Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
Review [Revisión]
WOODY AND SEMI-WOODY PLANTS, WILD AND NATIVE TO
DRY AND SEMI-HUMID FORESTS FROM THE ÁREA DE
PROTECCIÓN DE FLORA Y FAUNA MESETA DE CACAXTLA,
SINALOA, MÉXICO †
[PLANTAS LEÑOSAS Y SEMILEÑOSAS SILVESTRES, NATIVAS DE
LOS BOSQUES SECOS Y SEMIHÚMEDOS DEL ÁREA DE
PROTECCIÓN DE FLORA Y FAUNA MESETA DE CACAXTLA,
SINALOA, MÉXICO]
Gilberto Márquez-Salazar1*, Manuel Guillermo Millán-Otero2,
José Saturnino Díaz1 and Jacek Márquez-Stone1
1 Facultad de Biología Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa. Ciudad
Universitaria, Blvd. de las Américas y Blvd. Universitarios S/N. C P 80013,
Culiacán Rosales, Sinaloa, México. Email: *gmarquez@uas.edu.mx;
jsdiaz_24@hotmail.com; jacek_mars@hotmail.com.
2 Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo A. C. Avenida Sábalo
Cerritos S/N, Cerritos, C P 82100 Mazatlán, Sinaloa, México. Email:
bio.millan@gmail.com
*Corresponding author
SUMMARY
Background. Plant catalogues are basic to propose and manage natural protected areas. Through those censuses
plans and conservation strategies are developed, plus comparisons can be made over time. Updated floristic
listings are urgent in tropical forests due to the threats to their biodiversity. Objective. Present a structured
listing by family, genus and species, which quantifies the hierarchical relations of genera-species and familygenera while arranging life-forms and including species with endangered status recorded in national (NOM059 SEMARNAT 2010) and international (Red list, UICN) legislation of woody and semi-woody plants from
dry and semi-humid forest from the Área de Protección de Flora y Fauna Meseta de Cacaxtla, Sinaloa, México
(APFFMC). Methodology. Published studies about the site were reviewed, selecting the indigenous species
with secondary growth, excluding the invasive, naturalized, cultivated, ornamental ones, collating different
online sites, specialized bibliography and consulting specialists. Regarding the nomenclature different sources
and databases were employed. Through field trips, the presence of taxa was corroborated and new registers
were included. The listing was sorted alphabetically. Results. 60 families, 223 genera and 389 species were
recorded. Fabaceae was the family with the highest taxa richness, with 44 genera and 75 species, followed by
Malvaceae (19/31), Euphorbiaceae (12/34), Asteraceae (10/17), Cactaceae (9/21) and Apocynaceae (8/10). A
low number of 13 genera and 12 families gathered five or more species and genera respectively. On the other
hand, a high quantity of 210 genera and 48 families presented four or less taxa. The most diverse genera were
Croton (12 species), Bursera (8), Solanum (7), Ficus and Randia (6); Opuntia, Merremia, Euphorbia,
Lonchocarpus, Mimosa, Senna, Jatropha and Sideroxylon (5). The tree category grouped 146 species, followed
by shrub (114), sub-shrub (54), vine (51), succulent and semi-succulent (21) and parasitic (3). According to the
NOM 059 SEMARNAT-2010 endangered species list, five species were included in the Amenazadas (A)
category and two Sujetas a protección especial (Pr). The red list (UICN) comprehended 173 species for the
Natural Protected Area (ANP). In the Least concern category (LC) 155 taxa were counted, Near threatened
(NT) with four, Vulnerable (V) seven and Endangered (EN) again seven. Implications. A renewed listing of
alien, native, woody and semi-woody species from dry and semi-humid forests of the APFFMC, is crucial for
its contribution to a proper management and decision taking in the ANP. 94 taxa names were updated. At family
level, the inclusion of Sterculiaceae into Malvaceae was the most significant change. Conclusions. The
taxonomic richness concentrated inside the APFFMC, whose surface is inferior to 1% of the state, oscillates
†
Submitted August 5, 2021 – Accepted October 18, 2021. This work is licensed under a CC-BY 4.0 International License.
ISSN: 1870-0462.
ORCID: G. Márquez-Salazar: 0000-0002-1142-9962; M. G. Millán-Otero: 0000-0002-0613-8907; J. S. Díaz: 0000-0001-7494-4002;
J. Márquez-Stone: 0000-0003-0551-613x
1
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
between 10.41 and 13.93% of the species; 19.95 and 22.80 % of the genera and 29.70 and 30% of the families
reported in the state of Sinaloa, Mexico.
Key words: fabaceae; floristic listing; life forms; natural protected areas; taxonomical richness.
RESUMEN
Antecedentes. Los catálogos de plantas son básicos para proponer y manejar áreas naturales protegidas. A
través de los censos se elaboran planes, estrategias de conservación y hacen comparaciones a través del tiempo.
En bosques tropicales la actualización de levantamientos florísticos es urgente por las amenazas en su
biodiversidad. Objetivo. Presentar un listado estructurado por familia, género y especie, que cuantifique las
relaciones jerárquicas de géneros-especies y familias-géneros y estructure formas de vida e incluya especies
con estatus de riego de extinción registradas en la legislación nacional (NOM-059 SEMARNAT 2010) e
internacional (Lista Roja UICN) de plantas leñosas y semi leñosas de los bosques secos y semi húmedos del
Área de Protección de Flora y Fauna Meseta de Cacaxtla, Sinaloa, México (APFFMC). Metodología. Se
revisaron los trabajos publicados para el sitio, seleccionando las especies autóctonas con crecimiento
secundario, excluyendo invasoras, naturalizadas, cultivadas, ornamentales, etc., cotejando en páginas virtuales,
bibliografía especializada y consultando a especialistas. Para la nomenclatura se emplearon diferentes fuentes
de información y bases de datos. A través de recorridos en campo, se corroboró presencia de taxones e
incluyeron nuevos registros. El listado se ordenó de manera alfabética. Resultados. Fueron registradas 60
familias, 223 géneros y 389 especies. Fabaceae fue la familia con mayor riqueza de taxones, con 44 géneros y
75 especies, seguida por Malvaceae (19/31), Euphorbiaceae (12/34), Asteraceae (10/17), Cactaceae (9/21) y
Apocynaceae (8/10). Un bajo número de 13 géneros y de 12 familias agruparon cinco o más especies y géneros
respectivamente. Por el contrario, una alta cantidad de 210 géneros y 48 familias presentaron cuatro o menos
taxones. Los géneros más diversos fueron Croton (12 especies), Bursera (8), Solanum (7), Ficus y Randia (6);
Opuntia, Merremia, Euphorbia, Lonchocarpus, Mimosa, Senna, Jatropha y Sideroxylon (5). La categoría árbol
agrupó 146 especies, arbusto (114), subarbusto (54), trepadora (51), suculenta y semi suculenta (21) y parásita
(3). De acuerdo con el listado de especies en riesgo de la NOM 059 SEMARNAT-2010, fueron incluidas cinco
especies en la categoría de Amenazadas (A) y dos Sujetas a protección especial (Pr). La lista roja (UICN)
incluyó 173 especies reportadas para el ANP. En la categoría Menor Preocupación (Least Concern) se
registraron 155 taxones, Casi Amenazada (Near Threatened) cuatro, Vulnerable (Vulnerable) siete y en Peligro
de Extinción (Endangered) siete. Implicaciones. Un listado actualizado de las especies silvestres, nativas,
leñosas y semileñosas de los bosques secos y semihúmedos del APFFMC, es crucial para contribuir en la
correcta gestión y toma de decisiones en la ANP. Fueron actualizados los nombres de 94 taxones. A nivel
familia la inclusión de taxones de Sterculiaceae en Malvaceae fue el cambio más significativo. Conclusiones.
La riqueza taxonómica que concentra el APFFMC, cuya superficie es inferior al 1 % del estado, oscila entre
10.41 y 13.93 % de las especies; 19.95 y 22.80 % de géneros, y 29.70 y 30 % de las familias reportadas para el
estado de Sinaloa, México.
Palabras clave: áreas naturales protegidas; fabaceae; formas de vida; listado florístico; riqueza taxonómica.
INTRODUCTION
part of the natural heritage, present in any
geographic unit or administrative, like a country
(Villaseñor et al., 2016), region or specific area.
Plant listings characterize and concentrate current
information from a determined place and particular
time. The censuses gather useful data to monitor
the changes throughout time (Gillson et al., 2020)
in the different flora categories. The floristic
catalogues represent a vital summary of the
collected or previously known information
regarding plant species, or other taxonomical
categories, from a region (Nimis, 1996). They are
the result of a long process that consists of an
exhaustive botanical exploration, herbarium work,
a wide virtual and bibliographical research,
networks with specialist taxonomists and the
publication of results. Floristic researches pretend
to register with the highest precision the taxa from
a specific area, which across published studies
indicate the floristic richness of families, genders,
species, their life-forms and conservation status as
Among Natural Protected Areas (ANP) the
catalogues are crucial for its ordinance. They are
used to plan the conservation efforts at a major
scale (Phillips et al., 2003), as well at a medium and
small scale; due to being helpful at developing
plans and conservation programs which are used to
collate listings considering national and
international norms, where native taxa can appear
in different risk categories, similarly at verifying
alien species censuses we can find invasive and
exotic taxa, along with species with few registers
(rare and low abundance), for which is required to
establish a plan including clear strategies to face
biodiversity threats. The principal axis of planning
is constituted by biodiversity use and conservation
actions, with the goal of shielding the most
2
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
of native taxa Villaseñor (2004) was verified. The
records of domesticated (crops, fruit trees and
ornamental) and naturalized species were
eliminated. Fully unidentified species were
excluded and the subspecies weren’t added.
Relating to the genus-specie and families-genera
link, these were structured into classes.
Quantifying from the obtained listing the genera
with a single species and families with one, two or
three genera, subsequently until reaching the
category with the highest richness of taxa. For the
growth forms, the criteria of León et al. (2012) was
modified, incorporating bushes or sub-shrubs
(Díaz, 2008; Rodríguez et al., 2012), combining
life-forms (Nivia y Cascante, 2008), excluding the
habit. Considering the following categories: tree
(Ar), shrub (Ab), sub-shrub (Su), vines (Tr),
parasitic (Pa) and succulent (Sc). The climbing
shrubs were included as shrubs. For the endangered
species the NOM 059-SEMARNAT 2010
(SEMARNAT 2019) was consulted. The Mexican
legislation includes the next categories from lowest
to highest concern: Protección especial (Pr),
Amenazado (A), En Peligro de extinción (P), and
Probablemente extinta en el medio silvestre (E),
and the red list (IUCN). The international
legislation contains these categories: Not
evaluated, Data deficient, Least concern, Near
threatened, Vulnerable, Endangered, Critically
endangered, Extinct in the wild and Extinct
(https://www.iucnredlist.org).
diversity and endemism possible (Pennington,
2012). Therefore, there is a close relation between
species listing and conservation planning.
Inside dry forest families such as Fabaceae,
Bignoniaceae,
Malvaceae,
Apocynaceae,
Capparaceae, Euphorbiaceae, Hippocrateaceae,
Mimosaceae, Rubiaceae, Cactaceae, Bignoniaceae
and Annonaceae dominate (Murphy y Lugo, 1986;
Narváez-Espinoza et al., 2015; Ferrufino-Acosta et
al., 2019; Romero-Duque et al., 2019); while
genera such as Bursera, Caesalpinia and Randia
being considered the most diverse (MárquezSalazar et al., 2019). Regarding life-forms, treelike species obtaining the most records, following
with shrubs and vines (Cedeño-Fonseca et al.,
2020); the quantity of sub-shrubs is inferior to
shrubs but superior to vines (Angel et al., 2017).
This present study aims to build a floristic listing in
dry and semi-humid forest from the Area de
Protección de Flora y Fauna Meseta de Cacaxtla
(APFFMC), Sinaloa, which concentrates the
taxonomical richness of families, genera and
species including the updated names of woody
plants, semi-woody, native and wild, along with the
life-forms, thus contributing to the knowledge of
vascular plants from the ANP across the state of
Sinaloa. For said purpose, bibliographies of the
Instituto Nacional de Ecología, Secretaría del
Medio Ambiente, Recursos Naturales y Pesca, y
Gobierno del Estado de Sinaloa (1998), Secretaría
del Medio Ambiente Recursos Naturales (2016),
Márquez-Salazar et al. (2019), van der Heiden et
al. (2019) were reviewed and the records of the
authors were included. To homogenize the listings
nomenclature, the synonyms of the current
proposed names were considered, field routes were
drawn along the outskirts of roads, pathways, and
towns, as well as into dry and semi-humid forests.
The familiar species were identified and recorded
in situ, the dubious or unrecognized species were
collected, employing herbarium collections (Díaz,
2007). For the nomenclature, the taxonomic system
APG III 2011 was utilized, and confirmed with The
Plant List database (http://www.theplantlist.org/),
TROPICOS del Missouri Botanical Garden
(http://www.tropicos.org/), ILDIS (International
Legume Database and Information Service)
(https://ildis.org/LegumeWeb10.01.shtml), World
Flora Online (http://www.worldfloraonline.org),
The International Compositae Alliance (TICA).
(https// www.compositae.org/aphia.php?p=stats):
for some genera Gagnon et al. (2016), Korotkova
et al. (2017) and Estrada (2019). The geographic
distribution was corroborated through the online
site Global Biodiversity Information Facility
(https://www.gbif.org/). To confirm the inclusion
THREATS TO DRY FORESTS IN SINALOA
The dry forests are the most threatened tropical
ecosystems of the world (Janzen, 1988), around
80% of their actual coverage has disappeared,
while the causal anthropogenic processes continue,
presenting high levels of fragmentation (SánchezAzofeifa et al., 2014) and increasing the deforested
surface. Particularly in northwest Mexico, the dry
forests along the northwestern coastal plain of
Sonora and Sinaloa have become fragmented since
the 1940’s throughout the 1950’s (Rzedowski,
1978), turning dry forests and shrubland into
farming, ranching land and in recent decades
shrimp farming. Ruiz-Guerrero et al. (2015),
stating the threats, they mention that during
centuries, the vegetation and flora from southern
Sinaloa was severely impacted, without regulation
from human activities, by the agricultural slashand-burn system (RTQ), extensive ranching, local
logging and deforestation for coal production.
From 1993 until 2011 (18 years), the San Ignacio
municipality lost 174.41 km2 of deciduous tropical
forest alone and the Mazatlán municipality lost
101.54 km2. The average deforestation rate of this
forest in Sinaloa was of 126.50 km2/per year
3
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
(Monjardín-Armenta et al., 2017); other
biodiversity challenges in the ANP at southern
Sinaloa are urbanization (Peraza-Durán, 2021) and
the exotic species invasion, which modify the
richness, biodiversity and structure of plant
communities (Márquez-Salazar et al., 2021). Due
to the issues and threats to biodiversity in dry and
semi-humid forest, the APFFMC decree
(Secretarpía de Gobernación, 2000) was an
appropriate conservation policy, justified due being
located inside the dry forests from the Mexican
Pacific, which are plant communities with the
highest conservation priorities at an international
level (SEMARNAT, 2016). The registration of
species in tropical forest must be a permanent
activity (Raven, 1988); the challenge maximizes
when the existing problematic in tropical dry
forests in the state is acknowledged. A complete
plant listing is vital to protect endangered species
from all classes of organisms, before many of them
go extinct.
climate station at Estación Dimas (20 m) the
climate classification is: BSo (h´) w (w) (i´), which
corresponds to the “driest of the semi-arids”
climate, the average annual temperature is 24.9°C,
it is hot, with little thermal oscillation and a median
annual precipitation of 482.8 mm, concentrated
during the months of July to October (García,
2004). The dominant types of soils are: Lithosol,
Regosol and Vertisol according to the
FAO/UNESCO classification (INEGI, 1988). In
the ANP converge contrasting types of vegetation
(by the criteria of Rzedowski, 1978); Plant
communities from humid and dry regions are
located, by their biogeographic pattern, continuous
and discontinuous. Aquatic with sub-aquatic
vegetation (mangroves) and tropical deciduous
forest form continuous stripes parallel to the coastal
zone. The thorny and the tropical sub-deciduous
forest are presented in separated fragments.
Dispersed areas of secondary vegetation are also
located.
DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA
TAXONOMICAL RICHNESS OF THE
APFFMC
The APFFMC is situated in the coastal zone of the
San Ignacio municipality (central-west and
southeast) and Mazatlán (northeast), in the
southern region of Sinaloa, delimited by the
outmost coordinates 106° 35’ 10’’ and 106° 45’
30’’ west ; 23° 32’00’’ and 23° 46’’ 00’’ north)
between the low basin of Piaxtla river (left bank)
and the Quelite river (right bank) with an extension
of 50, 862-31-25 ha (Figure 1). It holds 0.874 % of
the total state surface. It retains an elevation
gradient of 0 to 360 meters above sea level (msnm).
It has a semi-dry or semi-arid climate. In the
The taxonomic categories of dry and semi-humid
forests from the Área de Protección de Flora y
Fauna Meseta de Cacaxtla were 60 families, 223
genera and 389 species. In contributions to the
census, The Instituto Nacional de Ecología et al.
(1998) added 27 families, 61 genera and 72 species,
SEMARNAT (2016) (47/165/221), MárquezSalazar et al. (2019) (27/67/86), van der Heiden et
al. (2019) (47/171/245) and the authors
(53/175/246) respectively (Table 1).
Figure 1. Geographical localization of the Área de Protección de Flora y Fauna Meseta de Cacaxtla.
4
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
Table 1. Woody and semi-woody plants listing from dry and semi-humid forests of the Área de Protección
de Flora y Fauna Meseta de Cacaxtla.
Botanical family
Scientific name
Life-form
Risk category
Acanthaceae
Carlowrightia arizonica A. Gray 4
SU
Henrya insularis Nees ex Benth. 4
SU
Justicia candicans (Nees) L.D. Benson 2,4,5
SH
Justicia hilsenbeckii T.F. Daniel 2,4
SH
Ruellia intermedia Leonard 4
SU
Ruellia inundata Kunth 2,4
SU
Ruellia nudiflora (Engelm. & A. Gray) Urb. 4
SU
Tetramerium glandulosum Oerst 4
SU
Tetramerium nervosum Nees 4
SU
Tetramerium tenuissimum Rose 2,4
SU
Achatocarpaceae
Phaulothamnus spinescens A. Gray 2,4,5
SH
Amaranthaceae
Atriplex barclayana (Benth.) D.Dietr.1,4
SU
Suaeda vermiculata Forssk. ex J.F. Gmel. 2
SU
Suaeda ramosissima (Standl.) I.M. Johnst. 2
SU
Anacardiaceae
Rhus terebinthifolia Schltdl. & Cham. 1,5
TR
LC
Spondias purpurea L.1,5
TR
LC
Apocynaceae
Asclepias curassavica L. 5
SU
Cascabela ovata (Cav.) Lippold 2,4,5
SH
LC
Marsdenia coulteri Hemsl. 2
VI
Marsdenia edulis S. Watson 3,4,5
VI
Matelea chrysantha (Greenm.) Woodson 2,5
VI
Plumeria rubra L. 1,2,3,4,5
TR
LC
Rauvolfia tetraphylla L. 2,4
SH
Tabernaemontana amygdalifolia Jacq. 1,2,5
TR
LC
Tabernaemontana tomentosa (Greenm.) A.O.
TR
LC
Simões & M.E. Endress 2,4
Vallesia glabra (Cav.) Link 1, 2,4,5
SH
LC
Asteraceae
Ambrosia ambrosioides (Cav.) W.W. Payne 2,4, 5
SH
Ambrosia confertiflora DC. 4
SH
Ambrosia monogyra (Torr. & A. Gray) Strother
SH
& B.G. Baldwin 2,5
Ambrosia psilostachya DC. 2
SH
Baccharis salicina Torr. & A. Gray 1,2,4,5
SH
Baccharis sarothroides A. Gray 2
SH
Baccharis thesioides Kunth 2
SH
Brickellia coulteri A. Gray 2
SH
Brickellia subuligera (Schauer) B.L. Turner 4
SH
Chromolaena sagittata (A. Gray) R.M. King &
SH
H. Rob. 2,4
Critonia quadrangularis (DC.) R.M. King & H.
SH
Rob. 2
Koanophyllon albicaulis (Sch.Bip. ex Klatt)
SH
R.M. King & H. Rob. 1,4
Lagascea decipiens Hemsl. 2,4
SH
Parthenium hysterophorus L. 5
SH
Pluchea carolinensis (Jacq.) G. Don 4
SH
LC
Pluchea odorata (L.) Cass. 5
SH
Porophyllum punctatum (Mill.) S.F. Blake 4,5
SH
Bataceae
Batis maritima L. 1,2,4
SU
Bignoniaceae
Adenocalymma inundatum Mart. ex DC. 2,4
VI
Amphilophium paniculatum (L.) Kunth 2,4,5
VI
Crescentia alata Kunth 1,2,4,5
TR
LC
Dolichandra unguis-cati (L.) L.G. Lohmann 2,
VI
3,4,5
5
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Botanical family
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
Scientific name
Handroanthus chrysanthus (Jacq.) S.O. Grose
Life-form
TR
Risk category
A
TR
A. LC
TR
SH
TR
TR
TR
TR
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
LC
LC
LC
NT
LC
LC
LC
NT
LC
LC
TR
SC
SC
SC
LC
LC
VU*
LC
Cylindropuntia thurberi (Engelm.) F.M. Knuth
SC
LC
Mammillaria beneckei Ehrenb. 5
Mammillaria bocensis R.T. Craig 5
Mammillaria mazatlanensis K. Schum. 2,4,5
Opuntia decumbens Salm-Dyck 1,2,3,4,5
Opuntia karwinskiana Salm-Dyck 2,3,5
Opuntia rileyi J. G. Ortega 2,4
Opuntia spraguei J. G. Ortega 5
Opuntia wilcoxii Britton & Rose 1,4
Pachycereus pecten-aboriginum (Engelm. ex S.
Watson) Britton & Rose 1,2,3,4,5
Pereskiopsis blakeana J.G. Ortega 5
Pereskiopsis porteri (Brandegee ex F.A.C.
Weber) Britton & Rose 2,3,4,5
Pilosocereus purpusii (Britton & Rose) Byles &
G.D. Rowley 2,3,4,5
Selenicereus vagans (K. Brandegee) Britton &
Rose 4,5
Stenocereus alamosensis (J.M. Coult.) A.C.
Gibson & K.E. Horak 1,2,3,4,5
Stenocereus kerberi (K. Schum.) A.C. Gibson &
K.E. Horak 2,5
Stenocereus martinezii (J. G. Ortega) Buxb. 2,3,4,5
Stenocereus standleyi (J.G. Ortega) Buxb. 3,4,5
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
LC
VU
LC
LC
SC
SC
LC
LC
SC
LC
SC
LC
SC
VU
SC
LC
Celtis iguanaea (Jacq.) Sarg 1,2
Celtis pallida Torr. 1,2,5
TR
TR
2,4,5
Bixaceae
Boraginaceae
Burseraceae
Handroanthus impetiginosus (Mart. ex DC.)
Mattos 1,3,4,5
Parmentiera aculeata (Kunth) Seem 2,4
Tecoma stans (L.) Juss. ex Kunth 2,4,5
Cochlospermum vitifolium (Willd.) Spreng. 2,5
Bourreria rekoi Standl. 2
Cordia alliodora (Ruiz & Pav.) Oken 2,4,5
Cordia sonorae N.E. Rose 1,2,3,4,5
Tournefortia capitata M. Martens & Galeotti 2
Tournefortia hartwegiana Steud 5
Tournefortia mutabilis Vent. 5
Tournefortia volubilis L. 2
Varronia curassavica Jacq 2
Varronia macrocephala Desv. 2,5
Bursera arborea (Rose) L. Riley 4,5
Bursera excelsa (Kunth) Engl. 3,4,5
Bursera fagaroides (Kunth) Engl. 1,2,3,4,5
Bursera grandifolia (Schltdl.) Engl. 1,2,3,5
Bursera laxiflora S. Watson 1,3,4,5
Bursera palmeri S. Watson 4
Bursera penicillata (Sessé & Moc. ex DC.) Engl.
LC
2,3,5
Cactaceae
Bursera simaruba (L.) Sarg. 2,3,4,5
Acanthocereus tetragonus (L.) Hummelinck 2,3,4,5
Acanthocereus rosei (J.G. Ortega) Lodé 2,4
Cylindropuntia fulgida (Engelm.) F.M. Knuth
1,2,4
2,3,4,5
Cannabaceae
6
SC
SC
LC
LC
Pr. EN
LC
LC
LC
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Botanical family
Capparaceae
Celastraceae
Cleomaceae
Combretaceae
Convolvulaceae
Ebenaceae
Erythroxylaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
Scientific name
Trema micrantha (L.) Blume 5
Crateva palmeri Rose 2
Crateva tapia L 2,3,4,5
Cynophalla flexuosa (L.) J. Presl 2,3,4,5
Cynophalla verrucosa (Jacq.) J. Presl 2,4,5
Morisonia americana L. 1,2,3,4,5
Quadrella indica (L.) Iltis & Cornejo 2,3,4,5
Maytenus phyllanthoides Benth. 2,5
Pristimera celastroides (Kunth) A.C.Sm. 3,4,5
Semialarium mexicanum (Miers) Mennega 5
Cleome viscosa L. 4
Combretum fruticosum (Loefl.) Stuntz 2,3,4,5
Conocarpus erectus L. 1, 2, 4, 5
Ipomoea arborescens (Humb. & Bonpl. ex
Willd.) G. Don 1,2,3,4,5
Ipomoea bracteata Cav. 2,3,4,5
Jacquemontia pentanthos (Jacq.) G. Don 4
Jacquemontia polyantha (Schltdl. & Cham.)
Hallier 4
Merremia aegyptia (L.) Urb. 4,5
Merremia dissecta (Jacq.) Hallier f. 2
Merremia palmeri (Hallier) Hallier f. 2
Merremia quinquefolia (L.) Hallier f. 4
Merremia umbellata (L.) Hallier f. 4,5
Operculina pinnatifida (Kunth) O'Donell 4,5
Operculina pteripes (G. Don) O'Donell 4
Diospyros aequoris Standl. 3,5
Diospyros sphaerantha Standl. 2
Erythroxylum havanense Jacq. 4
Erythroxylum mexicanum Kunth 2,3,5
Acalypha californica Benth. 5
Acalypha microphylla Klotzsch 4,5
Adelia vaseyi (J.M. Coult.) Pax & K. Hoffm. 5
Cnidoscolus sinaloensis Breckon ex Fern.Casas
Life-form
TR
TR
TR
SH
SH
TR
TR
TR
VI
SH
SU
VI
TR
TR
Risk category
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
A. LC
LC
VI
VI
VI
VI
VI
VI
VI
VI
VI
VI
TR
TR
TR
TR
SU
SU
SH
TR
LC
EN
2,3,4,5
Croton alamosanus Rose 2,3,4,5
Croton californicus Müll.Arg. 2,4
Croton ciliatoglandulifer Ortega 2,4,5
Croton fantzianus F. Seym. 2
Croton flavescens Greenm 4,5
Croton fragilis Kunth 2,5
Croton jucundus Brandegee 1
Croton morifolius Willd. 1
Croton pseudoniveus Lundell 5
Croton reflexifolius Kunth 1
Croton rhamnifolius Willd 1
Croton roxanae Croizat 5
Dalechampia scandens L. 2,4,5
Euphorbia bracteata Jacq 2,4
Euphorbia californica Benth 3,4,5
Euphorbia cymosa Poir. 4,5
Euphorbia lomelii V.W. Steinm. 2,3,5
Euphorbia schlechtendalii Boiss. 3,5
Hippomane mancinella L. 4
Hura polyandra Baill. 1,2,4,5
Jatropha cf. bullockii E.J. Lott 3,5
Jatropha cordata (Ortega) Müll.Arg. 2,3,4,5
7
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
VI
SH
SH
SU
SH
TR
TR
TR
SH
TR
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
EN
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Botanical family
Fabaceae
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
Scientific name
Jatropha curcas L. 1,3,4,5
Jatropha gossypiifolia L. 2
Jatropha peltata Sessé 4,5
Manihot aesculifolia (Kunth) Pohl 2,4,5
Manihot chlorosticta Standl. & Goldman 2,4
Manihot rubricaulis I.M. Johnst. 3,5
Sapium lateriflorum Hemsl. 2,4,5
Sebastiania pavoniana (Müll. Arg.) Müll. Arg 4
Acacia riparia Kunth 5
Acaciella tequilana (S. Watson) Britton & Rose 2
Bauhinia pauletia Pers. 2,4,5
Bauhinia pringlei S. Watson 3,5
Brongniartia alamosana Rydb. 4,5
Brongniartia glabrata Hook. & Arn. 5
Caesalpinia cacalaco Humb. & Bonpl. 1,2,3,4,5
Caesalpinia palmeri S. Watson 3,4,5
Caesalpinia pulcherrima (L.) Sw. 2,4,5
Calliandra houstoniana (Mill.) Standl. 5
Calliandra tergemina (L.) Benth. 5
Canavalia rosea (Sw.) DC.1,2,4
Canavalia villosa Benth. 2,5
Cenostigma eriostachys (Benth.) E. Gagnon &
G. P. Lewis 1,2,3,4,5
Chloroleucon mangense (Jacq.) Britton & Rose
Life-form
TR
TR
TR
SH
SH
SH
TR
TR
TR
SH
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
SH
SH
SH
SH
VI
VI
TR
Risk category
LC
LC
TR
LC
Conzattia multiflora (Robinson) Standl. 1,2,3,4,5
Coulteria platyloba (S. Watson) N. Zamora 1,3,4,5
Coursetia caribaea (Jacq.) Lavin 4
Coursetia glandulosa A. Gray 2,3,5
Crotalaria incana L. 2,4
Crotalaria pumila Ortega 2,4,5
Desmanthus bicornutus S. Watson 4
Desmanthus covillei (Britton & Rose) Wiggins 4
Diphysa occidentalis Rose 4,5
Ebenopsis caesalpinioides (Standl.) Britton &
Rose 2,4,5
Entada polystachya (L.) DC. 4,5
Enterolobium cyclocarpum (Jacq.) Griseb. 1,2,4,5
Erythrina lanata Rose 1,3,4,5
Erythrina flabelliformis Kearney 1,5
Eysenhardtia polystachya (Ortega) Sarg 4,5
Galactia acapulcensis Rose 4
Galactia incana (Rose) Standl. 5
Guilandina bonduc L. 4,5
Haematoxylum brasiletto H. Karst. 1,2,3,4,5
Havardia sonorae (S. Watson) Britton & Rose 1,2
Hesperalbizia occidentalis (Brandegee) Barneby
& J.W. Grimes 1,2,3,4,5
Indigofera suffruticosa Mill. 2,4
Inga vera Willd 2,4
Leucaena lanceolata S. Watson 4,5
Leucaena leucocephala (Lam.) de Wit 1,2,4
Libidibia sclerocarpa (Standl.) Britton & Rose
TR
TR
SH
SH
SU
SU
SH
SH
SH
TR
Lonchocarpus hermannii M. Sousa 2,4,5
Lonchocarpus guatemalensis Benth 3,4,5
Lonchocarpus lanceolatus Benth. 1,5
TR
TR
TR
1,2,3,4,5
1,2,3,4,5
8
VI
TR
TR
TR
TR
VI
VI
SH
TR
TR
TR
SH
TR
TR
TR
TR
LC
NT
NT
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
A
LC
LC
LC
LC
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Botanical family
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
Scientific name
Lonchocarpus mutans M. Sousa 2,4
Lonchocarpus sericeus (Poir.) DC. 5
Lysiloma divaricatum (Jacq.) J.F. Macbr. 1,2,3,4,5
Life-form
TR
TR
TR
Lysiloma microphylla Benth. 2
Macroptilium gracile (Benth.) Urb 4
Mariosousa russelliana (Britton & Rose) Seigler
& Ebinger 4
Microlobius foetidus (Jacq.) M.Sousa & G.
Andrade 2,4,5
Mimosa palmeri Rose 5
Mimosa pigra L. 2,4
Mimosa polyantha Benth. 2,3,5
Mimosa quadrivalvis L 4
Mimosa spirocarpa Rose 4
Nissolia fruticosa Jacq. 4,5
Parkinsonia aculeata L. 2,4,5
Parkinsonia praecox (Ruiz & Pav.) Hawkins 5
Pithecellobium dulce (Roxb.) Benth. 1,2,3,4,5
Pithecellobium lanceolatum (Willd.) Benth. 2,4,5
Pithecellobium unguis-cati (L.) Benth. 2,4,5
Poincianella eriostachys (Benth.) Britton &
Rose 1,2,3,4,5
Prosopis juliflora (Sw.) DC. 1,2,4,5
Senna atomaria (L.) H.S. Irwin & Barneby 2,3,4,5
Senna fruticosa (Mill.) H.S. Irwin & Barneby 2,4
Senna occidentalis (L.) Link 2,4,5
Senna pallida (Vahl) H.S. Irwin & Barneby
TR
VI
TR
Risk category
LC
LC
LC
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
VI
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
SH
SH
SH
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
1,2,3,4,5
Fouquieriaceae
Hernandiaceae
Lamiaceae
Loranthaceae
Malpighiaceae
Senna uniflora (Mill.) H.S. Irwin & Barneby 4
Sesbania herbacea (Mill.) McVaugh 2,4,5
Vachellia campechiana (Mill.) Seigler &
Ebinger 1,2,3,4,5
Vachellia farnesiana (L.) Wight & Arn. 1.2.3.4.5
Vachellia macracantha (Humb. & Bonpl. ex
Willd.) Seigler & Ebinger 1
Zapoteca formosa (Kunth) H.M. Hern. 4
Zapoteca media (M. Martens & Galeotti) H.M.
Hern 2
Fouquieria macdougalii Nash 5
Gyrocarpus jatrophifolius Domin 4,5
Condea albida (Kunth) Harley & J.F.B. Pastore 5
Hyptis suaveolens (L.) Poit. 4
Salvia mazatlanensis Fernald 5
Psittacanthus palmeri (S. Watson) Barlow &
Wiens 2
Bunchosia biocellata Schltdl. 4
Bunchosia palmeri S. Watson 2,5
Byrsonima crassifolia (L.) Kunth 4
4,5
Malvaceae
Callaeum macropterum (DC.) D.M. Johnson
Heteropterys palmeri Rose 4
Malpighia emarginata DC. 2,3,4,5
Mascagnia macroptera (Moc. & Sessé ex DC.)
Nied. 2,5
Abutilon abutiloides (Jacq.) Garcke ex Hochr. 4,5
Abutilon grandidentatum Fryxell 2
9
SH
SH
SH
SH
TR
LC
LC
SU
SU
LC
TR
TR
SH
SH
SH
PA
LC
LC
LC
SH
SH
TR
LC
LC
VI
VI
TR
VI
SU
SU
EN
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Botanical family
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
Scientific name
Abutilon trisulcatum (Jacq.) Urb. 2,4,5
Anoda acerifolia Cav. 2,4
Anoda cristata (L.) Schltdl. 2,5
Ayenia pusilla L. 5
Byttneria aculeata Jacq. 2,3,4,5
Ceiba aesculifolia (Kunth) Britten & Baker f.
Life-form
SU
SU
SU
SU
VI
TR
Risk category
LC
1,2,3,4,5
Corchorus aestuans L. 5
Corchorus hirtus L. 4
Corchorus olitorius L. 4
Gossypium aridum (Rose & Standl.) Skovst.
SU
SU
SU
TR
Pr.VU
2,3,4,5
Meliaceae
Guazuma ulmifolia Lam. 1,3,4,5
Helicteres baruensis Jacq. 2,3,4,5
Helicteres vegae Cristóbal 5
Herissantia crispa (L.) Brizicky 2,5
Hibiscus biseptus S. Watson 2,5
Hibiscus phoeniceus Jacq. 4
Kosteletzkya depressa (L.) O.J. Blanch., Fryxell
& D.M. Bates 2,4,5
Luehea candida (Moc. & Sessé ex DC.) Mart. 2,5
TR
SH
SH
SU
SU
SU
SU
LC
LC
TR
LC
Malachra alceifolia Jacq. 4
Malvastrum americanum (L.) Torr. 4
Malvastrum coromandelianum (L.) Garcke
Melochia pyramidata L. 2,4,5
Melochia speciosa S. Watson 4
Melochia tomentosa L. 2,4,5
Sida acuta Burm.F. 2,4,5
Sida rhombifolia L. 2
Triumfetta acracantha Hochr 4
Triumfetta discolor Rose 5
Waltheria indica L 2,4,5
Cedrela odorata L. 5
Swietenia humilis Zucc. 1,2,4,5
Trichilia americana (Sessé & Moc.) T.D. Penn.
SU
SU
SH
SU
SU
SU
SH
SU
SU
SU
SU
TR
TR
TR
Trichilia havanensis Jacq. 5
Trichilia hirta L 5
Trichilia trifolia L. 5
Cissampelos pareira L. 2,5
Cocculus diversifolius DC. 2
Brosimum alicastrum Sw. 1,2,4,5
Ficus cotinifolia Kunth 1,3,4,5
Ficus insipida Willd. 4
Ficus maxima Mill. 1,2,4,5
Ficus pertusa L.f. 1,2
Ficus petiolaris Kunth 5
Ficus trigonata L. 2
Maclura tinctoria (L.) D. Don ex Steud. 1,2,3,4,5
Trophis racemosa (L.) Urb.2
Ardisia revoluta Kunth 5
Eugenia inconspicua Standl. 5
Eugenia guatemalensis Donn.Sm. 1
Eugenia sinaloae Standl. 5
Psidium sartorianum (O. Berg) Nied. 1,2,4,5
Boerhavia erecta L. 5
TR
TR
TR
VI
VI
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
SU
4,5
Menispermaceae
Moraceae
Myrsinaceae
Myrtaceae
Nyctaginaceae
10
LC
VU
EN
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Botanical family
Onagraceae
Opiliaceae
Passifloraceae
Petiveriaceae
Plantaginaceae
Polygonaceae
Pricamniaceae
Primulaceae
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
Scientific name
Commicarpus scandens (L.) Standl. 2,4,5
Neea psychotrioides Donn.Sm. 3,5
Pisonia aculeata L. 4,5
Pisonia capitata (S. Watson) Standl. 2,4
Salpianthus macrodontus Standl. 2,4
Salpianthus purpurascens (Cav. ex Lag.) Hook.
& Arn. 2,4
Ludwigia octovalvis (Jacq.) P.H. Raven 4
Agonandra racemosa (DC.) Standl. 4,5
Passiflora arida (Mast. & Rose) Killip 2,5
Passiflora foetida L. 2
Turnera diffusa Willd. ex Schult.3,4,5
Petiveria alliacea L. 2,4,5
Rivina humilis L. 4
Russelia sarmentosa Jacq 4
Antigonon leptopus Hook. & Arn 2,4,5
Coccoloba barbadensis Jacq. 4,5
Coccoloba goldmanii Standl. 2,4,5
Ruprechtia fusca Fernald 3,5
Alvaradoa amorphoides Liebm. 5
Bonellia macrocarpa (Cav.) B. Ståhl & Källersjö
Life-form
SU
TR
SH
TR
SH
SH
Risk category
SU
TR
VI
VI
SH
SU
SH
SU
VI
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
1,2,3,4,5
Ranunculaceae
Rhamnaceae
Clematis dioica L. 2,5
Colubrina heteroneura (Griseb.) Standl. 2,4,5
Colubrina triflora Brongn. ex Sweet 2,4,5
Condalia mexicana Schltdl. 2,4,5
Condalia spathulata A. Gray 2,4
Gouania lupuloides (L.) Urb. 4,5
Gouania rosei Wiggins 2,5
Karwinskia humboldtiana (Schult.) Zucc. 1,2,3,4,5
VI
TR
TR
SH
SH
VI
VI
TR
Karwinskia latifolia Standl. 4,5
Ziziphus amole (Sessé & Moc.) M.C. Johnst
TR
TR
LC
LC
SH
TR
LC
LC
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
SH
TR
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
VU
LC
LC
LC
LC
1,2,3,4,5
Rubiaceae
Rutaceae
Chiococca alba (L.) Hitchc. 3,5
Hintonia latiflora (Sessé & Moc. ex DC.)
Bullock 1,2,3,4,5
Randia aculeata L. 1,2,4,5
Randia armata (Sw.) DC. 2,3,4,5
Randia echinocarpa Moc. & Sessé ex DC. 2,3,4,5
Randia obcordata S. Watson 2,3
Randia laetevirens Standl. 4
Randia thurberi S. Watson 2,5
Esenbeckia hartmanii B.L. Rob. & Fernald
1,2,3,4,5
Salicaceae
Santalaceae
Sapindaceae
Zanthoxylum arborescens Rose 1,3,4,5
Zanthoxylum caribaeum Lam. 2,4,5
Zanthoxylum fagara (L.) Sarg. 2,3,4,5
Zanthoxylum schreberi (J.F. Gmel.) Reynel ex C.
Nelson 5
Casearia arguta Kunth 2,3,4,5
Casearia nitida (L.) Jacq. 2,4,5
Phoradendron bolleanum (Seem.) Eichler 4
TR
TR
TR
TR
LC
LC
LC
LC
TR
TR
PA
LC
Phoradendron quadrangulare (Kunth) Griseb 2,5
Cupania dentata DC. 4
Paullinia fuscescens Kunth 2,4
PA
TR
VI
11
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Botanical family
Sapotaceae
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
Scientific name
Paullinia tomentosa Jacq. 2,4,5
Sapindus saponaria L. 2,4
Serjania mexicana (L.) Willd. 5
Serjania palmeri S. Watson 2,5
Serjania triquetra Radlk 4
Thouinidium decandrum (Humb. & Bonpl.)
Radlk. 2,3,4,5
Urvillea ulmacea Kunth 2,5
Sideroxylon occidentale (Hemsl.) T.D.Penn. 5
Sideroxylon palmeri (Rose) T.D.Penn. 1,2,4
Sideroxylon peninsulare (Brandegee) T.D.Penn.
Life-form
VI
TR
VI
VI
VI
TR
VI
TR
TR
TR
Risk category
LC
LC
LC
LC
EN
2
Schoepfiaceae
Scrophulariaceae
Solanaceae
Stegnospermataceae
Talinaceae
Verbenaceae
Violaceae
Vitaceae
Sideroxylon persimile (Hemsl.) T.D.Penn. 2,4
Sideroxylon tepicense (Standl.) T.D.Penn. 2
Schoepfia schreberi J.F. Gmel. 5
Buddleja sessiliflora Kunth 2
Capraria biflora L. 2
Capraria frutescens (Mill.) Britten 4
Capsicum annuum L. 2,4
Lycium brevipes Benth. 2,4
Lycium andersonii A. Gray 3,5
Nicotiana glauca Graham 2,4,5
Nicotiana trigonophylla Dunal 2
Solanum americanum Mill. 2,4,5
Solanum axillifolium K.E. Roe 4
Solanum erianthum D. Don 4,5
Solanum hirtum Vahl 2
Solanum nigrescens M. Martens & Galeotti 5
Solanum refractum Hook. & Arn. 4
Solanum torvum Sw 4
Stegnosperma cubense A. Rich. 4
Stegnosperma scandens (Lunan) Standl. 1,5
Talinum paniculatum (Jacq.) Gaertn. 5
Citharexylum affine D. Don 2,5
Citharexylum berlandieri S. Watson 2
Lantana camara L. 1,2,4,5
Lippia palmeri S. Watson 2
Vitex mollis Kunth 2
Hybanthus mexicanus Ging. ex DC. 2
Cissus tiliacea Kunth 4
Cissus trifoliata (L.) L. 4
Cissus verticillata (L.) Nicolson & C.E. Jarvis
TR
TR
TR
SH
SU
SU
SH
SH
SH
SH
SU
SU
SH
SH
SH
SU
VI
SH
VI
VI
SU
TR
TR
SH
SH
TR
SH
VI
VI
VI
LC
LC
LC
LC
LC
EN
LC
LC
2,4,5
Parthenocissus quinquefolia (L.) Planch. 2
VI
5
SH
LC
TR
A.VU
Urticaceae
Urera baccifera (L.) Gaudich. ex Wedd.
Zygophyllaceae
Guaiacum coulteri A. Gray 1,2,3,4,5
The sources of information are: 1: Instituto Nacional de Ecología et al. (1998); 2: SEMARNAT 2016; 3:
Márquez-Salazar et al 2019; 4: van der Heiden et al. 2019 and 5: Authors. The growth forms correspond to:
Tree (TR), Shrub (SH), Sub-shrub (SU), Vine (VI), Succulent and semi-succulent (SC) and Parasitic (PA). The
risk categories of the NOM 059 SEMARNAT are: Sujetas a protección especial (Pr) and Amenazadas (A); from
the red list: Least Concern (LC), Near Threatened (NT), Vulnerable (V) y Endangered (EN).
Note: In the present listing Acanthocereus rosei (J.G. Ortega) Lode, is considered synonymous of Peniocerus
rosei J.G Ortega, which appears on the IUCN Red List as Vulnerable (VU).
12
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
Table 2. Families with highest richness of genera and species of the Area de Protección de Flora y Fauna
Meseta de Cacaxtla, Sinaloa.
Family
Genera
Species
Number
Percentage
Number
Percentage
Fabaceae
44
19.73
75
19.28
Malvaceae
19
8.52
31
7.97
Euphorbiaceae
12
5.38
34
8.74
Asteraceae
10
4.48
17
4.37
Cactaceae
9
4.04
21
5.40
Apocynaceae
8
3.59
10
2.57
Acanthaceae
5
2.24
10
2.57
Solanaceae
4
1.79
12
3.08
Convolvulaceae
4
1.79
11
2.83
of the different registers in dry and semi-humid
forests.
The nine most diverse families accumulated 15%
of the total. They added 115 genera (51.57%) and
221 species (56.81%) (Table 2). When including
sub-shrubs in the listing, Malvaceae and
Acanthaceae became the family groups with the
highest richness of genera and species of the ANP.
The names of 94 taxa were updated, starting from
the Instituto Nacional de Ecología et al. (1998)
source until the authors (2021). The epithet
changes were partial and total. The partial
modifications included the generic and the specific
epithets. The genera alterations were present in 40
species (42.55%) and the specific epithets 39
(41.49%). The complete changes were in 15 taxa.
15.96% of the species were registered with a new
name (Table 3).
It is partially matched with Murphy & Lugo (1986),
Narváez-Espinoza et al. (2015) and RomeroDuque et al. (2019) and totally with MárquezSalazar et al. (2019) and Ferrufino-Acosta et al.
(2019), due to the reported families with higher
records. Fabaceae is the most important family out
Table 3. List of updated taxonomic names and synonyms from APFFMC.
Previous name or Synonym
Updated Name
Abutilon dentatum Rose
Abutilon abutiloides (Jacq.) Garcke ex Britton & Wilson
Acacia cochliacantha Willd.
Vachellia campechiana (Mill.) Seigler & Ebinger
Acacia farnesiana (L.) Willd.
Vachellia farnesiana (L.) Wight & Arn.
Acacia macracantha Willd.
Vachellia macracantha (Humb. & Bonpl. ex Willd.) Seigler
& Ebinger
Acacia russelliana (Britton & Rose) Lundell Mariosousa russelliana (Britton & Rose) Seigler & Ebinger
Acaciella crinita (Brandegee) Britton &
Acaciella tequilana (S. Watson) Britton & Rose
Rose
Acanthocereus occidentalis Britton & Rose
Acanthocereus tetragonus (L.) Hummelinck
Albizzia occidentalis Brandegee
Hesperalbizia occidentalis (Brandegee) Barneby & J.W.
Grimes
Baccharis glutinosa Pers.
Baccharis salicina Torr. & A. Gray
Boerhavia scandens L.
Commicarpus scandens (L.) Standl.
Bumelia laetevirens Hemsl.
Sideroxylon palmeri (Rose) T.D. Penn.
Bumelia palmeri Rose
Sideroxylon palmeri (Rose) T.D. Penn.
Bumelia peninsularis Brandegee
Sideroxylon peninsulare (Brandegee) T.D.Penn.
Bursera odorata Brandegee
Bursera fagaroides (Kunth) Engl.
Caesalpinia bonduc (L.) Roxb
Guilandina bonduc Griseb.
Caesalpinia eriostachys Benth.
Cenostigma eriostachys (Benth.) E. Gagnon & G. P. Lewis
Caesalpinia platyloba S. Watson
Coulteria platyloba (S. Watson) N. Zamora
Caesalpinia sclerocarpa Standl.
Libidibia sclerocarpa (Standl.) Britton & Rose
Canavalia maritima Thouars
Canavalia rosea (Sw.) DC.
Capparis flexuosa (L.) L.
Cynophalla flexuosa (L.) J. Presl
Capparis verrucosa Jacq.
Cynophalla verrucosa (Jacq.) J. Presl
Capparis indica (L.) Druce
Quadrella indica (L.) Iltis & Cornejo
Casearia arguta Kunth
Casearia nitida (L.) Jacq.
13
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Previous name or Synonym
Casearia corymbosa Kunth
Cassia biflora L.
Cedrela occidentalis C.DC. & Rose
Ceiba acuminata (S. Watson) Rose
Combretum farinosum Kunth
Cephalocereus purpusii Britton & Rose
Chlorophora tinctoria (L.) Gaudich.
Colubrina glomerata (Benth.) Hemsl.
Commicarpus scandens (L.) Standl.
Cordia brevispicata M. Martens & Galeotti
Cordia curassavica (Jacq.) Roem. & Schult.
Cordia macrocephala (Desv.) Kunth
Cordia pringlei B.L. Rob.
Coutarea latiflora Sessé & Moc. ex DC.
Coutarea pterosperma (S. Watson) Standl.
Croton ciliatoglandulosus Ortega
Diospyros rosei Standl.
Erioxylum aridum Rose & Standl.
Eupatorium albicaule Sch.Bip. ex Klatt
Feuilleea xalapensis (Benth.) Kuntze
Ficus glaucescens (Liebm.) Miq.
Ficus mexicana (Miq.) Miq.
Ficus padifolia Kunth
Goldmania foetida (Jacq.) Standl.
Hymenoclea monogyra Torr. & A. Gray
Hyptis albida Kunth
Inga eriocarpa Benth
Jacquinia macrocarpa Cav.
Jacquinia pungens A. Gray
Jatropha platyphylla Müll.Arg.
Karwinskia parvifolia Rose
Lagascea glandulosa Fernald
Leucaena glauca Benth.
Lysiloma divaricata (Jacq.) J.F. Macbr.
Lysiloma microphyllum Benth
Macfadyena unguis-cati (L.) A.H. Gentry
Macroptilium longepedunculatum (Benth.)
Urb.
Mallotus rhamnifolius (Willd.) Müll.Arg.
Nopalea karwinskiana (Salm-Dyck) K.
Schum
Opuntia puberula Pfeiff.
Opuntia thurberi Engelm.
Parmentiera edulis DC.
Pedilanthus macrocarpus Benth
Peniocereus rosei J. G. Ortega
Pithecellobium mangense (Jacq.) J.F.
Macbr.
Pithecellobium seleri Harms
Pithecellobium sonorae S. Watson
Plumeria acutifolia Poir.
Poincianella eriostachys (Benth.) Britton &
Rose
Polanisia viscosa (L.) DC.
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
Updated Name
Casearia nitida (L.) Jacq.
Senna pallida (Vahl) H.S. Irwin & Barneby
Cedrela odorata L.
Ceiba aesculifolia (Kunth) Britten & Baker f.
Combretum fruticosum (Loefl.) Stuntz
Pilosocereus purpusii (Britton & Rose) Byles & G.D.
Rowley
Maclura tinctoria (L.) D. Don ex Steud.
Colubrina triflora Brongn. ex Sweet
Boerhavia scandens L.
Varronia curassavica Jacq.
Varronia curassavica Jacq.
Varronia macrocephala Desv
Varronia macrocephala Desv
Hintonia latiflora (Sessé & Moc. ex DC.) Bullock
Hintonia latiflora (Sessé & Moc. ex DC.) Bullock
Croton ciliatoglandulifer Ortega
Diospyros sphaerantha Standl.
Gossypium aridum (Rose & Standl.) Skovst.
Koanophyllon albicaulis (Sch.Bip. ex Klatt) R.M. King &
H. Rob.
Inga vera subsp. spuria (Willd.) J. León
Ficus maxima Mill.
Ficus maxima Mill.
Ficus pertusa L.f.
Microlobius foetidus (Jacq.) M.Sousa & G. Andrade
Ambrosia monogyra (Torr. & A. Gray) Strother & B.G.
Baldwin
Condea albida (Kunth) Harley & J.F.B. Pastore
Inga vera subsp. spuria (Willd.) J. León
Bonellia macrocarpa (Cav.) B. Ståhl & Källersjö
Bonellia macrocarpa (Cav.) B. Ståhl & Källersjö
Jatropha peltata Sessé
Karwinskia humboldtiana (Schult.) Zucc.
Lagascea decipiens Hemsl.
Leucaena leucocephala (Lam.) de Wit
Lysiloma divaricatum (Jacq.) J.F. Macbr.
Lysiloma microphylla Benth
Dolichandra unguis-cati (L.) L.G. Lohmann
Macroptilium gracile (Benth.) Urb.
Croton rhamnifolius Willd
Opuntia karwinskiana Salm-Dyck
Opuntia decumbens Salm-Dyck
Cylindropuntia thurberi (Engelm.) F.M. Knuth
Parmentiera aculeata (Kunth) Seem.
Euphorbia lomelii V.W. Steinm.
Acanthocereus rosei (J.G. Ortega) Lodé
Chloroleucon mangense (Jacq.) Britton & Rose
Pithecellobium unguis-cati (L.) Benth.
Havardia sonorae (S. Watson) Britton & Rose
Plumeria rubra L.
Cenostigma eriostachys (Benth.) E. Gagnon & G. P. Lewis
Cleome viscosa L.
14
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Previous name or Synonym
Arivela viscosa (L.) Raf.
Randia mitis L.
Rathbunia alamosensis (J.M. Coult.) Britton
& Rose
Rhamnus humboldtiana Willd. ex Schult.
Ruellia albicaulis Bertero ex Spreng.
Ruprechtia occidentalis Standl.
Sarcomphalus amole (Sessé & Moc.)
Hauenschild
Sesbania exaltata (Raf.) Cory
Solanum nigrum L.
Stegnosperma halimifolium Benth.
Stemmadenia palmeri Rose & Standl.
Stemmadenia tomentosa Greenm.
Suaeda fruticosa Forssk. ex J.F. Gmel.
Tabebuia chrysantha (Jacq.) G. Nicholson
Tabebuia palmeri Rose
Tabebuia pentaphylla Helmsl.
Thevetia ovata (Cav.) A.DC.
Waltheria americana L.
Willardia mexicana (S. Watson) Rose
Zanthoxylum monophyllum (Lam.) P.
Wilson
Ziziphus sonorensis S. Watson
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
Updated Name
Cleome viscosa L.
Randia aculeata L.
Stenocereus alamosensis (J.M. Coult.) A.C. Gibson & K.E.
Horak
Karwinskia humboldtiana (Schult.) Zucc.
Ruellia inundata Kunth
Ruprechtia fusca Fernald
Ziziphus amole (Sessé & Moc.) M.C. Johnst.
Sesbania herbacea (Mill.) McVaugh
Solanum americanum Mill.
Stegnosperma scandens (Lunan) Standl.
Tabernaemontana tomentosa (Greenm.) A.O. Simões &
M.E. Endress
Tabernaemontana tomentosa (Greenm.) A.O. Simões &
M.E. Endress
Suaeda vermiculata Forssk. ex J.F. Gmel.
Handroanthus chrysanthus (Jacq.) S.O. Grose
Handroanthus impetiginosus (Mart. ex DC.) Mattos
Handroanthus impetiginosus (Mart. ex DC.) Mattos
Cascabela ovata (Cav.) Lippold
Waltheria indica L
Lonchocarpus hermannii M. Sousa
Zanthoxylum schreberi (J.F. Gmel.) Reynel ex C. Nelson
Ziziphus amole (Sessé & Moc.) M.C. Johnst.
Villaseñor (2016), mentions that 3,736 species,
1,118 genera and 200 families are found in the
state. Under this criteria, the ANP would keep
10.41% of the species, 19.95% and 30% of the
genera and families estimated for the state.
Villaseñor (2016) while including more genera and
species and less families, the percentages change,
reducing the quantities of genera and species and
lightly increasing the families.
31 taxa switched families. The taxa inclusion of
Sterculiaceae to Malvaceae was the most
significant change. Renewing taxonomical
information is crucial to the proper management
and decision taking of ANPs (López-Jiménez et al.,
2020). Although in some cases is controversial and
disadvantageous due to the disagreement between
different fields like the taxonomic and legislative.
The updated name of the amapa amarilla is
Handroanthus chrysanthus (Jacq.) S.O. Grose, but
in the Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-059SEMARNAT-2010, is shown as Tabebuia
chrysantha (SEMARNAT, 2019. Having the same
species with different names creates a problem of
jurisprudence.
Regarding genera with distinct species, those were
grouped in classes. The number of genera with a
single species were 134, from a total of 223, which
concentrated the 60.09%, with two (57/25.56%),
with three (14/6.28%) and four (5/2.24%). Adding
the first four clusters results in 94.17% of the total.
The genera with the highest species richness, which
registered five, six, seven, eight, even twelve
species, assembled 5.83% (Table 4). The first result
is lesser to the one reported by Rodríguez et al.
(2012), who recorded a high number of genera
(77%) represented by a single species. Referring to
families with distinct quantities of genera, which
were further structured into family classes. Those
with just a genus totaled 26 out of 60, with a
percentage of 43.33%, with two (11/18.33 %),
three (5/8.33 %) and four (6/10 %). The first four
classes grouped 80% of the total. The families with
highest richness of genera displayed five, six, seven,
The most diverse genera were Croton (12 species),
Bursera (8), Solanum (7), Ficus and Randia (6);
Opuntia, Merremia, Euphorbia, Lonchocarpus,
Mimosa, Senna, Jatropha and Sideroxylon (5).
In relation to the taxonomical richness of Sinaloa,
Vega (2001), which includes a set of vascular
plants of diverse plants communities, estimates
2792 species distributed in 978 genera and 202
families, the APFFMC only from wild woody and
semi-woody from dry and semi-humid forest
represents 13.93% of the species, 22.80% of the
genera and 29.70 % of the families. In the case of
15
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
Table 4. Number of genera-species and families-genera of woody and semi-woody plants from the Área
de Protección de Flora y Fauna Meseta de Cacaxtla, Sinaloa.
Genera classes
Quantity of
Percentage
Family classes
Quantity of
Percentage
species
genera
1
134
60.09
1
26
43.33
2
57
25.56
2
11
18.33
3
14
6.28
3
5
8.33
4
5
2.24
4
6
10
5
8
3.59
5
3
5
6
2
0.89
6
2
3.33
7
1
0.45
7
1
1.67
8
1
0.45
8
1
1.67
12
1
0.45
9
1
1.67
10
1
1.67
12
1
1.67
19
1
1.67
44
1
1.67
Grose), as synonym of Tabebuia chrysantha and
trucha (Hesperalbizia occidentalis (Brandegee)
Barneby & J.W. Grimes). Sujetas a protección
especial (Pr) are listed: Pitaya de Martinez
(Stenocereus martinezii (J.G. Ortega) Buxb.) and
listoncillo (Gossypium aridum (Rose & Standl.)
Skovst.). By taxonomic group the Bignoniaceae
family groups two species of the Handroanthus
genus. In life-forms six are trees (TR) and one
succulent (SC). The red list (IUCN) includes 173
species reported in the ANP. Inside the Least
Concern category (LC) fall 155 taxa, Near
threatened (NT) four, Vulnerable (V) seven, and
Endangered seven. The families which included the
total of the species were: Anacardiaceae with 2,
Bixaceae (1), Burseraceae (8), Cannabaceae (3),
Capparaceae
(6),
Fouquieriaceae
(1),
Hernandiaceae (1), Meliaceae (6), Picramniaceae
(1), Primulaceae (1), Rubiaceae (8), Rutaceae (6),
Sapotaceae (5), Schoepfiaceae (1), Urticaceae (1)
and Zygophyllaceae (1). The taxa which registered
a partial quantity were: Apocynaceae with 5,
Asteraceae (1), Bignoniaceae (5), Boraginaceae
(1),
Cactaceae
(17),
Celastraceae
(2),
Combretaceae
(1),
Convolvulaceae
(1),
Erythroxylaceae (1), Euphorbiaceae (14), Fabaceae
(38), Lamiaceae (1), Malpighiaceae (2), Malvaceae
(7), Moraceae (7), Nyctaginaceae (3), Onagraceae
(1) Opiliaceae (1), Polygonaceae (1), Rhamnaceae
(6),
Salicaceae
(1),
Sapindaceae
(2),
Scrophulariaceae (1), Solanaceae (3) and
Verbenaceae (1). Species from 41 families were
counted (68% of the total) with risk categories. The
families with five or more species in the
international
legislation
were:
Fabaceae,
Cactaceae,
Euphorbiaceae,
Burseraceae,
Rubiaceae, Malvaceae, Moraceae, Capparaceae,
Meliaceae, Rutaceae, Rhamnaceae, Bignoniaceae
eight, nine, ten, 12, 19, even 44, which focused the
remaining 20% (Table 4).
Of the life-forms, the trees totalled 146 (37.53%),
shrubs 114 (29.31%), sub-shrubs 54 (13.88%),
vines 51 (13.11%), succulent and semi-succulent
21 (5.40%) and parasitic 3 (0.77%) (Table 5).
Coinciding with (Bravo et al., 2016) and CedeñoFonseca et al. (2020) about the quantity of trees
being superior to shrubs and which itself is greater
than the vines, similarly with Angel et al. (2017), a
quantity of sub-shrubs inferior to shrubs and
superior to vines was recorded.
Table 5. Richness of growth-forms in the Área
de Protección de Flora y Fauna Meseta de
Cacaxtla, Sinaloa.
LifeSymbol Quantity Percentage
forms
Trees
TR
146
37.53
Shrubs
SH
114
29.31
SubSU
54
13.88
shrubs
Vines
VI
51
13.11
Succulent
SC
21
5.40
and semisucculent
Parasitic
PA
3
0.77
The Mexican legislation NOM-059-SEMARNAT2010 (SEMARNAT, 2019) includes in the
Amenazadas
(A)
category:
Botoncillo
(Conocarpus erectus L.), guayacán (Guaiacum
coulteri A. Gray), amapa rosa (Handroanthus
impetiginosus (Mart. ex DC.) Mattos), amapa
amarilla (Handroanthus chrysanthus (Jacq.) S. O.
16
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
and Sapotaceae.They added 133 species which
compose the 76.88% out of the total 173 included
under a risk status. By life-forms 106 taxa of trees
were counted, shrubs 43, succulents and semisucculent 17, sub-shrubs 5 and vines 2. In the red
list (IUCN), the representation of the Fabaceae,
Malvaceae, Euphorbiaceae and Cactaceae families
is noted, which were the ones with the highest
taxonomic richness in the APFFMC. Paradoxically
the red list shows a wider protection spectrum of
species than the NOM 059-SERMARNAT-2010.
total species. The partial modifications were
applied to 79 taxa, which added a total of 84.04%.
Among the relations of genus-species and familygenus, inverse relations also exist. The classes with
the most taxa were the least numerous. A low
quantity of 13 genera and 12 families (out of a total
of 223 and 60 respectively) concentrated the
highest taxonomical richness, at converging five or
more species and genera. On the contrary a high
quantity of 210 genera and 48 families presented
four or less taxa.
CONCLUSIONS
The resulting pattern of the life-forms structure is
similar to the dry forests one, where the tree lifeform dominates, followed by shrubs, sub-shrubs
and vines. The succulents and semi-succulents
were superior to the parasitic plants.
The listing constitutes a compendium which
congregates the species richness of woody and
semi-woody plants from dry and semi-humid forest
from the APFFMC, the product of a compilation of
information from various studies published about
the ANP throughout different times. Highlighting
the wild and native species.
The threats to dry and semi-humid forests in the
region highlight the importance of their
conservation on their natural state. In these
scenarios, flora censuses possess relevance to draw
comparisons with the exotic, invasive and
naturalized plants from the ANP, of anthropogenic
origin which arrive accidentally or deliberately.
The taxonomical richness ascended to 60 families,
223 genera and 389 species. The ones that
contributed the most of families, genera and
species to the census were SEMARNAT (2016)
(47/165/221), van der Heiden et al. (2019)
(47/171/245) and authors (2021) (53/175/246)
respectively. The total sum surpassed the parts. The
results obtained in the review, allow to highlight
the relevance of the APFFMC at the conservation
of taxa. On a surface inferior to the 1% of the state,
between 10.41% & 13.93% of the species, 19.95 &
22.80% of the genera and 29.70 to 30 % of the
families are kept under conservation, from only
native and wild woody and semi-woody plants
from dry and semi-humid forests.
Seven taxa from the NOM-059-SEMARNAT2010 were registered. Five inside the Amenazadas
category (A) and two Sujetas a protección especial
(Pr). Which indicates the lack of proposals to
category adjustment and the inclusion of species
through studies to evaluate the addition of species
with low abundance, with one or few recorded sites
of presence or taxa with slow growth rate like
Cactaceae and Burseraceae. The introduction of
more species to the Mexican legislation from the
APFFMC would provide double protection. The
Mexican legal response to the biodiversity
challenges of woody and semi-woody plants is lax.
Contrastingly, the red list (IUCN) has listed 173
species in four different risk status.
The families with the highest richness of genera
and species were: Fabaceae, Malvaceae,
Euphorbiaceae,
Asteraceae,
Cactaceae,
Apocynaceae,
Acanthaceae,
Solanaceae,
Convolvulaceae and Boraginaceae. The most
diverse genera were: Croton, Bursera, Solanum,
Ficus, Randia, Jatropha, Opuntia, Merremia,
Euphorbia, Lonchocarpus, Mimosa, Senna and
Sideroxylon. The taxonomic similarities among
tropical dry forest can be partially explained due to
the convergence of ecological and historical
characteristics.
Particularly,
geological,
geographic, climatic, edaphological and the
differences due to the high replacement rates in the
latitudinal and altitudinal axes.
Acknowledgements
The authors express their deep gratitude to
Vladimir Márquez Stone and Roberto C. Cárcamo
Arechiga for the comments made on an earlier
version of the manuscript.
Funding. There was no source of funding either
public or private.
Conflict of interest. The authors declare non
existing personal or institutional conflict of
interest.
One relevant part of the floristic listing was the
partial and complete updating of 94 generic and
specific epithets, which enclosed 24.26 % of the
Compliance with ethical standards. Due to the
nature of the study this does not apply.
17
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
Disponibilidad de datos. Do not apply.
Inventario florístico en un bosque
amenazado por la expansión agrícola en la
reserva del Centro Turístico Los
Chocuacos, Costa Rica. Revista de
Ciencias Ambientales (Tropical Journal
of Environmental Sciences), 54(1), pp. 3357. https://doi.org/10.15359/rca.54-1.3.
Author contribution statement (CRediT): G.
Márquez-Salazar: Conceptualization, Formal
Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project
administration, Supervision, Writing – original
draft. M. G. Millán-Otero: Data curation, Formal
Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Resources,
Visualization, Writing – review & editing. J. S.
Díaz:
Data
curation,
Formal
Analysis,
Investigation,
Methodology,
Resources,
Visualization, Writing – review & editing. J.
Márquez-Stone: Data curation, Formal Analysis,
Investigation, Resources, Investigación, Writing –
review & editing.
Díaz, P.W.A., 2007. Composición florística y
estructura
de
bosques
en
los
asentamientos campesinos Las Delicias,
El Guamo y Lechozal, Estado Bolívar,
Venezuela. Ernstia, 17(1), pp. 1-24.
Díaz, J. S., 2008. Diversidad florística y estructura
de la vegetación de las islas de los
sistemas
lagunares
Navachiste
y
Macapule, del norte de Sinaloa. Tesis
maestría. IPN-CIIDIR. Sinaloa, México.
REFERENCES
Angel, M., Álvarez, C., Bermúdez, A. and Robles,
M., 2017. Composición florística y
estructura del bosque semideciduo de la
Villa Universitaria, Núcleo Rafael Rangel
– Universidad de los Andes, Trujillo.
Ernstia, 27 (2), pp. 111-144.
Estrada, S. J., 2019. Revisión taxonómica del
género Cordia L. subgénero varronia (P.
Browne) Cham. (Boraginaceae) en
Colombia. Universidad Complutense de
Madrid. Tesis de Doctorado.
Borsch, T., Berendsohn, W., Dalcin, E., Delmas,
M., Demissew, S., Elliott, A., Fritsch, P.,
Fuchs, A., Geltman, D., Güner, A.,
Haevermans, T., Knapp, S., le Roux, M.
M., Loizeau, P. A., Miller, Ch. Miller, J.,
Miller, J. T., Palese, R., Paton, A. P.,
Parnell, J., Pendry, C., Qin, H. N., Sosa,
V., Sosef, M., von Raab-Straube, E.,
Ranwashe, F., Raz, L., Salimov, R.,
Smets, E., Thiers, B., Thomas, W., Tulig,
M., Ulate, W., Ung, V., Watson, Jackson,
P. W. and Zamora, N., 2020. World Flora
Online: Placing taxonomists at the heart of
a definitive and comprehensive global
resource on the world’s plants. TAXON,
69 (6), pp. 1311–1341. https://doi.org
org/10.1002/tax.12373.
Ferrufino-Acosta, L., Cruz, S. Y., Mejía-Ordóñez,
T., Rodríguez, F., Escoto, D. Sarmiento,
E. and Larkin, J. L., 2019. Composición,
estructura y diversidad florística del
bosque seco en el Valle de Agalta,
Honduras. Madera y Bosques, 25 (2), pp.
1-15.
https://doi.10.21829/myb.2019.2521635.
Gagnon, E., Bruneau, A., Hughes, C. E., de
Queiroz, L. P. and Lewis, G. P., 2016. A
new system for pantropical Caesalpinia
group (Leguminosae). PhytoKeys, 71, pp.
1-160.
https://
doi:
10.3897/phytokeys.71.9203.
García, E., 2004. Modificaciones al Sistema de
Clasificación Climática de Köppen.
Instituto de Geografía. Universidad
Nacional Autónoma de México. Serie de
libros número 6. México D. F.
Bravo, B. O., Gómez, F. C. and Márquez, G. A. R.,
2013. Composición florística del Ejido de
Sayulita, Bahía de Banderas, Nayarit,
México: Un Análisis Espacial. Revista Bio
Ciencias, 2(3), pp. 172-188.
Gillson, L., Seymour, C. L., Slingsby, J. A. and
Inouye, D. W., 2020. What Are the Grand
Challenges for Plant Conservation in the
21st Century? Frontiers in Conservation
Science, 1, pp. 1-6. http: doi:
10.3389/fcosc.2020.600943.
Bravo, B.O., Sánchez-González, A., De Nova,
V.J.A. and Pavón, H.N.P., 2016.
Composición y estructura arbórea y
arbustiva de la vegetación de la zona
costera de Bahía de Banderas, Nayarit,
México. Botanical Sciences, 94(3), pp.
603-623.
https://doi.org/10.17129/botsci.461.
Global Biodiversity Information Facility., 2021.
Free and open access to biodiversity data.
Consulted:
15-02-2021.
https://www.gbif.org.
Cedeño-Fonseca, M., Flores-Leitón, J. M.,
Quesada-Román, A. and Flores, R., 2020.
18
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
Monjardín-Armenta, S., Pacheco-Angulo, C. E.,
Plata-Rocha, W. and Corrales-Barraza,
G., 2017. La Deforestación y sus Factores
Causales en el estado de Sinaloa, México.
Madera y Bosques, 23 (1), pp. 7-22.
https://doi.org/10.21829/myb.2017.23114
82.
International Legume Database and Information
Service., 2021. Consulted: 20.02.2021
https://ildis.org/LegumeWeb10.01.shtml.
Instituto Nacional de Ecología, Secretaría del
Medio Ambiente Recursos Naturales y
Pesca, y Gobierno del Estado de Sinaloa.,
1998. Propuesta de la “Meseta de
Cacaxtla” como Área de Protección de
Flora
y Fauna
Silvestre.
INE,
SEMARNAP. México D. F.
Murphy P. G. and Lugo, A. E., 1986. Ecology of
tropical dry forest. Annual Review of
Ecology and Systematics, 17, pp. 67-68.
Narváez-Espinoza, O., González-Rivas, B. and
Castro-Marín, G., 2015. Composición,
estructura, diversidad e incremento de la
vegetación arbórea secundaria en trópico
seco en Nandarola, Nicaragua. La
Caldera, 15 (25), pp. 111-116.
Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e
Informática (INEGI)., 1988. Atlas
Nacional del Medio Físico. INEGI.
Aguscalientes (México).
Janzen, D.H., 1988. Tropical dry forests: The most
endangered major tropical ecosystems. In:
Wilson,
E.O.
ed.
Biodiversity.
Washington, DC: National Academy
Press. pp. 130-137.
Nimis, P. L., 1996. Towards a checklist of
Mediterranean lichens. Bocconea, 6, pp.
5–17.
Nivia, R. A. and Cascante, M. A., 2008.
Distribución de las formas de vida en la
flora costarricense. Brenesia, 69, pp. 1-17.
Korotkova, N., Borsch, T. and Arias, S., 2017. A
phylogenetic
framework
for
the
Hylocereeae (Cactaceae) and implications
for the circumscription of the genera.
Phytotaxa,
327
(1),
pp.
1-46.
https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.327.1.
1.
Pennington, T., 2012. Preface. Biota Colombiana,
13 (2), pp. 5-6.
Peraza-Durán,
C.,
2021.
Evaluación
socioecológica y planificación para la
conservación del Estero del Yugo,
Mazatlán, Sinaloa, México. Tesis
maestría. Centro de Investigación en
Alimentación y Desarrollo, A.C. Sinaloa,
México.
León, J. L., Domínguez-Cadena, R. and MedelNarváez, A., 2012. Florística de la selva
Baja Caducifolia de la Península de Baja
California, México. Botanical Sciences,
90 (2), pp. 143-162.
López-Jiménez, L N., Jiménez-López, D. A.,
Castillo-Acosta, O., Gallardo-Cruz, J. A.
and Hernández-Montes de Oca, A. I.,
2020. Plantas vasculares de la reserva de
la biosfera Pantanos de Centla, México.
Botanical Sciences, 98(1), pp. 159-204.
https://doi.10.17129/botsci.2279.
Phillips, O. L., Vásquez, M. R., Nuñez, V. P.,
Monteagudo, A. L., Chuspe, Z. M. E.,
Galiano, S. W., Peña, C. A., Timaná, M.,
Yli-Halla, M. and Rose, S., 2003.
Efficient plot-based floristic assessment
of tropical forests. Journal of Tropical
Ecology, 19, pp. 629–645. https://
doi:10.1017/S0266467403006035.
Márquez-Salazar, G., Salomón-Montijo, B.,
Reyes-Olivas, A., Amador-Medina, M.
and Millán-Otero, G. M., 2019.
Composición y diversidad florística de
bosques secos en la Meseta de Cacaxtla,
Sinaloa, México. Gayana Botánica, 76
(2), pp. 19-31. https://doi.10.4067/S071766432019000200176.
Raven, P. H., 1988. Tropical floristics tomorrow.
TAXON, 37, pp. 549-560.
Rodríguez M. G. M., Banda, R. K., Reyes, B. S. P.
and Estupiñán, G. A. C., 2012. Lista
comentada de las plantas vasculares de
bosques secos prioritarios para la
conservación en los departamentos de
Atlántico y Bolívar (Caribe colombiano).
Biota Colombiana, 13 (2), pp. 7-39.
Márquez-Salazar, G., Díaz, J. S., Pio-León, J. F.
and Amador-Medina, M., 2021. Plantas
Invasivas en el Santuario Playa El Verde
Camacho, Sinaloa, México. Áreas
Naturales Protegidas Scripta, 7 (1), pp.
63-68.
https://doi.org/10.18242/anpscripta.2021.
07.07.01.0004.
Romero-Duque, L. P., Rosero-Toro, J. H.,
Fernández-Lucero, M., SimbaquebaGutiérrez, A. and Pérez, C., 2019. Trees
and shrubs of the tropical dry forest of the
Magdalena river upper watershed
19
Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 25 (2022): #038
Márquez-Salazar et al., 2022
diciembre de 2010. Diario Oficial de la
Federación. 14.11.2019.
(Colombia). Biodiversity Data Journal, 7,
pp.
1-21.
e36191.
https://
doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.7. e36191.
The Plant List., 2021. The Plant List. A working
list of all plant species. Versión 1.1.
Consulted:
22-02-2021.
http://www.theplantlist.org.
Rzedowski J. 1978. Vegetación de México.
Limusa, México, D.F.
Ruiz-Guerrero, M., Van Devender, T. R., ReinaGuerrero, A. L., Mejía-Mora, P. and van
der Heiden, A. M., 2015. A preliminary
checklist of the vascular plant flora of La
Guásima, southern Sinaloa, northwestern
Mexico. Phytoneuron, 63, pp. 1–25.
The International Compositae Alliance (TICA).,
2021. Compositae. The global data base.
Consultada
17.06.2021.
https://www.compositae.org/aphia.php?p
=stats.
Tropicos., 2021. Missouri Botanical Garden.
Consulted:
15-02-2021.
https://www.tropicos.org/name/.
Sánchez-Azofeifa, A. Calvo-Alvarado, J., Do
Espírito-Santo, M.M., Fernandes, J.W.,
Powers, J.S. and Quesada, M., 2014.
Tropical dry forests in the Americas: the
tropi-dry endeavor. In: Sánchez-Azofeifa,
A., Powers, J.S., Fernandes. G.W.,
Quesada, M. eds. Tropical dry forests in
the Americas ecology, conservation, and
management. New York: CRC Press, pp.
1-16.
van der Heiden, A.M., Ruiz, G. M., González B. M.
A., Mejía, M. P., van der Heiden, A. K.
García, A. M. E., Vega, A. R., Plascencia,
G. H. G., Rojas, A. E. I., Villalobos, H. J.
L. and Sanders, A., 2019. Inventario
multitaxonómico (plantas, crustáceos y
vertebrados) del APFF Meseta de
Cacaxtla, Sinaloa, México. Centro de
Investigación
en
Alimentación
y
Desarrollo, A.C. Informe final SNIBCONABIO, Proyecto No. PJ010. Ciudad
de México.
Secretaria de Gobernación., 2000. DECRETO por
el que se declara área natural protegida,
con el carácter de área de protección de
flora y fauna, la región conocida como
Meseta de Cacaxtla, ubicada en los
municipios de San Ignacio y Mazatlán, en
el Estado de Sinaloa, con una superficie
total de 50,862-31-25 hectáreas. Diario
Oficial de la Federación. 27.11.2000.
Vega Aviña, R., 2001. Catálogo y base de datos
preliminar de la flora de Sinaloa.
Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa.
Facultad de Agronomía. Informe final
SNIB-CONABIO proyecto No. L057.
México, D.F.
Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos
Naturales., 2016. Programa de Manejo
Área de Protección de Flora y Fauna
Meseta de Cacaxtla. SEMARNAT.
México D.F.
Villaseñor, J. L. and Espinosa-García, F. J., 2004.
The alien flowering plants of Mexico.
Diversity and Distributions, 10 (2), pp.
113–123. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.13669516.2004.00059.x.
Secretaría del Medio Ambiente y Recursos
Naturales
(SEMARNAT).,
2019.
Modificación del Anexo Normativo III,
Lista de especies en riesgo de la Norma
Oficial
Mexicana
NOM-059SEMARNAT-2010,
Protección
ambiental-Especies nativas de México de
flora y fauna silvestres-Categorías de
riesgo y especificaciones para su
inclusión, exclusión o cambio-Lista de
especies en riesgo, publicada el 30 de
Villaseñor, J. L. 2016. Checklist of the native
vascular plants of Mexico. Revista
Mexicana de Biodiversidad. 87: 559–902.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rmb.2016.06.0
17.
Word Flora Online. 2021. Supporting the Global
Strategy
for
Plant
Conservation.
Consultada
20.02.2021.
http://www.worldfloraonline.org.
20
Gilberto Márquez