Biodiversity of Mexico according to Mittermeier et al. [2].
1. Introduction
1.1 Flora, fauna and vegetation
Mesoamerica (starting from the southern states of Mexico) differs from Central America, which is a geopolitical name. The expression “Middle America” is in use as well, which involves all areas south from the border of the US including the Islands of the Caribbean [1]. In this chapter the biodiversity of Mexico is presented and the literature on its protection is analyzed.
Mexico being the largest country in the region is very rich in species in itself (Tables 1–4). Lot of species occur even in the dry northern areas. In the Chihuahuan Desert 826 plant species are noted by Villarreal-Quintanilla et al. [7], out of which 560 are endemic, 165 are quasi-endemic and és 176 are microendemic. 116 taxa can be originated from a non-arid habitat. The most species-rich are Cactaceae with 141, Asteraceae with 106, Boraginaceae with 34 and Brassicaceae with 31 species. On the California Peninsula 723 endemic species are noted by Riemann and Exequiel [8], claiming that the great number of endemic species is due to the heterogenity of the environment. The flora and fauna are very interesting because the area of Mexico involves the border of
Vascular plants | 248 428 | 18000–30000 | 7–12 | 10000–15000 | 33–50 |
Amphibians | 4222 | 284 | 7 | 169 | 60 |
Reptiles | 6458 | 717 | 11 | 368 | 51 |
Birds | 9040 | 1050 | 12 | 125 | 12 |
Mammals | 4629 | 450 | 10 | 140 | 31 |
Cloud forest | 0.7 | 3000 | 30 |
Rainforest | 4.4 | 5000 | 5 |
Pine and oak | 12.9 | 7000 | 70 |
Xerophyl and steppe | 34.8 | 6000 | 60 |
Wetlands | 1.43 | 1000 | 15 |
Tropical deciduous | 7.9 | 6000 | 40 |
Agricultural and ruderal | ND | 2000 | 20 |
Chiapas moist forests | 5759 | 3000–4500 | 67 |
Chimalpas montane forests | 2076 | 2000–3000 | 49 |
Pantanos de Centla | 17152 | 1500–3000 | 11 |
Petén-Veracruz moist forests | 148604 | 5000–8000 | 31 |
Sierra de los Tuxtlas | 3890 | 2400–3500 | 11 |
Sierra Madre de Chiapas moist forests | 11218 | 3500–4700 | 34 |
Veracruz moist forests | 68949 | 4500–7000 | 20 |
Veracruz montane forests | 4942 | 2200–3500 | 55 |
Yucatán moist forests | 69485 | 1300–1900 | 64 |
Bajío dry forests | 37282 | 2900–5000 | 0,64 |
Balsas dry forests | 62249 | 2500–5100 | 2 |
Central American dry forests | 67777 | 2800–400 | 12 |
Chiapas Depression dry forests | 13974 | 1500–3500 | 7 |
Jalisco dry forests | 26051 | 1000–2500 | 26 |
Revillagigedo Islands dry forests | 210 | ND | ND |
Sierra de la Laguna dry forests | 3975 | 500–1000 | 0,008 |
Sinaloan dry forests | 77364 | 1700–2500 | 13 |
Sonoran-Sinaloan transition subtropical dry forest | 50326 | ND | ND |
Southern Pacific dry forests | 42283 | 2500–5100 | 15 |
Veracruz dry forests | 6616 | 900–2000 | 5 |
Central American pine-oak forests | 110948 | 4000–6000 | 42 |
Sierra de la Laguna pine-oak forests | 1061 | 700–1200 | 4 |
Sierra Juárez and San Pedro Mártir pine-oak forests | 4000 | ND | ND |
Sierra Madre de Oaxaca pine-oak forests | 14299 | 2500–3700 | 55 |
Sierra Madre del Sur pine-oak forests | 60976 | 3600–5000 | 43 |
Sierra Madre Occidental pine-oak forests | 222700 | ND | ND |
Sierra Madre Oriental pine-oak forests | 65600 | ND | ND |
Trans-Mexican volcanic belt pine-oak forests | 91800 | 4000–6000 | 26 |
Western Gulf coastal grasslands | 77425 | 2150–2250 | 3 |
Baja California desert | 45940 | 1500–2200 | 8 |
Central Mexican matorral | 59195 | 2500–4500 | 0,011 |
Chihuahuan desert | 501896 | 3300–3600 | 50 |
Gulf of California xeric shrub | 22573 | 900–1900 | 29 |
Meseta Central matorral | 124975 | 3000–4500 | 4 |
San Lucan xeric scrub | 3685 | ND | 12 |
Sonoran desert | 260000 | 2600–3000 | 37 |
Tamaulipan matorral | 16300 | 1500–2500 | 9 |
Tamaulipan mezquital | 141500 | 1700–2500 | 23 |
Tehuacan Valley matorral | 9842 | 0 | |
Central Mexican wetlands | 259 | 100–600 | ND |
Zacatonal | 306 | 150–500 | ND |
Alvarado mangroves | 4534 | 20–400 | 1,12 |
Marismas Nacionales-San Blas mangroves | 2034 | 20–400 | |
Mayan Corridor mangroves | 4079 | 20–400 | |
Mexican South Pacific Coast mangroves | 1168 | 20–400 | |
Petenes mangroves | 1971 | 20–400 | |
Ría Lagartos mangroves | 3457 | 20–400 | |
Tehuantepec-El Manchon mangroves | 2685 | 20–400 | |
Usumacinta mangroves | 3118 | 20–400 | |
California chaparral and woodlands | 121000 | 1550–1750 | 1 |
Veracruz | 664 | 101 |
Chiapas | 628 | 90 |
Oaxaca | 687 | 116 |
Jalisco | 481 | 107 |
Guerrero | 476 | 72 |
Puebla | 367 | 76 |
San Luis Potosí | 469 | 93 |
Michoacán | 460 | 79 |
Chihuahua | 329 | 95 |
Edo. México | 281 | 55 |
Tamaulipas | 444 | 90 |
Sonora | 456 | 100 |
Durango | 308 | 81 |
Nayarit | 407 | 72 |
Nuevo León | 252 | 63 |
Hidalgo | 236 | 59 |
Morelos | 274 | 46 |
Sinaloa | 460 | 69 |
Coahuila | 275 | 80 |
Tabasco | 370 | 47 |
Baja California | 292 | 95 |
Quintana Roo | 340 | 51 |
Distrito Federal | 222 | 44 |
Yucatán | 343 | 58 |
Baja California Sur | 258 | 77 |
Colima | 318 | 51 |
Zacatecas | 154 | 75 |
Guanajuato | 256 | 45 |
Campeche | 281 | 50 |
Querétaro | 181 | 36 |
Aguascalientes | 89 | 33 |
Tlaxcala | 89 | 21 |
Today tropical deciduous forest is typical on the western side but it is fragmented due to human activity and only 3% is protected. Agriculutal areas are concentrated in areas where the climate is seasonal that is why the reduction is faster than in the case of rainforests [14]. 10% and 19.7% of tropical forest and shrubland, respecively are protected. On the east side 28% of the rainforests are protected (Estado [15]). Examinations of flora and fauna are still not complete, our knowledge on the wildlife of the area is deficient [16, 17]. New species are still identified in Mexico such as
2. Environmental protection and biodiversity conservation
Since the nineties Mexico have been involved in the work of international environmental organizations with increasing activity and now have signed 44 international agreements. It is an active stakeholder of organizations such as the CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity) and CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora), CEC (Commission for Environmental Cooperation), Trilateral Committee, The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, EMSA (Mesoamerican Biological Corridor and the Mesoamerican Strategy of Environmental Sustainability). The NDP (National Development Plan) can be considered as a legal framework within the country providing basic regulations for the federal government by giving guidance for the work of the government with the development of clear strategies, setting regional aims and measures to be implemented, coordinating institutional and regional programs involving several areas [24].
The program, in which Mexico also participates, aiming to preserve biodiversity is the Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) that is an economic framework to plan and introduce payment schemes that provide market remuneration for ecosystem services [25]. This tool seems to be eligible for the protection of rainforests in the developing countries. 2.6 million hectares are involved in the program in Mexico, which in terms of money means 450 million USD and this is one of the biggest among such programs in the world [26]. With these territories approximately 25% of the biodiversity that needs protection is now included in the program [27]. According to Honey-Rosés et al. [28] 3–16% more forest were managed to be preserved along with those habitats that these forests include. Deforestation in those areas that are involved in the program is carried out at a slower rate, than in those that are not invovled. This can be beneficial to the population and to the owners of the forests as well since it can lead to other income sources, such as with the development of ecotourism. In the protected areas it is also important to invovle local residents and educate them on the importance of wildlife protection since mostly they only experience difficulties in accessing their resources [29, 30].
In order to preserve at least some part of biodiversity a system of protected areas is required. Determination of the most valuable protected areas can be carried out by ecological modeling. Torres-Miranda et al. [31] used red oaks and their distribution area to estimate (section
An experiment in the Tehuacán Valley showed that biodiversity is preserved with greater succes in areas under forest management than in areas that are not involved. Although, preserving rare species is limited even in this system. In average 59% of plant species and 94% of the genetic variety of dominant species (
3. Agricultural aspects
Traditional agriculture plays a part in sustaining biodiversity, since the landscape renews regularly. Traditional farming also has to be considered in the decision making process related to protected area [35]. Larios et al. [36] also claim that traditional farming has a great role in the preservation of biodiversity. According to a survey carried out in the area of the Tehuacán Valley 281vascular plants were identified even in the gardens out of which 34% were endemic. Though abundance of cultivated plants was the largest. The highest value (199) was found in gardens lying near the cloud forests in the mountains. The lowest valule (141) was found in those that are located near deciduous forests. This can be explained by the tendency that owners cultivate plants in their own land to compensate the rarity of useful species in the nearby forests.
An agricultural effort to protect the diversity of the species is the production of shade-grown coffee [37]. With the production of shade-grown coffee most of biodiversity can be preserved since a proportion of the original vegetation survives. Coffee produced with this method has a high price, which can encourage more and more people to choose this cultivation method. Cultivation area is increasing unfortunately to the detriment of the primary forest, thus in its current form this is not the appropriate method to preserve biodiversity [38]. For the protection of marine ecosystems aquaculture is spreading in Mexico as well regarding both fishes and marine invertebrates. The development of the technology means income for the economy and wildlife can also be protected since the importance of illegal fishing decreases. Aquacultural production can mean a legal income source for the local people, while overfishing and the decrease of biodiversity can be avoided [39].
Phytoremediation plays and important part in the region as well in the nutralisation of industrial pollutants, therefore the research of those organizations are important, which can be used for this purpose [40]. An abandoned mine in the state of Hidalgo was recultivated and the area was reforested. 56 species representing 29 families were managed to be planted. Samples of AMF (Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi) from tree roots
Area, estimated number of species and percentage of remaining intact vegetation. The boundaries of ecoregions are not the same as national borders.
References
- 1.
Winkler, K. (2011): Middle America, not Mesoamerica, is the accurate term for biogeography. – The Condor 113(1): 5-6 - 2.
Mittermeier, R.A., Myers, N., Mittermeier, C.G. (1999): Hotspots: Earth's biologically richest and Most endangered terrestrial ecoregions. – Journal of Mammalogy 83(2): 630-633 - 3.
Flores-Villela, O., Gerez, P. (1994): Biodiversidad y conservación en México: vertebrados, vegetación y uso del suelo. – Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de La Biodiversidad y Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, México - 4.
Kier, G., Mutke, J., Dinerstein, E., Ricketts, T.H., Küper, Kreft, H., Barthlott, W. (2005): Global patterns of plant diversity and floristic knowledge. – Journal of Biogeography 32(7): 1107-1116 - 5.
Dinerstein, E., Vynne, C., Sala, E., Joshi, A.R., Fernando, S., Lovejoy, T.E., Mayorga, J., Olson, D., Asner, G.P., Baillie, J.E.M., Burgess, N.D., Burkart, K., Noss, R.F., Baccini, A., Birch, T., Hahn, N., Joppa, L.N., Wikramanayake, E. (2019): A global Deal for nature: Guiding principles, milestones, and targets. – Science Advances 5(4): eaaw2869 - 6.
CONABIO. (1998): La diversidad biológica en México: Estudio de País, 1998. – Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad. México - 7.
Villarreal-Quintanilla, J.A., Bartolomé-Hernández, J.A., Estrada-Castillón, E., Ramírez-Rodríguez, H., Martínez-Amador, S. J. (2017): The endemic element of the Chihuahuan Desert vascular flora. – Acta Botanica Mexicana 118: 65-96 - 8.
Riemann, H., Exequiel, E. (2007): Endemic regions of the vascular Flora of the peninsula of Baja California, Mexico. – Journal of Vegetation Science 18(3): 327-336 - 9.
Villaseñor, J.L., Ortiz, E., Delgadillo-Moya, C., Juárez, D. (2020): The breadth of the Mexican transition zone as defined by its flowering plant generic flora. – PLoS ONE 15(6): e0235267 - 10.
López-González, C., Presley, S.J., Lozano, A., Stevens, R.D., Higgins, C.L. (2015): Ecological biogeography of Mexican bats: The relative contributions of habitat heterogeneity, beta diversity, and environmental gradients to species richness and composition patterns. – Ecography 38: 261-272 - 11.
Fernández, J.A. (2012): Phylogenetics and biogeography of the microendemic rodent Xerospermophilus perotensis (Perote ground squirrel) in the oriental basin of Mexico. – Journal of Mammalogy 93(6): 1431-1439 - 12.
Fernández, J.A., Cervantes, F.A., Hafner, M.S. (2012): Molecular systematics and biogeography of the Mexican endemic kangaroo rat, Dipodomys phillipsii (Rodentia: Heteromyidae). – Journal of Mammalogy 93(2): 560-571 - 13.
Moonlight, P.W., Richardson, J.E., Tebbitt, M.C., Thomas, D.C., Hollands, R., Peng, C.I., Hughes, M. (2015): Continental-scale diversification patterns in a megadiverse genus: The biogeography of neotropical begonia. – Journal of Biogeography 42: 1137-1149 - 14.
Chazdon, R.L., Harvey, C.A., Martínez-Ramos, M., Balvanera, P., Schondube, J.E., Stoner, K.E., Cabadilla, L.D.A., Flores-Hidalgo, M. (2011): Seasonally dry tropical Forest biodiversity and conservation value in agricultural landscapes of Mesoamerica. – In: Dirzo, R., Young, H.S., Mooney, H.A., Ceballos, G. (eds.) Seasonally Dry Tropical Forests. Island Press, Washington, DC - 15.
Estado de la Región. (2008): Estado de la Región en Desarrollo Humano Sostenible un informe desde Centroamérica y para Centroamérica. – Programa Estado de la Región. San José, Costa Rica - 16.
Bastida-Zavala, J.R., del Socorro García-Madrigal, M., Rosas-Alquicira, E.F., López-Pérez, R.A., Benítez-Villalobos, F., Meraz-Hernando, J.F., Torres-Huerta, A.M., Montoya-Márquez, A., Barrientos-Luján, N.A. (2013): Marine and coastal biodiversity of Oaxaca, Mexico. – Check List 9(2): 329-390 - 17.
de León, G.P.P., García-Prieto, L., Mendoza-Garfia, B. (2011): Describing parasite biodiversity: The case of the helminth Fauna of wildlife vertebrates in Mexico. – In: Grillo, O., Venora, G. Changing Diversity in Changing Environment. BoD – Books on Demand - 18.
Hershler, R., Liu, H.P., Landye, J.J. (2011): New species and records of springsnails (Caenogastropoda: Cochliopidae: Tryonia) from the Chihuahuan Desert (Mexico and United States), an imperiled biodiversity hotspot. – Zootaxa 3001: 1-32 - 19.
Sáenz-Romero, C., Rehfeldt, G.E., Crookston, N.L., Duval, P., St-Amant, R., Beaulieu, J., Richardson, B.A. (2010): Spline models of contemporary, 2030, 2060 and 2090 climates for Mexico and their use in understanding climate-change impacts on the vegetation. – Climatic Change 102: 595-623 - 20.
Silva-Flores, R., Pérez-Verdín, G., Wehenkel, C. (2014): Patterns of tree species diversity in relation to climatic factors on the Sierra Madre occidental, Mexico. – PLOS One 9(8): e105034 - 21.
Mosco, A. (2017): Niche characteristics and potential distribution of Thelocactus species, a Mexican genus of globular cacti. – doi:10.1101/124511. PPR:PPR32150 - 22.
Peters, R., Ripple, W.J., Wolf, C., Moskwik, M., Carreón-Arroyo, G., Ceballos, G., Córdova, A., Dirzo, R., Ehrlich, P.R., Flesch, A.D., List, R., Lovejoy, T.E., Noss, R.F., Pacheco, J., Sarukhán, J.K., Soulé, M.E., Wilson, E.O., Miller, J.R.B., and 2556 scientist signatories from 43 countries. (2018): Nature Divided, Scientists United: US–Mexico Border Wall Threatens Biodiversity and Binational Conservation. – BioScience 68(10): 740-743 - 23.
Lasky, J.R., Jetz, W., Keitt, T.H. (2011): Conservation biogeography of the US–Mexico border: A transcontinental risk assessment of barriers to animal dispersal. – Diversity and Distributions 17: 673-687 - 24.
Dávila, P., Benítez, H., Barrios, Y., Cruz-Angón, A., Álvarez-Girard, N. (2011): Definition and insertion of the GSPC in the political context of Mexico. – Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 166(3): 326-330 - 25.
Fodor, R.K. (2014): Ökoszisztéma szolgáltatások egy újfajta keretrendszerben. – In: Lukovics, M., Zuti, B. A területi fejlődés dilemmái. SZTE Gazdaságtudományi Kar, Szeged - 26.
Alix-Garcia, J.M., Sims, K.R.E., Yañez-Pagans, P. (2015): Only one tree from each seed? Environmental effectiveness and poverty alleviation in Mexico's payments for ecosystem. – American Economic Journal: Economic Policy 7(4): 1-40 - 27.
Costedoat, S., Corbera, E., Ezzine-de-Blas, D., Honey-Rosés, J., Baylis, Castillo-Santiago, M.A. (2015): How Effective Are Biodiversity Conservation Payments in Mexico? – PLoS ONE 10(3): e0119881 - 28.
Honey-Rosés, J., Baylis, K., Ramírez, M.I. (2011): A spatially explicit estimate of avoided forest loss. – Conservation Biology 25(5): 1032-1043 - 29.
Durand, L., Vázquez, L.B. (2011): Biodiversity conservation discourses. A case study on scientists and government authorities in sierra de Huautla biosphere reserve, Mexico. – Land Use Policy 28: 76-82 - 30.
Mendez-Lopez, M.E., García-Frapolli, E., Pritchard, D.J., Gonzalez, M.C.S., Ruiz-Mallen, I., Porter-Bolland, L., Reyes-Garcia, V. (2014): Local participation in biodiversity conservation initiatives: A comparative analysis of different models in south East Mexico. – Journal of Environmental Management 145: 321-329 - 31.
Torres-Miranda, A., Luna-Vega, I., Oyama, K. (2011): Conservation biogeography of red oaks (Quercus, section Lobatae) in Mexico and Central America. – American Journal of Botany 98(2): 290-305 - 32.
Sanborn, A.F., Phillips, P.K. (2013): Biogeography of the cicadas (Hemiptera: Cicadidae) of North America, North of Mexico. – Diversity 5: 166-239 - 33.
Moreno-Calles, A., Casas, A., Blancas, J., Torres, I., Masera, O., Caballero, J., Garcia-Barrios, L., Perez-Negron, E., Rangel-Landa, S. (2010): Agroforestry systems and biodiversity conservation in arid zones: The case of the Tehuacan Valley, Central Mexico. – Agroforestry Systems 80: 315-331 - 34.
Vallejo, M., Casas, A., Blancas, J., Moreno-Calles, A.I., Solís, L., Rangel-Landa, S., Dávila, P., Téllez, O. (2014): Agroforestry systems in the highlands of the Tehuacán Valley, Mexico: Indigenous cultures and biodiversity conservation. – Agroforestry Systems 88: 125-140 - 35.
Robson, J.P., Berkes, F. (2011): Exploring some of the myths of land use change: Can rural to urban migration drive declines in biodiversity? – Global Environmental Change 21: 844-854 - 36.
Larios, C., Casas, A., Vallejo, M., Moreno-Calles, A.I., Blancas, J. (2013): Plant management and biodiversity conservation in Náhuatl homegardens of the Tehuacán Valley, Mexico. – Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 9:74 - 37.
Ruben, R., Zuniga, G. (2010): How standards compete: Comparative impact of coffee certification schemes in northern Nicaragua. – Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 16(2): 98-109 - 38.
Tejeda-Cruz, C., Silva-Rivera, E., Barton, J.R., Sutherland, W.J. (2010): Why shade coffee does not guarantee biodiversity conservation. – Ecology and Society 15(1): 13 - 39.
Solís-Marín, F.A., Honey-Escandón, M.B.I., Herrero-Perezrul, M.D., Benitez-Villalobos, F., Díaz-Martínez, J.P., Buitrón-Sánchez, B.E., Palleiro-Nayar, J.S., Durán-González, A. (2013): The echinoderms of Mexico: Biodiversity, distribution and current state of knowledge. – In: Alvarado, J.J., Solís-Marín, F.A. (eds.) Echinoderm Research and Diversity in Latin America. – Springer-Verlag, Berlin - 40.
Wong-Arguelles, C., Alonso-Castro, A.J., Ilizaliturri-Hernandez, C.A., Carranza-Alvarez, C. (2020): Credibility of In Situ Phytoremediation for Restoration of Disturbed Environments. – In: Hakeem, K., Bhat, R., Qadri, H. Bioremediation and Biotechnology. Springer, Cham - 41.
del Pilar Ortega-Larrocea, M., Xoconostle-Cazares, B., Maldonado-Mendoza, I.E., Carrillo-Gonzalez, R., Hernandez-Hernandez, J., Garduño, M.D., Lopez-Meyer, M., Gomez-Flores, L., del Carmen A. Gonzalez-Chavez, M. (2010): Plant and fungal biodiversity from metal mine wastes under remediation at Zimapan, Hidalgo, Mexico. – Environmental Pollution 158: 1922-1931 - 42.
Coleman-Derr, D., Desgarennes, D., Fonseca-Garcia, C., Gross, S., Clingenpeel, S., Woyke, T., North, G., Visel, A., Partida-Martinez, L.P., Tringe, S.G. (2016): Plant compartment and biogeography affect microbiome composition in cultivated and native agave species. – New Phytologist 209: 798-811 - 43.
Panke-Buisse, K., Poole, A.C., Goodrich, J.K., Ley, R.E., Kao-Kniffin, J. (2015): Selection on soil microbiomes reveals reproducible impacts on plant function. – ISME Journal 9: 980-989 - 44.
Turner, T.R., James, E.K., Poole, P.S. (2013): The plant microbiome. – Genome Biology 14: 209 - 45.
Folaranmi, J. (2013): Production of Biodiesel (B100) from Jatropha Oil Using Sodium Hydroxide as Catalyst. – Journal of Petroleum Engineering Article ID: 956479 - 46.
Fresnedo-Ramírez, J., Orozco-Ramírez, Q. (2013): Diversity and distribution of genus Jatropha in Mexico. – Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 60: 1087-1104