ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE URBAN PARK CHICO MENDES, PORTO ALEGRE - RS, BRAZILDIAGNOSE THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHICO MENDES MUNICIPAL PARK, PORTO ALEGRE- RS, BRASIL

Authors

  • Vladimir Stolzenberg Torres Prefeitura Municipal de Porto Alegre
  • Felipe Todeschini Pontíficia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul
  • Mariana Freitas Farias Universidade do Vale do Rio do Sinos

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X14419

Keywords:

Environmental impacts. Qualitative analysis. Environmental awareness.

Abstract

http://dx.doi.org/10.5902/2179460X14419

The environmental impacts in this XXI century increased dangerously and, thus, was reinforced the paradigm of maintaining the environment. In the context of an urban forest, was recommended the increase of green areas and the connectivity between them, as well as encourage greater use of native essences, even as an expansion in the diversity of species. The aim of this study was to diagnose the environmental conditions of Chico Mendes Municipal Park. The qualitative analysis of avifauna and plant was based on the presence and absence compared to other studies. The Sørensen index was estimated for flora and avifauna, and a review of the phytosanitary conditions of tree specimens. Thus, in the present study were cataloged 51 species of birds in the Chico Mendes Park, being 23 considered migratory and 28 as residents, 2 species of amphibians, reptiles 10, 9 mammals and 55 plants. The Sørensen index for avifauna expressed a similarity value of 0.65420 when compared to other studies; while the same index for tree flora was in order of 0.37500. It is necessary the development of awareness and transformation tools that promote behavioral change in the surrounding community.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Vladimir Stolzenberg Torres, Prefeitura Municipal de Porto Alegre

Graduado em Ciências Biológicas (LP) pela PUCRS (1993), e em Gestão Ambiental pela UNIASSELVI (2013), Ms em Biociências (Zoologia) pela PUCRS (1996) e Dr em Informática na Educação pela UFRGS (2004). Atualmente é Especialista do Conselho Regional de Biologia 3ª Região, Parecerista de vários periódicos científicos, Perito Judicial do Tribunal de Justiça do RS, Técnico Científico - Superior - da Secretaria Municipal de Meio Ambiente de Porto Alegre. Desenvolve pesquisas sobre Nutrição e Alimentação de Abelhas e sobre a estrutura e manejo de Florestas Urbanas.

Felipe Todeschini, Pontíficia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul

Acadêmico de Ciências Biológicas e Estagiário da Secretaria Municipal do Meio Ambiente de Porto Alegre.

Mariana Freitas Farias, Universidade do Vale do Rio do Sinos

Acadêmica de Ciências Biológicas e Estagiária da Secretaria Municipal do Meio Ambiente de Porto Alegre.

Downloads

Published

2015-05-30

How to Cite

Torres, V. S., Todeschini, F., & Farias, M. F. (2015). ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE URBAN PARK CHICO MENDES, PORTO ALEGRE - RS, BRAZILDIAGNOSE THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHICO MENDES MUNICIPAL PARK, PORTO ALEGRE- RS, BRASIL. Ciência E Natura, 37(2), 200–211. https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X14419

Issue

Vol. 37 No. 2 (2015)

Section

Biology

License

To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.

 

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles. 

Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.

In particular, 

Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.

Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.

Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.