differences between forest zone and Savanna zone
Answers
Answer:
Specifically, we suggest that tropical mesic savannas are predominantly mixed tree–C4 grass systems defined by fire tolerance and shade intolerance of their species, while forests, from which C4 grasses are largely absent, have species that are mostly fire intolerant and shade tolerant and please follow my channel
Answer:
Savannas are defined based on vegetation structure, the central concept being a discontinuous tree cover in a continuous grass understorey. However, at the high‐rainfall end of the tropical savanna biome, where heavily wooded mesic savannas begin to structurally resemble forests, or where tropical forests are degraded such that they open out to structurally resemble savannas, vegetation structure alone may be inadequate to distinguish mesic savanna from forest. Additional knowledge of the functional differences between these ecosystems which contrast sharply in their evolutionary and ecological history is required. Specifically, we suggest that tropical mesic savannas are predominantly mixed tree–C4 grass systems defined by fire tolerance and shade intolerance of their species, while forests, from which C4 grasses are largely absent, have species that are mostly fire intolerant and shade tolerant. Using this framework, we identify a suite of morphological, physiological and life‐history traits that are likely to differ between tropical mesic savanna and forest species. We suggest that these traits can be used to distinguish between these ecosystems and thereby aid their appropriate management and conservation. We also suggest that many areas in South Asia classified as tropical dry forests, but characterized by fire‐resistant tree species in a C4 grass‐dominated understorey, would be better classified as mesic savannas requiring fire and light to maintain the unique mix of species that characterize them.
Savannas are mixed tree–grass systems characterized by a discontinuous tree canopy in a continuous grass layer (Scholes & Archer, 1997; House et al ., 2003, and references therein). Within the bounds of this definition, actual tree cover in the world's savannas is highly variable, such that they range from sparsely ‘treed’ grasslands to heavily ‘treed’ woodlands, often along a gradient of increasing precipitation, but also modified by edaphic factors (Scholes & Archer, 1997; Sankaran et al ., 2005; Lloyd et al ., 2008). This classical definition of savannas accurately captures the salient structural features of savanna vegetation, but contains little information about the functional ecology or evolution of these ecosystems. This distinction can be a critical one in a few important instances, as we illustrate below.
Across the globe, there is much concern over what is referred to as the ‘savannization’ of tropical forests but this is primarily a structural reference to loss of trees from tropical forest areas to clear felling or logging, often followed by fires (see Barlow & Peres, 2008, for more on the ‘savannization’ issue). While such degraded forest areas, which are extensive in the tropics, may ‘look’ like savannas due to low tree cover, their functional ecology in terms of which species predominate and how these communities respond to perturbation is entirely different from that of true savannas (Barlow & Peres, 2008; Malhi et al ., 2009). Likewise, at the mesic end of the tropical savanna biome where densely wooded savannas occur alongside forests, transitions between the savanna and forest may either be abrupt or may occur gradually through a savanna–forest ecotone. In the latter case, distinguishing a ‘treed’ savanna from a degraded forest based only on vegetation structure may be problematic, whereas there would be large functional and compositional differences between the two ecosystems. Clearly, in these contexts, the structural definition of savannas alone is inadequate to distinguish mesic savanna from forest; what is additionally needed is knowledge of differences in the functional ecology of these ecosystems. In this contribution, we outline critical differences between tropical mesic savanna and forest environments, and identify a suite of contrasting physiological, morphological and life‐history traits that differ between them from the individual to the community level. We suggest that these functional traits, which reflect both ecological function and evolutionary history, should be used to distinguish between mesic savannas and degraded forests (Key 1, Table 1) and thereby aid in appropriate management and conservation of these systems.
Explanation:
Hope it will help u
follow me
mark this answer as brain list