Is pseudobulb harvest a sustainable management strategy in wild orchid populations? An experiment with Laelia autumnalis

• Published in: Forest ecology and management Vol. 491; p. 119205
• Main Authors: Emeterio-Lara, Aucencia, García-Franco, José G., Hernández-Apolinar, Mariana, Toledo-Hernández, Víctor H., Valencia-Díaz, Susana, Flores-Palacios, Alejandro
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier B.V 01.07.2021
• Subjects: administrative management; biomass; Epiphyte management; flowering; forest ecology; Growth/reproduction trade-off; Illegal trade; Laelia; Mexico; Nontimber forest products; nutrient content; Orchid conservation; reproduction; trees; Mexico; Growth/reproduction trade-off; Illegal trade; Epiphyte management; Orchid conservation; Nontimber forest products
• ISSN: 0378-1127; 1872-7042
• DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119205

•The collection of orchid pseudobulbs is a conservation problem.•Extraction of pseudobulbs diminishes orchid growth and flowering.•After two years, plants subject to extraction didn’t recover the lost biomass.•The collected plant sections can be used to restore orchid populations.•Pseudobulbs extraction must be avoided, and fallow periods allow plant recovery. The illegal collection of wild orchid pseudobulbs is a conservation problem, but little is known about this practice's consequences in orchid individuals. In some regions of Mexico, the latest two pseudobulbs of Laelia autumnalis plants are collected and traded, including the inflorescence. We: 1.- determined the nutrient content of pseudobulbs/leaves, 2.- tested the effect of pseudobulbs harvest in the survival, growth, flowering, and 3.- explored if the removed sections can be used to restore populations. In three L. autumnalis populations, we selected five small (one inflorescence), five medium-sized (one inflorescence), and five big (two inflorescences) plants. In each plant, we marked 8–10 pseudobulb along a growth chain (two in big plants); pseudobulb/leaves were measured (wide, height, length), and their biomass was estimated. We removed the latest two (in large plants, the harvest was done in one chain, and the other was a control). The removed pseudobulbs were tied in the same tree. Nutrient content was higher in leaves. No plant died because of the pseudobulb's harvest; >55% produced new pseudobulbs yearly. Among the big plants, pseudobulb production was constant (87%) in the control chains but not in the chains subject to harvest; in these, inflorescence production was lower. Four removed sections died, and <40% developed new pseudobulbs yearly. The harvest of the most recent two pseudobulbs diminish the growth and reproduction of L. autumnalis, and after two years, the plants did not recover the lost biomass. Removed sections can be used to restore populations, but these must be assisted with nutrients and watering.