by
P. Van Breugel3, W. Amaral4, L. Gallo 5, D. Caron6, P. Kageyama7, A.R. Higa8 and B. Vinceti9
Tropical forests provide a wide range of products as well as socio-economic benefits and ecological services that contribute to livelihood and particularly to the subsistence of people living in or nearby the forests. However, forest resources in the tropics are declining at an alarming rate (FAO, 2001). The underlying causes are complex and diverse. Some major transformations are associated with land-use changes caused by population growth, changing/growing market demands (Whitmore, 1998), poor and conflicting development policies, unequal land distribution, and land speculation practices (Reydon, 2000; Johnson and Cabarle, 1993; Anderson, 1989a; Fearnside, 1989). In general, local communities who depend directly on forest resources will be the first ones to be affected by such changes. On the other hand, they are often partially responsible for forest degradation and deforestation. Therefore, for the development of alternative forest management practices or conservation strategies, it is vital to understand the factors that influence management and land-use decisions of local communities. Equally important is to know how management practices or conservation strategies will in return affect local communities.
This article discusses some of the main challenges and problems faced during the implementation of an interdisciplinary and participatory research project. The initiative interests different socio-economic contexts, four different ecosystems, and involves a large number of stakeholders and research partners.
The development of management systems that are environmentally, socially and financially sustainable is crucial for the conservation of forest genetic resources, but it is also fundamental to guarantee the local communities a sustainable additional income (FAO, 2000). A better understanding of key factors determining the long-term conservation of forest genetic resources is vital and requires an interdisciplinary approach, integrating ecological, genetic and socio-economic information (IPGRI, 1997; Namkoong, 1997; Bawa, 1997;
Gandara et al., 1997). Ecological and genetic research helps to define the limits beyond which forest management interventions will jeopardize the environmental and socio-economic benefits over time.
Very often information on the status of forest genetic resources and the factors having an influence on them is not available or only partially, the development of conservation-through-use guidelines and strategies requires substantial research input, which is expensive and time consuming.
The project “Conservation, management and sustainable use of forest genetic resources with reference to Brazil and Argentina”, supported and coordinated by IPGRI, and funded by BMZ (Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Germany), aims at developing appropriate management strategies or guidelines for conservation of key forest genetic resources, through an improved understanding of human impact on the genetic diversity and ecological processes in four selected ecosystems.
Resource management and use are analyzed across sites to extrapolate guidelines for conservation-through-use, applicable to a range of different environmental and socio-economic circumstances. The result is achieved in collaboration with local communities, local research institutes and other local governmental and non-governmental organizations. The project addresses a set of priority species with contrasting life history and reproductive strategies (Table 1), selected by all stakeholders based on their economic or potential economic importance for livelihoods, and for local and regional markets.
Table 1. Priority species within the project “Conservation, management and sustainable use of forest genetic resources with reference to Brazil and Argentina”
Scientific name |
Common name |
Study region |
Forest type |
Araucaria araucana |
Pehuen |
Neuquén, Argentine |
Araucaria forest ecosystem |
Hevea brasiliensis |
Seringueira |
Acre, Brazil |
Amazon tropical rainforest |
Euterpe precatoria |
Açaí |
Acre, Brazil |
Amazon tropical rainforest |
Bertholetia excelsa |
Castanheira |
Acre, Brazil |
Amazon tropical rainforest |
Carapa guianensis |
Andiroba |
Breves, Acre, Brazil |
Amazon tropical rainforest |
Euterpe oleracea |
Açaí |
Breves, Brazil |
Amazon tropical rainforest |
Araucaria angustifolia |
Pinheiro do Paraná |
Paraná, Brazil & Missiones, Argentina |
Araucaria forest ecosystems |
Copaifera langsdorffii |
Copaiba |
São Paulo, Brazil |
Atlantic Forest |
Hymenaeae courbaril |
Jatobá |
São Paulo, Brazil |
Atlantic Forest |
Cedrela fissilis |
Cedro |
São Paulo, Brazil |
Atlantic Forest |
Peltophorum dubium |
Canafistula |
São Paulo, Brazil |
Atlantic Forest |
A close look at local communities, within the research process, leads to the formulation of guidelines for conservation-through-use which reflect the complex and wide range of existing relationships between people and forest resources. Furthermore, an effective implementation of the elaborated strategies depends greatly on the degree of empowerment of local communities, their involvement in process of formulation of these strategies and their empowerment.
In Brazil and Argentina there are many local communities that depend, to a different degree, on forest resources in their environment (Table 2). In some areas, principally in the Amazon, there are still indigenous populations with a traditional, pre-colonial life pattern. They have an intimate knowledge of natural resources (Begossi et al., 1999) and their use of the forest in general is non-destructive, although they do alter its structure and composition (Whitmore, 1998). However, in most contemporary communities a shift can be observed from a subsistence economy towards a more market oriented economy (Anderson, 1989b; Whitmore, 1998).
Table 2. Different local communities, landscape types and main threats on forest resources within the various regions involved in the BMZ project
Study region |
Stakeholders |
Landscape type |
Threats |
Neuquén, Argentine |
Indigenous communities |
Woodlots of Araucaria forest and pasture land |
Ecosystem fragmentation |
Acre, Brazil |
Rubber tapers and rural settlers |
Large continuous extension of rainforest |
Logging, clearcutting |
Breves, Acre, Brazil |
Riverbank communities |
Tropical forest, riparian vegetation |
Over-exploitation of forest products |
Paraná, Brazil & Missiones, Argentina |
Farmers |
Mosaic of woodlots of Araucaria and other forest species, alternated with crops and pasture |
Over-exploitation of Araucaria timber |
São Paulo, Brazil |
Landless people |
Forest fragments of various size, mostly small, surrounded by cropland |
High depletion of diversity due to fragmentation |
Changes in the daily life of indigenous communities are promoted by globalization and global and local trends towards economic liberalization (McNeely and Vorhies, 2000). Increasing demands for forest products brings immediate benefits but undermine the sustainability of the exploitation.
Another type of community is made by recent rural settlers, formerly landless people re-settled by the government, or who have occupied private lands or colonized public lands (Leite, 2000). New settlements have been established in areas still largely covered by forest, where they have started agriculture (Romeiro and Reydon, 2000) or extractive reserves (Leite, 2000). Other settlements have been established in areas with no forest or with only few remaining forest fragments, left by the former owners (ITESP, 2000; Carvalho et al., 2000). These recently settled communities derive most of their income from forest resources, especially in the first year (Carvalho et al., 2000, Santos, pers. comm.), but they lack a deep knowledge of their environment (Begossi, 1998).
The project activities in the Amazon are located in Acre, addressing two main groups of stakeholders, the rubbertappers and rural settlers. The area is representative of traditional systems applied for the extraction of latex (seringal) and a new agricultural settlement, recently established under the guidance of INCRA (Brazilian National Institute for Agrarian Reform). The research study offers the possibility to investigate the specific relations of both communities with their natural environment as well as their mutual relationship.
Traditionally, rubbertappers (seringueiros) have been in the area since the beginning of the latex exploitation, without formal land-use rights or ownership. Their communities are rather small their use of forest resources is in balance with resource availability, producing a low impact as opposed to the more recent settlers. The need to integrate traditional practices with additional sources of income has led in some areas to a shift towards agriculture and small livestock raising. In Caquetá however, rubber and other forest products sold on the market (Brazil nut, Bertholletia excelsa, and Açai, Euterpe precatoria) are the main resource. These valuable NTFP (non-timber forest products) could provide an economically viable alternative (e.g., Açai) (Rocha, 2002), however, transport and casing costs are relatively high and more information on the ecology of the species is necessary to elaborate management plans. Use of alternative forest products has been encouraged and supported by the state governmental institute SEFE (Executive Secretariat for Forests and Extractivism), responsible for the commercialization of forest products.
Recently, INCRA planned to established a settlement in the study area. Rubbertappers made pressure to maintain control of their land, and INCRA finally defined the area as an Extractive Settlement Project (ESP). ESPs are "project modalities destined to the exploitation of rich areas, through activities economically viable and ecologically sustainable, to be carried out by the populations occupying or coming to occupy the mentioned areas". Land can only be used for extraction of forest products with exception of a small lot that can be used for agriculture. The official establishment of an extractive reserve introduces restrictions in land use, but guarantees exclusive use and ownership rights to the rubbertappers. A management plan was defined by a community council and subsequently approved by the authorities.
The project is addressing two rural settlements created by INCRA, established at different times. The land allocated to each family is about 40 hectares, used partially for agriculture (mainly cassava and other crops in the first years). Timber is taken from the forest to build houses and other small constructions (fences, tools storage etc.). An additional lot of 40 hectare per family has been set aside as a continuous reserve, but the area partly overlaps with the Caquetá ESP. The CNS (National Council for the Defense of Rubber Tapers) claimed the area, while INCRA strongly supported the implementation of the Agrarian Reform programme, leaving the conflict unresolved, and determining negative repercussion on the use of the main forest products.
Representatives of the local communities participating in a project workshop in 2002 indicated their interest in implementing more sustainable practices. However, lacks of information on their rights of use of the legal reserves as well lack of capacity (financial and technical) seemed to be major obstacles.
One of the project sites involves two rural settlements, established in different periods in Pontal, within the state of São Paulo, on land occupied by forest at the time of establishment. The original vegetation of this region is classified as “Mata Atlântica do Interior or Planalto” (seasonal semi-deciduous forest). Forest fragmentation started 50 years ago, determining a deforestation of more than 98 percent of the area. The region is therefore predominantly covered by pasture (71 percent) and to a lesser degree by sugar cane fields (ITESP, 1998a) and property is split among few large estates. Within the framework of the agrarian reform, approximately 60 000 families of former landless farmers have been settled in about 60 settlements. Newly settled farmers do not traditionally use forest products; however, the pressure on the remaining forest fragments is considerable during the first years of settlement, as forest resources often offer the first and only source of income and material for construction (ITESP, 1998b), fencing and cooking (Kageyama et al, 2000). Some people hunt within the forested fragments bordering with the settlements, and illegally exploit forest products, but the real impact is difficult to estimate.
Forest fragments are legally protected, and only sustainable practices are allowed (ITESP, 1998b). A major problem is the lack of awareness about the importance of conserving the forest and lack of knowledge about alternative management systems that can generate additional income for the settlers. Some species, such as Copaífera langsdorffii, appear to be manageable in a sustainable way. C. langsdorffii provides oil (Carvalho, 1994) used in the cosmetic industry and raw material for various other purposes (Lorenzi, 1992; Feirreira and Braz, 2001).
Another alternative land-use system suggested is the establishment of agroforestry systems that would connect natural forest fragments (stepping-stones or green corridors). Upon request of the local communities, the project has supported the implementation of demonstration plots, with forest tree species and medicinal plants mixed in agroforestry systems.
In southern Brazil and northern Argentina, the Araucaria angustifolia forests used to cover extensive areas. They played an important economic role, first for the erva mate (erva tea, Ilex paraguariensis) production and later for exploitation of Araucaria angustifolia wood. In the decades after the First World War most araucaria forests were cut down and their economic importance strongly diminished (Seitz, 2000). Nowadays, the contribution of forestry activities to the overall economy of the state is limited. According to the 1993 census, all forest activities together counted for about 3.4 percent of the total revenues of agricultural production. Only
0.7 percent came from wood and non-wood products (including charcoal) from native forests. Furthermore, only 1.75 percent of the agricultural labor force was active in forestry related jobs (IBGE, 1993).
Today, less than one percent of the araucaria forest ecosystems has remained intact (Sanquetta and Tetto, 1999; PROBIO, 2001), and can be found in the central south and southeast of the state (Yu, 1980; Higa, 2001). Census data from 1993 (IBGE, 1993) show that the extraction of wood and non-wood forest products in some regions where communitarian systems have been functioning, the forest cover spared is significantly higher than in other regions.
The small and medium sized landowners in this region used to work with an agroforestry system called “Faxinal”. This typically includes a forest area or campos (natural grasslands), which is used for livestock and collection of forest products (Campos, 1998; Bittencourt, 2001b). In the last decade the number of faxinals decreased dramatically. The overexploitation of the araucaria tree led to a reduction in the availability of forest product and a related decrease in income, also due to the fall in the price of some secondary products derived from the forest (erva mate) (Bittencourt, 2001a). This in turn has triggered a process of conversion of land to agriculture in areas that are not suitable for highly productive crops. More recently, the pressure of immigration from other states has made livestock raising increasingly unsustainable.
An official registration of the existing faxinal system started recently. The registration introduces limitations in use but brings more security and stability to the community structure. Parallel activities that support the production of alternative products are taking place. However, although making progress in the marketing of its products, the increase in production and extraction raises the question whether this model is ecological sustainable (Bittencourt, 2001b).
Exploitation of Araucaria angustifolia is now illegal, but the legislation seems unsatisfactory, almost counterproductive. Due to this ban, planting is less attractive for small and medium sized farmers, who will be increasingly limited in their land use if covered with a protected species. Some promising income sources are the utilization of medicinal plants and tourism, but the commercialization of these products and the access to the market seem to be the main obstacles.
In South-west Argentine, in the Andean mountains, Araucaria araucana forests form an important source of income for the local indigenous inhabitants, the Mapuches. There are about 30 communities in the Neuquén Province (Gallo, 2000b). The project works with two communities, Aucapán and Chiuquilihuin. They represent communities with relatively intensive use and medium intensive use of the forests respectively (20-30 percent of land forested in Aucapán, 50-60 percent in Chiuquilihuin).
The indigenous Mapuches used to depend on A. araucana (piñon) seeds for their basic diet, and piñons are still an important resource for the communities. No reliable numbers exists, but a study in Chili indicated that piñon could provide on average 13 percent of the alimentation (Ceballos in Gallo, 2000a). Seeds and derived products are sold on the markets of nearby towns or changed for other products. Quantities harvested for both consumption and sale vary with the annual variation in seed production, and accessibility of the area. In higher areas with more closed forests the collection is conducted in conjunction with the collection of fuel wood and grazing (Gallo, 2000a).
The harvest of seeds and other products is regulated through the legislation of Lanin National Park and the Neuquén Province Government. The cutting of the Araucaria is prohibited since 1991. The Mapuches are only allowed to use dead wood for fuel or for carving, and to collect up to 300 kg of seeds per family for consumption or commercial purposes. Regulations for non-local inhabitants are stricter (Gallo, 2000b). Other products collected from the forest are fuel wood, summer and winter forage, medicinal plants, and wild animals. The main source of income is livestock raising. Tourism is playing an increasing role. The intensity of use of their lands differ between Mapuche communities, mainly depending on the areas they have access to (Gallo, 2000c). However, both communities face an increasing degradation of their natural resources. The main problem is the lack of regeneration of A. araucana. Causes are overgrazing, trampling of natural regeneration and in some areas over-collection of the seeds. A. araucana is not only economically, but also culturally highly valuable, therefore it has to be preserved as part of the landscape (Gallo, 2000c).
Two strategies have been suggested to achieve a more sustainable use of A. araucana. One is a more flexible system for determining maximal seed harvest levels per family. Seed production fluctuates strongly in time and space (Gallo, 2000a), and maximum harvest should be defined according to the quota and to the overall production of a specific year. Another strategy is based on regulating the access to grazing land, temporally fencing some areas to allow regeneration and restoration to take place. Local communities have shown interest, but initial costs (fencing, establishment of nurseries, capacity building) are high and cannot be easily borne by the community. Furthermore, earlier experiments with fencing of individual properties created social conflicts between communities (Gallo, 2000b).
There is a wide consensus that sustainable development should be based on local-level solutions derived from community initiatives (Leach et al., 1997). This is seen as contributing to the empowerment of local communities and offering greater potential to meet local needs, while more effectively managing natural resources (Poffenberger, 1990; Murphee, 1993; Pretty and Shah, 1994; Chambers, 1997; Brosius, Tsing and Zerner, 1998; in: Cramb et al, 2000). Based on these ideas many international development agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and national governments have adopted participatory or community-based development approaches. This has also been one of the guiding principles of this project, whose objective was to produce base-line data to support a following phase (Figure 1) of elaboration of sustainable management alternatives to forest resources use, by managers and policy makers.
The participation of representatives of local communities in the planning phase proved to be crucial for the identification of priorities and the on-going re-adjustment of project work plans.
Figure 1. The black and dotted line represent research and development activities respectively. In (a) research activities are planned and carried out independently of development-oriented activities that implement and possibly test the research results. In (b) development and research activities are planned within one project and implementation of both types of activities is partly overlapping in time.
Some difficulties have been faced during the implementation of the project and these seem to be typically associated with most research projects oriented towards the elaboration of development strategies. A major challenge for a research project is the translation of research outputs into guidelines. Problems arise while extrapolating general guidelines from small, although representative, case studies, to apply them to larger geographical contexts. Baseline information is often missing and large efforts and costs have to be faced for their collection. Pressing needs and demands from local communities can be very difficult to conciliate with long-term conservation goals. Initial costs of adopting new management practices are high and revenues are uncertain and are often generated only in the mid- to long-term.
The formulation of sound guidelines for natural resource management could take a long time and the positive impact on the livelihood of local people could become significant only later. Ecological and economical required knowledge is not always available, and considerable research efforts are required. Sometimes the use of under-utilized alternative resources is limited by lack of access to the market and lack of extension activities, but local solutions are in most cases not sufficient to reach long-term conservation targets, and political interventions at higher level are required.
Furthermore, the environmental and social contexts are changing fast (population growth, immigration) and other highly variable factors can come into play (e.g., market changes), putting additional pressure on the sustainable use of forest resources in areas were traditional use systems are still in place. Some communities are politically strong but not knowledgeable enough to manage the natural resources made available to them, due to their lack of traditional acquaintance with certain management practices and species.
The BMZ project outcomes once again highlight the need to allow local people fully participate in the process of strategies and guidelines formulation, from the early stages of research studies. The present project has shown that, thanks to this involvement, additional benefits can be generated. Satellite initiatives stimulated by the original project and requested by local people could take off, better addressing local needs and having a greater positive impact on the livelihood of local people.
Anderson, A.B. 1989a. Deforestation in the Amazon: Dynamics, Causes, and Alternatives. In: Anderson AB. (Ed.). 1989. Alternatives to Deforestation: Steps Toward Sustainable Use of the Amazon Rain Forest. New York, Colombia University Press.
Anderson, A.B. 1989b. Extraction of forest management by rural inhabitants in the Amazon Estuary. In: Anderson, A.B. (Ed.). 1989. Alternatives to Deforestation: Steps Toward Sustainable Use of the Amazon Rain Forest. New York, Colombia University Press.
Begossi, A. 1998. Resilience and neotraditional populations: The caiçaras (Atlantic Forest) and caboclos (Amazon). In: F. Berkes and C. Folke (eds.). Linking Social and Ecological Systems for Resilience and Sustainability, pp. 129-157. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Begossi, A., Silvano, R.A.M., do Amaral, B.D. & Oyakawa, O.T. 1999. Uses of fish and game by inhabitants of an extractive reserve (upper Juruá, Acre, Brasil). Environment, Development and Sustainability, 1: 1-21.
Bittencourt, J.V.M. 2001a. Ilex paraguariensis – Erva-mate. Unpublished document
Bittencourt, J.V.M. 2001b. Faxinal – The traditional agroforestry system in southern Brasil
Campos, J.B. 1998. O uso sustentável de florestas. Cadernos da biodiversidade. Directoria de Biodiversidade Áreas Protegidas. Instituto Ambiental do Paraná. V. 1, no 1, Curitiba: DIBAP/IAP. 44 p.
Carvalho, A.J.E., de Campelo, F.B., Gariglio, M.A.G. & Barcelos, N.D.E. 2000. Potencial econômico dos recursos florestais em áreas de assentamento do Rio Grande do Norte. In: Ministério do Desenvolvimento Agrário. Reforma agrária e desenvolvimento sustentável. Brasília.
Carvalho, P.E.R. 1994. Espécies florestais brasileiras: recomendações silviculturais, potencialidades e uso de madeira. Brasília: EMBRAPA-CNPF, 640p.
FAO. 2000. Community-based tree and forest product enterprises: Market Analysis and Development. Rome, Italy, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
FAO. 2001. State of World's Forests 2000. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.
Fearnside, P.M. 1989. Predominant land uses in the Brazilian Amazonia. In: Anderson AB. (Ed.). 1989. Alternatives to Deforestation: Steps Toward Sustainable Use of the Amazon Rain Forest. New York, Colombia University Press.
Gallo, L. 2000a. Pehuen Project. Conservation, management and sustainable use of Araucaria araucana genetic resources in Argentina. Advance Report May 2000 - November 2000. Rome, IPGRI.
Gallo, L. 2000b. Pehuen Project. Conservation, management and sustainable use of Araucaria araucana genetic resources in Argentina. Advance Report November 1999- April 2000. Rome, IPGRI.
Gallo, L. 2000c. Pehuen Project. Conservation, management and sustainable use of Araucaria araucana genetic resources in Argentina. Progress Report January 2000. Rome, IPGRI.
Higa, A. 2001. Conservation, management and sustainable use of Forest Genetic Resources with reference to Brazil and Argentina. Progress report for the period of 01 October to 30 November 2001. Rome, IPGRI.
IBGE (Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística). 1993. Census agrarian production 1993. URL: .a href="#TopOfPage".http://www.ibge.org.br./a.. -->From internet on 10-11-2001.
ITESP (Instituto de Terra do Estado de São Paulo). 1998a. Pontal Verde: Plano de recuperação ambiental nos assentamentos do Pontal do Parapanema, no. 2. Série Cadernos ITESP/Secretaria da Justiça e da defesa da Cidadania, no. 2. Såo Paulo, ITESP, 80p.
ITESP. 1998b. Retrato da terra: perfil sócio-econômico dos assentamentos do estado de São Paulo - 96/97, no. 1. Série Cadernos ITESP/Secretaria da Justiça e da defesa da Cidadania. Såo Paulo, ITESP, 80p.
ITESP. 2000. Programa de recuperação ambiental nos projetos de assentamento. In: Ministério do Desenvolvimento Agrário. Reforma agrária e desenvolvimento sustentável. Brasília.
ITESP. 2000. Programa de recuperação ambiental nos projetos de assentamento. In: Ministério do Desenvolvimento Agrário. Reforma agrária e desenvolvimento sustentável. Brasília.
Johnson, N. & Cabarle, B. 1993. Surviving the cut: Natural forest management in the humid tropics. World Resources Institute.
Kageyama, P., Caron, D., Gandara, F.B., Santos, J.D., Batista de Lacerda, C. & Wongtschowski, M. 2000. Progress report to IPGRI in reference to the research project “Conservation, Management and Sustainable use of forest genetic resources, with reference to Brazil and Argentina”. Rome, IPGRI.
Leach, M., Mearns, R. & Scoones, I. 1997a. Community-based sustainable development: consensus or conflict? IDS Bulletin, 28: 1-3.
Leite, S. 2000. Impactos Regionais da Reforma Agrária no Brasil: Aspectos políticos, econômicos e sociais. In: Ministério do Desenvolvimento Agrário. Reforma agrária e desenvolvimento sustentável. Brasília.
Lorenzi, H. 1992. Árvores brasileiras: manual de identificação e cultivo de plantas arbóreas nativas do Brasil. Nova Odessa: Plantarum, 352 p.
McNeely, J.A. & Vorhies, F. 2000. Economics and conserving forest genetic diversity. In: Y.D. Boshier and T. Boyle (eds.). Forest conservation genetics. Principles and practice. CCIRO publishing, Collingwood, and CABI Publishing, Oxon.
Reydon, P.R. 2000. Intervenções nos mercados de terras: Uma proposta para a redução do uso especulativo da terra. In: Ministério do Desenvolvimento Agrário. Reforma agrária e desenvolvimento sustentável. Brasília.
Rocha, E. 2002. Aspectos ecológicos e socioeconômicos do manejo de Euterpe precatória (Açaí) Mart, em áreas extrativistas no Acre, Brasil. Dissertação(Ms). EESC-USP.
Romeiro, A.R. & Reydon, B.P. 2000. Desenvovimento da Agricultura familiar e reabilitação de terras alteradas na Amazônia. In: Ministério do Desenvolvimento Agrário. Reforma agrária e desenvolvimento sustentável. Brasília.
Sanquetta, C.R. & Tetto, A.F. 1999. Pinheiro do Paraná: Lendas e realidades. Curitiba: Fundação de Pesquisas Florestais do Paraná. 112 p.
Seitz, R. 2000. IPGRI – Araucaria. Final report LoA 99/052. Rome, IPGRI
Whitmore, T.C. 1998. An introduction to tropical rain forests. Oxford, New York, Tokyo, Oxford University Press.
Yu, C.M. 1980. Faxinais no Paraná. Informe da Pesquisa, 80. Londrina, IAPAR, 20 p.
Recent Advances with Gmelina arborea - CAMCORE 2003
3 International Plant Genetic Resources Institute , IPGRI-AMS
4 IPGRI, HQ, Rome, Italy; Piracicaba, Brazil
5 INTA (Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria), Bariloche, Argentine
6 USP-ESALQ (Universidade de São Paulo-Escola Superior de Agricultura "Luiz de Queiroz"), Piracicaba, Brazil
7 USP-ESALQ, Piracicaba
8 Federal University of Parana, Curitiba, Brazil
9 IPGRI, HQ, Rome, Italy.
