Phytosociological Studies of Tree Species for long-term monitoring and management

International Journal of Current Science Research and Review ISSN: 2581-8341 Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V8-i11-16, Impact Factor: 8.048 IJCSRR @ 2025 www.ijcsrr.org 5583 *Corresponding Author: Samreen Naz G.S., Ramya M.V. Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 Available at: www.ijcsrr.org Page No. 5583-5597 Phytosociological Studies of Tree Species for long-term monitoring and management Poornima D.1, Samreen Naz G.S.*2, Ramya M.V.*3 1,2,3 Department of studies and Research in Ecology and Environmental Science, University College of Science, Tumkur University, Tumakuru, Karnataka -572103 ABSTRACT: Tree species diversity studies help to understand the species composition and determine the information for forest conservation. The current workwas conducted in Salumarada Thimmakka Park for the assessment of tree species composition. Random sampling using quadrants was employed for the study. This study assesses the park's biodiversity index to provide a detailed assessment of its ecological health, species richness and distribution. This researchused quantitative methodologies, such as Shannon-Weiner and Simpson's Diversity Indices, to assess species abundance and evenness across the ecosystems.The objective is to study composition and diversity of tree species. Tree species and families were identified, a total of 240 species of trees distributed into 8 families were found in all the quadrants and the dominant families were Fabaceae and Santalaceae. This work examined a number of well-known diversity indexes, i.e., Shannon index (H'), Simpson Diversity Index (D), Pielou Evenness Index (J), Margalef’s Diversity indicator (R), Berger–Parker Index (d), Menhinick index (D Menhinick), Brillouin’s Diversity Index (Hb), McIntosh Diversity Index (DM) and IVI, Santalum album has the highest IVI (54.23) and Mangifera indica has the lowest IVI (4.6),Quadrant 4 showed highest biodiversity compared to other three quadrants.Variations in species composition demonstrate the significance of conservation efforts to safeguard native species and improve ecosystem stability. This study emphasises the ecological relevance of Salumarada Thimmakka Park and provides baseline data needed for long-term monitoring and management. KEY WORDS: Biodiversity Indices, Diversity, Quadrants, Species richness, IVI 1. INTRODUCTION Biodiversity refers to the various forms of life on earth, its structure and functioning is collectively referred to as ecosystem services on which humans rely and are influenced by plants, animals, and microorganisms which is important for ecosystem health and productivity where the flexibility is more with high biodiversity [1]. Global climate change, natural disasters, and anthropogenic activities pose a greater threat to species, with an increase in the threat rate lesser the chances of survival unless the organism has the necessary features and adaptability to survive. Out of different types of diversity, Habitat diversity is one of the most important ecological concepts that reflects the health of ecological systems [2]. Ecologists have proposed a variety of diversity indices for quantifying biodiversity in any location or ecosystem. Shannon-Wiener Index, Simpson's Index, Margalef's Index and the Important Value Index (IVI) are some of the most widely used indices for measuringtree diversity with significant results [3]. Phytosociology is a branch of ecology concerned with the identification, analysis and classification of plant communities and is useful to collect the data, describe the population dynamics of each individual species and how they relate to different kinds of the same community [4]. The species and individual dynamics can reveal that how the community changes over time, disturbance and patterns of response. Biodiversity includes two important features: richness and evenness. Richness is often measured by the number of species in that area, while evenness is the uniformity and distribution among the species [5]. For complete analysis of biodiversity, detailed information (data) regarding the total species, individuals and the ratio of each species in the area or community is required [6]. Biodiversity indices are used to assess threatened species, design protected areas, manage land and forest resources and implement fire management[7]. It has been verified that about 52% of total forests on earth are in tropical regions and regarded as the most important regions as far as biodiversity is concerned [8]. Anthropogenic activities and various natural factors lead to the changes of local and indigenous diversity and include land use change, sea pollution and alien species invasion [9]. The ecosystem and its functioning is negatively affected by the biodiversity loss and it may ultimately lead toecosystem collapse. To understand the quantification of species International Journal of Current Science Research and Review ISSN: 2581-8341 Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V8-i11-16, Impact Factor: 8.048 IJCSRR @ 2025 www.ijcsrr.org 5584 *Corresponding Author: Samreen Naz G.S., Ramya M.V. Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 Available at: www.ijcsrr.org Page No. 5583-5597 biodiversity there are many illustrations of how different biodiversity indices areutilized in scientific literature and can be usedwhere many examples related to biodiversity indices and changes in it caused by several factors such as climate change, ocean acidificationand loss of habitat [10]. In the present scenario, deforestation is a vivid issue worldwide. It is estimated that 420 million hectares of forest have been lost since 1990 through conversion to other land uses. Loss of forest cover due to deforestation was estimated at 10 million per year between 2015 and 2020 [11]. The main causes of the destruction of forests are the fragmentation of natural habitats, urbanization, industrialization, and intensified agricultural practices of human beings [12]. Due to the population explosion, the pressure on forests is rising to meet the demand for food, fuel, and timber. Developmental activities are expanding globally that directly affected the natural environment [13]. The main objective of the current study is to find out structural diversity and the status of tree species in protected vegetation stand by using different biodiversity indices [14]. Due to high anthropogenic activities, there is a risk of losing plant diversity. Studies on diversity are not yet done in this area, so the present work is a benchmark as it provides the status of vegetation that help out to identify the conservation strategy and is requisite to preserve the diversity of this region [15]. This paper highlights the overview of most commonly used indicators for biodiversity analysis. Each index measures richness, diversity and abundance in different ways by considering number of species, types and frequency. By integrating both richness and distribution, these indicators effectively helps in assessing the overall biodiversity in the study area [16]. 2. METHODOLOGY In this current work Salumarada Thimmakka Park of Heggere village, Tumkur Taluk, Tumkur district was selected as our study area. It is an excellent site for biodiversity research due to its focus on native species conservation, restoration ecology, and community engagement. It emphasizes afforestation and environmental awareness, provides a rich habitat for various plant and animal species, making it an ideal location for a biodiversity research.The village has forest coverage ranging upto 100 hectares which is a part of Joint Forest Management (JFM) programme brought into implementation by Forest department, well connected to Arasikere - Tumkur highway (NH 73) and has got good access to transportation [17]. It is the largest and most diverse park in Tumkur, covering an area of approximately 6,671 sq.km. It’s located in the Northeast of Tumkur between latitudes 13° 20' 17.7468'' N, and between longitudes 77° 6' 5.0760'' E as shown in Fig 1.Saalumarada Thimmakka Park is named in honour of great Indian environmentalist from the state of Karnatakanoted for her work in planting 385 banyan trees along the highway. Annual rainfall within the park ranges from 669mm in the southern region. The tree species composition and community structure were analyzed by field visits in the park. The study focus on illustrating the status of plant communities and the species diversity. International Journal of Current Science Research and Review ISSN: 2581-8341 Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V8-i11-16, Impact Factor: 8.048 IJCSRR @ 2025 www.ijcsrr.org 5585 *Corresponding Author: Samreen Naz G.S., Ramya M.V. Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 Available at: www.ijcsrr.org Page No. 5583-5597 Fig.1 (a) India map, (b) Karnataka map, (c) Tumkur map (Study area map of Heggere) 3. SAMPLING METHOD Field survey sampling technique is employed using transect and plot measurements. Thefundamental aspects of species diversity, specifically species richness and evenness was determined. The research was carried out by diving the study area into 4 quadrants with 100 x 100 m dimension plots. All the tree species was enumerated by direct counting method and consolidated check list of all the species with their respective family weremade in the sample plots [18]. 4. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Data collection included identification of species and classification of plant species into families. A botanist with the Park assisted in tree identification. Diameters at breast height and total tree height were measured. Trees identified were listed and classified. DBHwas used to calculate the Basal Area, Relative Frequency, Relative Density, Relative Dominance and Importance Value Index (IVI) [19]. 5. FORMULAS APPLIED FOR CALCULATIONS: The data collected from all the quadrants were used to calculate the diversity indices viz; Shannon index (H'), Simpson Diversity Index(D), Margalef’s Diversity indicator (R), Pielou Evenness Index (J), Berger-Parker index (d), Menhinick index(D Menhinick), Brillouin’s Diversity Index (Hb), McIntosh Diversity Index (DM) and Important Value index (IVI) [20]. International Journal of Current Science Research and Review ISSN: 2581-8341 Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V8-i11-16, Impact Factor: 8.048 IJCSRR @ 2025 www.ijcsrr.org 5586 *Corresponding Author: Samreen Naz G.S., Ramya M.V. Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 Available at: www.ijcsrr.org Page No. 5583-5597 6. SPECIES RICHNESS It refers to the number of species present in habitat. It is exhibited in simplest way as the total number of species and individuals in a given habitat, higher the values, greater the species richness. In order to quantify diversity and to compare species diversities between ecosystems under varying climatic conditions richness is measured[21]. 6.1. Shannon index(H') It combine richness and evenness to provide a measure of species diversity in an area. Higher the Shannon index value, the more diverse or evenly distributed the individuals are in the community [22]. Formula forShannon diversity index: H′ = i∑s pi ln pi (1) H1: Shannon Diversity Index; p: Proportion of characters belonging to the type of letter in the string of interest; n: Number of individuals belonging to i species; N: Total number of individuals. The range of the indicator values is 0.0 to 5.0, usually the results may range from 1.5–3.5 with rare instances exceeding 4.5. Indicators of a stable and balanced habitat structure are values greater than 3.0, indicators of a polluted and degraded habitat structure are values less than 1.0. 6.2. Simpson Diversity Index (D) Itacts as an index of dominance within ecological communities. When the ecosystem is dominated by single species the Simpson diversity value attains 1. In contrast, values near to 1 suggests lack of dominance with only few species present. It considers the total number of species and also the relative abundance of each species. Simpson dominance offers an indication of the probability that two randomly chosen samples belong to the same species. A higher Simpson dominance value indicates individual species which is dominant in an area [23]. Simpson Diversity Index is calculated using the formula; 𝐷 = 1 − ∑𝑛(𝑛−1) 𝑁(𝑁−1) (2) Where: n = Total number of organisms of a particular species N = Total number of organisms of all species 6.3. Margalef’s Diversity index (R) It provides species diversity that considers total number of individuals and overall sample size, higher the value indicates greater species diversity by considering thetotal number of individuals. It also provides a measure of relative species richness in relation to the sample size [24]. It can be calculated using the formula; 𝑆𝑅 =𝑆−1 𝑙𝑛(𝑁) (3) Where: R = Margalef’s index of species richness S = Number of species N = Total number of individual This parameter does not have threshold values, and its higher values prove higher biodiversity 6.4. Pielou Evenness Index (J) Species evenness or equitability refers to the distribution of individuals among different species within a community.It measures evenness of a community by taking into account both the number of species present and the relative abundance of each species.The results are based on ratio between the observed value of Shannon index and its maximum value. These values are in the range of 0 to 1. As the value gets close to 1, it means that each individual are distributed equally [25]. Pielou Evenness Index is determined by; 𝐽 = 𝐻′ ln (𝑆) (4) International Journal of Current Science Research and Review ISSN: 2581-8341 Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V8-i11-16, Impact Factor: 8.048 IJCSRR @ 2025 www.ijcsrr.org 5587 *Corresponding Author: Samreen Naz G.S., Ramya M.V. Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 Available at: www.ijcsrr.org Page No. 5583-5597 Where: J = Pielou’s measure of species evenness, H| = Shannon-Wiener index, S = Total number of species/sample 6.5. Berger-Parker index (d) It provides a simple quantification of the most abundant species in an area. It ranges from 0 to 1, where 0 refers to complete evenness and 1 indicates complete dominance, with one species accounting for all individuals in the community. It is a simple measure useful for preliminary analyses or comparisons of dominance across different samples. It only considers the dominance of a single species and does not provide information about the overall diversity or richness of the community [26]. Berger–Parker index was calculated using the formula; 𝑑 = 𝑁(max) 𝑁 (5) Here Nmax is the number of individuals of the most abundant species. The values range from 0 to 1, with values closer to 0 indicating greater variety and values closer to 1 indicating monoculture. 6.6. Menhinick index (D Menhinick) Itis a simple measure of species richness, allowing for comparisons of diversity between different communities over time. It is used for comparing the diversity of different communities or to assess changes in species richness over time, accounting for the relationship between species richness and sample size. It does not consider species evenness or the relative abundance of different species within the community [27]. Menhinick index is calculated using the formula; 𝐷 = 𝑅 √𝑁 (6) R = number of categories, types, species, or classes. N: number of observations. 6.7. Brillouin’s Diversity Index (Hb) It accounts for both species richness and evenness, providing a measure of diversity that considers how evenly individuals are distributed among species. Higher values indicate greater diversity in a community [28]. It gives more emphasis on species richness and is moderatelysensitive to sample size. Brillouin index is calculated by using the formula. 𝐻𝑏 =ln 𝑁− ln ∑ 𝑛 𝑁 (7) Where HB represents the Brillouin Index, N is the total number of individuals in the sample, ni is the number of individuals in the ith species. 6.8. McIntosh Diversity Index: (DM) McIntosh index of diversity is derived from the distance measure of similarity within the community. It is represented more naturally by the familiar representation of points in a coordinate system. Base calculations of this McIntosh Diversity Index is [29]. It can be determined using; 𝐷𝑀 =N−U N− √N (8) where N is the total number of individuals in the sample U is given by the expression 𝑈 = √∑𝑛𝑖2 (9) where ni is the number of individuals in the ith species and the summation is undertaken over all the species. U is the Euclidean distance of the community from the origin when plotted in an S-dimensional hypervolume where ni is the abundance of ith species. International Journal of Current Science Research and Review ISSN: 2581-8341 Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V8-i11-16, Impact Factor: 8.048 IJCSRR @ 2025 www.ijcsrr.org 5588 *Corresponding Author: Samreen Naz G.S., Ramya M.V. Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 Available at: www.ijcsrr.org Page No. 5583-5597 6.9. Important Value index IVI gives the overall ecological importance of each tree species in a community. It is estimated on the basis of relative values of frequency, density, and dominance of the species and it represents establishment and dominance of a species in a community. A high IVI value reflects a well-established and good adaptability of taxa [30] and shows the overall picture of ecological importance of the species in a community and it depicts the phytosociological structure of a species in the community. IVI can be calculated using the formula IVI = Rd + RF + RD (10) Where IVI = Important value index Rd = Relative density Rf = Relative frequency RD = Relative dominance 𝑅𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑎 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑋 100 𝑅𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑓𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑜𝑐𝑐𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑎 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑜𝑐𝑐𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑋 100 𝑅𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑑𝑜𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 = 𝐵𝑎𝑠𝑎𝑙 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑎𝑙 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑋 100 Important value index (IVI)= Relative density + Relative frequency + Relative dominance[31] Table 1: List of Diversity indices and their formulas; Sl. No Diversity index Formula Meaning 1 Shannon Diversity Index (H′) H′ = - i∑spi ln pi pi: proportional abundance of the ith category. Larger the H, greater the diversity A high value means the community is more diverse. 2 Simpson Diversity Index (D) 𝐷 = 1 − ∑𝑛(𝑛 − 1) 𝑁(𝑁 − 1) n: number of observations of the i-th category. N: number of observations. Closer Dis to 1, greater the diversity. A high value means the community is less diverse and exhibits greater dominance by only one or a few species. 3 Margalef’s Diversity indicator (R) 𝑅 = 𝑆 − 1 𝑙𝑛(𝑁) Larger R value, greater the diversity. 4 Pielou Evenness Index (J) 𝐽 = 𝐻′ ln (𝑆) As the value gets close to 1, it means that each individual are distributed equally. 5 Berger–Parker Index (d) 𝑑 = 𝑁(max) 𝑁 Closer BP is to 0, greater the diversity 6 Menhinick index (D Menhinick) 𝐷 = 𝑅 √𝑁 R = number of categories, types, species, or classes. N: number of observations. Larger the DMenhinick, greater the diversity. 7 Brillouin’s Diversity Index (Hb) 𝐻𝑏 =ln𝑁 − ln∑𝑛 𝑁 Larger the Hb, greater the diversity International Journal of Current Science Research and Review ISSN: 2581-8341 Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V8-i11-16, Impact Factor: 8.048 IJCSRR @ 2025 www.ijcsrr.org 5589 *Corresponding Author: Samreen Naz G.S., Ramya M.V. Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 Available at: www.ijcsrr.org Page No. 5583-5597 8 McIntosh Diversity Index (DM) 𝐷𝑀 =N − U N − √N where N - total number of individuals in the sample U is given by the expression 𝑈 = √∑𝑛𝑖2 Where ni - number of individuals in the ith species and the summation is undertaken over all the species. Where ni is the abundance of ith species. Larger the McIntosh Diversity index the greater the diversity. 9 Important Value Index (IVI) IVI = RD + RF + Rd Highest importance value index is the dominant species and species with the lowest importance value is considered least dominant of the given area. 7. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The present research was carried out in Salumarada Thimmakka Park of Gubbi, Tumkur. Table 1 represents tree diversity recorded across the four quadrants of the study area. A total of 240 tree species belonging to 8 different families were identified. Out of the 240 species, highest numbers of species were found in Quadrant 1 (77) followed by Quadrant 2 (57), Quadrant 3 (57) and the least number of species (49) were found in Quadrant 4 (Fig. 1). The distribution of trees across thequadrants isrecorded in the table 1. 7.1. Tree species in study area A total of 240trees species distributed into 8 families were identified in all the four quadrantsincluding dominant families like Fabaceae and Santalaceae followed by Menispermaceae and Bignoniaceaeas shown in Table 2. The rest of the families included Meliaceae, Myrtaceae, Moraceae and Anacardiaceae which represented single species. Fabaceae is taxonomically diverse and dominant family which is regarded as one of the most successful families of flowering plants due to its extreme flexibility in the adaptive response to different environments [23]. The total density of trees (stem/ha) studiedconsists of 99.98 tons/hectare and the total basal area of trees is found to be700.85tons/hectare. Higher density and basal area in study area shows less anthropogenic pressure and have optimal conditions for the regeneration of tree species. Table 2: Tree Species names with their families Sl. No. Family Species No. of species recorded from each quadrant Total no. of species observed Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 1 Meliaceae Azadirachta indica 3 5 2 5 15 2 Fabaceae Tamarindus indica 1 2 6 8 17 Albizia lebbeck 3 6 10 1 20 Albizia amara 1 5 1 1 08 3 Myrtaceae Syzygium cumini 5 5 2 15 27 4 Santalaceae Santalum album 45 30 9 10 94 5 Moraceae Ficus gomellira kunth 1 0 3 5 09 6 Menispermaceae Tinospora cordifolia 8 0 20 2 30 7 Anacardiaceae Mangifera indica 1 3 0 2 06 8 Bignoniaceae Tabebuia aurea 9 1 4 0 14 International Journal of Current Science Research and Review ISSN: 2581-8341 Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V8-i11-16, Impact Factor: 8.048 IJCSRR @ 2025 www.ijcsrr.org 5590 *Corresponding Author: Samreen Naz G.S., Ramya M.V. Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 Available at: www.ijcsrr.org Page No. 5583-5597 In Quadrant 1, a total of 77 trees were recorded with S. album (45) being the most abundant species, followed by, Tabebuia aurea(9), Tinospora cordifolia(8), Syzygium cumini(5) and one each from Tamarindus indica, Albizia amara, Ficus gomellira and Mangifera indicaspecies were noticed. In Quadrant 2, a total of 57 trees belonging to8 different trees species were recorded, among which 30 trees were Santalum albumand 6 trees belonged to Albizia lebbeckwhile Tabebuia aureahad least number. Similarly in Quadrant 3, Tinospora cordifolia (20) had the highest numbers followed by Albizia lebbeck (10), Santalum album (9), Tamarindus indica (6) and Tabebuia aurea (4). Quadrant 4 had least number of trees compared to all other landscapes, in which the Syzygium cumini (15) and Santalum album (10) were abundant followed by Tamarindus indica (8), Azadirachta indicaand Ficus gomellira (5) and Tinospora cordifolia (2) being the least followed byMangifera indica (2), Albizia lebbeck (1), Albizia amara (1). Among the four quadrants studied, 30 per cent of the tree population was avenue trees, 32 per cent were found in the Quadrant 1, 23 per cent in Quadrant 2, 23 per cent in Quadrant 3 and 20 per cent in Quadrant 4. Tree species composition and density varied across the quadrants. Santalum albumis found to be most dominant species which constitutes about 39 per cent of the total population from all the four quadrants studied. For assessing the diversity of tree species present in different quadrants of the study area, Shannon alpha diversity index, Simpson’s diversity index, Margalef’s index, Pielou’s index, BergerParker index, Menhiniks index, Brillouin’s Diversity Index, McIntosh Diversity Index and Important value indexwere used to assess the richness and evenness of the trees. 7.2. Shannon diversity index Shannon-Weiner index was calculated for all the four quadrants. The Shannon-Weiner index of Q1 is 3.295, Q2 is 4.113, Q3 is 4.769 and Q4 is 4.276 as shown in Table 3. From Table 3Q3 is having higher Shannon-Weiner index which infers thatit is more diverse than other three quadrants, whereas lower values have been recorded in Q1 3.295 which tells that it is having less species diversity compared to other quadrants. Diversity depend on both the number of individuals present as well as the number of species and comparison of H’in all quadrants is seen in Fig 2. Higher the value, more diverse the species in the habitats. Table 3: Shannon alpha diversity index Quadrant Diversity index Quadrant 1 3.295 Quadrant 2 4.113 Quadrant 3 4.769 Quadrant 4 4.276 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 0 1 2 3 4 5 Quadrants Shannon (H') Shannon diverisity index 7.3. Simpson’s diversity index The results of Simpson Diversity index are shown in Table 4. It has higher value in Q4 (5.49), lower values were recorded for Q1, these results signifies that Q4 is less diverse but exhibits greater dominance with respect to species abundance of few varieties.The comparative analysis of D in all quadrants in seen in Fig 3. It represents both species richness and evenness for different quadrants. Table 4: Simpson’s diversity index Quadrant Diversity index Quadrant 1 2.70 Quadrant 2 2.93 Quadrant 3 4.44 Quadrant 4 5.49 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 0 2 4 6 Quadrants Simpson dominance (D) Simpson Dominance index Fig. 3 Comparative analysis of Din all quadrants Fig. 2 Comparative analysis of H’in all quadrants International Journal of Current Science Research and Review ISSN: 2581-8341 Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V8-i11-16, Impact Factor: 8.048 IJCSRR @ 2025 www.ijcsrr.org 5591 *Corresponding Author: Samreen Naz G.S., Ramya M.V. Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 Available at: www.ijcsrr.org Page No. 5583-5597 7.4. Margalef’s index Margalef’s index of species richness for all the quadrants are recorded in Table 5. Highest value were recorded in Q1 showing higher species diversity and even distribution of each species in Q1 and lowest evenness value was recorded in Q2 i.e. 1.73 and its comparison is seen in Fig 4 which means that the quadrant is less diverse compared to all other quadrants. Table 5: Margalef’s index 7.5. Pielou’s index Pielou’s index (J) was recorded for all the quadrants. Quadrant having highest Pielou’s index is Q3 i.e. 1.17 as shown in Table 6, which indicates that each individual in Q3 is distributed equally (species evenness) and variation between quadrants is seen in Fig 5.The quadrant having lowest Pielou’s evenness value is Q1 i.e. 0.75 that indicates individuals are not distributed equally. Table 6: Pielou’s index Quadrant Diversity index Quadrant 1 0.75 Quadrant 2 1.01 Quadrant 3 1.17 Quadrant 4 1.09 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 Quadrants Pielou’s index (J) Pielou’s index 7.6. Berger–Parker Index (d) BergerParker index for all the quadrants was calculated and expressed in Table 7. BergerParker index of Q1 is 0.51, Q2 is 0.48, Q3 is 0.39 and Q4 is 0.31 and their comparison seen in Fig 6. Quadrant having value close to zero indicates highest diversity. According to our results Q4 is having highest biodiversity compared to other quadrants. Quadrant Diversity index Quadrant 1 2.07 Quadrant 2 1.73 Quadrant 3 1.97 Quadrant 4 2.05 Fig. 4 Comparative analysis of R in all quadrants Fig 5. Comparative analysis J in all quadrants