Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • All Issues
  • Contribute
    • Submit to AUF
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
  • About
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • Journal Metrics
    • International Society of Arboriculture
  • More
    • Contact
    • Feedback
  • Alerts

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry
  • Log in
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • All Issues
  • Contribute
    • Submit to AUF
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
  • About
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • Journal Metrics
    • International Society of Arboriculture
  • More
    • Contact
    • Feedback
  • Alerts
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
Research ArticleArticles

Quantifying Species Diversity of Streetside Trees in our Cities

Wen Quan Sun
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) March 1992, 18 (2) 91-93; DOI: https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.1992.021
Wen Quan Sun
Urban Horticulture Institute, Cornell University, 20 Plant Sciences Bldg., Ithaca, NY 14853
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Listen

Biological/genetic diversity is a key factor in the stability and disease tolerance of streetside tree populations. Low species diversity may leave the tree population more vulnerable to new stress environments, both abiotic and biotic. Monitoring and enriching the species diversity level has become an important issue in streetside tree planning and management. The present study introduces an index to species diversity in streetside tree populations (SDI). SDI allows quantitative comparisons of species diversity between tree populations. SDIs of 21 cities and towns are calculated based on literature published in the past 10 years. The diversity levels of streetside trees in our cities may have to be doubled to avoid species-specific catastrophic losses.

After Dutch elm disease eliminated American elms from city after city, the biological/genetic diversity has been considered as one of the key factors in the stability of streetside tree populations. (9). Low diversity due to using a limited number of tree species leaves the tree population more vulnerable to the challenges of uncertain future environments (both abiotic and biotic) (16). Monitoring and enriching species diversity levels has become more important than ever for streetside tree planning and management. The purposes of this study are to introduce a simple measure of species diversity for streetside tree populations and to examine the current diversity levels of streetside tree populations in many cities. The term “streetside tree” is borrowed from a paper by Zipperer et al. (21), which could include both street trees and yard trees.

Species Diversity Index

Listen

Species diversity of streetside trees depends on two factors: the number of species and the evenness of all species in the population. One of the best indicators to show the diversity of a population is Simpson’s diversity index (17). It integrates both the richness of the groups (species or genus) and the evenness of the groups distribution in agiven streetside tree population. Simpson’s index is calculated through the following equation:

Figure
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

where Nj is the number of individuals in the jth (j = 1,2 ··· n) group (species or genus) and n is the total number of groups in a particular population.

This index is the probability that two trees chosen randomly and independently from the population fall into the same group. In this paper, the inverse of Simpson’s index is used as a measure of species diversity (SDI) of streetside tree populations.

Figure
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

The inverse of this index can be simply interpreted as the expected number of samples with two randomly-selected trees, of which one sample could have two trees belonging to the same species. The greater the SDI the higher the diversity level. This SDI can be considered as the “adjusted” number of species in a street tree population based on species composition. This is because SDI equals the number of species if all species are evenly represented in a population. Any street tree population with a SDI + x is diverse as much as an evenly-distributed population with x species. The SDI permits linear comparisons of species diversity levels between any streetside tree populations. An example of SDI calculation is demonstrated in Table 1.

State of Species Diversity in Streetside Populations

Listen

The SDI of streetside tree populations in 21 cities and towns are calculated based on literature published in the past 10 years (Table 2). In 12 cities or towns, SDIs were below 10, and only one population had a SDI slightly above 20. The average SDI of these 21 street tree populations was 9.5 (i.e. less than 10 “adjusted” species). For the 11 tree populations of USA cities and towns, the average of SDI was 11.5. In 21 other USA cities where date of street tree populations were not published, the average SDI was 13.3.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

An example of SDI calculation for streetside tree populations.

Bassuk proposed a 5% criterion for urban street tree planting (2). She found that many under-used tree species could well adapt to the urban environment, and suggested that any species in a streetside tree population should not be more than 5%. A equivalent SDI to this criterion is 20. To raise SDI from the current level to 20, the diversity of many street tree populations has to be more than doubled. However, urban environments are particularly stressful, and cause low diversity of streetside trees due to a low survival rate of newly-planted trees and the short life-span for many tree species (15,16). Therefore the species diversity of streetside trees can only be increased when plant materials are selected with respect to both biological/genetic diversity and the specific characteristics of planting sites.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Species diversity index (SDI) of streetside tree popuylations in 21 cities and towns. SDI was calculated according to the formula (2).

Footnotes

Listen
  • ↵1. Present address. Boyce Thompson Institute, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853

  • © 1992, International Society of Arboriculture. All rights reserved.

Literature Cited

Listen
  1. 1.
    1. Allison, H. and
    2. G.F. Peterken
    , 1985. Changes in the number of non-woodland trees in Britain since 1945. Arboric. J. 9: 259–269.
    OpenUrl
  2. 2.↵
    1. Bassuk, N.L.
    1988. Recommended urban trees. Urban Horticulture Institute, Department of Floriculture and Ornamental Horticulture, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. p.1.
  3. 3.
    1. Dawson, J.O. and
    2. M.A. Khawaja
    . 1985. Changes in street-tree composition in tow Urbana, Illinois neighborhoods after fifty years: 1932-1982. J. Arboric. 11: 334–348.
    OpenUrl
  4. 4.
    DeGraaf, R.M. 1985. Residential forest structure in urban and suburban environments: some wildlife implications in New England. J. Arboric 11: 236–241.
  5. 5.
    Denne, M.P. 1987. The tree resource of churchyards of Gwynedd, Wales. Arboric. J. 11: 33–52.
  6. 6.
    1. Endress, A.G.
    1990. The importance of diversity in selecting trees for urban areas. J. Arboric. 16:143–147.
    OpenUrl
  7. 7.
    1. Good, J.E.G. and
    2. M.J. Steele
    . 1981. A survey of roadside trees in N. Wales—implications for conservation. Arboric. J. 5: 1–13.
    OpenUrl
  8. 8.
    1. Green, T. L.
    1984. Maintaining and preserving wood parks. J. Arboric. 10: 193–197.
    OpenUrl
  9. 9.↵
    1. Guntenpergen, G. and
    2. F. Stearns
    . 1983. Comment on N.A. Richards’ diversity and stability in a street tree population. Urban Ecol. 7: 173–176.
    OpenUrl
  10. 10.
    1. Jim, C.Y.
    1986. Street trees in high density urban Hong Kong. J. Arboric. 12: 257–263.
    OpenUrl
  11. 11.
    1. Jim, C.Y.
    1991. Street trees in a county town in south China. Arboric J. 15: 145–160.
    OpenUrl
  12. 12.
    1. Kelsey, P.D. and
    2. G.R. Hootman
    . 1988. Soil and tree resource inventories for campus landscapes. J. Arboric. 14: 243–249.
    OpenUrl
  13. 13.
    1. Lohmann, G.
    1988. How valuable are the street trees of LamBeth Borough? Arboric J. 12: 1–16.
    OpenUrl
  14. 14.
    1. Profous, G.V.,
    2. R.A. Rowntree, and
    3. E.R. Loeb
    . 1988. The urban forest landscape of Athens, Greece: aspects of structure, planning and management. Arboric. J. 12: 83–107.
    OpenUrl
  15. 15.↵
    1. Richards, N.A.
    1983. Diversity and stability in a street tree population. Urban Ecol. 7: 159–171.
    OpenUrl
  16. 16.↵
    1. Sanders, R.A.
    1981. Diversity in the street trees of Syracuse, New York. Urban Ecol. 5: 33–43.
    OpenUrl
  17. 17.↵
    1. Simpson, E.H.
    1949 Measurement of Diversity. Nature 163: 688.
  18. 18.
    1. Talarchek, G.M.
    1987. Indicators of urban forest condition in New Orleans. J. Arboric. 13:217–224.
  19. 19.
    1. Wong, T.W.,
    2. J.E.G. Good and
    3. M.P. Denne
    . 1988. Tree root damage to pavements and kerbs in the city of Manchester. Arboric J. 12: 17–34.
    OpenUrl
  20. 20.
    1. Wray, P.H. and
    2. C.W. Mize
    . 1985. Species adapted for street-tree environments in Iowa. J. Arboric. 11: 249–252.
    OpenUrl
  21. 21.↵
    1. Zipperer, W.C.,
    2. R.A. Rowntree and
    3. J.C. Stevens
    . 1991. Structure and composition of streetside trees of residential areas in the state of Maryland, USA. Arboric. J. 15:1–11.
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF)
Vol. 18, Issue 2
March 1992
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Arboriculture & Urban Forestry.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Quantifying Species Diversity of Streetside Trees in our Cities
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Arboriculture & Urban Forestry
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Arboriculture & Urban Forestry web site.
Citation Tools
Quantifying Species Diversity of Streetside Trees in our Cities
Wen Quan Sun
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Mar 1992, 18 (2) 91-93; DOI: 10.48044/jauf.1992.021

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Quantifying Species Diversity of Streetside Trees in our Cities
Wen Quan Sun
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Mar 1992, 18 (2) 91-93; DOI: 10.48044/jauf.1992.021
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Species Diversity Index
    • State of Species Diversity in Streetside Populations
    • Footnotes
    • Literature Cited
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Contribution of Urban Trees to Ecosystem Services in Lisbon: A Comparative Study Between Gardens and Street Trees
  • Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) in Tree Risk Assessment (TRA): A Systematic Review
  • Thiabendazole as a Therapeutic Root Flare Injection for Beech Leaf Disease Management
Show more Articles

Similar Articles

© 2025 International Society of Arboriculture

Powered by HighWire