recreation also negatively impact riparian vegetation. In southern India, fragmentation and agro-forestry plantations have been found to alter riparian species composition in Cauvery and Chalakudy River basins (Bachan 2003; Sunil et al. 2011). Alteration of riparian forests can result in changes in the intensity of sunlight, nutrient availability, increased soil deposition, eutrophication, lowering of the water table and modification of both terrestrial and aquatic habitats (Decamps et al. 1988; Dudgeon 2000; Jansson et al. 2000; Aguiar et al. 2009; Wootton 2012; Kamp et al. 2013). Loss of riparian forests has also been reported to result in declines in bird species richness and diversity in the area (Arizmendi et al. 2008; Villaseñor-Gomez 2008).

Riparian vegetation characteristics reveal the water and habitat quality, and can be used to restore riparian habitats (Stockan et al. 2012). The present riparian vegetation analysis can also support water and landscape planning by involving the local community in restoration and conservation efforts. Moyar riparian zone merits high conservation value as it is a vital wildlife corridor, sustains Red Listed and important medicinal plants, and is under increasing anthropogenic pressure.

Table 1. Woody species recorded in the longitudinal (LT) and perpendicular transects (PT) along the Moyar River.

	Family	Species	Habit	Origin	IUCN Status	Voucher no.	LT	PT
1	Acanthaceae	Strobilanthes cordifolia (Vahl) J.R.I.Wood	Shrub	I	NE	CET 555		Y
2	Anacardiaceae	Lannea coromandelica (Houtt.) Merr.	Tree	I	LC	#		Y
3	Anacardiaceae	Mangifera indica L.	Tree	I	DD	#	Y	Y
4	Anacardiaceae	Searsia mysorensis (G.Don) Moffett	Shrub	I	NE	#		Y
5	Anacardiaceae	Spondias pinnata (L.f.) Kurz	Tree	I	NE	#	Y
6	Apocynaceae	Carissa carandas L.	Shrub	I	NE	#	Y	Y
7	Apocynaceae	Carissa spinarum L.	Shrub	I	LC	#		Y
8	Apocynaceae	Rauvolfia verticillata (Lour.) Baill.	Shrub	I	NE	CET 552		Y
9	Apocynaceae	Wrightia arborea (Dennst.) Mabb.	Tree	I	LC	CET 512	Y
10	Apocynaceae	Wrightia tinctoria (Roxb.) R.Br.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y	Y
11	Asteraceae	Orbivestus cinerascens (Sch.Bip.) H.Rob.	Shrub	I	NE	CET 554		Y
12	Bignoniaceae	Dolichandrone arcuata (Wight) C.B.Clarke	Tree	I	NE	CET 533	Y	Y
13	Bignoniaceae	Dolichandrone atrovirens (Roth) K.Schum.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y	Y
14	Bignoniaceae	Dolichandrone falcata (Wall.ex DC.) Seem.	Tree	I	NE	CET 551	Y	Y
15	Bignoniaceae	Radermachera xylocarpa (Roxb.) K.Schum.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y
16	Bignoniaceae	Stereospermum colais (Buch.-Ham. ex Dillwyn) Mabb.	Tree	I	NE	CET 513	Y	Y
17	Bixaceae	Bixa orellana L.	Tree	TAm	LC	#	Y
18	Boraginaceae	Cordia macleodii (Griff.) Hook.f. & Thoms.	Tree	I	NE	CET 567		Y
19	Boraginaceae	Cordia monoica Roxb.	Tree	I	LC	#	Y	Y
20	Boraginaceae	Cordia obliqua Willd.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y
21	Burseraceae	Boswellia serrata Roxb.	Tree	I	NE	#		Y
22	Burseraceae	Commiphora caudata (Wight & Arn.) Engl.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y	Y
23	Burseraceae	Garuga pinnata Roxb.	Tree	I	NE	CET 560	Y	Y
24	Cactaceae	Opuntia monocantha Haw.	Shrub	TAm	NE	#		Y
25	Cannabaceae	Celtis timorensis Span.	Tree	I	LC	CET 511	Y	Y
26	Cannabaceae	Trema orientalis (L.) Blume	Tree	I	LC	#	Y
27	Capparaceae	Capparis brevispina DC.	Shrub	I	NE	CET 556		Y
28	Capparaceae	Capparis divaricata Lam.	Tree	I	NE	CET 559		Y
29	Capparaceae	Capparis sepiaria L.	Shrub	I	LC	#		Y
30	Caprifoliaceae	Viburnum punctatum Buch.-Ham. ex D.Don	Liane	I	NE	CET 516	Y
31	Celastraceae	Elaeodendron glaucum (Rottb.) Pers.	Tree	I	NE	CET 558	Y	Y
32	Celastraceae	Gymnosporia heyneana (Roth) M.A.Lawson	Shrub	I	NE	#	Y	Y
33	Celastraceae	Pleurostylia opposita (Wall.) Alston	Tree	I	LC	CET 517	Y
34	Combretaceae	Combretum ovalifolium Roxb.	Liane	I	NE	CET 536	Y
35	Combretaceae	Terminalia anogeissiana Gere & Boatwr.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y	Y
36	Combretaceae	Terminalia arjuna (Roxb. ex DC.) Wight & Arn.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y	Y
37	Combretaceae	Terminalia bellirica (Gaertn.) Roxb.	Tree	I	LC	#	Y	Y
38	Combretaceae	Terminalia elliptica Willd.	Tree	I	NE	CET 562	Y	Y
39	Cornaceae	Alangium salviifolium (L.f.) Wangerin	Tree	I	LC	CET 583	Y
40	Dipterocarpaceae	Shorea roxburghii G.Don.	Tree	I	VU	#	Y
41	Ebenaceae	Diospyros ferrea (Willd.) Bakh.	Tree	I	NE	CET 572	Y	Y
42	Ebenaceae	Diospyros malabarica (Desr.) Kostel.	Tree	I	NE	CET 588	Y
43	Ebenaceae	Diospyros montana Roxb.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y	Y
44	Erythroxylaceae	Erythroxylum monogynum Roxb.	Tree	I	NE	CET 522	Y	Y
45	Euphorbiaceae	Euphorbia antiquorum L.	Tree	I	LC	#		Y
46	Euphorbiaceae	Givotia moluccana (L.) Sreem.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y	Y
47	Euphorbiaceae	Homonoia riparia Lour.	Shrub	I	LC	CET 571	Y	Y
48	Euphorbiaceae	Jatropha curcas L.	Shrub	TAm	NE	#	Y
49	Euphorbiaceae	Jatropha gossypiifolia L.	Shrub	I	LC	#		Y
50	Euphorbiaceae	Mallotus nudiflorus (L.) Kulju & Welzen	Tree	I	LC	CET 521	Y
51	Euphorbiaceae	Ricinus communis L.	Shrub	TAm	NE	#	Y
52	Fabaceae	Albizia amara (Roxb.) Boivin	Tree	I	LC	#	Y	Y
53	Fabaceae	Albizia lebbeck (L.) Benth.	Tree	I	LC	#	Y	Y
54	Fabaceae	Bauhinia racemosa Lam.	Tree	I	NE	CET 520	Y	Y
55	Fabaceae	Brachypterum scandens (Roxb.) Miq.	Liane	I	NE	#	Y	Y
56	Fabaceae	Butea monosperma (Lam.) Kuntze	Tree	I	LC	#		Y
57	Fabaceae	Cassia fistula L.	Tree	I	LC	#	Y	Y
58	Fabaceae	Dalbergia lanceolaria subsp. paniculata (Roxb.) Thoth.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y	Y
59	Fabaceae	Dalbergia latifolia Roxb.	Tree	I	VU	CET 504	Y	Y
60	Fabaceae	Delonix regia (Bojer ex Hook.) Raf.	Tree	M	LC	#	Y
61	Fabaceae	Dichrostachys cinerea (L.) Wight & Arn.	Tree	I	LC	#		Y
62	Fabaceae	Entada rheedei Spreng.	Liane	I	NE	CET 527	Y
63	Fabaceae	Erythrina variegata L.	Tree	I	LC	#	Y
64	Fabaceae	Hardwickia binata Roxb.	Tree	I	LC	#		Y
65	Fabaceae	Mundulea sericea (Willd.) A.Chev.	Tree	I	LC	CET 573		Y
66	Fabaceae	Pongamia pinnata (L.) Pierre	Tree	I	LC	#	Y	Y
67	Fabaceae	Prosopis juliflora (Sw.) DC.	Tree	TAm	NE	#	Y	Y
68	Fabaceae	Pterocarpus marsupium Roxb.	Tree	I	NT	#		Y
69	Fabaceae	Pterolobium hexapetalum (Roth.) Santapau & Wagh	Liane	I	NE	#	Y
70	Fabaceae	Samanea saman (Jacq.) Merr.	Tree	TAm	LC	#	Y
71	Fabaceae	Senegalia chundra (Roxb. ex Rottler) Maslin	Tree	I	NE	#		Y
72	Fabaceae	Senegalia pennata (L.) Maslin.	Liane	I	LC	#	Y
73	Fabaceae	Senna didymobotrya (Fresen.) H.S.Irwin & Barneby	Shrub	I	LC	#	Y
74	Fabaceae	Senna occidentalis (L.) Link	Shrub	TAm	LC	#	Y
75	Fabaceae	Senna spectabilis (DC.) H.S.Irwin & Barneby	Tree	TAm	LC	CET 515	Y	Y
76	Fabaceae	Sophora velutina Lindl.	Shrub	I	NE	CET 576		Y
77	Fabaceae	Spatholobus purpureus Benth. ex Baker	Liane	I	NE	CET 580		Y
78	Fabaceae	Tamarindus indica L.	Tree	M	LC	#	Y	Y
79	Fabaceae	Vachellia leucophloea (Roxb.) Maslin, Seigler & Ebinger	Tree	I	LC	CET 532	Y	Y
80	Fabaceae	Vachellia planifrons (Wight & Arn.) Ragup., Seigler, Ebinger & Maslin	Tree	I	NE	#		Y
81	Hernandiaceae	Gyrocarpus americanus Jacq.	Tree	I	LC	#	Y	Y
82	Lamiaceae	Gmelina arborea Roxb. ex Sm.	Tree	I	LC	#		Y
83	Lamiaceae	Gmelina asiatica L.	Shrub	I	LC	#		Y
84	Lamiaceae	Premna mollissima Roth	Tree	I	NE	CET 592	Y	Y
85	Lamiaceae	Premna tomentosa Willd.	Tree	I	LC	#		Y
86	Lamiaceae	Tectona grandis L.f.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y	Y
87	Lamiaceae	Vitex altissima L.f.	Tree	I	NE	CET 541	Y
88	Lamiaceae	Vitex leucoxylon L.f.	Tree	I	LC	CET 542	Y
89	Loganiaceae	Strychnos nux-vomica L.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y	Y
90	Loganiaceae	Strychnos potatorum L.f	Tree	I	NE	CET 525	Y	Y
91	Lythraceae	Lagerstroemia microcarpa Wight	Tree	I	NE	CET 586	Y	Y
92	Lythraceae	Lagerstroemia parviflora Roxb.	Tree	I	LC	#		Y
93	Lythraceae	Lawsonia inermis L.	Shrub	I	LC	#	Y
94	Malvaceae	Bombax ceiba L.	Tree	I	LC	CET 557		Y
95	Malvaceae	Grewia hirsuta Vahl	Shrub	I	LC	CET 595	Y	Y
96	Malvaceae	Grewia orbiculata Rottler	Shrub	I	NE	#		Y
97	Malvaceae	Grewia orientalis L.	Shrub	I	NE	CET 543		Y
98	Malvaceae	Grewia serrulata DC.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y
99	Malvaceae	Grewia tiliifolia Vahl	Tree	I	NE	#	Y	Y
100	Malvaceae	Helicteres isora L.	Shrub	I	NE	#	Y	Y
101	Melastomataceae	Memecylon grande Retz.	Tree	I	VU	CET 526	Y
102	Melastomataceae	Memecylon umbellatum Burm.f.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y
103	Meliaceae	Aglaia elaeagnoidea (A.Juss.) Benth.	Tree	I	LC	CET 505	Y
104	Meliaceae	Azadirachta indica A.Juss.	Tree	IC	LC	#	Y	Y
105	Meliaceae	Cipadessa baccifera (Roxb. ex Roth) Miq.	Tree	I	LC	#	Y	Y
106	Meliaceae	Soymida febrifuga (Roxb.) A.Juss.	Tree	I	NE	CET 581		Y
107	Meliaceae	Swietenia mahagoni (L.) Jacq.	Tree	I	NT	#	Y
108	Meliaceae	Walsura trifoliolata (A.Juss.) Harms	Tree	I	NE	#	Y
109	Moraceae	Ficus benghalensis L.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y
110	Moraceae	Ficus benjamina L.	Tree	I	LC	#	Y	Y
111	Moraceae	Ficus hispida L.f.	Tree	I	LC	#	Y
112	Moraceae	Ficus microcarpa L.f.	Tree	I	LC	CET 506	Y	Y
113	Moraceae	Ficus mollis Vahl	Tree	I	NE	#	Y	Y
114	Moraceae	Ficus racemosa L.	Tree	I	LC	#	Y
115	Moraceae	Ficus tsjakela Burm.f.	Tree	I	NE	CET 529	Y
116	Moringaceae	Moringa concanensis Nimmo ex Dalzell & A.Gibson	Tree	I	NE	CET 537	Y	Y
117	Myrtaceae	Psidium guajava L.	Tree	I	LC	#	Y
118	Myrtaceae	Syzygium cumini (L.) Skeels	Tree	I	LC	#	Y	Y
119	Myrtaceae	Syzygium grande (Wight) Walp.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y
120	Olacaceae	Olax scandens Roxb.	Liane	I	NE	CET 509	Y
121	Olacaceae	Olea dioica Roxb.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y
122	Pandanaceae	Pandanus odorifer (Forssk.) Kuntze	Shrub	I	LC	#	Y
123	Phyllanthaceae	Aporosa acuminata Thwaites	Tree	I	NE	CET 503	Y
124	Phyllanthaceae	Bischofia javanica Blume	Tree	I	LC	#	Y
125	Phyllanthaceae	Breynia vitis-idaea (Burm.f.) C.E.C.Fisch.	Shrub	I	LC	CET 502	Y
126	Phyllanthaceae	Bridelia retusa (L.) A.Juss.	Tree	I	LC	CET 577	Y	Y
127	Phyllanthaceae	Flueggea leucopyrus Willd.	Shrub	I	LC	#		Y
128	Phyllanthaceae	Glochidion zeylanicum (Gaertn.) A.Juss.	Tree	I	LC	CET 501	Y
129	Phyllanthaceae	Phyllanthus emblica L.	Tree	I	LC	CET 535	Y	Y
130	Phyllanthaceae	Phyllanthus indofischeri Bennet	Tree	I	VU	CET 534	Y
131	Phyllanthaceae	Phyllanthus racemosus L.f.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y
132	Phyllanthaceae	Phyllanthus reticulatus Poir.	Shrub	I	LC	#	Y
133	Poaceae	Bambusa bambos (L.) Voss	Tree	I	NE	#	Y	Y
134	Poaceae	Dendrocalamus strictus (Roxb.) Nees	Shrub	I	NE	#	Y	Y
135	Primulaceae	Ardisia solanacea Roxb.	Tree	I	NE	CET 508	Y
136	Putranjivaceae	Putranjiva roxburghii Wall.	Tree	I	LC	#	Y
137	Rhamnaceae	Scutia myrtina (Burm. f.) Kurz	Shrub	I	LC	CET 524		Y
138	Rhamnaceae	Ziziphus glabrata B.Heyne ex Roth	Tree	I	NE	#	Y
139	Rhamnaceae	Ziziphus mauritiana Lam.	Tree	I	LC	#	Y	Y
140	Rhamnaceae	Ziziphus oenopolia (L.) Mill.	Liane	I	LC	#	Y	Y
141	Rhamnaceae	Ziziphus rugosa Lam.	Tree	I	NE	#		Y
142	Rhamnaceae	Ziziphus xylopyrus (Retz.) Willd.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y	Y
143	Rubiaceae	Canthium coromandelicum (Burm.f.) Alston	Shrub	I	NE	CET 530	Y
144	Rubiaceae	Catunaregam spinosa (Thunb.) Tirveng.	Tree	I	LC	#	Y	Y
145	Rubiaceae	Coffea wightiana Wall. ex Wight & Arn.	Shrub	I	LC	CET 538	Y	Y
146	Rubiaceae	Deccania pubescens var. candolleana (Wight & Arn.) Tirveng.	Tree	I	NE	CET 589		Y
147	Rubiaceae	Ixora pavetta Andrews	Tree	I	NE	#	Y	Y
148	Rubiaceae	Mitragyna parvifolia (Roxb.) Korth.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y	Y
149	Rubiaceae	Morinda coreia Buch.-Ham.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y
150	Rubiaceae	Pavetta indica L.	Shrub	I	NE	#	Y	Y
151	Rubiaceae	Psydrax dicoccos Gaertn.	Tree	I	VU	#	Y	Y
152	Rubiaceae	Tamilnadia uliginosa (Retz.) Tirveng. & Sastre	Tree	I	NE	#		Y
153	Rubiaceae	Wendlandia thyrsoidea (Schult.) Steud.	Shrub	I	NE	#	Y
154	Rutaceae	Atalantia monophylla (L.) DC.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y	Y
155	Rutaceae	Chloroxylon swietenia DC.	Tree	I	VU	#	Y	Y
156	Rutaceae	Glycosmis mauritiana (Lam.) Tanaka	Shrub	I	LC	#	Y
157	Rutaceae	Glycosmis pentaphylla (Retz.) DC.	Shrub	I	LC	#		Y
158	Rutaceae	Pleiospermium alatum (Wall. ex Wight & Arn.) Swingle	Tree	I	NE	CET 531	Y	Y
159	Salicaceae	Flacourtia ramontchi L'Hér.	Tree	I	NE	CET 523	Y
160	Salicaceae	Salix tetrasperma Roxb.	Tree	I	LC	#	Y
161	Salvadoraceae	Salvadora persica L.	Tree	I	LC	CET 519	Y	Y
162	Santalaceae	Santalum album L.	Tree	I	VU	#		Y
163	Sapindaceae	Dodonaea viscosa Jacq.	Shrub	I	LC	#		Y
164	Sapindaceae	Filicium decipiens (Wight & Arn.) Thwaites	Tree	I	LC	CET 510	Y
165	Sapindaceae	Sapindus emarginatus Vahl	Tree	I	NE	#	Y	Y
166	Sapindaceae	Schleichera oleosa (Lour.) Oken	Tree	I	LC	#	Y	Y
167	Sapotaceae	Madhuca longifolia (J.Koenig ex L.) J.F.Macbr.	Tree	I	NE	CET 540	Y	Y
168	Sapotaceae	Mimusops elengi L.	Tree	I	LC	#	Y
169	Simaroubaceae	Ailanthus excelsa Roxb.	Tree	I	NE	#	Y
170	Solanaceae	Solanum pubescens Willd.	Shrub	I	NE	#		Y
171	Verbenaceae	Lantana camara L.	Shrub	TAm	NE	#	Y
172	Verbenaceae	Lantana indica Roxb.	Shrub	I	NE	CET 596		Y

For figures & images - - click here for complete PDF

REFERENCES

Aguiar, F.C., M.T. Ferreira, A. Albuquerque, P. Rodríguez-González & P. Segurado (2009). Structural and functional responses of riparian vegetation to human disturbance: performance and spatial scale-dependence. Fundamental and Applied Limnology 175(3): 249–267. https://doi.org/10.1127/1863-9135/2009/0175-0249

Arizmendi, M.D.C., P. Dávila, A. Estrada, E. Figueroa, L. Márquez-Valdelamar, R. Lira, O. Oliveros-Galindo & A. Valiente-Banuet (2008). Riparian Mesquite bushes are important for bird conservation in tropical arid Mexico. Journal of Arid Environments 72(7): 1146-–1163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2007.12.017

Bachan, K.H.A. (2003). Riparian vegetation along the middle and lower zones of the Chalakudy River, Kerala, India. Center for Development Studies, Kerala, 117 pp. http://www.cds.ac.in/krpcds/report/amita.pdf

Bentham, G. & J.D. Hooker (1862–1883). Genera Plantarum. Vol. 1–3. Reeve and Company, London, 3577 pp.

Bognounou, F., A. Thiombiano, P. Savadogo, J.I. Boussim, P.C. Oden & S. Guinko (2009). Woody vegetation structure and composition at four sites along a latitudinal gradient in Western Burkina Faso. Bois et Forets des Tropiques 300(2): 30–44. http://bft.cirad.fr/cd/BFT_300_29-44.pdf

Bowler, D., R. Mant, H. Orr, D. Hannah & A. Pullin (2012). What are the effects of wooded riparian zones on stream temperature? Environmental Evidence 1: 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/2047-2382-1-3

Burton, M., L. Samuelson & S. Pan (2005). Riparian woody plant diversity and forest structure along an urban-rural gradient. Urban Ecosystems 8: 93–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-005-1421-6

Champion, H.G. & S.K. Seth (1968). Revised survey of the forest types of India. Manager of Publications, New Delhi, 404 pp.

Decamps, H., M. Fortune, F. Gazelle & G. Pautou (1988). Historical influence of man on the riparian dynamics of a fluvial landscape. Landscape Ecology 1(3): 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00162742

Dudgeon, D (2000). The ecology of tropical Asian rivers and streams in relation to biodiversity conservation. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 31: 239–263. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.31.1.239

Gamble, J.S. & C.E.C. Fischer (1915–36). Flora of the Presidency of Madras. Vol. 1–3, Adlard and Son Ltd., London.

Gregory, S.V., F.J. Swanson, W.A. McKee & K.W. Cummins (1991). An ecosystem perspective of riparian areas. BioScience 41(8): 540–551. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1311607

Hood, W.G. & R. Naiman (2000). Vulnerability of riparian zones to invasion by exotic vascular plants. Plant Ecology 148(1): 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009800327334

IPNI (2022). International Plant Names Index. Published on the Internet http://www.ipni.org, The Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Harvard University Herbaria & Libraries and Australian National Botanic Gardens. Retrieved 27 August 2022.

IUCN (2022). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2022-1. https://www.iucnredlist.org. Retrieved 27 August 2022.

Jackson, C.R., D.S. Leigh, S.L. Scarbrough & J.F. Chamblee (2015). Herbaceous versus forested riparian vegetation: narrow and simple versus wide, woody and diverse stream habitat. River Research and Applications 31(7): 847–857. https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.2783

Jansson, R., C. Nilsson, M. Dynesius & E. Andersson (2000). Effects of river regulation on river-margin vegetation: a comparison of eight boreal rivers. Ecological Applications 10(1): 203–224. https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[0203:EORROR]2.0.CO;2

Johansson, M.E., C. Nilsson & E. Nilsson (1996). Do rivers function as corridors for plant dispersal? Journal of Vegetation Science 7(4): 593–598. https://doi.org/10.2307/3236309

Kamp, K.V., M. Rigge, N.H. Troelstrup, A.J. Smart & B. Wylie (2013). Detecting channel riparian vegetation response to best-management-practices implementation in ephemeral streams with the use of spot high-resolution visible imagery. Rangeland Ecology & Management 66(1): 63–70. https://doi.org/10.2111/REM-D-11-00153.1

Kauffman, J.B., R.L. Beschta, N. Otting & D. Lytjen (1997). An ecological perspective of riparian and stream restoration in the western United States. Fisheries 22(5): 12–24. https://doi.org/10.1577/1548-8446(1997)022<0012:AEPORA>2.0.CO;2

Koponen, P., P. Nygren, D. Sabatier, A. Rousteau & E. Saur (2004). Tree species diversity and forest structure in relation to microtopography in a tropical freshwater swamp forest in French Guiana. Plant Ecology 173(1): 17–32. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:VEGE.0000026328.98628.b8

Lannerstad, M. & D. Molden (2009). Pumped out: basin closure and farmer adaptations in the Bhavani Basin in southern India, pp. 238–262. In: Francois, M. & P. Wester (eds.). River basin trajectories: societies, environments and development.: CABI, Wallingford, UK, International Water Management Institute (IWMI), Colombo, Sri Lanka, 238 pp.

Mathew, K.M. (1983). The flora of the Tamil Nadu Carnatic, Parts (1–3). Rapinat Herbarium, Tiruchirapalli.

Meek, C.S., D.M. Richardson & L. Mucina (2010). A river runs through it: land-use and the composition of vegetation along a riparian corridor in the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa. Biological Conservation 143(1): 156–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2009.09.021

Méndez-Toribio, M., I. Zermeño-Hernández & G. Ibarra-Manríquez (2014). Effect of land use on the structure and diversity of riparian vegetation in the Duero river watershed in Michoacán, Mexico. Plant Ecology 215(3): 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-014-0297-z

Myers, N., R.A. Mittermeier, C.G. Mittermeier, G.A. Da Fonseca & J. Kent (2000). Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403(6772): 853–858. https://doi.org/10.1038/35002501

Naiman, R.J. & H. Decamps (1997). The Ecology of Interfaces: Riparian Zones. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 28: 621–658. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.28.1.621

Naiman, R.J., H. Decamps & M. Pollock (1993). The Role of Riparian Corridors in Maintaining Regional Biodiversity. Ecological Applications 3(2): 209–212. https://doi.org/10.2307/1941822

Naiman, R.J., K.L. Fetherston, S. McKay & J. Chen (2001). Riparian forests, pp. 289–323. In: Naiman, R.J., R.E. Bilby & S. Kantor (eds.). River Ecology and Management: Lessons from the Pacific Coastal Ecoregion. Springer,Verlag, New York, 705 pp.

Narasimhan, D. & S.J. Irwin (2021). Flowering Plants of Tamil Nadu: A Compendium. Care Earth Trust, Chennai.

Natta, A.K. (2003). Ecological assessment of riparian forests in Benin: Phytodiversity, Phytosociology and Spatial Distribution of Tree Species. Ph.D. Thesis. Netherlands: Wageningen University, 215 pp.

Nilsson C., R. Jansson & U. Zinko (1997). Long-term responses of river-margin vegetation to water-level regulation. Science 276(5313): 798–800. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.276.5313.798

Nilsson, C. & M. Svedmark (2002). Basic principles and ecological consequences of changing water regimes: riparian plant communities. Environment Management 30(4): 468–480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-002-2735-2

Nilsson, C., A. Ekblad, M. Dynesius, S. Backe, M. Gardfjell, B. Carlberg, S. Hellqviist & R. Jansson (1994). A comparison of species richness and traits of riparian plants between a main river channel and its tributaries. Journal of Ecology 82(2): 281–295. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2261296

Paul, J. & K.V. George (2010). Studies on riverine flora of Pamba river basin, Kerala. Downloaded from Nature Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.1038/npre.2010.5135.1

Pielou, E.C (1966). The measurement of diversity in different types of biological collections. Journal of Theoretical Biology 13: 131–144.

Pither, R. & M. Kellman (2002). Tree species diversity in small, tropical riparian forest fragments in Belize, Central America. Biodiversity & Conservation 11(9): 1623–1636. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016831916994

POWO (2022). Plants of the World Online. Facilitated by the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Published on the Internet, http://www.plantsoftheworldonline.org/ Retrieved 17 August 2022.

Prabhakar, R. & J.P. Pascal (1996). Map of the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve area vegetation and land use (western, eastern and southern sheets (1/100,000). Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore and Institute Francais de,Pondicherry.

Richardson, D.M., P. M. Holmes, K.J. Esler, S.M. Galatowitsch, J.C. Stromberg, S.P. Kirkman, P. Pysek & R.J. Hobbs (2007). Riparian vegetation: degradation, alien plant invasions, and restoration prospects. Diversity and Distributions 13(1): 126–139. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1366-9516.2006.00314.x

Richter, F. (2000). Structure and Dynamics of Riverine Forest Vegetation. Eschborn, Germany, 93pp.

Sabo, J.L., R. Sponseller, M. Dixon, K. Gade, T. Harms, J. Heffernan, A. Jani, G. Katz, C. Soykan, J. Watts & J. Welter (2005). Riparian zones increase regional species richness by harboring different, not more, species. Ecology 86(1): 56–62. https://doi.org/10.1890/04-0668

Sambaré, O., F. Bognounou, R. Wittig & A. Thiombiano (2011). Woody species composition, diversity and structure of riparian forests of four watercourses types in Burkina Faso. Journal of Forestry Research 22(2): 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-011-0143-2

Shannon, C.E. & W. Weaver (1949). The Mathematical Theory of Communication., University of Illinois Press, Urbana, 117pp.

Stevens, P.F. (2001 onwards). Angiosperm Phylogeny Website. Version 14, July 2017 (and more or less continuously updated since).

Stockan, J.A., S.J. Langan & M.R. Young (2012). Investigating riparian margins for vegetation patterns and plant-environment relationships in northeast Scotland. Journal of Environmental Quality 41(2): 364–372. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2010.0518

Sukumar, R. (Ed.) (1989). The Asian elephant: Ecology and management. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 255 pp.

Sunil, C., R.K. Somashekar & B.C. Nagaraja (2010). Riparian vegetation assessment of Cauvery River Basin of South India. Environment Monitoring and Assessment 170(1–4): 545–553. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-009-1256-3

Sunil, C., R.K. Somashekar & B.C. Nagaraja (2011). Impact of anthropogenic disturbances on riparian forest ecology and ecosystem services in Southern India. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management 7(4): 273–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2011.631939

Suzuki, W., K. Osumi, T. Masaki, K. Takahashi, H. Daimaru & K. Hoshizaki (2002). Disturbance regimes and community structures of a riparian and an adjacent terrace stand in the Kanumazawa Riparian Research Forest, northern Japan. Forest Ecology and Management 157(1–3): 285–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00667-8

Tiegs, S.D., J.F. O’Leary, M.M. Pohl & C. Munill (2005). Flood disturbance and riparian species diversity on the Colorado River Delta. Biodiversity & Conservation 14(5): 1175–1194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-004-7841-4

Tockner, K. & J.A. Stanford (2002). Riverine flood plains: present state and future trends. Environmental Conservation 29(3): 308–330. https://doi.org/10.1017/S037689290200022X

Tropicos (2022). Missouri Botanical Garden. Published on the internet, http://www.tropicos.org. Accessed on 17 August 2022.

Villaseñor-Gomez, J.F (2008). Habitat use of wintering bird communities in Sonora, Mexico: the importance of riparian habitats. Studies in Avian Biology 37: 53–68.

Vincy, M.V., R. Brilliant, J. Paul & A.P. Pradeepkumar (2015). Comparison of riparian species diversity between the main river channel and subwatersheds of Meenachil river basin, Kerala, Southern India. Brazilian Journal of Botany 38(1): 81–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40415-014-0068-z

Ward, J.V., F. Malard & K. Tockner (2002). Landscape ecology: a framework for integrating pattern and process in river corridors. Landscape Ecology 17(Supplement 1):35–45. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015277626224

WFO (2022). World Flora Online. http://www.worldfloraonline.org. Accessed 17 August 2022

Wootton, J.T. (2012). River food web response to large-scale riparian zone manipulations. PLoS ONE 7(12): e51839. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0051839

Yang, J., T.E. Dilts, L.A. Condon, P.L. Turner & P.J. Weisberg (2011). Longitudinal- and transverse-scale environmental influences on riparian vegetation across multiple levels of ecological organization. Landscape Ecology 26(3): 381–395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-010-9565-z

Zavaleta, E. (2000). Valuing ecosystem services lost to Tamarix invasion in the United States, pp. 261–300. In:. Mooney, H.A. & R.J. Hobbs (eds.). Invasive Species in A Changing World. Island Press, Washington, 457 pp.