URBAN TREE COMPOSITION AND DIVERSITY ASSESSMENT IN A PUBLIC PARK USING TAXONOMIC IMBALANCE INDICATORS: THE CASE OF ATATÜRK PARK, KAHRAMANMARAŞ

Year 2025, Volume: 9 Issue: 2, 439 - 454, 27.10.2025

Mert Çakır , Mahmut Tuğluer

https://doi.org/10.32328/turkjforsci.1746885

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the urban tree composition of Atatürk Park in Kahramanmaraş through indicators of taxonomic imbalance. 733 tree individuals were identified within the park, representing 25 species, 22 genera, and 14 families. Species diversity was evaluated using 10-20-30 rule in conjunction with the Pest Vulnerability Matrix (PVM). The findings revealed that Cupressus sempervirens accounted for 30.42% of all individuals, indicating clear dominance at the species level. Additionally, Gleditsia triacanthos (16.23%) and Acer negundo (10.10%) exceeded the recommended species thresholds. The five most common species constituted 74.76% of the total, while the top ten species represented 93.99%. At the genus level, Cupressus (30.42%) was the most dominant, and at the family level, Cupressaceae (32.20%) exceeded the 30% threshold. These results show taxonomic imbalance ratios of 30.42% for species, 30.42% for genus, and 32.20% for family levels, indicating that the park falls within the high vulnerability category according to the PVM. Among all tree individuals, 59.89% were angiosperms and 40.11% were gymnosperms; phenologically, 59.75% were deciduous broadleaf, 40.11% coniferous, and only 0.14% evergreen broadleaf. Regarding provenance, native species made up 62.76% of the population, while exotic species constituted 37.24%. These findings reveal that the park exhibits insufficient taxonomic diversity and a high dependence on a few taxa, which contributes to ecological vulnerability. As a result, tree-planting strategies based on taxonomic balance and increased use of native species are recommended to promote sustainable urban forestry.

Keywords

Urban tree planting , biodiversity , taxonomic imbalance.

TAKSONOMİK DENGESİZLİK GÖSTERGELERİYLE KENTSEL BİR PARKTA AĞAÇ TÜRÜ ÇEŞİTLİLİĞİNİN DEĞERLENDIRİLMESİ: KAHRAMANMARAŞ ATATÜRK PARKI ÖRNEĞİ

Abstract

Bu çalışma, Kahramanmaraş Atatürk Parkı'ndaki kentsel ağaç kompozisyonunu taksonomik dengesizlik göstergeleri doğrultusunda analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Alanda yapılan envanter çalışmasında 733 ağaç bireyi tespit edilmiş olup, bu bireyler 25 tür, 22 cins ve 14 familyaya aittir. Çeşitlilik değerlendirmesinde 10-20-30 kuralı ile Zararlılara Duyarlılık Matrisi (Pest Vulnerability Matrix – PVM) birlikte kullanılmıştır. Bulgular, tür düzeyinde Cupressus sempervirens’in %30.42’lik oranla baskın olduğunu; ayrıca Gleditsia triacanthos (%16.23) ve Acer negundo (%10.10) gibi egzotik türlerin de eşik değerleri aştığını göstermektedir. En yaygın beş tür park genelinin %74.76’sını, ilk on tür ise %93.99’unu oluşturmaktadır. Cins düzeyinde Cupressus (%30.42), familya düzeyinde ise Cupressaceae (%32.20) açık ara baskındır. Bu durum, tür, cins ve familya düzeylerinde sırasıyla %30.42, %30.42 ve %32.20 oranlarında taksonomik dengesizlik bulunduğunu ve parkın PVM’ye göre yüksek kırılganlık risk grubunda yer aldığını göstermektedir. Ağaç bireylerinin %59.89’u angiosperm, %40.11’i gymnosperm grubuna aittir; fenolojik olarak %59.75’i yaprağını döken geniş yapraklı, %40.11’i iğne yapraklı, yalnızca %0.14’ü her dem yeşil geniş yapraklıdır. Köken açısından değerlendirildiğinde, bireylerin %62.76’sı yerli, %37.24’ü egzotik türlerden oluşmaktadır. Bu bulgular, parkta taksonomik çeşitliliğin yetersiz olduğunu ve belirli taksonlara aşırı bağımlılığın ekolojik kırılganlık yarattığını ortaya koymaktadır. Sonuç olarak, sürdürülebilir kentsel ormancılık açısından taksonomik dengeye dayalı dikim stratejilerinin benimsenmesi ve yerli türlerin çeşitlendirilerek kullanılması önerilmektedir.

Keywords

Kentsel ağaçlandırma , biyoçeşitlilik , taksonomik dengesizlik.

References

• Almas, A. D., & Conway, T. M. (2016). The role of native species in urban forest planning and practice: A case study of Carolinian Canada. Urban forestry & urban greening, 17, 54-62. DOI: /10.1016/j.ufug.2016.01.015
• Aronson, M. F., Lepczyk, C. A., Evans, K. L., Goddard, M. A., Lerman, S. B., MacIvor, J. S., Nilon, C. H., & Vargo, T. (2017). Biodiversity in the city: key challenges for urban green space management. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 15(4), 189-196.
• Alvey, A. A. (2006). Promoting and preserving biodiversity in the urban forest. Urban forestry & urban greening, 5(4), 195-201. DOI: 10.1016/j.ufug.2006.09.003
• Birdsey, R. A., Heath, L. S. 1995. Carbon changes in U.S. forests. In: Productivity of America’s Forest and Climatic Change, L. A. Joyce (ed.), U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Colorado.
• Davis, P. H. (1985). Flora of Turkey and the East Aegean Islands, Volume 9. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
• Del Tredici, P. (2000). The evolution, ecology, and cultivation of Ginkgo biloba. In Ginkgo biloba (pp. 25-42). CRC Press.
• Ekren, E., Çorbacı, Ö.L., & Kordon, S. (2024). Evaluation of plants based on ecological tolerance criteria: A case study of urban open green spaces in Rize, Turkiye, Turkish Journal of Forest Science, 8(2), 108-132.
• Gómez-Baggethun, E., & Barton, D. N. (2013). Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning. Ecological economics, 86, 235-245.
• Google Earth. (2025). Kahramanmaraş, Türkiye (Satellite imagery). Google. https://earth.google.com/ Accessed 17.07.2025
• Jim, C. Y., & Chen, W. Y. (2008). Pattern and divergence of tree communities in Taipei's main urban green spaces. Landscape and Urban Planning, 84(3-4), 312-323. DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.09.001
• Kara, B. (2012). Assessment of the distribution and diversity of street tree species in Aydin, Turkey. Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment, 10(3-4), 919-928.
• Kendal, D., Williams, K. J., & Williams, N. S. (2012). Plant traits link people's plant preferences to the composition of their gardens. Landscape and urban planning, 105(1-2), 34-42.
• Kendal, D., Williams, N. S., & Williams, K. J. (2012). A cultivated environment: exploring the global distribution of plants in gardens, parks and streetscapes. Urban Ecosystems, 15(3), 637-652.
• Kenis, M., Tomov, R., Svatos, A., Schlinsog, P., Lopez Vamonde, C., Heitland, W., Grabenweger, G., Girardoz, S., Freise, J., & Avtzis, N. (2005). The horse-chestnut leaf miner in europe – prospects and constraints for biological control. In Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Biological Control of Arthropods (pp. 12-16). USDA Forest Service.
• Konijnendijk, C. (2008). Erratum to "Urban green space, street tree and heritage large tree assessment in Bangkok, Thailand", Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 7(4), 315-315.
• Kordon, S. (2024). Cultivating Benefits: A review of the types of community gardens enhancing urban life. In Gül, A., Demirel, Ö. & Akten, S. (Eds.) Climate Change, Carbon Management and Green Space Systems in Architectural Sciences, 340-369.
• Laćan, I., & McBride, J. R. (2008). Pest vulnerability matrix (PVM): A graphic model for assessing the interaction between tree species diversity and urban forest susceptibility to insects and diseases. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 7(4), 291–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2008.07.002
• Lakicevic, M., Reynolds, K. M., Orlovic, S., & Kolarov, R. (2022). Measuring dendrofloristic diversity in urban parks in Novi Sad (Serbia). Trees, Forests and People, 8, 1-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.tfp.2022.100239
• Maurer, U., Peschel, T., & Schmitz, S. (2000). The flora of selected land-use types in Berlin and Potsdam with regard to nature conservation in cities. Landscape and Urban Planning, 46(1), 209-215. DOI: 10.1016/S0169-2046(99)00066-3
• Turkish State Meteorological Service. (2025). Climate data. https://mgm.gov.tr/ Accessed 17.07.2025
• Nagendra, H., & Gopal, D. (2011). Tree diversity, distribution, history and change in urban parks: studies in Bangalore, India. Urban Ecosystems, 14(2), 211-223. DOI: 10.1007/s11252-010-0148-1
• Nowak, D. J., & Dwyer, J. F. (2007). Understanding the benefits and costs of urban forest ecosystems. In J. E. Kuser (Ed.), Urban and Community Forestry in the Northeast (pp. 25–46). Springer.
• Nyambane, D. O., Njoroge, J. B., & Watako, A.O. (2016). Assessment of tree species distribution and diversity in the major urban green spaces of Nairobi city, Kenya. Journal of Horticulture and Forestry, 8(2), 12-23. DOI: 10.5897/JHF2016.0439
• Ögçe, H., Şatıroğlu, E., Bekiryazıcı, F. & Dinçer, D. (2022). Comparing urban parks' woody plant diversity in seven different locations of Turkey. Forestist, 72(3), 266-274. http://doi.org/10.54614/forestist.2022.21038
• Ogwu, M. C., Osawaru, M. E., Obayuwana, & O. K. (2016). Diversity and abundance of tree species in the University of Benin, Benin City, Nigeria. Applied Tropical Agriculture, 21(3), 46-54.
• OpenStreetMap contributors. (2025). OpenStreetMap (Map). https://www.openstreetmap.org/ Accessed 17.07.2025
• Pandey, R. K., Hemant, H. K. (2018). Tree species diversity and composition in urban green spaces of Allahabad city (UP). Plant Archives, 18(2), 2687-2692.
• Pérez Soba, M., Harrison, P. A., Smith, A. C., Simpson, G., Uiterwijk, M., Ayala, L. M., Archaux, F., Blicharska, M., Erős, T., Fabrega, N., György, Á. I., Haines-Young, R., Li, S., Lommelen, E., Meiresonne, L., Mononen, L., Stange, E., Turkelboom, F., Veerkamp, C., & de Echeverria, V. W. (2015). Database and operational classification system of ecosystem service–natural capital relationships. European Commission FP7.
• Plants of the World Online (POWO). (2025). Royal Botanic Gardens Kew. https://powo.science.kew.org/ Accessed 11.07.2025
• Raupp, M. J., Cumming, A. B., & Raupp, E. C. (2006). Street tree diversity in eastern North America and its potential for tree loss to exotic borers. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF), 32(6), 297-304.
• Richardson, D. M. (Ed.). (2000). Ecology and biogeography of Pinus. Cambridge University Press.
• Santamour, F. S. (1990). Trees for urban planting: diversity, uniformity, and common sense. In Proceedings of the 7th conference of the metropolitan tree improvement alliance (Vol. 7, No. 7, pp. 57-66). Lisle, IL: Metria.
• Santos, R. O.., Soares, R. N., & Silva, B. (2019). Compositional similarity of urban green areas in Southeastern Brazil. Floresta e Ambiente, 26(2), e20170747. DOI: 10.1590/2179-8087.074717
• Seto, K. C., Güneralp, B., & Hutyra, L. R. (2012). Global forecasts of urban expansion to 2030 and direct impacts on biodiversity and carbon pools. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(40), 16083–16088. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1211658109
• Sever Mutlu, S., Selim, C., & Ün, G. (2017). Plant biodiversity of urban roadside trees in Antalya, Turkey. Kastamonu University Journal of Forestry Faculty, 17(1), 80-87.
• Sjöman, H., Östberg, J., & Bühler, O. (2012). Diversity and distribution of the urban tree population in ten major Nordic cities. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 11(1), 31-39.
• The Plant List. (2013). The Plant List: A working list of all plant species. http://www.theplantlist.org/ Accessed 16.07.2025
• Tzoulas, K., Korpela, K., Venn, S., Yli-Pelkonen, V., Kaźmierczak, A., Niemela, J., & James, P. (2007). Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using green infrastructure: A literature review. Landscape and urban planning, 81(3), 167-178.
• USDA Forest Service. (2020). Dutch elm disease and its control. Oklahoma State University Extension. https://extension.okstate.edu/fact-sheets/dutch-elm-disease-and-its- control.html. Accessed 16.07.2025
• USDA NRCS. (2025). The PLANTS database. National Plant Data Team. https://plants.usda.gov/ Accessed 13.07.2025
• Wang, S., & Zhang, H. (2022). Tree composition and diversity in relation to urban park history in Hong Kong, China. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 67, 1-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127430
• Xie, C. (2018). Tree diversity in urban parks of Dublin, Ireland,” Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 27(12A), 8695-8708.
• Yang, J., La Sorte, F. A., Pyšek, P., Yan, P., Nowak, D., & McBride, J. (2015). The compositional similarity of urban forests among the world's cities is scale dependent. Global ecology and biogeography, 24(12), 1413-1423. DOI: 10.1111/geb.12376
• Zerbe, S., Choi, I., & Kowarik, I. (2004). Characteristics and habitats of non-native plant species in the city of Chonju, southern Korea. Ecological Research, 19(1), 91-98. Doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1703.2003.00616.x
• Zhao, M., Escobedo, F. J., & Staudhammer, C. (2010). Spatial patterns of a subtropical, coastal urban forest: Implications for land tenure, hurricanes, and invasives. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 9(3), 205-214. DOI: 10.1016/j.ufug.2010.01.008