Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Bryophytes of Rio Turvo State Park (SP), Brazil: integrating floristics, geographical distribution, reproduction and ecological traits to support the conservation of an Atlantic Forest fragment

ABSTRACT

Rio Turvo State Park (RTSP) is a Conservation Unit located within the Atlantic Forest biome in the Vale do Ribeira region of the State of São Paulo, Brazil. Considering the lack of knowledge regarding its bryoflora, we performed a floristic inventory of RTSP (following the random-walk method), the results of which we report here including discussion of the geographical distribution (Brazil and worldwide), substrate colonization, life forms and reproduction of the species. We found a total of 414 species, which represents 30 % of all known bryophyte species in Brazil. Dioicous species were predominant over monoicous species, the most colonized substrate was tree trunk (40 % of all species) and the predominant life form was mat (47 %), indicating that the floristic composition is influenced by the environmental conditions of the area (high humidity, dense vegetation and shading). Although anthropogenic intervention is present in RTSP, it harbors huge biodiverse potential, since 22 % of the species are rare. Furthermore, 16 new occurrences were recorded for the State of São Paulo. The information provided by this study exalts the importance of this Conservation Unit in the preservation of bryophytes, as well as all the biodiversity of its included ecosystems.

Keywords:
Atlantic Forest; bryophytes; Conservation Unit; distribution; floristics; inventory; liverworts; mosses; ombrophilous forest; Vale do Ribeira

Introduction

The SNUC Law 9.985/2000 (Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação - National System of Conservation Units) establishes the importance of conservation units in promoting public policies for the protection of natural landscapes, flora, fauna and historical-cultural heritage, the recovery and restoration of degraded areas, economic valorization by the sustainable use of natural resources that remain the subsistence of local populations and ecological tourism (Brasil 2011Brasil. 2011. SNUC - Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação da Natureza: Lei nº 9.985, de 18 de julho de 2000; Decreto nº 4.340, de 22 de agosto de 2002; Decreto nº 5.746, de 5 de abril de 2006. Plano Estratégico Nacional de Áreas Protegidas: Decreto nº 5.758, de 13 de abril de 2006. Brasília, Ministério do Meio Ambiente (MMA), Brazil. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/decreto/2002/d4340.htm#:~:text=DECRETO%20N%C2%BA%204.340%2C%20DE%2022,inciso%20IV%2C%20e%20o%20art. 03 Jul. 2018.
http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/dec...
). Furthermore, it provides the development of scientific research and environmental monitoring studies, as well as a space for discussion, interpretation and environmental education (Brasil 2011Brasil. 2011. SNUC - Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação da Natureza: Lei nº 9.985, de 18 de julho de 2000; Decreto nº 4.340, de 22 de agosto de 2002; Decreto nº 5.746, de 5 de abril de 2006. Plano Estratégico Nacional de Áreas Protegidas: Decreto nº 5.758, de 13 de abril de 2006. Brasília, Ministério do Meio Ambiente (MMA), Brazil. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/decreto/2002/d4340.htm#:~:text=DECRETO%20N%C2%BA%204.340%2C%20DE%2022,inciso%20IV%2C%20e%20o%20art. 03 Jul. 2018.
http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/dec...
). The Rio Turvo State Park conservation unit (RTSP), São Paulo, Brazil, was founded in 2008. It is located inside the Atlantic Forest biome, harboring several flora and fauna species, including endangered ones, such as Amazona vinacea (Psittacidae) and Panthera onca (jaguar, Felidae) (Portal do Governo do Estado de São Paulo 2018Portal do Governo do Estado de São Paulo. 2018. Parque Estadual do Rio Turvo. http://www.saopaulo.sp.gov.br/conhecasp/parques-e-reservas-naturais/parque-estadual-do-rio- turvo/. 03 Jul. 2018.
http://www.saopaulo.sp.gov.br/conhecasp/...
). Moreover, this State Park has a great archaeological significance due to the presence of a fluvial sambaqui, where it was found one of the oldest human fossils in the Americas, dating ca. 10,400 years (Pivetta 2005Pivetta M. 2005. Eu nasci dez mil anos atrás. Revista Pesquisa FAPESP 112. http://revistapesquisa.fapesp.br/wp-content/uploads/2005/06/038-043-arqueologia.pdf.
http://revistapesquisa.fapesp.br/wp-cont...
).

The Atlantic Forest is mostly located on the Brazilian coast and currently comprises only 12 % of its original extension (1,500 Km²) (Ribeiro et al. 2011Ribeiro MC, Martensen AC, Metzger JP, Tabarelli M, Scarano F, Fortin M-J. 2011. The Brazilian Atlantic Forest: a shrinking biodiversity hotspot. In: Zachos FE, Habel JC. (eds.) Biodiversity hotspots. Berlin, Springer. p. 405-434.). It is among the areas with the most significant habitat loss and high endemism rates, ranking fourth on the global priority list of conservation hotspots (Myers et al. 2000Myers N, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853-858.). Due to its enormous importance, the Atlantic Forest was declared a National Heritage by the Federal Constitution of 1988 and was granted the Biosphere Reserve title by Unesco (SOS Mata Atlântica 2018SOS Mata Atlântica. 2018. Relatório Anual 2018. https://www.sosma.org.br/sobre/relatorios-e-balancos/. 12 Mar. 2020.
https://www.sosma.org.br/sobre/relatorio...
).

Compared to the knowledge on vascular plants accumulated over the years, Bryology is still incipient since little is known on their biology, ecology, distribution and bioprospection (Hallingbäck & Tan 2010Hallingbäck T, Tan BC. 2010. Past and present activities and future strategy of bryophyte conservation. Phytotaxa 9: 266-274.). For this reason, efforts on bryophyte research are critical, mainly on species occurring within biodiversity hotspots, such as the Atlantic Forest. These efforts fill the gaps in this group’s geographical distribution, population sizes and susceptibility to anthropogenic environmental changes, enabling conscious conservation planning with effective measures to protect biodiversity (Hallingbäck & Tan 2010Hallingbäck T, Tan BC. 2010. Past and present activities and future strategy of bryophyte conservation. Phytotaxa 9: 266-274.). Scott et al. (1997Scott GAM, Entwisle TJ, May TW, Stevens GN. 1997. A conservation overview of Australian non-marine lichens, bryophytes, algae and fungi. Canberra, Wildlife Australia, Environment Australia.) emphasize the necessary investment in floristic and endemism studies of different regions to fill the remaining gaps.

According to Costa et al. (2011Costa DP, Pôrto KC, Luizi-Ponzo AP, et al. 2011. Synopsis of the Brazilian moss flora: checklist, distribution and conservation. Nova Hedwigia 93: 277-334.), the Atlantic Forest is the biome with the highest bryophyte richness and endemism in Brazil. Out of the 1,572 species recognized for the country, 334 species are endemic, 1,347 occur in the Atlantic Forest and 915 species occur in the State of São Paulo (Flora do Brasil 2020 2020Flora do Brasil 2020. 2020. Briófitas. Rio de Janeiro, Instituto de Pesquisas Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. http://reflora.jbrj.gov.br/reflora/floradobrasil/ FB128472. 02 Jan. 2020.
http://reflora.jbrj.gov.br/reflora/flora...
). For the Atlantic Forest in the State of São Paulo, several publications have consistently contributed to the knowledge of the diversity and distribution of bryophytes, such as: Yano (1998Yano O. 1998. Briófitas do Estado de São Paulo. In: Bicudo CEM, Shepherd GI. (eds.) Biodiversidade do Estado de São Paulo, Brasil - Síntese do conhecimento ao final do século XX. 2: Fungos Macroscópicos e Plantas. São Paulo, FAPESP. p. 37-46.), Visnadi (2002Visnadi SR. 2002. Meteoriaceae (Bryophyta) da Mata Atlântica do Estado de São Paulo. Hoehnea 29: 159-187.; 2004Visnadi SR. 2004. Briófitas de praias do Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 18: 91-97.; 2005Visnadi SR. 2005. Brioflora da Mata Atlântica do estado de São Paulo: região norte. Hoehnea 32: 215-231.), Peralta & Yano (2006Peralta DF, Yano O. 2006. Novas ocorrências de Musgos (Bryophyta) para o Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Botânica 29: 49-65.), Visnadi (2006)Visnadi SR. 2006. Sematophyllaceae da Mata Atlântica do nordeste do Estado de São Paulo. Hoehnea 33: 455-484., Yano & Peralta (2007)Yano O, Peralta DF. 2007. Briófitas da Ilha do Bom Abrigo, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Hoehnea 34: 87-94., Peralta & Yano (2008)Peralta DF, Yano O. 2008. Briófitas do Parque Estadual da Ilha Anchieta, Ubatuba, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Iheringia, Série Botânica 63: 101-127., Yano & Peralta (2008)Yano O, Peralta DF. 2008. Briófitas da Ilhabela, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Hoehnea 35: 111-121., Visnadi (2009)Visnadi SR. 2009. Briófitas do Caxetal, em Ubatuba, São Paulo, Brasil. Tropical Bryology 30: 8-14., Peralta & Yano (2012)Peralta DF, Yano O. 2012. Briófitas da Serra do Itapeti. In: Morini MSC, Miranda VFO. (eds..) Serra do Itapeti: Aspectos Históricos, Sociais e Naturalísticos. Santa Cruz do Rio Pardo, Viena Gráfica e Editora. p. 1-397., Visnadi (2012Visnadi SR. 2012. Briófitas da Estação Ecológica Juréia-Itatins, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Tropical Biology 34: 17-31.; 2013aVisnadi SR. 2013a. Briófitas de áreas antrópicas do Parque Estadual da Serra do Mar, Núcleo Picinguaba, Ubatuba, estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Naturais 8: 49-62.; 2013bVisnadi SR. 2013b. Brioflora do Parque Estadual Turístico do Alto do Ribeira (Petar), estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Tropical Bryology 35: 52-63.; 2015aVisnadi SR. 2015a. Parque Estadual das Fontes do Ipiranga: unidade de conservação importante para a proteção da brioflora da Mata Atlântica na cidade de São Paulo, Brasil. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Naturais 10: 437-469.; 2015bVisnadi SR. 2015b. Brioflora do Parque Estadual Intervales, São Paulo, Brasil: uma importante área para conservação da biodiversidade da Mata Atlântica do Sudeste brasileiro. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Ciências Naturais 10: 105-125.), Carmo et al. (2016Carmo DM, Lima JS, Amélio LA, Peralta DF. 2016. Briófitas do Parque Estadual da Serra do Mar, Núcleo de Santa Virgínia, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Hoehnea 43: 265-287.), Amélio et al. (2019Amélio LA, Peralta DF, Carmo DM. 2019. Briófitas do Parque Estadual de Campos do Jordão, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Hoehnea 46: e962018. doi: 10.1590/2236-8906-96/2018
https://doi.org/10.1590/2236-8906-96/201...
) and Yano et al. (2019)Yano O, Peralta DF, Bordin J. 2019. Brioflora da Ilha do Cardoso. São Paulo, RiMa Editora.. These surveys were carried out in State conservation units revealing territories with great species richness: 386 species for Serra do Mar State Park, Núcleo Santa Virgínia (Carmo et al. 2016Carmo DM, Lima JS, Amélio LA, Peralta DF. 2016. Briófitas do Parque Estadual da Serra do Mar, Núcleo de Santa Virgínia, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Hoehnea 43: 265-287.); 490 species for Campos do Jordão State Park (Amélio et al. 2019Amélio LA, Peralta DF, Carmo DM. 2019. Briófitas do Parque Estadual de Campos do Jordão, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Hoehnea 46: e962018. doi: 10.1590/2236-8906-96/2018
https://doi.org/10.1590/2236-8906-96/201...
); and 440 species for Ilha do Cardoso State Park (Yano et al. 2019Yano O, Peralta DF, Bordin J. 2019. Brioflora da Ilha do Cardoso. São Paulo, RiMa Editora.).

Bryophytes are land plants that are still water-dependent for sexual reproduction. They are strongly influenced by microclimatic conditions due to their small size (Richards 1984Richards PW. 1984. The ecology of tropical bryophytes. In: Schuster RM. (ed.) New Manual of Bryology. Nichinan, The Hattori Botanical Laboratory. p. 1233-1270.) and the poikilohydric feature - the low capacity to control water loss (Delgadillo & Cárdenas 1990Delgadillo CM, Cárdenas MAS. 1990. Manual de briofitas. 2nd. edn. México, Instituto de Biología de la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.). Due to their property in accumulating nutrients (Oishi & Hiura 2017Oishi Y, Hiura T. 2017. Bryophytes as bioindicators of the atmospheric environment in urban-forest landscapes. Landscapes and Urban Planning 167: 348-355.), heavy metals and other substances, several species are considered appropriate indicators for biomonitoring studies that evaluate air and water pollution (Govindapyari et al. 2010Govindapyari H, Leleeka M, Nivedita M, Uniyal PL. 2010. Bryophytes: indicators and monitoring agents of pollution. NeBIO 1: 35-41.). They are also useful in measuring the disturbance in Neotropical rainforests (Drehwald 2005Drehwald U. 2005. Biomonitoring of disturbance in neotropical rainforests using bryophytes as indicators. Journal of the Hattori Botanical Laboratory 97: 117-126.). Chemical studies are relevant to evaluate the atmospheric and other environmental conditions (Oishi & Hiura 2017Oishi Y, Hiura T. 2017. Bryophytes as bioindicators of the atmospheric environment in urban-forest landscapes. Landscapes and Urban Planning 167: 348-355.). However, several ecological studies have demonstrated the relationship between life forms, colonization of different substrates, reproductive strategies, humidity and light tolerance (Batista & Santos 2016Batista WVSM, Santos ND. 2016. Can regional and local filters explain epiphytic bryophyte distributions in the Atlantic Forest of southeastern Brazil? Acta Botanica Brasilica 30: 462-472.; Santos et al. 2017Santos ND, Costa DP, Kinoshita LS, Shepherd GJ. 2017b. Variations in bryophyte communities in a short elevational gradient in Atlantic Forest of Southeastern Brazil. Cryptogamie, Bryologie 38: 191-211.b; Batista et al. 2018Batista WVSM, Pôrto KC, Santos ND. 2018. Distribution, ecology, and reproduction of bryophytes in a humid enclave in the semiarid region of northeastern Brazil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 32: 303-313.).

Considering the lack of knowledge of the bryoflora of the RTSP, this study aimed to carry out a floristic inventory of the park’s bryophytes, discussing the species’ geographical distribution in Brazil and worldwide, substrate, life forms and reproductive aspects. These results will provide support to the park’s management plan (still under construction), as well as the preservation of conservation units located within the Atlantic Forest biome.

Materials and methods

Study area

The Rio Turvo State Park (24º47’-24º57’ S, 48º09’-48º25’ W) is located inside the Atlantic Forest biome, in Vale do Ribeira region, southern State of São Paulo. The park consists of 73,893.87 ha across the municipalities of Jacupiranga, Cajati and Barra do Turvo (Portal do Governo do Estado de São Paulo 2018Portal do Governo do Estado de São Paulo. 2018. Parque Estadual do Rio Turvo. http://www.saopaulo.sp.gov.br/conhecasp/parques-e-reservas-naturais/parque-estadual-do-rio- turvo/. 03 Jul. 2018.
http://www.saopaulo.sp.gov.br/conhecasp/...
). Its vegetation comprises mixed forest to rainforests (IBGE 2012IBGE - Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. 2012. Manual técnico da vegetação brasileira. 2nd. edn. Rio de Janeiro, Ministério do Planejamento, Orçamento e Gestão, Brazil. https://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/index.php/biblioteca-catalogo?view=detalhes&id =263011. 10 Jul. 2019.
https://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/index.php...
), with altitudes ranging from 10 to 1,500 m.a.s.l. (Bim & Furlan 2013Bim OJB, Furlan SA. 2013. Mosaico do Jacupiranga - Vale do Ribeira/SP: conservação, conflitos e soluções socioambientais. Agrária (São Paulo, Online) 18: 4-36). The climate can be defined as permanently humid subtropical, influenced by tropical and polar sea air masses (Monteiro 1973Monteiro CAF. 1973. A dinâmica climática e as chuvas do estado de São Paulo: estudo geográfico sob forma de atlas. São Paulo, Instituto de Geografia.). Following the Köppen-Geiger classification, areas at lower altitudes are classified as Cfa (humid subtropical climate), while areas at altitudes above 700 m are classified as Cfb (oceanic climate) (Lepsch et al. 1990Lepsch IF, Saraiva IR, Donzeli PL, et al. 1990. Macro Zoneamento de terras da região do Vale do Ribeira de Iguape, SP. Boletim Científico, Instituto Agronômico 19: 1-181.). The average temperature ranges from 11 to 32 ºC (Ross 2002Ross JLS. 2002. A morfogênese da Bacia do Ribeira do Iguape e os sistemas ambientais. Geousp, Espaço e Tempo 12: 21-46.). Rainfall is recorded throughout the year, with an average annual rainfall ranging from 1,000 to 3,000 mm/year but less intense in June, July and August (Ross 2002Ross JLS. 2002. A morfogênese da Bacia do Ribeira do Iguape e os sistemas ambientais. Geousp, Espaço e Tempo 12: 21-46.). This park is located within the Ribeira do Iguape river basin, with the main rivers being the Turvo, Jacupiranga and Pardo. The pedological aspect presents a montane topography, with deep and narrow valleys (Bim et al. 2017Bim OJB, Assis JC, Campolim MB, Furlan SA. 2017. De parque a mosaico: ecologia de paisagem no processo de recategorização do parque estadual Jacupiranga (SP). Confins (on-line) 32. https://journals.openedition.org/confins/12216. 03 Jul. 2018.
https://journals.openedition.org/confins...
). The vegetation cover is predominantly primary, with some secondary patches caused by anthropogenic interventions such as deforestation, farming and Euterpe edulis Mart. (palmito juçara or solitary açaí palm) extraction (Bim & Furlan 2013Bim OJB, Furlan SA. 2013. Mosaico do Jacupiranga - Vale do Ribeira/SP: conservação, conflitos e soluções socioambientais. Agrária (São Paulo, Online) 18: 4-36).

Sampling

We analyzed 401 samples collected until 2009 and deposited at the SP herbarium (Maria Eneyda P. Kaufmann Fidalgo), and 849 additional samples were collected during three field expeditions from 2018 to 2019. We adopted the random-walk technique that consists of walking freely (Filgueiras et al. 1994Filgueiras TS, Nogueira PE, Brochado AL, Guala II GF. 1994. Caminhamento: um método expedito para levantamentos florísticos qualitativos. Cadernos de Geociências 12: 39-43.) through trails and exploring all available substrates around, such as soil, rocks, leaves, tree trunks, decaying tree trunks and artificial substrates.

Specimens treatment

The methodology for collection, herborization and preservation of specimens followed Gradstein et al. (2001Gradstein SR, Churchill SP, Salazar-Allen N. 2001. Guide to the bryophytes of Tropical America. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 86: 1-586.) and all samples were included in the SP herbarium. Species identification followedFrahm (1991Frahm J-P. 1991. Dicranaceae: Campylopodioideae, Paraleucobryoideae. Flora Neotropica 54: 1-237.), Zander (1993Zander RH. 1993. Genera of the Pottiaceae: mosses of harsh environments. Buffalo, New York, The Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences.), Sharp et al. (1994Sharp AJ, Crum H, Eckel PM. 1994. The moss flora of Mexico. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 69: 1-1095.), Buck (1998Buck WR. 1998. Pleurocarpous mosses of the West Indies. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 29: 1-401.),Gradstein et al. (2001)Gradstein SR, Churchill SP, Salazar-Allen N. 2001. Guide to the bryophytes of Tropical America. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 86: 1-586., Gradstein & Costa (2003)Gradstein SR, Costa DP. 2003. The Hepaticae and Anthocerotae of Brazil. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 87: 1-333.,Câmara & Costa (2006Câmara PEAS, Costa DP. 2006. Hepáticas e antóceros das matas de galeria da Reserva Ecológica do IBGE, RECOR, Distrito Federal, Brasil. Hoehnea 33: 79-87.), Visnadi (2006Visnadi SR. 2006. Sematophyllaceae da Mata Atlântica do nordeste do Estado de São Paulo. Hoehnea 33: 455-484.), Zartman & Ilkiu-Borges (2007Zartman CE, Ilkiu-Borges AL. 2007. Guide to the epiphyllous liverworts of Central Amazonia. Manaus, INPA Press.), Câmara (2008aCâmara PEAS. 2008a. Musgos acrocárpicos das matas de galeria da Reserva Ecológica do IBGE, RECOR, Distrito Federal, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 22: 1027-1035.; 2008bCâmara PEAS. 2008b. Musgos pleurocárpicos das matas de galeria da Reserva Ecológica do IBGE, RECOR, Distrito Federal, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 22: 573-581.), Peralta & Yano (2008Peralta DF, Yano O. 2008. Briófitas do Parque Estadual da Ilha Anchieta, Ubatuba, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Iheringia, Série Botânica 63: 101-127.), Ballejos & Bastos (2009Ballejos J, Bastos CJP. 2009. Musgos Pleurocárpicos do Parque Estadual das Sete Passagens, Miguel Calmon, Bahia, Brasil. Hoehnea 36: 479-495.), Bastos & Yano (2009)Bastos CJP, Yano O. 2009. O gênero Lejeunea Libert (Lejeuneaceae) no Estado da Bahia, Brasil. Hoehnea 36: 303-320., Yano & Peralta (2009Yano O, Peralta DF. 2009. Flora de Grão-Mogol, Minas Gerais. Briófitas (Bryophyta e Marchantiophyta). Boletim de Botânica da Universidade de São Paulo 27: 1-26.; 2011Yano O, Peralta DF. 2011. Flora da Serra do Cipó, Minas Gerais: Briófitas (Anthocerotophyta, Bryophyta e Marchantiophyta). Boletim de Botânica da Universidade de São Paulo 29: 135-211.) and Bordin & Yano (2013Bordin J, Yano O. 2013. Fissidentaceae (Bryophyta) do Brasil. Boletim do Instituto de Botânica 22: 1-72.).

The classification system followed Renzaglia et al. (2009Renzaglia KS, Villarreal JC, Duff RJ. 2009. New insights into morphology, anatomy and systematics of hornworts. In: Goffinet B, Shaw AJ. (eds.) Bryophyte Biology . New York, Cambridge University Press . p. 139-171.) for Anthocerotophyta, Crandall-Stotler et al. (2009Crandall-Stotler B, Stotler RE, Long DG. 2009. Morphology and classification of the Marchantiophyta. In: Goffinet B, Shaw AJ. (eds.) Bryophyte Biology. 2nd. edn. New York, Cambridge University Press.) for Marchantiophyta and Goffinet et al. (2009Goffinet B, Buck WR, Shaw AJ. 2009. Morphology, anatomy and classification of the Bryophyta. In: Goffinet B, Shaw AJ. (eds.) Bryophyte Biology . New York, Cambridge University Press . p. 56-138.) for Bryophyta with adaptation based on recent classification studies of certain genera and families. The abbreviation of the authors’ name in the species list was based on Brummitt & Powell (1992Brummitt RK, Powell CE. 1992. Authors of plant names: a list of authors of scientific names of plants, with recommended standard forms of their names, including abbreviations. Kew, Royal Botanic Gardens. Archives of Natural History 21: 131-145.).

The list was organized in alphabetical order by division, family, genus and species. The biome classification followed IBGE (2019)IBGE - Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. 2019. Biomas e sistema costeiro-marinho do Brasil: compatível com a escala 1:250 000. Rio de Janeiro, IBGE, Coordenação de Recursos Naturais e Estudos Ambientais. https://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/index.php/ biblioteca-catalogo?view=detalhes&id=2101676. 13 Oct 2020.
https://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/index.php...
, information on biomes and worldwide distribution followed Gradstein & Costa (2003Gradstein SR, Costa DP. 2003. The Hepaticae and Anthocerotae of Brazil. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 87: 1-333.), Costa et al. (2011)Costa DP, Pôrto KC, Luizi-Ponzo AP, et al. 2011. Synopsis of the Brazilian moss flora: checklist, distribution and conservation. Nova Hedwigia 93: 277-334. and Flora do Brasil 2020 2020Flora do Brasil 2020. 2020. Briófitas. Rio de Janeiro, Instituto de Pesquisas Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. http://reflora.jbrj.gov.br/reflora/floradobrasil/ FB128472. 02 Jan. 2020.
http://reflora.jbrj.gov.br/reflora/flora...
. For life forms, substrate type and reproductive strategies (sexual system and structures), we followedBatista et al. (2018Batista WVSM, Pôrto KC, Santos ND. 2018. Distribution, ecology, and reproduction of bryophytes in a humid enclave in the semiarid region of northeastern Brazil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 32: 303-313.). To classify the geographical distribution in Brazil, we followed Valente & Pôrto (2006Valente EB, Pôrto KC. 2006. Hepáticas (Marchantiophyta) de um fragmento de Mata Atlântica na Serra da Jibóia, Município de Santa Teresinha, BA, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 20: 433-441.), which consider three statuses: wide (when a species occurs in ten or more Brazilian states), moderate (in five to nine states) and rare (in one to four states).

The substrates were classified into five categories according to Robbins (1952Robbins RG. 1952. Bryophyte ecology of a dune area in New Zealand. Vegetation 4: 1-31.): soil (terrestrial), rocks (rupicolous), leaves (epiphyllous), tree trunk (corticolous) and decaying trunk (epixylic), plus two additional categories: artificial and humicolous. The life form classification followed Mägdefrau (1982Mägdefrau K. 1982. Life-forms of bryophytes. In: Smith AJE. (ed.) Bryophyte ecology . New York, Chapman & Hall. p. 45-58.), recognizing nine categories: annual, turf, cushion, mat, weft, pendant, tail, fan and dendroid.

Regarding reproduction, we carefully checked the specimens to identify their sexual system (dioicous or monoicous) and the presence of sexual (male and female gametangia, sporophytes) or asexual propagules (gemmae and tubers).

Results

Species richness

A total of 1,250 samples were analyzed, containing one to twelve species on each envelope. We recorded 414 species: 203 Marchantiophyta (23 families, 62 genera); 204 Bryophyta (38 families, 105 genera); and seven Anthocerotophyta (three families, four genera) (Tab. 1). The total number of species represented 46 % of the total known species for the State of São Paulo, 31 % of the species for the Atlantic Forest, 26 % of the species for Brazil and 10 % of the species for the Neotropical Region (Tab. 2). We recorded 16 new occurrences for the State of São Paulo (6 %).

Table 1
List and characteristics of bryophytes species of Rio Turvo State Park. Biomes: AM = Amazon Forest; AT = Atlantic Forest; CA= Caatinga; CE = Cerrado; PA = Pampa; PL = Pantanal. Geographical distribution in Brazil: rare = occurrence in one to four Brazilian States; moderate = in five to nine States; wide = ten or more States. Worlwide = worldwide distribution. 1st = First occurrence to SP State. Life forms: annual; turf; cushion; mat; weft; pendant; tail; fan; dendroid. Substrates: TT = tree trunk, SO = soil, RO = rock, DT = decaying trunk, LE = leaf, HU = humicolous, AR = artificial. Sexual system: FG = Female gametangia, MG = Male gametangia; S = Sporophyte; AS = Asexual propagule. Symbol: * in species = Endemic to Brazil.

Table 2
Distribution and richness of species found in the Rio Turvo State Park (RTSP) in relation to other regional scales. The percentage represents the richness found in the RTSP compared with the total number of species in each region.

Among liverworts, the richest families were Lejeuneaceae (98 species), Plagiochilaceae (17 spp.), Lepidoziaceae (14 spp.), Frullaniaceae and Radulaceae (12 spp. each), Aneuraceae (8 spp.), Lophocoleaceae and Metzgeriaceae (7 spp. each) and Pallaviciniaceae (5 spp.). The most well-representative families of mosses were Pilotrichaceae (22 spp.), Fissidentaceae (17 spp.), Sematophyllaceae (16 spp.), Leucobryaceae (12 spp.) and Bryaceae, Calymperaceae, Neckeraceae and Ortothrichaceae (11 spp. each). Finally, the richest family of hornworts, in terms of the number of species, was Dendrocerotaceae (4 spp.).

Geographical distribution (Brazilian States, biomes and worldwide distribution)

Considering their distribution in Brazil, 160 species (39 %) show wide distribution, 161 species (39 %) are moderately distributed and 93 species (22 %) are rarely distributed.

In terms of species occurrence in Brazilian biomes, 94 % occur in the Atlantic Forest (AT), 45 % in the Amazon Forest (AM), 42 % in the Cerrado (CE), 17 % in the Pantanal (PL), 11 % in the Caatinga (CA) and 10 % in the Pampa (PA) (Fig 1).

Figure 1
Percentage of species’ occurrence in each Brazilian biome.

We highlight that 145 species (35 %) are exclusive to the AT. However, only five species are exclusive to the AM, two to the CE and one to the CA. Schlotheimia merkelii, Pylaisiadelpha tenuirostris and Lejeunea herminieri are new records to the AT. On the other hand, 33 % occur in three to six biomes. The group of biomes that share more species in common (48 spp., which represents 12 % of the list) is composed of AM, AT and CE (Fig. 2). The AM and AT share 57 species (14 %), while the CE and AT share 34 species (8 %).

Figure 2
Percentage of species shared among Atlantic Forest (AT), Amazon Forest (AM) and Cerrado (CE).

Concerning worldwide distribution, 215 species (52 %) are Neotropical, 65 spp. (16 %) are disjunctly distributed (species found in one to three countries in the same continent or specific localities in different continents), 46 spp. (11 %) are endemic to Brazil, 45 spp. (11 %) are Pantropical, 25 spp. (6 %) are cosmopolitan and 14 spp. (3 %) are sub-cosmopolitan.

Substrates and life forms

The most common substrate was tree trunks - with 40 % of the species - followed by rocks, decaying trunks, soil and leaves (Fig. 3). About 63 % of the species had a preference for a single type of substrate. Some species demonstrated considerable potential to colonize different substrates: the moss Thamniopsis langsdorffii (Pilotrichaceae) and the liverworts Saccogynidium caldense, Chiloscyphus martianus. (Lophocoleaceae) and Radula mexicana (Radulaceae) occurred simultaneously in tree trunks, soil, decaying trunks and rocks. Cheilolejeunea filiformis (Lejeuneaceae) was found inhabiting all four substrates, plus leaves. The dominant life form was mat (present in 47 % of the total species), followed by turf, weft, fan, pendant, tail, cushion and dendroid (Fig. 4).

Figure 3
Percentage of species’ occurrence per substrate.

Figure 4
Percentage of species per life form.

Reproductive aspects

The prevailing sexual system was dioicous (56 %), followed by monoicous (41 %), and 3 % of the total species exhibited both sexual systems. Regarding sexual expression, 53 % of the species were sexual - meaning the species possess male (antheridia) and/or female gametangia (archegonia) - 32 % exhibited sporophytes and 13 % presented asexual reproduction (that included caducous leaves, gemmae, fragmented leaves, brood leaves and flagelliform-branches).

Of all the sexual species, 46 % were dioicous, 51 % monoicous and only 3 % presented both sexual systems. Of all the asexual species, 82 % were dioicous and only 16 % were monoicous. Finally, of all species that bore sporophytes, 65 % were monoicous and 35 % were dioicous (Fig. 5).

Figure 5
Number of species according to their reproductive strategies: dioicous and/or monoicous. Types of reproduction: S = presence of sporophyte, Asex = asexual reproduction, Sex = sexual reproduction.

Discussion

Species richness

The richness of liverworts overcoming the mosses represents a common pattern in the floristic surveys in well-preserved areas in the Atlantic Forest, as pointed out by Gradstein et al. (2001Gradstein SR, Churchill SP, Salazar-Allen N. 2001. Guide to the bryophytes of Tropical America. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 86: 1-586.) for the Neotropics. This pattern was described for Northeastern Brazil, in the State of Bahia by Valente & Pôrto (2006Valente EB, Pôrto KC. 2006. Hepáticas (Marchantiophyta) de um fragmento de Mata Atlântica na Serra da Jibóia, Município de Santa Teresinha, BA, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 20: 433-441.), Bastos & Bôas-Bastos (2008Bastos CJP, Bôas-Bastos SBV. 2008. Musgos acrocárpicos e cladocárpicos (Bryophyta) da Reserva Ecológica da Michelin, Igrapiúna, Bahia, Brasil. Sitientibus, Série Ciências Biológicas 8: 275-279.), Bastos & Valente (2008)Bastos CJP, Valente EB. 2008. Hepática (Marchantiophyta) da Reserva Ecológica da Michelin, Igrapiúna, Bahia, Brasil. Sitientibus, Série Ciências Biológicas 8: 280-293. and Bôas-Bastos & Bastos (2009)Bôas-Bastos SV, Bastos CJP. 2009. Musgos pleurocárpicos dos fragmentos de Mata Atlântica da Reserva Ecológica da Michelin, município de Igrapiúna, BA, Brasil. II - Hypnales (Bryophyta: Bryopsida). Acta Botanica Brasilica 23: 630-643.. In Southeastern Brazil, it was described in the State of Rio de Janeiro by Santos & Costa (2008Santos ND, Costa DP. 2008. A importância de Reservas Particulares do Patrimônio Natural para a conservação da brioflora da Mata Atlântica: um estudo em El Nagual, Magé, RJ, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 22: 359-372.) and in the State of São Paulo by Yano et al. (2009Yano O, Visnadi SR, Peralta DF. 2009. Briófitas. In: Lopes MIMS, Kirizawa M, Melo MMRF. (eds.) Patrimônio da Reserva Biológica do Alto da Serra de Paranapiacaba. São Paulo, Instituto de Botânica. p. 255-267.; 2019Yano O, Peralta DF, Bordin J. 2019. Brioflora da Ilha do Cardoso. São Paulo, RiMa Editora.), Carmo et al. (2016Carmo DM, Lima JS, Amélio LA, Peralta DF. 2016. Briófitas do Parque Estadual da Serra do Mar, Núcleo de Santa Virgínia, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Hoehnea 43: 265-287.) and Visnadi (2012Visnadi SR. 2012. Briófitas da Estação Ecológica Juréia-Itatins, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Tropical Biology 34: 17-31.).

Our study recorded practically equal quantities of liverworts and mosses. Although the predominant vegetation is composed of Dense Ombrophilous Forest, there are patches of Open Ombrophilous Forest (due to the presence of bamboo) and Mixed Ombrophilous Forest (evidenced by Araucaria angustifolia). Furthermore, the fragments of secondary vegetation and the presence of rocky outcrops and waterfalls imply a heterogeneous landscape. Mosses usually exhibit morphological traits that allow them to tolerate desiccation (i.e., leaf arrangement, hyaline cells near the leaf bases, papillae on the leaf surface; Schofield 1981Schofield WB. 1981. Ecological significance of morphological characters in the moss gametophyte. The Bryologist 84: 149-165.; Goffinet et al. 2009Goffinet B, Buck WR, Shaw AJ. 2009. Morphology, anatomy and classification of the Bryophyta. In: Goffinet B, Shaw AJ. (eds.) Bryophyte Biology . New York, Cambridge University Press . p. 56-138.), which also contribute to this division’s elevated species richness in dry forests. In contrast, liverworts are predominant in humid forests since they do not have the same morphological variation as mosses, so they are more sensitive to oscillations in temperature, rainfall and humidity, hence, more susceptible to climatic changes (Henriques et al. 2016Henriques DSG, Borges PAV, Ah-Peng C, Gabriel R. 2016. Mosses and liverworts show contrasting elevational distribution patterns in an oceanic island (Terceira, Azores): the influence of climate and space. Journal of Bryology 38: 183-194. ). Therefore, the equal species number of liverworts and mosses can be explained by the park’s heterogeneity, which provides different humidity and shading conditions.

According to Gradstein et al. (2001Gradstein SR, Churchill SP, Salazar-Allen N. 2001. Guide to the bryophytes of Tropical America. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 86: 1-586.), in lowland rainforests, there is the predominance of four moss families: Calymperaceae, Fissidentaceae, Pilotrichaceae and Sematophyllaceae, which coincide with the results of this study. Further inventory surveys carried out in Atlantic Forest areas in the States of São Paulo (Visnadi 2005Visnadi SR. 2005. Brioflora da Mata Atlântica do estado de São Paulo: região norte. Hoehnea 32: 215-231.; Yano & Peralta 2007Yano O, Peralta DF. 2007. Briófitas da Ilha do Bom Abrigo, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Hoehnea 34: 87-94.; Peralta & Yano 2008Peralta DF, Yano O. 2008. Briófitas do Parque Estadual da Ilha Anchieta, Ubatuba, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Iheringia, Série Botânica 63: 101-127.; Visnadi 2009Visnadi SR. 2009. Briófitas do Caxetal, em Ubatuba, São Paulo, Brasil. Tropical Bryology 30: 8-14.; Carmo et al. 2016Carmo DM, Lima JS, Amélio LA, Peralta DF. 2016. Briófitas do Parque Estadual da Serra do Mar, Núcleo de Santa Virgínia, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Hoehnea 43: 265-287.), Rio de Janeiro (Santos & Costa 2008Santos ND, Costa DP. 2008. A importância de Reservas Particulares do Patrimônio Natural para a conservação da brioflora da Mata Atlântica: um estudo em El Nagual, Magé, RJ, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 22: 359-372.) and Bahia (Valente et al. 2009Valente EM, Pôrto KC, Bôas-Bastos SBV, Bastos CJP. 2009. Musgos (Bryophyta) de um fragmento de Mata Atlântica na Serra da Jibóia, município de Santa Terezinha, BA, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 23: 369-375.), presented Pilotrichaceae as the most well-representative moss family, followed by Fissidentaceae, Sematophyllaceae, Bryaceae, Orthotrichaceae and Leucobryaceae (not necessarily in the same order).

As mentioned in Vaz-Imbassahy et al. (2008Vaz-Imbassahy TF, Imbassahy CAA, Costa DP. 2008. Sinopse de Pilotrichaceae (Bryophyta) no Brasil. Rodriguésia 59: 765-797.), Pilotrichaceae has 11 genera and 51 species and occurs mainly in the Amazon Forest and Atlantic Forest biomes, with the greatest richness in Southern and Southeastern Brazil. Pilotrichaceae is characterized by a well-developed and elongate double-costae, a hyaloderm in most species (Buck 1998Buck WR. 1998. Pleurocarpous mosses of the West Indies. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 29: 1-401.; Gradstein et al. 2001Gradstein SR, Churchill SP, Salazar-Allen N. 2001. Guide to the bryophytes of Tropical America. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 86: 1-586.) and complanate tristichously-arranged leaves, which are laterally- and medially symmetric (Vaz & Costa 2006Vaz TF, Costa DP. 2006. Os gêneros Lepidopilidium, Lepidopilum, Pilotrichum e Thamniopsis (Pilotrichaceae, Bryophyta) no Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 20: 975-993.). These aspects might help them absorb and transport more water, contributing to their colonization success.

Out of 38 moss families, 18 are represented by only one or two species, a ratio confirmed by Gradstein et al. (2001Gradstein SR, Churchill SP, Salazar-Allen N. 2001. Guide to the bryophytes of Tropical America. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 86: 1-586.), which stated that in lowland rainforests, approximately 50 % of the families possess only one or two species each. The most well-representative family was Lejeuneaceae, with a richness of 48 % of the total number of liverworts. This percentage is compatible with the pattern observed in Gradstein (1995)Gradstein SR. 1995. Diversity of Hepaticae and Anthocerotae in montane forests of the tropical Andes. In: Churchill SP, Balslev H, Forero E, Luteyn JL. (eds.) Biodiversity and Conservation of neotropical montane forests. Bronx, New York Botanical Garden. p. 321-334., which points out Lejeuneaceae as the most species-rich family, with a richness of 70 % in lowland rainforests. However, this percentage tends to decrease as the altitude increases, as seen in lower montane rainforests, where Lejeuneaceae constitutes 45 % of liverworts species.

Tropical forests, mainly the Atlantic Forest, are characterized by wet climate and a wide range of substrates (e.g., tree trunks, decaying tree trunks, soil, rocks and leaves) that allow the colonization by Lejeuneaceae (Gradstein et al. 2001Gradstein SR, Churchill SP, Salazar-Allen N. 2001. Guide to the bryophytes of Tropical America. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 86: 1-586.; Carmo et al. 2016Carmo DM, Lima JS, Amélio LA, Peralta DF. 2016. Briófitas do Parque Estadual da Serra do Mar, Núcleo de Santa Virgínia, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Hoehnea 43: 265-287.). Several inventories in this biome point out Lejeuneaceae as the richest liverwort family: Visnadi (2005Visnadi SR. 2005. Brioflora da Mata Atlântica do estado de São Paulo: região norte. Hoehnea 32: 215-231.), Yano & Peralta (2007Yano O, Peralta DF. 2007. Briófitas da Ilha do Bom Abrigo, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Hoehnea 34: 87-94.), Peralta & Yano (2008)Peralta DF, Yano O. 2008. Briófitas do Parque Estadual da Ilha Anchieta, Ubatuba, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Iheringia, Série Botânica 63: 101-127., Santos & Costa (2008Santos ND, Costa DP. 2008. A importância de Reservas Particulares do Patrimônio Natural para a conservação da brioflora da Mata Atlântica: um estudo em El Nagual, Magé, RJ, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 22: 359-372.), Valente et al. (2009Valente EM, Pôrto KC, Bôas-Bastos SBV, Bastos CJP. 2009. Musgos (Bryophyta) de um fragmento de Mata Atlântica na Serra da Jibóia, município de Santa Terezinha, BA, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 23: 369-375.), Visnadi (2009Visnadi SR. 2009. Briófitas do Caxetal, em Ubatuba, São Paulo, Brasil. Tropical Bryology 30: 8-14.; 2015aVisnadi SR. 2015a. Parque Estadual das Fontes do Ipiranga: unidade de conservação importante para a proteção da brioflora da Mata Atlântica na cidade de São Paulo, Brasil. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Naturais 10: 437-469.), Carmo et al. (2016)Carmo DM, Lima JS, Amélio LA, Peralta DF. 2016. Briófitas do Parque Estadual da Serra do Mar, Núcleo de Santa Virgínia, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Hoehnea 43: 265-287., Santos et al. (2017a)Santos EL, Carmo DM, Peralta DF. 2017a. Bryophytes of the cloud forest of Pico do Marumbi State Park, Paraná, Brazil. Check List 13: 959-986. and Amélio et al. (2019Amélio LA, Peralta DF, Carmo DM. 2019. Briófitas do Parque Estadual de Campos do Jordão, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Hoehnea 46: e962018. doi: 10.1590/2236-8906-96/2018
https://doi.org/10.1590/2236-8906-96/201...
).

As discussed in Gradstein (1992Gradstein SR. 1992. Threatened bryophytes of the Neotropical rain forest: a status report. Tropical Bryology 6: 83-93.), Schuster (1983Schuster RM. 1983. Phytogeography of the Bryophyta. In: Schuster RM. (ed.) New Manual of Bryology . Nichinan, The Hattori Botanical Laboratory . p. 463-626.) and Wilson et al. (2007Wilson R, Gradstein SR, Schneider H, Heinrichs J. 2007. Unravelling the phylogeny of Lejeuneaceae (Jungermanniopsida): Evidence for four main lineages. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 43: 270-282.), the recent diversification of Lejeuneaceae can be attributed to the expansion of angiosperm forests, which provided a wide range of habitats.

Geographical distribution

Although most species have wide or moderate distribution, 22 % of the bryoflora is rarely distributed. This is a significant number, demonstrating the potential of the Rio Turvo State Park for the conservation of species concentrated in restricted geographical areas or habitats. Notwithstanding, the State of São Paulo has been well sampled. Considering all surveys, the number of 16 new species records emphasizes this study’s importance to the Brazilian bryoflora knowledge. The addition of geographical distribution data is vital to elaborate lists of regionally threatened species based on the number of localities where those species usually occur (IUCN 2001IUCN. 2001. IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1. IUCN Species Survival Commission. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK, IUCN .).

Philonotis longiseta was reported only for Northeastern Brazil, in the States of Bahia and Ceará (Oliveira & Peralta 2015Oliveira HC, Peralta DF. 2015. Adições à brioflora de musgos acrocárpicos (Bryophyta) no Estado do Ceará, Brasil. Pesquisas, Botânica 67: 37-50.). This is the third citation for Brazil. It has been usually found on rocks and wet tree trunks, next to waterfalls (Sharp et al. 1994Sharp AJ, Crum H, Eckel PM. 1994. The moss flora of Mexico. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 69: 1-1095.). Dicranella pabstiana is restricted to the Atlantic Forest at altitudes between 500-1000 m. The species has been recorded in Santa Catarina, the location of the type material, and recently in Minas Gerais (Carmo & Peralta 2020Carmo DM, Peralta DP. 2020. Sinopse do gênero Dicranella (Müll. Hal.) Schimp. (Dicranellaceae, Bryophyta) para o Brasil com lectotipificações e citações de novas ocorrências. Pesquisas, Botânica . 74: 249-282. ). Other species such as Callicostella martiana occurs in a large range, between 0-1,000 m a.s.l. (Vaz & Costa 2006Vaz TF, Costa DP. 2006. Os gêneros Lepidopilidium, Lepidopilum, Pilotrichum e Thamniopsis (Pilotrichaceae, Bryophyta) no Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 20: 975-993.). Leucomium steerei has been collected in montane rainforests, with records only in Serra dos Órgãos (RJ) and Serra dos Carajás (PA) (Moraes & Lisboa 2006Moraes ENR, Lisboa RCL. 2006. Musgos (Bryophyta) da Serra dos Carajás, Estado do Pará, Brasil. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Naturais 1: 39-68.).

Porotrichodendron superbum has been found in warm and humid montane rainforests and at the mountain bases (Fuertes et al. 2015Fuertes E, Prada C, Rolleri C. 2015. Aportaciones a la flora briofítica de los bosques tropicales y subtropicales de la Argentina (Bryophyta, Musci). Botanica Complutensis 39: 49-61.). In Brazil, it occurs from average altitudes in Mixed Ombrophilous Forest (this study: 400 m a.s.l.) to elevated altitudes in Dense High Mountain Ombrophilous Forest, or the Cloud Forest from Pico do Marumbi (alt.: 1213 m a.s.l.), in the State of Paraná (Santos et al. 2017Santos EL, Carmo DM, Peralta DF. 2017a. Bryophytes of the cloud forest of Pico do Marumbi State Park, Paraná, Brazil. Check List 13: 959-986.a).

The first and only reference for Pylaisiadelpha tenuirostris in Brazil is from the municipality of Selviria, State of Mato Grosso do Sul, growing in cerradão phytophysiognomy (Yano 2004Yano O. 2004. Novas ocorrências de briófitas para vários estados do Brasil. Acta Amazonica 34: 559-576.). The specimen was collected at the base of a tree trunk, while we found this species growing on decaying tree trunks.

Mnioloma cyclostipa. represents a peculiar species from the Montane Belt to the Upper Montane Belt transition. It had been recorded only above 1,000 m elevation ( Santos & Costa 2010Santos ND, Costa DP. 2010. Altitudinal zonation of liverworts in the Atlantic Forest, Southeastern Brazil. The Bryologist 113: 631-645.). However, in the present study, the species occurs in a distinct altitude range (660 m a.s.l.), on soil, along the Turvo River banks.

Prionolejeunea galliotii is typical of Dense Ombrophilous Forest, between altitudes 0-700 m a.s.l. It had been only cited for the State of Bahia (Bastos & Bôas-Bastos 2019Bastos CJP, Bôas-Bastos SBV. 2019. Catálogo da família Lejeuneaceae (Marchantiophyta) no Estado da Bahia, Brasil. Pesquisas, Botânica 73: 55-111.).

Daniels et al. 2010Daniels AED, Kariyappa KC, Daniel P. 2010. Circumscription of the polymorphic Cololejeunea lanciloba Steph. (Lejeuneaceae, Hepaticae) and species falling within it. Acta Botanica Hungarica 52: 287-295. highlight Cololejeunea lanciloba as a polymorphic species, with several synonyms, such as Cololejeunea katiae (the synonymization was published in Pócs et al. 2014Pócs T, Bernecker A, Tixier P. 2014. Synopsis and key to species of neotropical Cololejeunea (Lejeuneaceae). Acta Botanica Hungarica 56: 185-226.), which has been recorded only for Recife (PE).

Marchantia berteroana is classified as an Endangered (EN), according to the IUCN Red List. It occurs in Dense Ombrophilous Forest and Semideciduous Mesophytic Forest (CNC Flora 2020CNC Flora. 2020. Marchantia berteroana in Lista Vermelha da flora brasileira versão 2012.2 Centro Nacional de Conservação da Flora. http://cncflora.jbrj.gov.br/portal/pt-br/profile/Marchantia berteroana. 28 May 2020.
http://cncflora.jbrj.gov.br/portal/pt-br...
). Deforestation and human-made forest fires are the factors that most contribute to the fragmentation of tropical rainforests. Consequently, damaging the reproduction and dispersion of the species. Furthermore, we take into consideration the hypothesis of low sampling effort caused by the lack of studies in Marchantiaceae (CNC Flora 2020CNC Flora. 2020. Marchantia berteroana in Lista Vermelha da flora brasileira versão 2012.2 Centro Nacional de Conservação da Flora. http://cncflora.jbrj.gov.br/portal/pt-br/profile/Marchantia berteroana. 28 May 2020.
http://cncflora.jbrj.gov.br/portal/pt-br...
).

The fact that the park harbors 5 % of all Brazilian endemic species (275 spp. according to Costa & Luizi-Ponzo 2010Costa DP, Luizi-Ponzo AP. 2010. Introdução às briófitas. In: Forzza RC, Leitman PM, Costa A, et al. (eds.) Catálogo de plantas e fungos do Brasil [online]. Rio de Janeiro, Andrea Jakobsson Estúdio, Instituto de Pesquisa Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro. p. 61-68. https://static.scielo.org/scielobooks/x5x7v/pdf/forzza-9788560035090.pdf.
https://static.scielo.org/scielobooks/x5...
), and that 35 % of the species listed in our survey occur exclusively in the Atlantic Forest biome enhances the importance of preserving the RTSP to maintain the region’s current biodiversity.

The most well-representative biomes (i.e., the Amazon Forest, Atlantic Forest and Cerrado) share several species. This can be explained by the first two being tropical rainforests, which are located in the lower zone of the humid tropics (up to an altitude of 1,500 m.a.s.l. near the Equator and up to 600-700 m within the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn), comprising evergreen, tall trees, shrubs, lianas and epiphytes, with an annual rainfall of 1,500 mm up to 6,000-8,000 mm (Pócs 1982Pócs T. 1982. Tropical forest bryophytes. In: Smith AJE. (ed.) Bryophyte Ecology. New York, Chapman & Hall. p. 59-104.). Regarding the Cerrado, there are several phytophysiognomies (e.g., capões de mata, slope forests or matas de encosta and gallery forests or matas de galeria) that constitute a green oasis, providing humid microhabitats for the establishment of bryophytes (Pinheiro et al. 2012Pinheiro EML, Faria ALA, Câmara PEAS. 2012. Riqueza de espécies e diversidade de Marchantiophyta (hepáticas) de capões de mata, no Parque Nacional da Chapada dos Veadeiros, Goiás, Brasil. Revista de Biologia Neotropical 9: 19-27.).

Concerning the global scale, almost 50 % of the species have a Neotropical distribution. The Neotropics comprise a very heterogeneous landscape, including hot tropical rainforests (e.g., the Amazon and Atlantic Forests), the high and frozen Andean mountains, dry savannas and scrubby vegetation in central Brazil, and the exuberant tropical islands of the West Indies (Gradstein et al. 2001Gradstein SR, Churchill SP, Salazar-Allen N. 2001. Guide to the bryophytes of Tropical America. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 86: 1-586.). This wide range of phytophysiognomies provides a very diverse flora, responsible for supplying habitats for almost 4,000 bryophytes species (Gradstein et al. 2001Gradstein SR, Churchill SP, Salazar-Allen N. 2001. Guide to the bryophytes of Tropical America. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 86: 1-586.).

Schuster (1983Schuster RM. 1983. Phytogeography of the Bryophyta. In: Schuster RM. (ed.) New Manual of Bryology . Nichinan, The Hattori Botanical Laboratory . p. 463-626.) assumes there are few genuinely pantropical species. It is worth mentioning Octoblepharum albidum, Calymperes afzelii and Fissidens asplenioides. In liverworts, it was observed that most of the species occur in low and medium elevations, such as Lejeunea flava and Cheilolejeunea xanthocarpa Malombe (Schuster 1983Schuster RM. 1983. Phytogeography of the Bryophyta. In: Schuster RM. (ed.) New Manual of Bryology . Nichinan, The Hattori Botanical Laboratory . p. 463-626.).

About 8 % of the bryoflora is cosmopolitan or sub-cosmopolitan. Mosses with this distribution are usually found in disturbed or open areas (Schuster 1983Schuster RM. 1983. Phytogeography of the Bryophyta. In: Schuster RM. (ed.) New Manual of Bryology . Nichinan, The Hattori Botanical Laboratory . p. 463-626.), like Bryum argenteum (collected on cement) and Polytrichum juniperinum (harvested on a ravine at the edge of the highway). In the case of cosmopolitan hornworts, Schuster (1983)Schuster RM. 1983. Phytogeography of the Bryophyta. In: Schuster RM. (ed.) New Manual of Bryology . Nichinan, The Hattori Botanical Laboratory . p. 463-626. recorded Phaeoceros laevis in cultivated fields (we collected in the ravine behind an abandoned house). Its long-viable spores are man-dispersed and typically mixed with seed grains and nursery stock (Schuster 1983Schuster RM. 1983. Phytogeography of the Bryophyta. In: Schuster RM. (ed.) New Manual of Bryology . Nichinan, The Hattori Botanical Laboratory . p. 463-626.).

Substrates and life form aspects

As we can see in our study, in tropical forests, most bryophytes spread on tree trunks and branches - acting as epiphytes - and on decaying trunks (Richards 1984Richards PW. 1984. The ecology of tropical bryophytes. In: Schuster RM. (ed.) New Manual of Bryology. Nichinan, The Hattori Botanical Laboratory. p. 1233-1270.; Visnadi 2015Visnadi SR. 2015a. Parque Estadual das Fontes do Ipiranga: unidade de conservação importante para a proteção da brioflora da Mata Atlântica na cidade de São Paulo, Brasil. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Naturais 10: 437-469.a). It is essential to highlight that in ombrophilous forests, the most available substrate are trees, shrubs and liana trunks.

Several studies have demonstrated the relationship between the composition of corticolous bryophyte species and the phorophyte conditions, such as pH, roughness and water retention capacity. Furthermore, they associate the bryophyte coverage percentage with the diameter at breast height (DBH) (Batista & Santos 2016Batista WVSM, Santos ND. 2016. Can regional and local filters explain epiphytic bryophyte distributions in the Atlantic Forest of southeastern Brazil? Acta Botanica Brasilica 30: 462-472.). Oliveira & Mota de Oliveira (2016Oliveira HC, Mota de Oliveira S. 2016. Vertical distribution of epiphytic bryophytes in Atlantic Forest fragments in northeastern Brazil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 30: 609-617.) show that in Atlantic Forest fragments in Northeastern Brazil, the species composition varies along a height gradient. These diverse factors provide many microhabitats and niches that can be colonized by different communities (Smith 1982Smith AJE. 1982. Epiphytes and epiliths. In: Smith AJE. (ed.) Bryophyte ecology . New York, Chapman & Hall . p. 191-227.; Frahm 1990Frahm J-P. 1990. The ecology of epiphytic bryophytes on Mt. Kinabalu, Sabah (Malaysia). Nova Hedwigia 51: 121-132.). This wide range of microhabitats is not available in other substrates such as soil (Batista et al. 2018Batista WVSM, Pôrto KC, Santos ND. 2018. Distribution, ecology, and reproduction of bryophytes in a humid enclave in the semiarid region of northeastern Brazil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 32: 303-313.). Within forests, it is not common to find bryophytes on soil due to the significant amount of litter and its fast decomposition (Frahm 2003Frahm J-P. 2003. Manual of tropical Bryology. Tropical Bryology 23: 1-196.). However, rupicolous species had great representativeness in our study area due to the presence of rock outcrops and rocks at the edge of waterfalls.

The presence of epiphyllous bryophytes is an iconic feature of tropical forests and is an indicator of preserved native areas (Gradstein et al. 2001Gradstein SR, Churchill SP, Salazar-Allen N. 2001. Guide to the bryophytes of Tropical America. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 86: 1-586.). Furthermore, the more humid, the greater the migration rate from the trunks and branches to leaves. By far, Lejeuneaceae is the most well-represented family of epiphyllous bryophytes (Frahm 2003Frahm J-P. 2003. Manual of tropical Bryology. Tropical Bryology 23: 1-196.). As the leaves represent an ephemeral substrate, the most successful colonizing species exhibited morphological adaptations, such as neoteny (reduction of the gametophyte), short life cycle, high fertility, asexual reproduction by gemmae and mucilaginous structure for fixation on the surface (Frahm 2003Frahm J-P. 2003. Manual of tropical Bryology. Tropical Bryology 23: 1-196.; Zartman 2003Zartman CE. 2003. Habitat fragmentation impacts on epiphyllous bryophyte communities in central Amazonia. Ecology 84: 948-954.). The occurrence of epiphylls suggests the importance of protecting the RTSP.

The fact that 63 % of the bryoflora is specific to a single substrate type means that the RTSP has predominantly stable environments, unlike regeneration areas, which bryophytes use to establish in a wide range of substrates (Peralta & Yano 2008Peralta DF, Yano O. 2008. Briófitas do Parque Estadual da Ilha Anchieta, Ubatuba, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Iheringia, Série Botânica 63: 101-127.; Visnadi 2015Visnadi SR. 2015a. Parque Estadual das Fontes do Ipiranga: unidade de conservação importante para a proteção da brioflora da Mata Atlântica na cidade de São Paulo, Brasil. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Naturais 10: 437-469.a).

According to the model proposed by Bates (1998Bates JW. 1998. Is ‘life-form’ a useful concept in bryophyte ecology? Oikos 82: 223-237.), mats are common in places with high to medium desiccation tolerance, shaded and lit, due to the morphology of their gametophytes, which are branched and creeping, forming a moisture containment and carbon stock grid. In shaded habitats, it is possible to associate the flat arrangement of the stems and leaves of fans and mats with optimizing the light-capturing surface area.

Turfs, which have dense foliage, are capable of storing water in the spaces between the leaves and gametophytes by capillarity (Glime 2017Glime JM. 2017. Adaptive Strategies: growth and life forms. In: Glime JM. (ed.) Bryophyte ecology. Michigan, Ebook sponsored by Michigan Technological University and the International Association of Bryologists. http://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/bryophyte-ecology/. 22 Jan. 2020.
http://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/bryophyte-...
). They also have a protective layer against desiccation, which allows them to live under medium to high luminosity conditions, favoring their proliferation in very damp places (Bates 1998Bates JW. 1998. Is ‘life-form’ a useful concept in bryophyte ecology? Oikos 82: 223-237.).

Wefts are found in moist and moderately shaded conditions (Bates 1998Bates JW. 1998. Is ‘life-form’ a useful concept in bryophyte ecology? Oikos 82: 223-237.). Sollows et al. (2001Sollows MC, Frego KA, Norfolk C. 2001. Recovery of Bazzania trilobata following desiccation. The Bryologist 104: 421-429.) tested Bazzania trilobata and observed that the overlapping leaves protect against direct exposure that could harm the inner shoots’ net photosynthesis. Furthermore, they realized that the overlapping leaves conserve more water.

In tropical and subtropical cloud forests, there is a high rate of precipitation throughout the year. Consequently, there is high air humidity, so pendants and tails stand out due to their feathery stems, which make it possible to collect water vapor droplets from the atmosphere (Richards 1984Richards PW. 1984. The ecology of tropical bryophytes. In: Schuster RM. (ed.) New Manual of Bryology. Nichinan, The Hattori Botanical Laboratory. p. 1233-1270.; Glime 2017Glime JM. 2017. Adaptive Strategies: growth and life forms. In: Glime JM. (ed.) Bryophyte ecology. Michigan, Ebook sponsored by Michigan Technological University and the International Association of Bryologists. http://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/bryophyte-ecology/. 22 Jan. 2020.
http://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/bryophyte-...
).

Cushions are found more frequently in dry environments, with a high incidence of light. Their gametophytes bundle in a compressed colony, causing a self-shading effect - when individuals physically very close to one another end up shading each other, protecting colonies from direct sun radiation (Bates 1998Bates JW. 1998. Is ‘life-form’ a useful concept in bryophyte ecology? Oikos 82: 223-237.). As the stems are the same height, the wind turbulence and water evaporation are reduced (Glime 2017Glime JM. 2017. Adaptive Strategies: growth and life forms. In: Glime JM. (ed.) Bryophyte ecology. Michigan, Ebook sponsored by Michigan Technological University and the International Association of Bryologists. http://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/bryophyte-ecology/. 22 Jan. 2020.
http://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/bryophyte-...
). Furthermore, the colony shape provides stability and support for gametophytes, which do not have lignin (During et al. 2015 During HJ, Verduyn B, Jägerbrand AR. 2015. Biomechanical properties of the terrestrial mosses Pleurozium schreberi (Brid.) Mitt. and Pogonatum japonicum Sull. and Lesq. along altitudinal gradients in northern Japan. Arctoa 24: 375-381.).

Dendroids, which stand out in environments with medium humidity and brightness, climb higher layers towards the light elevating the stems from their horizontal shoots since they grow from the trunk bases (Bates 1998Bates JW. 1998. Is ‘life-form’ a useful concept in bryophyte ecology? Oikos 82: 223-237.).

On certain occasions, particular species may vary their way of life according to the environment’s conditions. Rincon and Grimes (1989Rincon E, Grimes JP. 1989. Plasticity and light interception by six bryophytes of contrasted ecology. Journal of Ecology 77: 439-446.) attribute the phenotypic plasticity of life forms to foraging behavior towards water retention adaptation, then representing a competitive strategy to enhance the absorption of nutrients in the soil and water.

Reproductive aspects

As reported in Hedenäs & Bisang (2011Hedenäs L, Bisang I. 2011. The overlooked dwarf males in mosses - Unique among green land plants. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 13: 121-135.), there are more dioicous than monoicous species. According to Villarreal & Renner (2013Villarreal JC, Renner SS. 2013. Correlates of monoicy and dioicy in hornworts, the apparent sister group to vascular plants. Evolutionary Biology 13: 1-8.), 68 % of liverworts species, 57 % of mosses and 40 % of hornworts are dioicous. In the study of Hedderson & Longton (1995Hedderson TA, Longton RE. 1995. Patterns of life history variation in the Funariales, Polytrichales and Pottiales. Journal of Bryology 18: 639-675.), a proportion of 60 % dioicous to 40 % monoicous species was observed, which is a similar result to our survey.

Ando (1980Ando H. 1980. Evolution of bryophytes in relation to their sexuality. Proceedings of the Bryological Society of Japan 9: 129-130.) assumes monoicous individuals - which possess both male and female sexual organs - as the sexual system with more chances for fertilization. For this reason, bryophytes that inhabit recent and ephemeral substrates, such as decaying wood and leaves, have a greater tendency to monoecy. In fact, all twenty species found growing exclusively over decaying trees and/or leaves were monoicous. In order to avoid self-fertilization, several species have developed adaptations, as protandry (i.e., maturation of antheridia before archegonia on the same plant) and protogyny (i.e., maturation of archegonia before antheridia) (Maciel-Silva & Pôrto 2014Maciel-Silva AS, Pôrto KC. 2014. Reproduction in bryophytes. In: Ramawat KG, Mérillon JM, Shivanna KR. (eds.) Reproductive biology of plants. Boca Raton, London, New York, CRC Press, Taylor Francis Group. p. 57-84.).

According to Villarreal and Renner (2013Villarreal JC, Renner SS. 2013. Correlates of monoicy and dioicy in hornworts, the apparent sister group to vascular plants. Evolutionary Biology 13: 1-8.), mating systems depend on the spores’ size, but the inverse is yet to be confirmed. For instance, dioicous species have smaller and more numerous spores that guarantee the colonization of a larger territory since the spores are more easily dispersed, forming mats of gametophytes, achieving even disturbed and ephemeral habitats. In addition, dioicous species generally grow more in size and have a more expansive lifestyle, such as mats, to compensate for the lower production of sporophytes (Crawford et al. 2009Crawford M, Linley KJ, Garnock-Jones PJ. 2009. Correlated evolution of sexual system and life-history traits in mosses. Evolution 63: 1129-1142.). Our results confirm this statement since 35 % of the dioicous species present mat life form, followed respectively by turf (18 %), weft (13 %), pendant (10 %), tail (9 %), cushion (6 %), fan (5 %) and dendroid (4 %).

Places subjected to the seasonal effects - long dry periods and irregular precipitation - like the humid enclave of Chapada do Araripe, located in the Caatinga biome, monoecy prevails - given this sexual system likely guarantees a higher fertilization rate (Batista et al. 2018Batista WVSM, Pôrto KC, Santos ND. 2018. Distribution, ecology, and reproduction of bryophytes in a humid enclave in the semiarid region of northeastern Brazil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 32: 303-313.). Alternatively, Santos et al. (2017Santos ND, Costa DP, Kinoshita LS, Shepherd GJ. 2017b. Variations in bryophyte communities in a short elevational gradient in Atlantic Forest of Southeastern Brazil. Cryptogamie, Bryologie 38: 191-211.b) assume that there is a higher tendency to dioecy in more humid environments, such as the ombrophilous forests of the Atlantic Forest, considering the substantial water availability that contributes to the higher frequency of sexual reproduction events. Moreover, our study confirmed this assumption.

One of the advantages of dioecy is that cross-breeding increases genetic variability, contributing to the broader morphological range of character states, as observed in Campylopus (Frahm 1991Frahm J-P. 1991. Dicranaceae: Campylopodioideae, Paraleucobryoideae. Flora Neotropica 54: 1-237.), currently included in Leucobryaceae (Flora do Brasil 2020 2020Flora do Brasil 2020. 2020. Briófitas. Rio de Janeiro, Instituto de Pesquisas Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. http://reflora.jbrj.gov.br/reflora/floradobrasil/ FB128472. 02 Jan. 2020.
http://reflora.jbrj.gov.br/reflora/flora...
). However, dioecy also presents disadvantages. For instance, many bryophyte species, when establishing themselves in a new area, form a colony generally consisting of only one sex, making cross-breeding difficult, as antherozoids (male gametes) need to travel great distances through the water surface to reach the archegonia (female gametes) (Haig 2016Haig D. 2016. Living together and living apart: the sexual lives of bryophytes. Philosophical Transaction B. The Royal Society Publishing 371: 20150535. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2015.0535
https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0535...
). For this reason, many dioicous species end up investing in asexual reproduction to guarantee dispersal and growth (Frahm 2003Frahm J-P. 1991. Dicranaceae: Campylopodioideae, Paraleucobryoideae. Flora Neotropica 54: 1-237.; Maciel-Silva & Pôrto 2014Maciel-Silva AS, Pôrto KC. 2014. Reproduction in bryophytes. In: Ramawat KG, Mérillon JM, Shivanna KR. (eds.) Reproductive biology of plants. Boca Raton, London, New York, CRC Press, Taylor Francis Group. p. 57-84.). This pattern was observed in our study, where 86 % of the species that showed vegetative reproduction were dioicous.

Vegetative reproduction can be stimulated as a dispersion and colonization strategy when plants are submitted to some selective environmental pressure, such as temperature increase, the direct incidence of sunlight and desiccation. During (1979During HJ. 1979. Life strategies of bryophytes: A preliminary review. Lindbergia 5: 2-18.) realized that in rainforests, it was common to find Campylopus flexuosus forming large turfs without vegetative reproduction, while in dry forests, the plants were behaved forming dense cushions with detachable branches.

Conclusion

The Rio Turvo State Park has a very rich bryoflora, counting with 414 species, which represent 10 % of the Neotropic, 30 % of Brazil and approximately 50 % of the species known for the State of São Paulo. Despite the human influence in the area, the RTSP harbors species that are not very well known - 16 new occurrences for the State of São Paulo were recorded - and have restricted geographical distribution, such as Pylaisiadelpha tenuirostris and Prionolejeunea galliotii (both representing the second citation for Brazil) and Marchantia berteroana (an endangered species).

It is possible to understand the predominance of some families over others when we analyze the area’s ecological aspects since they reflect the area’s environmental conditions. As expected for areas with great water availability, the probability of sexual reproduction is directly higher. Thus, dioicous species are likely to predominate. Similarly, the moist climate and abundant shade caused by the forest canopy allowed the prevalence of the mat life form, which morphology enables greater water storage and an optimized surface area to capture light.

The predominance of corticolous species can be associated with the higher availability of tree trunks and branches, highlighting the dense forest structure in the RTSP territory. The considerable presence of epiphylls is one more indicator of well-preserved vegetation. These data reinforce the importance of this conservation unit for the preservation not only of the RTSP’s bryoflora but of all biodiversity.

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the team of Rio Turvo State Park, mainly the park manager T.L.Vecki, the guards and monitors for assistance during the field excursions; L.A. Amélio, D.S. Oliveira, J.S. Lima, G.J. Silva, B.K. Canestraro, E.D. Lozano, O. Koga and I.T.O. Koga for supporting field trip; B.K. Canestraro, D.M. Carmo, J. Bordin and M.E. Reiner-Drehwald for confirming the identification of some species. This work was supported through a research grant from the CNPq (133891/2018-6).

References

  • Amélio LA, Peralta DF, Carmo DM. 2019. Briófitas do Parque Estadual de Campos do Jordão, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Hoehnea 46: e962018. doi: 10.1590/2236-8906-96/2018
    » https://doi.org/10.1590/2236-8906-96/2018
  • Ando H. 1980. Evolution of bryophytes in relation to their sexuality. Proceedings of the Bryological Society of Japan 9: 129-130.
  • Ballejos J, Bastos CJP. 2009. Musgos Pleurocárpicos do Parque Estadual das Sete Passagens, Miguel Calmon, Bahia, Brasil. Hoehnea 36: 479-495.
  • Bastos CJP, Bôas-Bastos SBV. 2008. Musgos acrocárpicos e cladocárpicos (Bryophyta) da Reserva Ecológica da Michelin, Igrapiúna, Bahia, Brasil. Sitientibus, Série Ciências Biológicas 8: 275-279.
  • Bastos CJP, Bôas-Bastos SBV. 2019. Catálogo da família Lejeuneaceae (Marchantiophyta) no Estado da Bahia, Brasil. Pesquisas, Botânica 73: 55-111.
  • Bastos CJP, Valente EB. 2008. Hepática (Marchantiophyta) da Reserva Ecológica da Michelin, Igrapiúna, Bahia, Brasil. Sitientibus, Série Ciências Biológicas 8: 280-293.
  • Bastos CJP, Yano O. 2009. O gênero Lejeunea Libert (Lejeuneaceae) no Estado da Bahia, Brasil. Hoehnea 36: 303-320.
  • Bates JW. 1998. Is ‘life-form’ a useful concept in bryophyte ecology? Oikos 82: 223-237.
  • Batista WVSM, Pôrto KC, Santos ND. 2018. Distribution, ecology, and reproduction of bryophytes in a humid enclave in the semiarid region of northeastern Brazil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 32: 303-313.
  • Batista WVSM, Santos ND. 2016. Can regional and local filters explain epiphytic bryophyte distributions in the Atlantic Forest of southeastern Brazil? Acta Botanica Brasilica 30: 462-472.
  • Bim OJB, Assis JC, Campolim MB, Furlan SA. 2017. De parque a mosaico: ecologia de paisagem no processo de recategorização do parque estadual Jacupiranga (SP). Confins (on-line) 32. https://journals.openedition.org/confins/12216 03 Jul. 2018.
    » https://journals.openedition.org/confins/12216
  • Bim OJB, Furlan SA. 2013. Mosaico do Jacupiranga - Vale do Ribeira/SP: conservação, conflitos e soluções socioambientais. Agrária (São Paulo, Online) 18: 4-36
  • Bôas-Bastos SV, Bastos CJP. 2009. Musgos pleurocárpicos dos fragmentos de Mata Atlântica da Reserva Ecológica da Michelin, município de Igrapiúna, BA, Brasil. II - Hypnales (Bryophyta: Bryopsida). Acta Botanica Brasilica 23: 630-643.
  • Bordin J, Yano O. 2013. Fissidentaceae (Bryophyta) do Brasil. Boletim do Instituto de Botânica 22: 1-72.
  • Brasil. 2011. SNUC - Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação da Natureza: Lei nº 9.985, de 18 de julho de 2000; Decreto nº 4.340, de 22 de agosto de 2002; Decreto nº 5.746, de 5 de abril de 2006. Plano Estratégico Nacional de Áreas Protegidas: Decreto nº 5.758, de 13 de abril de 2006. Brasília, Ministério do Meio Ambiente (MMA), Brazil. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/decreto/2002/d4340.htm#:~:text=DECRETO%20N%C2%BA%204.340%2C%20DE%2022,inciso%20IV%2C%20e%20o%20art 03 Jul. 2018.
    » http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/decreto/2002/d4340.htm#:~:text=DECRETO%20N%C2%BA%204.340%2C%20DE%2022,inciso%20IV%2C%20e%20o%20art
  • Brummitt RK, Powell CE. 1992. Authors of plant names: a list of authors of scientific names of plants, with recommended standard forms of their names, including abbreviations. Kew, Royal Botanic Gardens. Archives of Natural History 21: 131-145.
  • Buck WR. 1998. Pleurocarpous mosses of the West Indies. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 29: 1-401.
  • Câmara PEAS. 2008a. Musgos acrocárpicos das matas de galeria da Reserva Ecológica do IBGE, RECOR, Distrito Federal, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 22: 1027-1035.
  • Câmara PEAS. 2008b. Musgos pleurocárpicos das matas de galeria da Reserva Ecológica do IBGE, RECOR, Distrito Federal, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 22: 573-581.
  • Câmara PEAS, Costa DP. 2006. Hepáticas e antóceros das matas de galeria da Reserva Ecológica do IBGE, RECOR, Distrito Federal, Brasil. Hoehnea 33: 79-87.
  • Carmo DM, Lima JS, Amélio LA, Peralta DF. 2016. Briófitas do Parque Estadual da Serra do Mar, Núcleo de Santa Virgínia, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Hoehnea 43: 265-287.
  • Carmo DM, Peralta DP. 2020. Sinopse do gênero Dicranella (Müll. Hal.) Schimp. (Dicranellaceae, Bryophyta) para o Brasil com lectotipificações e citações de novas ocorrências. Pesquisas, Botânica . 74: 249-282.
  • CNC Flora. 2020. Marchantia berteroana in Lista Vermelha da flora brasileira versão 2012.2 Centro Nacional de Conservação da Flora. http://cncflora.jbrj.gov.br/portal/pt-br/profile/Marchantia berteroana 28 May 2020.
    » http://cncflora.jbrj.gov.br/portal/pt-br/profile/Marchantia berteroana
  • Costa DP, Luizi-Ponzo AP. 2010. Introdução às briófitas. In: Forzza RC, Leitman PM, Costa A, et al (eds.) Catálogo de plantas e fungos do Brasil [online]. Rio de Janeiro, Andrea Jakobsson Estúdio, Instituto de Pesquisa Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro. p. 61-68. https://static.scielo.org/scielobooks/x5x7v/pdf/forzza-9788560035090.pdf
    » https://static.scielo.org/scielobooks/x5x7v/pdf/forzza-9788560035090.pdf
  • Costa DP, Pôrto KC, Luizi-Ponzo AP, et al 2011. Synopsis of the Brazilian moss flora: checklist, distribution and conservation. Nova Hedwigia 93: 277-334.
  • Crandall-Stotler B, Stotler RE, Long DG. 2009. Morphology and classification of the Marchantiophyta. In: Goffinet B, Shaw AJ. (eds.) Bryophyte Biology. 2nd. edn. New York, Cambridge University Press.
  • Crawford M, Linley KJ, Garnock-Jones PJ. 2009. Correlated evolution of sexual system and life-history traits in mosses. Evolution 63: 1129-1142.
  • Daniels AED, Kariyappa KC, Daniel P. 2010. Circumscription of the polymorphic Cololejeunea lanciloba Steph. (Lejeuneaceae, Hepaticae) and species falling within it. Acta Botanica Hungarica 52: 287-295.
  • Delgadillo CM, Cárdenas MAS. 1990. Manual de briofitas. 2nd. edn. México, Instituto de Biología de la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
  • Drehwald U. 2005. Biomonitoring of disturbance in neotropical rainforests using bryophytes as indicators. Journal of the Hattori Botanical Laboratory 97: 117-126.
  • During HJ. 1979. Life strategies of bryophytes: A preliminary review. Lindbergia 5: 2-18.
  • During HJ, Verduyn B, Jägerbrand AR. 2015. Biomechanical properties of the terrestrial mosses Pleurozium schreberi (Brid.) Mitt. and Pogonatum japonicum Sull. and Lesq. along altitudinal gradients in northern Japan. Arctoa 24: 375-381.
  • Filgueiras TS, Nogueira PE, Brochado AL, Guala II GF. 1994. Caminhamento: um método expedito para levantamentos florísticos qualitativos. Cadernos de Geociências 12: 39-43.
  • Flora do Brasil 2020. 2020. Briófitas. Rio de Janeiro, Instituto de Pesquisas Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. http://reflora.jbrj.gov.br/reflora/floradobrasil/ FB128472 02 Jan. 2020.
    » http://reflora.jbrj.gov.br/reflora/floradobrasil/ FB128472
  • Frahm J-P. 1990. The ecology of epiphytic bryophytes on Mt. Kinabalu, Sabah (Malaysia). Nova Hedwigia 51: 121-132.
  • Frahm J-P. 1991. Dicranaceae: Campylopodioideae, Paraleucobryoideae. Flora Neotropica 54: 1-237.
  • Frahm J-P. 2003. Manual of tropical Bryology. Tropical Bryology 23: 1-196.
  • Fuertes E, Prada C, Rolleri C. 2015. Aportaciones a la flora briofítica de los bosques tropicales y subtropicales de la Argentina (Bryophyta, Musci). Botanica Complutensis 39: 49-61.
  • Glime JM. 2017. Adaptive Strategies: growth and life forms. In: Glime JM. (ed.) Bryophyte ecology. Michigan, Ebook sponsored by Michigan Technological University and the International Association of Bryologists. http://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/bryophyte-ecology/ 22 Jan. 2020.
    » http://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/bryophyte-ecology/
  • Goffinet B, Buck WR, Shaw AJ. 2009. Morphology, anatomy and classification of the Bryophyta. In: Goffinet B, Shaw AJ. (eds.) Bryophyte Biology . New York, Cambridge University Press . p. 56-138.
  • Govindapyari H, Leleeka M, Nivedita M, Uniyal PL. 2010. Bryophytes: indicators and monitoring agents of pollution. NeBIO 1: 35-41.
  • Gradstein SR. 1992. Threatened bryophytes of the Neotropical rain forest: a status report. Tropical Bryology 6: 83-93.
  • Gradstein SR. 1995. Diversity of Hepaticae and Anthocerotae in montane forests of the tropical Andes. In: Churchill SP, Balslev H, Forero E, Luteyn JL. (eds.) Biodiversity and Conservation of neotropical montane forests. Bronx, New York Botanical Garden. p. 321-334.
  • Gradstein SR, Churchill SP, Salazar-Allen N. 2001. Guide to the bryophytes of Tropical America. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 86: 1-586.
  • Gradstein SR, Costa DP. 2003. The Hepaticae and Anthocerotae of Brazil. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 87: 1-333.
  • Haig D. 2016. Living together and living apart: the sexual lives of bryophytes. Philosophical Transaction B. The Royal Society Publishing 371: 20150535. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2015.0535
    » https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0535
  • Hallingbäck T, Tan BC. 2010. Past and present activities and future strategy of bryophyte conservation. Phytotaxa 9: 266-274.
  • Hedderson TA, Longton RE. 1995. Patterns of life history variation in the Funariales, Polytrichales and Pottiales Journal of Bryology 18: 639-675.
  • Hedenäs L, Bisang I. 2011. The overlooked dwarf males in mosses - Unique among green land plants. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 13: 121-135.
  • Henriques DSG, Borges PAV, Ah-Peng C, Gabriel R. 2016. Mosses and liverworts show contrasting elevational distribution patterns in an oceanic island (Terceira, Azores): the influence of climate and space. Journal of Bryology 38: 183-194.
  • IBGE - Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. 2012. Manual técnico da vegetação brasileira. 2nd. edn. Rio de Janeiro, Ministério do Planejamento, Orçamento e Gestão, Brazil. https://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/index.php/biblioteca-catalogo?view=detalhes&id =263011 10 Jul. 2019.
    » https://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/index.php/biblioteca-catalogo?view=detalhes&id =263011
  • IBGE - Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. 2019. Biomas e sistema costeiro-marinho do Brasil: compatível com a escala 1:250 000. Rio de Janeiro, IBGE, Coordenação de Recursos Naturais e Estudos Ambientais. https://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/index.php/ biblioteca-catalogo?view=detalhes&id=2101676 13 Oct 2020.
    » https://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/index.php/ biblioteca-catalogo?view=detalhes&id=2101676
  • IUCN. 2001. IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1. IUCN Species Survival Commission. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK, IUCN .
  • Lepsch IF, Saraiva IR, Donzeli PL, et al 1990. Macro Zoneamento de terras da região do Vale do Ribeira de Iguape, SP. Boletim Científico, Instituto Agronômico 19: 1-181.
  • Maciel-Silva AS, Pôrto KC. 2014. Reproduction in bryophytes. In: Ramawat KG, Mérillon JM, Shivanna KR. (eds.) Reproductive biology of plants. Boca Raton, London, New York, CRC Press, Taylor Francis Group. p. 57-84.
  • Mägdefrau K. 1982. Life-forms of bryophytes. In: Smith AJE. (ed.) Bryophyte ecology . New York, Chapman & Hall. p. 45-58.
  • Monteiro CAF. 1973. A dinâmica climática e as chuvas do estado de São Paulo: estudo geográfico sob forma de atlas. São Paulo, Instituto de Geografia.
  • Moraes ENR, Lisboa RCL. 2006. Musgos (Bryophyta) da Serra dos Carajás, Estado do Pará, Brasil. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Naturais 1: 39-68.
  • Myers N, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853-858.
  • Oishi Y, Hiura T. 2017. Bryophytes as bioindicators of the atmospheric environment in urban-forest landscapes. Landscapes and Urban Planning 167: 348-355.
  • Oliveira HC, Mota de Oliveira S. 2016. Vertical distribution of epiphytic bryophytes in Atlantic Forest fragments in northeastern Brazil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 30: 609-617.
  • Oliveira HC, Peralta DF. 2015. Adições à brioflora de musgos acrocárpicos (Bryophyta) no Estado do Ceará, Brasil. Pesquisas, Botânica 67: 37-50.
  • Peralta DF, Yano O. 2006. Novas ocorrências de Musgos (Bryophyta) para o Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Botânica 29: 49-65.
  • Peralta DF, Yano O. 2008. Briófitas do Parque Estadual da Ilha Anchieta, Ubatuba, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Iheringia, Série Botânica 63: 101-127.
  • Peralta DF, Yano O. 2012. Briófitas da Serra do Itapeti. In: Morini MSC, Miranda VFO. (eds..) Serra do Itapeti: Aspectos Históricos, Sociais e Naturalísticos. Santa Cruz do Rio Pardo, Viena Gráfica e Editora. p. 1-397.
  • Pinheiro EML, Faria ALA, Câmara PEAS. 2012. Riqueza de espécies e diversidade de Marchantiophyta (hepáticas) de capões de mata, no Parque Nacional da Chapada dos Veadeiros, Goiás, Brasil. Revista de Biologia Neotropical 9: 19-27.
  • Pivetta M. 2005. Eu nasci dez mil anos atrás. Revista Pesquisa FAPESP 112. http://revistapesquisa.fapesp.br/wp-content/uploads/2005/06/038-043-arqueologia.pdf
    » http://revistapesquisa.fapesp.br/wp-content/uploads/2005/06/038-043-arqueologia.pdf
  • Pócs T. 1982. Tropical forest bryophytes. In: Smith AJE. (ed.) Bryophyte Ecology. New York, Chapman & Hall. p. 59-104.
  • Pócs T, Bernecker A, Tixier P. 2014. Synopsis and key to species of neotropical Cololejeunea (Lejeuneaceae). Acta Botanica Hungarica 56: 185-226.
  • Portal do Governo do Estado de São Paulo. 2018. Parque Estadual do Rio Turvo. http://www.saopaulo.sp.gov.br/conhecasp/parques-e-reservas-naturais/parque-estadual-do-rio- turvo/ 03 Jul. 2018.
    » http://www.saopaulo.sp.gov.br/conhecasp/parques-e-reservas-naturais/parque-estadual-do-rio- turvo/
  • Renzaglia KS, Villarreal JC, Duff RJ. 2009. New insights into morphology, anatomy and systematics of hornworts. In: Goffinet B, Shaw AJ. (eds.) Bryophyte Biology . New York, Cambridge University Press . p. 139-171.
  • Ribeiro MC, Martensen AC, Metzger JP, Tabarelli M, Scarano F, Fortin M-J. 2011. The Brazilian Atlantic Forest: a shrinking biodiversity hotspot. In: Zachos FE, Habel JC. (eds.) Biodiversity hotspots. Berlin, Springer. p. 405-434.
  • Richards PW. 1984. The ecology of tropical bryophytes. In: Schuster RM. (ed.) New Manual of Bryology. Nichinan, The Hattori Botanical Laboratory. p. 1233-1270.
  • Rincon E, Grimes JP. 1989. Plasticity and light interception by six bryophytes of contrasted ecology. Journal of Ecology 77: 439-446.
  • Robbins RG. 1952. Bryophyte ecology of a dune area in New Zealand. Vegetation 4: 1-31.
  • Ross JLS. 2002. A morfogênese da Bacia do Ribeira do Iguape e os sistemas ambientais. Geousp, Espaço e Tempo 12: 21-46.
  • Santos EL, Carmo DM, Peralta DF. 2017a. Bryophytes of the cloud forest of Pico do Marumbi State Park, Paraná, Brazil. Check List 13: 959-986.
  • Santos ND, Costa DP. 2008. A importância de Reservas Particulares do Patrimônio Natural para a conservação da brioflora da Mata Atlântica: um estudo em El Nagual, Magé, RJ, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 22: 359-372.
  • Santos ND, Costa DP. 2010. Altitudinal zonation of liverworts in the Atlantic Forest, Southeastern Brazil. The Bryologist 113: 631-645.
  • Santos ND, Costa DP, Kinoshita LS, Shepherd GJ. 2017b. Variations in bryophyte communities in a short elevational gradient in Atlantic Forest of Southeastern Brazil. Cryptogamie, Bryologie 38: 191-211.
  • Schofield WB. 1981. Ecological significance of morphological characters in the moss gametophyte. The Bryologist 84: 149-165.
  • Schuster RM. 1983. Phytogeography of the Bryophyta. In: Schuster RM. (ed.) New Manual of Bryology . Nichinan, The Hattori Botanical Laboratory . p. 463-626.
  • Scott GAM, Entwisle TJ, May TW, Stevens GN. 1997. A conservation overview of Australian non-marine lichens, bryophytes, algae and fungi. Canberra, Wildlife Australia, Environment Australia.
  • Sharp AJ, Crum H, Eckel PM. 1994. The moss flora of Mexico. Memoirs of The New York Botanical Garden 69: 1-1095.
  • Smith AJE. 1982. Epiphytes and epiliths. In: Smith AJE. (ed.) Bryophyte ecology . New York, Chapman & Hall . p. 191-227.
  • Sollows MC, Frego KA, Norfolk C. 2001. Recovery of Bazzania trilobata following desiccation. The Bryologist 104: 421-429.
  • SOS Mata Atlântica. 2018. Relatório Anual 2018. https://www.sosma.org.br/sobre/relatorios-e-balancos/ 12 Mar. 2020.
    » https://www.sosma.org.br/sobre/relatorios-e-balancos/
  • Valente EB, Pôrto KC. 2006. Hepáticas (Marchantiophyta) de um fragmento de Mata Atlântica na Serra da Jibóia, Município de Santa Teresinha, BA, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 20: 433-441.
  • Valente EM, Pôrto KC, Bôas-Bastos SBV, Bastos CJP. 2009. Musgos (Bryophyta) de um fragmento de Mata Atlântica na Serra da Jibóia, município de Santa Terezinha, BA, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 23: 369-375.
  • Vaz TF, Costa DP. 2006. Os gêneros Lepidopilidium, Lepidopilum, Pilotrichum e Thamniopsis (Pilotrichaceae, Bryophyta) no Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 20: 975-993.
  • Vaz-Imbassahy TF, Imbassahy CAA, Costa DP. 2008. Sinopse de Pilotrichaceae (Bryophyta) no Brasil. Rodriguésia 59: 765-797.
  • Villarreal JC, Renner SS. 2013. Correlates of monoicy and dioicy in hornworts, the apparent sister group to vascular plants. Evolutionary Biology 13: 1-8.
  • Visnadi SR. 2002. Meteoriaceae (Bryophyta) da Mata Atlântica do Estado de São Paulo. Hoehnea 29: 159-187.
  • Visnadi SR. 2004. Briófitas de praias do Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 18: 91-97.
  • Visnadi SR. 2005. Brioflora da Mata Atlântica do estado de São Paulo: região norte. Hoehnea 32: 215-231.
  • Visnadi SR. 2006. Sematophyllaceae da Mata Atlântica do nordeste do Estado de São Paulo. Hoehnea 33: 455-484.
  • Visnadi SR. 2009. Briófitas do Caxetal, em Ubatuba, São Paulo, Brasil. Tropical Bryology 30: 8-14.
  • Visnadi SR. 2012. Briófitas da Estação Ecológica Juréia-Itatins, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Tropical Biology 34: 17-31.
  • Visnadi SR. 2013a. Briófitas de áreas antrópicas do Parque Estadual da Serra do Mar, Núcleo Picinguaba, Ubatuba, estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Naturais 8: 49-62.
  • Visnadi SR. 2013b. Brioflora do Parque Estadual Turístico do Alto do Ribeira (Petar), estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Tropical Bryology 35: 52-63.
  • Visnadi SR. 2015a. Parque Estadual das Fontes do Ipiranga: unidade de conservação importante para a proteção da brioflora da Mata Atlântica na cidade de São Paulo, Brasil. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Naturais 10: 437-469.
  • Visnadi SR. 2015b. Brioflora do Parque Estadual Intervales, São Paulo, Brasil: uma importante área para conservação da biodiversidade da Mata Atlântica do Sudeste brasileiro. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Ciências Naturais 10: 105-125.
  • Wilson R, Gradstein SR, Schneider H, Heinrichs J. 2007. Unravelling the phylogeny of Lejeuneaceae (Jungermanniopsida): Evidence for four main lineages. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 43: 270-282.
  • Yano O. 1998. Briófitas do Estado de São Paulo. In: Bicudo CEM, Shepherd GI. (eds.) Biodiversidade do Estado de São Paulo, Brasil - Síntese do conhecimento ao final do século XX. 2: Fungos Macroscópicos e Plantas. São Paulo, FAPESP. p. 37-46.
  • Yano O. 2004. Novas ocorrências de briófitas para vários estados do Brasil. Acta Amazonica 34: 559-576.
  • Yano O, Peralta DF. 2007. Briófitas da Ilha do Bom Abrigo, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Hoehnea 34: 87-94.
  • Yano O, Peralta DF. 2008. Briófitas da Ilhabela, Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Hoehnea 35: 111-121.
  • Yano O, Peralta DF. 2009. Flora de Grão-Mogol, Minas Gerais. Briófitas (Bryophyta e Marchantiophyta). Boletim de Botânica da Universidade de São Paulo 27: 1-26.
  • Yano O, Peralta DF. 2011. Flora da Serra do Cipó, Minas Gerais: Briófitas (Anthocerotophyta, Bryophyta e Marchantiophyta). Boletim de Botânica da Universidade de São Paulo 29: 135-211.
  • Yano O, Peralta DF, Bordin J. 2019. Brioflora da Ilha do Cardoso. São Paulo, RiMa Editora.
  • Yano O, Visnadi SR, Peralta DF. 2009. Briófitas. In: Lopes MIMS, Kirizawa M, Melo MMRF. (eds.) Patrimônio da Reserva Biológica do Alto da Serra de Paranapiacaba. São Paulo, Instituto de Botânica. p. 255-267.
  • Zander RH. 1993. Genera of the Pottiaceae: mosses of harsh environments. Buffalo, New York, The Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences.
  • Zartman CE. 2003. Habitat fragmentation impacts on epiphyllous bryophyte communities in central Amazonia. Ecology 84: 948-954.
  • Zartman CE, Ilkiu-Borges AL. 2007. Guide to the epiphyllous liverworts of Central Amazonia. Manaus, INPA Press.

Publication Dates

  • Publication in this collection
    12 Nov 2021
  • Date of issue
    Jul-Sep 2021

History

  • Received
    10 Aug 2020
  • Accepted
    17 Nov 2020
Sociedade Botânica do Brasil SCLN 307 - Bloco B - Sala 218 - Ed. Constrol Center Asa Norte CEP: 70746-520 Brasília/DF. - Alta Floresta - MT - Brazil
E-mail: acta@botanica.org.br