Talk:Tropical and subtropical dry broadleaf forests

Untitled

well i think that it should be that there is a tropical ry forest at —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.92.185.162 (talk) 11:35, 6 October 2008 (UTC) Incorporated a bunch of information from a WWF site that was very informative. I wrote them, and got express permission to use it. Let me know if any of you find this inappropriate. aysha aneekah

Stian Haklev to questions Jan 27 (5 days ago) I came across the page http://www.panda.org/about_wwf/where_we_work/ecoregions/global200/pages/habitat/habitat02.htm, and I would like to incorporate some of this material on the public, freely available Wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Tropical_and_subtropical_dry_broadleaf_forests, but I need your permission to do so. Information about Wikipedia's copyright might be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Wikipedia:Copyrights.

Stian Haklev University of Toronto

---

From: Questions Questions <questions@wwfint.org> To: Stian Haklev Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 01:05:23 +0100 Subject: Re: Use of material on Wikipedia Hello Stian

I have received a reply to your request. We are very happy to let you use the material that you need as long as it credited appropriately;

http://panda.org/credits.cfm

Also, you may like to use content from our more up to date G200 site;

www.panda.org/g200

Hope this helps and good luck

Best Regards, Online Team WWF International

Houshuang 06:12, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Conservation

Effective conservation of dry broadleaf forests requires the preservation of large and continuous areas of forest.

I wonder how useful this statement is here. Since DF are less species rich than RF, the areal requirement is actually lower. In addition, since the canopy is more open and the species are more drought resistant, I suspect that edge effects are less pronouced than they are in more humid forests.

To some extent this statement is a truism, but there is a lack of real hard evidence. In fact, Janzen's successes in restoring dry forest in Guanacaste province, Costa Rica, are based on discontinuous areas of forest. So while this statement is not incorrect, it is less important than it would be for rainforests. Any thoughts? [[User:

You should feel free to remove it if you think it is misleading.Guettarda|Guettarda]] 21:35, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I don't think the statement is untrue; most of the evidence I have seen suggests that effective conservation in virtually all biomes, especially with regard to megafaunal predators, is best accomplished by preserving large and continuous areas.

The question is whether this is especially true of tropical dry forests. The rest of the text in that section, which talks about the generally larger ranges of dry forest megafauna, recovery after disruption from fire, and the need to include riparian forests in conservation units, suggests to me that the larger conservation units may indeed be called for. Tom Radulovich 17:36, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Ok, makes sense to me. Guettarda 19:36, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) i think it needs more information like about the climate and diversity

Understory

The newly bare trees open up the canopy layer, enabling sunlight to reach ground level and facilitate the growth of thick underbrush.

I disagree with this info, but it comes straight from the WWF site. Canopies in Caribbean dry forests are open enough to allow seed germination under the canopy, but "thick underbrush" is really only present in burned sites. In contrast to how this is presented, I would say that in the dry season the trees have more access to moisture than anything in the understorey. Still, I don't know Old World dry forests well enough - I know that fires are considered a "normal" part of the system, and that fires result in grassy understoreys, which are important for animals. I don't want to impose a neotropical POV but... Does the sentence suggest the the deciduousness is the cause for the understorey? If so, I disagree. If it merely suggests that understorey plants benefit from the increase in light - I am skeptical, but I can live with it. Guettarda 19:36, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) Please, check your grammar.

Listing animals

I don't see what the value is in listing additional animals. I don't really see what the benefit is of the existing list, but adding more specific examples only makes the random nature of the list more apparent. Guettarda 13:18, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

found a clumsy phrase. hopefully this inspires better phrasing  :-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tropical_and_subtropical_dry_broadleaf_forests&action=edit&section=1
toward parenthetical.2z2z (talk) 05:09, 7 June 1993 (UTC) I do not know who this is... I am a scientist at Black Mesa and am learning about biomes. I believe tropical rainforests are quite fascinating. There are so many species of flora and fauna that consist in many tropical rainforests in the world!

Monsoon forest redirected to here

A small article called Monsoon forest was recently-created. As the terms are pretty much synonymous I WP:BOLDly redirected that page here. Older versions can be found in that page's edit history or the last version before I turned it into a redirect. Please merge any relevant material into this article. Thanks. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 18:23, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Removal of list under geographical variation

I've removed a list of specific forests. I've done that for two reasons. Firstly, it isn't in keeping with WP:EMBED. The list doesn't meet any of the appropriate reasons for embedding a list in an article, yet takes up over half the space of the article. Secondly, it is inaccurate because it is incomplete. A list, with no qualifications, under geographical variation should list that variation. This list doesn't do that. For example, it lists no forests geographically in Australia, implying that th geogrphic range of these forests doesn't extend to that continent. If the lsit isn't goint to be compete, then it shouldn't be here. Mark Marathon (talk) 04:28, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tropical and subtropical dry broadleaf forests. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061107024829/http://www.panda.org/about_wwf/where_we_work/ecoregions/about/habitat_types/selecting_terrestrial_ecoregions/habitat02.cfm to http://www.panda.org/about_wwf/where_we_work/ecoregions/about/habitat_types/selecting_terrestrial_ecoregions/habitat02.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:59, 21 January 2018 (UTC)