View Article

  • Assessment Of Floral And Fauna Diversity Of The Biodiversity Park, Sabarmati Riverfront, Ahmedabad

  • Department of Botany, Bioinformatics and Climate Change Impact Management, Gujarat University, Ahmedabad-380009, Gujarat, India.

Abstract

In order to catalog the plant and animal life of the biodiversity park along the Sabarmati Riverfront in Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India, a through biological inventory was conducted. To document taxonomic diversity across several biological groups, repeated field investigations were carried out. More than 100 vascular plant species with a variety of life stages and growth behaviors made up the floristic component. Using morphological characteristics and substrate association, macrofungal occurrences were recorded concurrently. Arachnids, avifauna, a variety of insect taxa, and a few terrestrial vertebrates were among the faunal assemblages found in the park’s many habitat patches. All reported taxa were methodically assembled into structured checklists, and species identification was done using accepted taxonomic references. Field observation was supplemented by extensive photographic recording, which gave the documented biodiversity visual validity and archival support. As a result, the inventory creates a baseline dataset that is fundamental to understanding the study site’ compositional variety. Additionally, field studies demonstrated dynamic ecological processes that are suggestive of the functionality of the habitat. Some arthropod exuviae were seen, indicating continuous molting activities and fruitful developmental advancement in population of insects and spiders. A sequential shot of an insect going through ecdysis gave clear proof that life cycle changes were taking place right there. The dynamic biological interactions that are maintained within the park environment are highlighted by these observations. The site’s ecological significance as an urban biodiversity refuge is emphasized by the combination of floristic, mycological and faunal documentation. The baseline data provided by this study is crucial for ecological assessment, conservation planning, and long-term biodiversity monitoring in managed urban green spaces.

Keywords

Biodiversity inventory, taxonomic diversity, macro fungi, faunal assemblages.

Introduction

Biological diversity is a modern contraction of the word biodiversity. Biological diversity, thus, refers to variation within the living world or within and among living species. Diversity is defined as the range of variation, variety, or differences among a collection of traits. Most often used to refer to the quantity of species, the term “Biodiversity” was originally coined by lovejoy (1980) in its extended for, biological diversity (Swingland, 2001). Amounts of biodiversity the complexity of life on earth is created by the interaction of the three levels of biodiversity that are examined here: (1) Genetic diversity, (2) Species diversity, (3) Ecosystem diversity. The present research focuses on species diversity through the systematic identification and documentation of plant and faunal species within the study area. It is the variation between species within a community or between species within a species population. The species is the actual fundamental unit of classification for organisms, and the most widely used level for characterizing biodiversity is its diversity. In general, it depicts the quantity and species richness of a population. Because of this, species are unique units of diversity, each of which contributes in a unique way to the environment (Ashok Verma, 2016).

Urbanization and Riverfront Transformation:

India’s urbanization has complicated the country’s landscape ecology and human society (Chaturvedi et al.,2013). The choice to turn eleven kilometers of the city’s monsoon river into a riverfront is one example of how Ahmedabad’s spatial shape has changed as a result of the city’s growing urbanization. With strong political backing for the “environmental improvement and urban rejuvenation project” The Sabarmati Riverfront project has a broad scope and ambitious goals (Dempsey et al.,2020). In order to promote environmental sustainability and conserve local flora and fauna diversity, several green spaces have been developed along the riverfront, including the Flowers Park, Biodiversity Park, Miyawaki Forest Patches, and multiple riverfront gardens at Usmanpura and Vasna, collectively enhancing the ecological value of the urban landscape (Paneria et al.,2017)

Fig 1: Zonation map of the Sabarmati Riverfront, Ahmedabad, showing parks, development areas, and river promenade. (Reference: Amirtahmasebi et al., 2016)

Study Area:

The Sabarmati Riverfront Biodiversity Park in Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India, is the site of the current study. An essential part of the Sabarmati Riverfront development, the biodiversity park aims to improve habitat, save endangered species and support urban ecological restoration. The Biodiversity Park is separated into two sections and covers an area of roughly 65,000 m². The current study was limited to Phase 1, which has a total area of about 20,000 m². Nearly 5,000 no. of plants, representing roughly 60 different plant species, make up Phase 1. A variety of attractive, native, and ecologically significant plant taxa make up the flora, adding to the heterogeneity of the system. Phase 2: There are around 100 plant species in Phase 2, which covers an area of about 45,000 m². Plantation operations have been finished in a number of areas, and the vegetation is presently establishing and maturing, even though this phase is not yet accessible to the general public. Important ecological and cultural species have been introduced, such as the Sandalwood (Santalum album) and Sindoor (Bixa Orellana). In several areas of Phase 2, development is still in progress.

Fig 2: Riverfront Biodiversity Park, Ahmedabad

Field investigation for the present research was initiated in Late November and continued through Early December. Dense forest cover and the biodiversity park’s proximity to the Sabarmati River have an impact on localized microclimatic conditions, even though the park is part of Ahmedabad’s larger semi-arid climate regime. Compared to nearby metropolitan region, increased canopy cover results in comparatively greater humidity levels, improved soil moisture retention, and reduced ambient temperatures. Together, these macro- and microclimatic elements affect the study area’s seasonal patterns of fungal emergence, faunal activity, and plant growth.

Materials and Methods:

The previously reported study site, which is situated along the Sabarmati Riverfront in Ahmedabad, Gujrat, India was the location of field experiments. Regular field visits were made on weekends (Saturday and Sunday) during the survey’s four-month duration, which ran from November to February. In order to optimize the detectability of flora and faunal activities, observations were mostly conducted in the morning between 07:00 AM and 11:00 AM. Throughout the research area, many and methodical field treks over various habitat patches were used to document the flora. During these surveys, every species of vascular plant that was found was closely examined, documented, and photographed in the field. Observable morphological characteristics, such as leaf arrangement, inflorescence type, floral structure, and growth habit, were used for preliminary identification. Standard regional taxonomic literature, such as Flora of Gujarat and Practical Botany (Bendre & Kumar, 2008), was used to authenticate the species. To preserve uniformity in systematic arrangement, the recognized scientific names and associated higher taxonomic placement were confirmed in line with the Bentham and Hooker classification system. Every verified species was listed and assembled into an extensive, methodically structured checklist that reflected the floristic makeup of the research location.

Observable morphological traits, growth from, and substrate association within the study area were used to systematically document fungal occurrences. Macroscopic characteristics such cap shape, pore or gill structure, texture, color, and pattern of attachment to the substrate were the main tools used for identification of specimens found during field survey. We meticulously documented the fungi’s growth pattern and ecological niche, including whether they were saprophytic on the surfaces of living plants, leaf litter, or rotting wood (Webster & Weber, 2007). Broader classification was established using distinctive traits that pointed to Ascomycetes and Basidiomycetes types. Approximately seven to eight morphologically different fungus kinds were identified during survey time. The growth of a Polyporous basidiomycetes on woody substrate was noteworthy. This specimen showed discernible chromatic variation, which was probably caused by the weather at the time. The documented specimen had a yellowish-green marginal tint, which may have been caused by seasonal change or moisture fluctuation. Normally, Polyporous mushrooms exhibit a whitish edge during active growth (Bendre & Kumar, 2021). These findings demonstrate how macrofungi’s morphological responses to the local microclimate at the research location are dynamic.

Fig 3: Polyporous fungi observed on decaying wood

Fig 4: Polyporous fungi with Yellowish green margin due to weathering effect

During field walks across various habitats and microhabitats within the study region, systematic visual encounter surveys were used to conduct faunal observations. The behavior and preferred habitats of visible wildlife, including insect, birds, and arachnids, were meticulously examined. In order to accurately describe morphological characteristics such body form, coloration, wing pattern, and distinctive traits, specimens were photographed in situ (Vala et al.,2020). Organisms were recognized to the highest feasible taxonomic level based on field features and a through morphological investigation. A systematic faunal inventory was then created by employing the proper scientific nomenclature and classification hierarchy to arrange and collate all confirmed taxa. Notably, three of India’s top five venomous snake species are known to exist in the research area. However, Russell’s viper was the sole poisonous species encountered during the current survey period (Whitaker et al.,2004). The snake was presumably displaced from its typical habitat into the wet region when the individual was spotted during a period of intense rainfall when the boardwalk was momentarily inundated by high river water level (Wolfgang et al.,1992).

Fig 5: Russell’s Viper observed swimming in floodwater during heavy rainfall.

In insects, the start of a molting cycle is neither purely periodic nor random. Given that molting can achieve many goals depending on the situation, such as changing size or shape, it makes sense to assume that the timing of a molt needs to be adjusted to accommodate these purposes. Because the initiation of metamorphosis ends a larva’s growth period and determines the adult insect’s body size, it is very important to carefully regulate the start of a metamorphic molt (Nijhout, 1981). Molting, or ecdysis, is a fundamental biological process not only in insect but across thr entire phylum Arthropoda. This physiological mechanism underpins the evolutionary success and diversification of arthropods. With almost a million species listed in the catalogue of the most species among Metazoa, making it a remarkable illustration of the animal kingdom’s variety and evolutionary success (Campli et al., 2024). The superphylum Ecdysozoa, which comprises all organisms that grow via ecdysis, or the molting of their exoskeletons (Daley et al., 2018), is where the arthropods originated more than 500 million years ago from their last common ancestor (Giribet and Edgecombe, 2019). During the survey, direct field evidence of ecdysis was recorded, including the photographic documentation of alive insect undergoing molting. These observations provided in situ confirmation of active development processes within the arthropod community of the study area.

Fig 6: Exoskeleton of an arthropod observed on the leaf surface, indicating recent molting

Fig 7: Long-legged fly observed undergoing molting on a leaf surface

RESULTS

The biodiversity assessment of the selected study area revealed a diverse assemblage of plant and animal species, reflecting the ecological richness of the site. 109 vascular plant species, representing a diverse variety of life forms and development behaviors, made up the floristic component. The presence of fungi, with only six species identified, most of which were basidiomycetes and found on decomposing organic matter. With 20 species identified in several orders, including insect and arachnids, the faunal inventory demonstrated a noteworthy diversity of arthropods. 22 chordate species (Ganpule et al., 2014), which constitute avifauna and a few terrestrial vertebrates, were found among vertebrates. Furthermore, the research area had lone representatives of less frequently observed invertebrate phyla, such as one species of each of the Mollusca and platyhelminthes, underscoring the park’s biological niches and microhabitat variety.

Table 1: Systematic Floristic inventory of vascular plant species recorded from the Sabarmati Riverfront Biodiversity Park, Ahmedabad, Gujarat

Sr. no.

Scientific Name

Family

Common Name

  1.  

Annona squamosa L.

Annonaceae

Custard Apple

  1.  

Polyalthia longifolia (Sonn.) Thw.

Annonaceae

False Ashoka

  1.  

Cocculus hirsutus (L.) Theob.

Menispermaceae

Vevdi

  1.  

Tinospora cordifolia (Willd.) Miers ex Hook. f. & Thoms.

Menispermaceae

Giloy

  1.  

Adansonia digitata L.

Malvaceae

African Baobab

  1.  

Abutilon indicum (L.) Sweet, Hort.

Malvaceae

Indian Mallow

  1.  

Bombax ceiba L.

Malvaceae

Red Silk Cotton

  1.  

Hibiscus rosa-sinensis L.

Malvaceae

Gurhal

  1.  

Hibiscus tiliaceus L.

Malvaceae

Sea Hibiscus

  1.  

Sterculia foetida L.

Malvaceae

Wild Indian Almond

  1.  

Thespesia populnea (L.) Soland. ex. Corr.

Malvaceae

Indian Tulip Tree

  1.  

Aegle marmelos (L.) Corr.

Rutaceae

Bael

  1.  

Citrus limon (L.) Burm. f.

Rutaceae

Lemon

  1.  

Murraya koenigii (L.) Spreng.

Rutaceae

Curry Leaf Tree

  1.  

Azadirachta indica A. Juss.

Meliaceae

Neem

  1.  

Khaya senegalensis (Desr.) A.Juss.

Meliaceae

Khaya

  1.  

Moringa oleifera Lam.

Moringaceae

Drumstick

  1.  

Sapindus mukorossi Gaertn.

Sapindaceae

Indian Soap Berry

  1.  

Ziziphus mauritiana Lam.

Rhamnaceae

Ber, Indian Jujube

  1.  

Mangifera indica L.

Anacardiaceae

Mango

  1.  

Abrus precatorius L.

Fabaceae

Rosary Pea, Chanothi

  1.  

Butea monosperma (Lam.) Taub.

Fabaceae

Palash

  1.  

Dalbergia sissoo Roxb.

Fabaceae

Shisham

  1.  

Lablab purpureus (L.) Sweet

Fabaceae

Val

  1.  

Pongamia pinnata (L.) Pierre

Fabaceae

Karanj

  1.  

Bauhinia purpurea L.

Fabaceae

Kachnar

  1.  

Caesalpinia pulcherrima (L.) Sw.

Fabaceae

Orange Galtoro

  1.  

Caesalpinia pulcherrima F. flava

Fabaceae

Yellow Galtoro

  1.  

Cassia fistula L.

Fabaceae

Golden Shower Tree

  1.  

Cassia javanica L.

Fabaceae

Pink Shower Tree

  1.  

Cassia siamea Lam.

Fabaceae

Kashid

  1.  

Delonix regia (Boj.) Raf.

Fabaceae

Gulmohar

  1.  

Peltophorum pterocarpum (DC.) Backer ex K. Heyne

Fabaceae

Copperpod

  1.  

Acacia nilotica (L.) Del. Subsp. Indica (Bth.) Brenan

Fabaceae

Gum Arabic Tree

  1.  

Acacia auriculiformis A. Cunn. ex. Bth.

Fabaceae

Australian Babul

  1.  

Albizia lebbeck (L.) Bth.

Fabaceae

Shirish Tree

  1.  

Calliandra inaequilatera Rusby

Fabaceae

Powder Puff

  1.  

Pithecellobium dulce (Roxb.) Bth.

Fabaceae

Gorus Ambli

  1.  

Prosopis cineraria (L.) Druce

Fabaceae

Khejari, Khijdo

  1.  

Tamarindus indica L.

Fabaceae

Imli

  1.  

Prunus avium L.

Rosaceae

Wild Cherry

  1.  

Anogeissus acuminata (Roxb. ex DC.) Guill.

Combretaceae

Button Tree

  1.  

Conocarpus lancifolius Engl.

Combretaceae

Conocarpus

  1.  

Terminalia bellirica (Gaertn.) Roxb.

Combretaceae

Behda

  1.  

Terminalia catappa L.

Combretaceae

Indian Almond

  1.  

Terminalia arjuna (Roxb.) W. & A.

Combretaceae

Arjun Tree

  1.  

Callistemon citrinus (Curtis) Skells

Myrtaceae

Bottlebrush

  1.  

Eucalyptus globulus Labill.

Myrtaceae

Nilgiri

  1.  

Syzygium cumini (L.) Skeels

Myrtaceae

Jamun

  1.  

Lawsonia inermis L.

Lythraceae

Mehndi

  1.  

Couroupita guianensis Aubl.

Lecythidaceae

Cannon Ball Tree

  1.  

Polyscias scutellaria (Burm.f.) Fosberg

Araliaceae

Aralia

  1.  

Tarlmounia elliptica (DC.) H. Rob., S.C. Keeley, Skvarla & R.Chan

Asteraceae

Curtain Creeper

  1.  

Phoenix dactylifera L.

Ericaceae

Date Palm

  1.  

Washingtonia robusta H. Wendl.

Ericaceae

Mexican Fan Palm

  1.  

Manilkara zapota (L.) van Royen

Sapotaceae

Chikoo

  1.  

Madhuca longifolia (J. Koenig ex L.) J.F. Macbr

Sapotaceae

Mahua

  1.  

Manilkara hexandra (Roxb.) Dub.

Sapotaceae

Rayan

  1.  

Mimusops elengi L.

Sapotaceae

Borsalli

  1.  

Jasminum auriculatum Vahl

Oleaceae

Indian Jasmine

  1.  

Jasminum sambac (L.) W. Ait.

Oleaceae

Mogra

  1.  

Nyctanthes arbortristis L.

Oleaceae

Parijat

  1.  

Salvadora sp.

Salvadoraceae

Piludi, Peelu

  1.  

Allamanda cathartica L. var. hendersonii Bailey

Apocynaceae

Yellow Allamanda

  1.  

Carissa carandas L.

Apocynaceae

Karonda

  1.  

Cascabela thevetia (L.) Lippold

Apocynaceae

Yellow Karen

  1.  

Tabernaemontana divaricata (L.) R.Br. ex Roem. & Schult.

Apocynaceae

Chandani

  1.  

Thevetia peruviana Var. alba

Apocynaceae

White Karen

  1.  

Cordia monoica Roxb.

Boraginaceae

Gunda

  1.  

Cordia dichotoma Forst. f.

Boraginaceae

Gunda, Snot Berry

  1.  

Cordia sebestena L.

Boraginaceae

Geiger Tree

  1.  

Jacquemontia pentanthos (Jacq.) G.Don

Convolvulaceae

Cluster vine

  1.  

Cestrum nocturnum L.

Solanaceae

Night Jasmine

  1.  

Asystasia gangetica (L.) T. Anders.

Acanthaceae

Coromandel

  1.  

Barleria cristata L.

Acanthaceae

Vajradanti

  1.  

Thunbergia erecta Var. Alba

Acanthaceae

White Bush Clock vine

  1.  

Thunbergia erecta (Benth.) T.Anderson

Acanthaceae

Bush Clock vine

  1.  

Kigelia pinnata (Jacq.) DC.

Bignoniaceae

Sausage Tree

  1.  

Millingtonia hortensis L. f.

Bignoniaceae

Indian Cork Tree

  1.  

Spathodea campanulata Beauv.

Bignoniaceae

African Tulip Tree

  1.  

Tabebuia rosea (Bertol.) DC. Prodr

Bignoniaceae

Pink Trumpet Tree

  1.  

Tecoma gaudichaudi DC.

Bignoniaceae

Yellow Bell Flower

  1.  

Lantana camara L. var. aculeata (L.) Mold.

Verbenaceae

Wild sage

  1.  

Vitex negundo L.

Lamiaceae

Nagod

  1.  

Clerodendrum inerme (L.) Gaertn.

Lamiaceae

Wild jasmine

  1.  

Grevillea robusta Cunn. ex R. Br.

Proteaceae

Silver Oak

  1.  

Achyranthes aspera L. var. aspera

Amaranthaceae

Anghedi

  1.  

Alternanthera sessilis (L.) Dc.

Amaranthaceae

Sessile Joyweed

  1.  

Coccoloba uvifera (L.) L.

Polygonaceae

Sea grape

  1.  

Bougainvillea spectabilis Willd.

Nyctaginaceae

Bougainvillea

  1.  

Jatropha integerrima Jacq.

Euphorbiaceae

Jatropha

  1.  

Phyllanthus emblica L.

Euphorbiaceae

Amla

  1.  

Putranjiva roxburghii Wall.

Euphorbiaceae

Putranjiva

  1.  

Holoptelea integrifolia (Roxb.) Planch

Ulmaceae

Indian Elm

  1.  

Ficus virens Ait.

Moraceae

Pilkhan

  1.  

Ficus racemosa L.

Moraceae

Cluster fig, Umbro

  1.  

Ficus benghalensis L.

Moraceae

Banyan Tree

  1.  

Ficus lyrata Warb.

Moraceae

Fiddle-leaf Fig

  1.  

Ficus religiosa L.

Moraceae

Peepal

  1.  

Morus alba L.

Moraceae

Mulberry

  1.  

Cycas revoluta Thunb.

Cycadaceae

Cycas

  1.  

Agave americana L. var. marginata

Amaryllidaceae

Century Plant

  1.  

Dioscorea bulbifera L.

Dioscoreaceae

Air Potato

  1.  

Canna indica L.

Cannaceae

Canna

  1.  

Cordyline fruticosa (L.) A.Chev.

Liliaceae

Red Dracena

  1.  

Dieffenbachia seguine (Jacq.) Schott

Araceae

Dumb Cane

  1.  

Bambusa vulgaris Schrad. ex J.C. Wendl.

Poaceae

Golden Bamboo

  1.  

Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers.

Poaceae

Durva

  1.  

Dendrocalamus calostachys (Kurz) Kurz

Poaceae

Green Bamboo

Table 2: Inventory of macrofungal species recorded during the survey in the Sabarmati Riverfront Biodiversity Park, Ahmedabad, Gujarat.

  1.  

Daldinia concentrica (Bolton) Ces. & De Not.

Hypoxylaceae

Coal Balls Fungi

  1.  

Lentinus squarrosulus (Mont.)

Polyporaceae

White Shiitake

  1.  

Marasmiellus Candidus (Fr.)

Omphalotaceae

Snow Fungi

  1.  

Schizophyllum commune Fr.

Schizophyllaceae

Split Gill Mushroom

  1.  

Trametes versicolor (L.) Lloyd

Polyporaceae

Ployporous

  1.  

Tubaria furfuracea (Pers.) Gillet

Tubariaceae

Scurfy Twiglet

Table 3: Inventory of arthropod fauna recorded from the Sabarmati Riverfront Biodiversity Park, Ahmedabad, Gujarat.

  1.  

Anthia sexguttata (Fabricius)

Carabidae

Six Spot ground beetle

  1.  

Aulacophora foveicollis (Lucas)

Chrysomelidae

Red Beetle

  1.  

Brachythemis contaminata (Fabricius)

Libellulidae

Ditch Jewel

  1.  

Condylostylus sp.

Dolichopodidae

Long legged Fly

  1.  

Coridius ianus (Fabricius)

Dinidoridae

Red Pumpkin Bug

  1.  

Episyrphus balteatus (De Geer)

Syrphidae

Hover Fly

  1.  

Estigmene acrea (Dury)

Erebidae

Salt Marsh Caterpillar

  1.  

Graphium doson C. & R. Felder

Papilionidae

Jay Butterfly

  1.  

Halyomorpha halys Carl S.

Pentatomidae

Marmorated Stink Bug

  1.  

Musca domestica L.

Muscidae

Housefly

  1.  

Neoscona oaxacensis (Keyserling)

Araneidae

Zig Zag Spider

  1.  

Olene mendosa (Jacob Hübner)

Erebidae

Hairy tussock moth

  1.  

Paratrechina longicornis (Latreille)

Formicidae

Long Horn Crazy Ant

  1.  

Pholcus phalangioides (Fuesslin)

Pholcidae

Cellar spider

  1.  

Promachus sp.

Asilidae

Robber Fly

  1.  

Riptortus pedestris (Fabricius)

Alydidae

Broad Headed Bug

  1.  

Suastus gremius (Fabricius)

Hesperiidae

Palm Bob

  1.  

Tettigonia viridissima L.

Tettigoniidae

Great Bush Cricket

  1.  

Tetragnatha extensa L.

Tetragnathidae

Stretch Spider

  1.  

Tholymis tillarga (Fabricius)

Libellulidae

Evening skimmer

Table 4: Inventory of chordate species recorded from the Sabarmati Riverfront Biodiversity Park, Ahmedabad, Gujarat.

  1.  

Acridotheres ginginianus (Latham)

Sturnidae

Common Bank Myna

  1.  

Acridotheres tristis L.

Sturnidae

Common Myna

  1.  

Alcedo atthis L.

Alcedinidae

Kingfisher

  1.  

Argya caudata (Dumont)

Leiothrichidae

Babbler

  1.  

Athene blewitti (Hume)

Strigidae

Spotted Owlet

  1.  

Centropus sinensis (Stephens)

Cuculidae

Greater Coucal

  1.  

Cinnyris asiaticus (Latham)

Nectariniidae

Purple sunbird

  1.  

Columba livia (Gmelin)

Columbidae

Pigeon

  1.  

Corvus splendens (Vieillot)

Corvidae

House Crow

  1.  

Daboia russelii (Shaw & Nodder)

Viperidae

Russell’s viper

  1.  

Eudynamys scolopaceus L.

Cuculidae

Asian koel

  1.  

Lampropholis delicata De Vis.

Scincidae

Garden Skink

  1.  

Lonchura malacca L.

Estrildidae

Tricoloured Munia

  1.  

Merops orientalis (Latham)

Meropidae

Green Bee-eater

  1.  

Milvus migrans (Boddaert)

Accipitridae

Black kite

  1.  

Orthotomus sutorius (Pennant)

Cisticolidae

Tailor Bird

  1.  

Oriolus kundoo (Sykes)

Oriolidae

Golden Oriole

  1.  

Pavo cristatus L.

Phasianidae

Indian Peafowl

  1.  

Ptyas mucosa L.

Colubridae

Indian Rat Snake

  1.  

Psittacula krameri (Scopoli)

Psittaculidae

Parakeet

  1.  

Tyto javanica (Gmelin)

Tytonidae

Barn Owl

  1.  

Varanus bengalensis (Daudin)

Varanidae

Indian Moniter Lizard

Table 5: Inventory of Platyhelminthes fauna recorded from the Sabarmati Riverfront Biodiversity Park, Ahmedabad, Gujarat.

1.

Bipalium javanum (Loman)

Geoplanidae

Hammer Head Worm

Table 6: Inventory of Mollusca recorded from the Sabarmati Riverfront Biodiversity Park, Ahmedabad, Gujarat.

1.

Oxychilus draparnaudi (Beck)

Oxychilidae

Glass snail

The systematic inventory of the Sabarmati Riverfront Biodiversity Park reveals a rich taxonomical composition, encompassing a total of 109 plant species, 6 fungal species, 44 faunal species. The vegetative structure of the park is predominantly arboreal, as illustrated in the distribution of plant species according to habits. Tree constitute the largest segment of the flora at 61%, followed by shrubs at 22%. This dominance of tree species indicates a well-established canopy layer, essential for urban microclimate regulation. Other growth forms, including herbs 7%, climber 7%, and grasses 3% contribute to the vertical stratification and ground cover of the ecosystem, supporting a diverse range of ecological niches (Bendre & Kumar, 2021). Concurrently, the Distribution of Fauna Species According to Groups shows that both lower and higher vertebrates and invertebrates are significantly present. At 41%, Aves are the most varied faunal category (Ganpule et al., 2014). Insects come in second at 39%. The park's floral environment appears to have a good supply of food supplies and nesting locations, as indicated by the wide diversity of birds and insects. Reptiles (9%) (Whitaker et al., 2004), Arachnids (7%), Mollusca (2%), and Platyhelminthes (2%) are further documented groups. Together, these results highlight the park's essential function as a hub for urban biodiversity, promoting intricate relationships between species and sustaining a robust ecosystem in an area that has been altered by human activity

DISCUSSION:

The current study shows that a physically and functionally integrated urban ecosystem with significant species richness is maintained in the Sabarmati Riverfront Biodiversity Park. A managed urban landscape has significant floristic variability, as evidenced by the recording of 109 vascular plant species. By improving primary productivity, habitat stratification, and structural complexity, such plant diversity establishes ecological niches that sustain a variety of trophic levels. In semi-arid urban settings, faunal assemblages depend on vertical layering and microclimatic buffering, which are facilitated by variation in life form such as tree, shrubs, climbers, herbs. The presence of six fungi species, which are primarily linked to organic substrates that are breaking down, indicates that there are active detrital routes in the park. As decomposers, fungi play crucial ecological roles by promoting the turnover of organic matter and the mineralization of nutrients (Gessner et al., 2010). Their existence is indicative of continuous biogeochemical cycling mechanism that maintain plant regeneration and soil fertility. Environmental responsiveness and adaptive morphological plasticity within the mycobiota are further suggested by the observation of a Polyporous basidiomycetes displaying margin color fluctuation under changed moisture conditions. These characteristics highlight how susceptible fungal communities are to change in the microclimate, especially in riparian urban environments.

The site’s trophic interconnectivity is highlighted by the faunal inventory, which includes 22 chordate species and 20 arthropod species. Arthropods are the link between primary producers and higher vertebrates, acting as primary consumers, pollinators, decomposers, and prey organisms (Schowalter et al., 2018). The variety of insects and arachnids seen in different habitat patches suggests that functional guilds, including herbivorous, predatory, and shelter are call reflected in avifaunal and other chordate records, which together indicate habitat appropriateness in an environment that has been anthropogenically altered. Despite their small numbers, the discovery of Platyhelminthes and Mollusca representatives highlights the landscape’s moisture-dependent niches and microhabitat variability. Crucially, biological confirmation of ongoing developmental cycles within the arthropod community is provided by direct field evidence of ecdysis, such as exuviae from shed spiders and an insect going through molting (Truman & Riddiford, 2002). In molting creatures, molting is a physiological process that is hormonally controlled and necessary for growth and metamorphic transformation. Its presence in situ suggests that the habitat promotes effective growth and life cycle completion in addition to supporting transient individuals. These findings support the ecological understanding of the location as a working system as opposed to just a decorative green area (Riddiford, 2012).

Primary production, decomposition, trophic transfer, and developmental succession are among the interconnected ecological process that are demonstrated by the integration of floristic, mycological and faunal components. The ability of planned green areas to preserve aspects of natural ecosystem dynamics is demonstrated by the coexistence of several taxonomic group inside an urban riverside matrix (Loreau et al., 2001). The inventory creates a fundamental basis for long term biodiversity monitoring and ecological assessment, albeit being a temporal snapshot limited to the survey period. Systematically documented inventory like this one help us better understand how managed landscapes can support biological diversity in the face of growing urban expansion. The study emphasizes how urban biodiversity parks can serve as havens that support species survival, ecological interactions, and developmental continuity in urban settings provided they are structurally varied and ecologically maintained.

CONCLUSION

A through examination of the Sabarmati Riverfront Biodiversity Park showed that it was covered to 109 vascular plant, 6 fungi, 20 arthropods, 22 chordates, and representative of Mollusca and Platyhelminthes. Together, these species enable food web interactions, habitat variability, and nutrient cycling, which all contribute to the structure and functionality of the urban ecosystem. The ecosystem’s continuous biological dynamics are highlighted by observation of active developmental process, such as the incomplete documenting of bug and spider molting. A baseline for comprehending ecosystem change is provided by this combined floristic and faunal inventory, which is also a vital resource for upcoming biodiversity monitoring, conservation, and sustainable management plans.

REFERENCES

  1. Amirtahmasebi, R., Orloff, M., Wahba, S., & Altman, A. (2016). Regenerating urban land: A practitioner's guide to leveraging private investment. World Bank Publications.
  2. Bendre, A. (2008). Practical botany. Deep and Deep Publications.
  3. Bendre, A. M. (2021). A Text Book of Practical Botany 1. Rakesh Kumar Rastogi.
  4. Campli, G., Volovych, O., Kim, K., Veldsman, W. P., Drage, H. B., Sheizaf, I., ... & Waterhouse, R. M. (2024). The moulting arthropod: a complete genetic toolkit review. Biological Reviews, 99(6), 2338-2375.
  5. Chaturvedi, A., Kamble, R., Patil, N. G., & Chaturvedi, A. (2013). City–forest relationship in Nagpur: One of the greenest cities of India. Urban forestry & urban greening, 12(1), 79-87.
  6. Daley, A. C., Antcliffe, J. B., Drage, H. B., & Pates, S. (2018). Early fossil record of Euarthropoda and the Cambrian Explosion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(21), 5323-5331.
  7. Dempsey, N., Velarde, C. M., Samuel, M., Bakshi, Y., & Baradi, M. (2020). From river to Riverfront: How meanings and cultural heritage change. The case of the Sabarmati Riverfront project, Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Town Planning Review, 91(6), 643-666.
  8. Ganpule, P., Trivedi, B., Varu, M., & Raina, A. D. (2014). A field guide to the birds of Gujarat. Birds Conservation Society of Gujarat.
  9. Gessner, M. O., Swan, C. M., Dang, C. K., McKie, B. G., Bardgett, R. D., Wall, D. H., & Hättenschwiler, S. (2010). Diversity meets decomposition. Trends in ecology & evolution, 25(6), 372-380.
  10. Giribet, G., & Edgecombe, G. D. (2019). The phylogeny and evolutionary history of arthropods. Current Biology, 29(12), R592-R602.
  11. Loreau, M., Naeem, S., Inchausti, P., Bengtsson, J., Grime, J. P., Hector, A., ... & Wardle, D. A. (2001). Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: current knowledge and future challenges. science, 294(5543), 804-808.
  12. Nijhout, H. F. (1981). Physiological control of molting in insects. American zoologist, 21(3), 631-640.
  13. Paneria, D. B., Mehta, V. D., & Bhatt, B. V. (2017). Waterfront development: A case study of sabarmati riverfront. Arvindbhai Patel Institute of Environmental Design.
  14. Riddiford, L. M. (2012). How does juvenile hormone control insect metamorphosis and reproduction? General and comparative endocrinology, 179(3), 477-484.
  15. Schowalter, T. D., Noriega, J. A., & Tscharntke, T. (2018). Insect effects on ecosystem services—Introduction. Basic and Applied Ecology, 26, 1-7.
  16. Shah, G.L. (1978). Flora of Gujarat state (Vols. 1-2). Vallabh Vidyanagar, India: Sardar Patel University.
  17. Swingland, I. R. (2001). Biodiversity, definition of. Encyclopedia of biodiversity, 1, 377-391.
  18. Truman, J. W., & Riddiford, L. M. (2002). Endocrine insights into the evolution of metamorphosis in insects. Annual review of entomology, 47(1), 467-500.
  19. Vala, D., Parmar, H., Dal, P., Parihar, A., Parmar, D., Parihar, V., & Khandla, Y. (2020). Diversity and distribution of birds in Jamnagar, Gujarat, India. Int. J. Fauna Biol. Stud, 7(4), 35â.Verma, A. K. (2016). Biodiversity: Its different levels and values. International Journal on Environmental Sciences, 7(2), 143-145.
  20. Webster, J., & Weber, R. (2007). Introduction to fungi. Cambridge university press.
  21. Whitaker, R., Captain, A., & Ahmed, F. (2004). Snakes of India: the field guide.
  22. Wüster, W., OTSUKA, S., Malhotra, A., & THORPE, R. S. (1992). Population systematics of Russell's viper: a multivariate study. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 47(1), 97-113.

Reference

  1. Amirtahmasebi, R., Orloff, M., Wahba, S., & Altman, A. (2016). Regenerating urban land: A practitioner's guide to leveraging private investment. World Bank Publications.
  2. Bendre, A. (2008). Practical botany. Deep and Deep Publications.
  3. Bendre, A. M. (2021). A Text Book of Practical Botany 1. Rakesh Kumar Rastogi.
  4. Campli, G., Volovych, O., Kim, K., Veldsman, W. P., Drage, H. B., Sheizaf, I., ... & Waterhouse, R. M. (2024). The moulting arthropod: a complete genetic toolkit review. Biological Reviews, 99(6), 2338-2375.
  5. Chaturvedi, A., Kamble, R., Patil, N. G., & Chaturvedi, A. (2013). City–forest relationship in Nagpur: One of the greenest cities of India. Urban forestry & urban greening, 12(1), 79-87.
  6. Daley, A. C., Antcliffe, J. B., Drage, H. B., & Pates, S. (2018). Early fossil record of Euarthropoda and the Cambrian Explosion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(21), 5323-5331.
  7. Dempsey, N., Velarde, C. M., Samuel, M., Bakshi, Y., & Baradi, M. (2020). From river to Riverfront: How meanings and cultural heritage change. The case of the Sabarmati Riverfront project, Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Town Planning Review, 91(6), 643-666.
  8. Ganpule, P., Trivedi, B., Varu, M., & Raina, A. D. (2014). A field guide to the birds of Gujarat. Birds Conservation Society of Gujarat.
  9. Gessner, M. O., Swan, C. M., Dang, C. K., McKie, B. G., Bardgett, R. D., Wall, D. H., & Hättenschwiler, S. (2010). Diversity meets decomposition. Trends in ecology & evolution, 25(6), 372-380.
  10. Giribet, G., & Edgecombe, G. D. (2019). The phylogeny and evolutionary history of arthropods. Current Biology, 29(12), R592-R602.
  11. Loreau, M., Naeem, S., Inchausti, P., Bengtsson, J., Grime, J. P., Hector, A., ... & Wardle, D. A. (2001). Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: current knowledge and future challenges. science, 294(5543), 804-808.
  12. Nijhout, H. F. (1981). Physiological control of molting in insects. American zoologist, 21(3), 631-640.
  13. Paneria, D. B., Mehta, V. D., & Bhatt, B. V. (2017). Waterfront development: A case study of sabarmati riverfront. Arvindbhai Patel Institute of Environmental Design.
  14. Riddiford, L. M. (2012). How does juvenile hormone control insect metamorphosis and reproduction? General and comparative endocrinology, 179(3), 477-484.
  15. Schowalter, T. D., Noriega, J. A., & Tscharntke, T. (2018). Insect effects on ecosystem services—Introduction. Basic and Applied Ecology, 26, 1-7.
  16. Shah, G.L. (1978). Flora of Gujarat state (Vols. 1-2). Vallabh Vidyanagar, India: Sardar Patel University.
  17. Swingland, I. R. (2001). Biodiversity, definition of. Encyclopedia of biodiversity, 1, 377-391.
  18. Truman, J. W., & Riddiford, L. M. (2002). Endocrine insights into the evolution of metamorphosis in insects. Annual review of entomology, 47(1), 467-500.
  19. Vala, D., Parmar, H., Dal, P., Parihar, A., Parmar, D., Parihar, V., & Khandla, Y. (2020). Diversity and distribution of birds in Jamnagar, Gujarat, India. Int. J. Fauna Biol. Stud, 7(4), 35â.Verma, A. K. (2016). Biodiversity: Its different levels and values. International Journal on Environmental Sciences, 7(2), 143-145.
  20. Webster, J., & Weber, R. (2007). Introduction to fungi. Cambridge university press.
  21. Whitaker, R., Captain, A., & Ahmed, F. (2004). Snakes of India: the field guide.
  22. Wüster, W., OTSUKA, S., Malhotra, A., & THORPE, R. S. (1992). Population systematics of Russell's viper: a multivariate study. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 47(1), 97-113.

Photo
Bhavna Singh
Corresponding author

Department of Botany, Bioinformatics and Climate Change Impact Management, Gujarat University, Ahmedabad-380009, Gujarat

Photo
Shiv Gupta
Co-author

Department of Botany, Bioinformatics and Climate Change Impact Management, Gujarat University, Ahmedabad-380009, Gujarat

Photo
Hitesh Solanki
Co-author

Department of Botany, Bioinformatics and Climate Change Impact Management, Gujarat University, Ahmedabad-380009, Gujarat

Shiv Gupta, Bhavna Singh*, Hitesh Solanki, Assessment Of Floral And Fauna Diversity Of The Biodiversity Park, Sabarmati Riverfront, Ahmedabad, Int. J. Sci. R. Tech., 2026, 3 (4), 739-749. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19662730

More related articles
A Comprehensive Review of Pharmacognostic and Phyt...
Sakshi Boralkar, Maitreyee Pachpor, Gaurav Khupse, Sayali Gawali,...
Review on Fluconazole: Properties and Analytical M...
Dnyaneshwari Gaikwad, Amol Gayke, Amol Jadhav, Komal Kute, ...
Edible Drinking Straws: A Sustainable Zero-Waste Solution for the Circular Bioec...
Asiya Shaik, Swechha Gouravelli, Gudisela Geyasri, Gubbala Naga Vinay, Gogineni Sriram, Gorrekanti S...
An Overview of The Optimisation of 3D Printed Concrete Using Silica Sand...
Harshad Raut, Dinanath Shegar, Prajwal Londhe, Abhishek Unde, Sahil Ghorpade, Prasad Gayake, ...
Related Articles
Proteomics in Personalized Cancer Therapy: Advances, Applications, and Future Pe...
Ishwari Jaiswal, Ruturaj Kulkarni, Garima Singh, Vaishnavi Rindhe, Krutika Patil, ...
Paracetamol-Induced Toxicity: A Review of the Side Effects Associated with Exces...
Arnab Roy, Kumari Shiwani Shivam , Divyansh Kumar Gourav , Manish Kumar , Satyam Kumar Prajapati , G...
Transitioning from Preclinical to Clinical Training: An Evaluation of Students...
Dr. M. Hariharan, Dr. C. Selvakmar, Dr. K. Hiruthika, Dr. Haseena Begum H., Dr. T. Yoka, Dr. S. Kavi...
Perceived Daily Difficulties of Dental Students: A Questionnaire-Based Analysis...
Dr. S. Gopi krishna, Dr. V. Karthika, Dr. M. Kathuri, Dr. G. Hariprasath, Dr. Selvakumar, Dr. Yoka, ...
A Comprehensive Review of Pharmacognostic and Phytochemical Profile of Bauhinia ...
Sakshi Boralkar, Maitreyee Pachpor, Gaurav Khupse, Sayali Gawali, Dipali Doifode, ...