Next Article in Journal
The Short-Term Effects of Heavy Thinning on Selected Soil Carbon Pools and Microbial Activity in a Young Aleppo Pine Forest
Next Article in Special Issue
Can Cooperatives Enhance the Income-Generating Effect of Eco-Industries for Farmers?—Empirical Evidence from the Crested Ibis National Nature Reserve, China
Previous Article in Journal
Characteristics of the Rhizospheric AMF Community and Nutrient Contents of the Dominant Grasses in Four Microhabitats of the Subalpine Zone in Northwestern Yunnan, China
Previous Article in Special Issue
How Does Carbon Trading Impact China’s Forest Carbon Sequestration Potential and Carbon Leakage?
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Forests
Volume 15
Issue 4
10.3390/f15040657
forests-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Traditional Knowledge of Plants for Sunggau Rafters on Three Forest Types for Conservation of Apis dorsata in Indonesia

by
Suci Dian Hayati
1,
Ibnul Qayim
2,
Rika Raffiudin
2,
Nunik Sri Ariyanti
2,*,
Windra Priawandiputra
2 and
Miftahudin Miftahudin
2
1
Plant Biology Study Program, Department of Biology, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, IPB University, Bogor 16680, Indonesia
2
Department of Biology, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, IPB University, Bogor 16680, Indonesia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Forests 2024, 15(4), 657; https://doi.org/10.3390/f15040657
Submission received: 24 February 2024 / Revised: 20 March 2024 / Accepted: 28 March 2024 / Published: 4 April 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Forest Management, Utilization and Biodiversity Conservation)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The traditional knowledge of sunggau rafters for Apis dorsata nesting is essential for livelihood and forest conservation. We determine the plant species needed to support the conservation of A. dorsata in Belitung Islands, Indonesia, by investigating the distribution of the sunggau in the three types of forests, the traditional knowledge regarding the plant species used for sunggau, and the vegetation structure of forests in which the sunggau is installed. Distribution of sunggau were explored on heath, swamp heath, and mangrove forests. We conducted a vegetation survey in those forests and an ethnobotanical survey by interviewing bee farmers regarding the plants used for sunggau and other uses. We found 95 sunggau distributed in the heath, swamp heath, and mangrove forest. Based on interviews, we recorded 65 plant species for sunggau and six other uses, including bee forages. Calophyllum sp., Cryptocarya sp., Melaleuca cajuputi, and Syzygium urceolatum are the most important plants according to bee farmers. The last two species dominate all forests, except mangroves, which are dominated by Lumnitzera littorea, according to vegetation surveys. However, the availability of several plants for sunggau is declining. Therefore, the conservation of A. dorsata needs the sustainability of sunggau and bee forage plants.

1. Introduction

Deforestation has become a major worldwide problem [1] that affects the sustainability of forest resources [2] and climate [3,4]. The rapid rate of deforestation in South-east Asia reached one percent per year between 2000 and 2010 due to the industrial plantations and agriculture [5]. In accordance, deforestation of over five percent annually occurs in Indonesia, particularly in the eastern lowlands of Sumatra and the peatlands of Kalimantan [5]. The conversion of forests into oil palm plantations in tropical South America and Asia threatens forest ecosystems and biodiversity [6,7]. In Indonesia, mining activities, especially in Belitung, also decrease the forest area, in addition to oil plantations [8,9].
Belitung Islands lie between Sumatra and Borneo in Indonesia and are part of the savanna corridor in Sundaland [10]. The ecosystem in Belitung Islands comprises mainly the heath forest, which stands almost entirely on Belitung Island [11] with small areas of lowland rainforests [12]. As an archipelago, the Belitung Islands also have an extensive mangrove forest ecosystem, which is a species-rich community [13]. The heath forest, also known as Sundaland heath forest or kerangas forest (local name), is a typical tropical moist forest found only on Borneo, Belitung, and Bangka Islands. Permanently or temporarily waterlogged heath forests are known as swamp heath forests [14]. However, these various types of forests in Belitung are currently threatened by mining activities and the expansion of oil palm plantations [8,9].
In Belitung Islands, the conversion of forests into tin mining sites and oil palm plantations has raised concerns about the ecological consequences of these activities, which might lead to fragmentation of the forests [15], affect biodiversity loss, and drain water sources [9]. In fact, the people in Belitung have rich traditional knowledge and local wisdom regarding the utilization and conservation of land as well as biodiversity. They have a culture of preserving plant species, especially fruit plants, medicinal plants, or other valuable plants, in an area called kelekak [16].
Traditional knowledge (TK) is knowledge, know-how, skills, and practices developed, sustained, and passed on from generation to generation within a community, often forming part of its cultural or spiritual identity [17]. The traditional knowledge involves practices that preserve and promote the conservation of forests and associated biodiversity, as well as the resilience of local communities [18,19]. People in Belitung have local wisdom in conserving the forest, such as by constructing a rafter (called sunggau by local people) for the honey bee Apis dorsata in the forest. Apis dorsata naturally builds nests in the bee trees, known as sambit by local people in Belitung [20,21]. However, when the bee farmer installs sunggau, the bees prefer to construct the nest on the sunggau rather than the bee trees [22,23]. In general, there are two categories of sunggau: ground (tunggak muke, ungad, tanger) and climbing (bantayan, bersilang) that are constructed in heath forest, swamp heath forest, mangroves [20,22,23], and riparian areas [20].
The existence of A. dorsata in the Belitung Islands plays a fundamental role in community life. The bees contribute as important pollinators for natural plant communities and crops [24,25] and provide bee products such as honey and beebread [15]. The giant A. dorsata migrates annually to the blooming flowers across the continent [26,27]. Belitung Islands serve as a bridge between Kalimantan and Sumatra Island in A. dorsata’s migration path [20,28].
The bee farmers in Belitung have traditional knowledge regarding the requirements for constructing sunggau, i.e., the time of the flowering season, the rendap (composition of the vegetation surrounding the sunggau), and the renak (the path of sun rays entering the sunggau), as well as the plant species suitable for the sunggau [20,22]. Therefore, the bee farmers protect the forests with their local wisdom to maintain sunggau practice. However, this traditional knowledge has yet to be documented scientifically because it has been transmitted through generations. Thus, this knowledge is prone to become extinct. Previous studies reported that several species are used for sunggau [22]. Our study expands the knowledge of the diversity of plants used for sunggau and strengthens the importance of plants for sunggau by exploring the other uses of these plants. Our studies aimed to investigate the traditional knowledge of bee farmers relating to sunggau, i.e., (1) the type and distribution of the sunggau in heath, swamp heath, and mangrove forests; (2) the importance of plant species used to construct sunggau, defined by number of used (NU), cultural important index (CI), and relative frequent citation (RFC); and (3) composition, diversity pattern, and vegetation structure of forest types which serve sunggau.

2. Methods

2.1. Study Areas

Our study was conducted in the Sub Regency of Membalong, Belitung Regency, Belitung Islands, Indonesia (Figure 1). Data were collected in three villages: Perpat (Per), Kembiri (Kem), and Tanjung Rusa (TR). Data in TR were collected in two islands: Belitung Island (TR-Bel) and Kampak Island (TR-Kam) (Figure 1). These villages were chosen due to the fact that many skilled bee farmers practice sunggau, according to the Regional Planning and Development Agency (or BAPPEDA) of Belitung Regency. The total area of Sub Regency Membalong is 910.37 km2.
The people of Membalong are mostly from the Belitung-Malay ethnic group [29], whose primary income is from forestry, fishing, and mining activities [30]. Membalong has rainy and dry seasons; the highest annual rainfall was 3026 mm [30], with two peaks of rainfall during October–January and March–May; the dry season ranges from June to September [31]; and the annual average temperature is 28.1 °C [30].

2.2. Ethnobotanical Survey

Respondents were selected based on the following criteria: (1) has a traditional ecological knowledge of sunggau; (2) has the ability to construct sunggau and harvest honey of A. dorsata; (3) a minimum of one year experience in sunggau construction; (4) willing to share their knowledge; and (5) effective communicators [32]. The respondents are the residents of the three villages who are 18 years or older (Table S1), due to this age group being able to describe their opinions independently [33]. All respondents were informed about the purpose of the research prior to the interview [32] and signed the informed consent. Data on sunggau were collected from respondents through in-depth interviews [32,34] using a questionnaire. We asked the respondents: (1) the type of sunggau, (2) the type of forest where the sunggau was built, (3) plants used for the construction of sunggau and other uses, and (4) the availability of the plants in nature.

2.3. Field Survey for Exploring Sunggau Type and Measurement

We explored the distribution of five types of sunggau, i.e., tunggak muke, ungad, tanger, bantayan, and bersilang, that are constructed in heath forest, swamp heath forest, and mangrove forest [20,22,23]. We measured the structure of the tunggak muke, which has the highest distribution in the three types of forests. The measurement consists of (1) the height of the front poles (HFP), (2) the back poles (HBP), (3) the length of the plank (LP), (4) the diameter (DP), and (5) the incline (IP) of the plank. The measurement of the incline of sunggau used clinometer apps for Android.

2.4. Vegetation Survey

The vegetation survey covered three types of forest in which sunggau was constructed: heath forest, swamp heath forest, and mangrove forest. The heath forest is characterized by nutrient-poor soil [35], low soil pH [35,36], and is dominated by white sand with a thin organic layer [35,36]. Therefore, heath forest has a low diversity and canopy, dominated by tolerant and semi-tolerant species with poor nutrients [14]; the plants have small stem and thick and small leaves [14,36]. The swamp heath forest is a type of heath forest that floods during the rainy season and has a water level below ground level throughout the dry season [37]. The mangrove forest is characterized by being periodically flooded with seawater [38] and usually consists of plants from the Rhizophoraceae family such as Bruguiera and Rhizophora [13,39].
The current study explored floristic composition, vegetation structure, and diversity pattern of the forest type in which sunggau were constructed (Table S2). Our data were combined with the data of the previous studies (Table S2). Vegetation survey in each forest was conducted using four quadrants (20 × 20 m) placed along a transect. The transect was established based on the location of sunggau and following the flight direction of A. dorsata. We assessed the floristic composition and vegetation structure using a nested quadrat sampling technique; that is, 20 × 20 m quadrats for the tree stage (the diameter at breast height (DBH) ≥ 20 cm), 10 × 10 m quadrats for the pole stage (DBH 10–20 cm), 5 × 5 m quadrats for sapling stage (DBH < 10 cm; height ≥ 1.5 m) and shrubs, and 2 × 2 m for seedling stage (height < 1.5 m) and herbs [14,40,41].
We documented the local name and individual number of plant species in each quadrat and the diameter at DBH of trees, poles, and saplings. All plant species observed in the field were collected as herbarium specimens for identification.

2.5. Data Analysis

The measurement data of the tunggak muke sunggau structure were compared among three villages and three types of forests using Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney pairwise analysis. The analysis was performed using R [42]. The data gathered from the respondents in the ethnobotanical survey were analyzed based on ethnobotanical indices in Table 1 [34] using the ethnobotanyR package of R (v0.1.9) [43]. We carried out cluster analysis to group the forest type (1) based on plant species used for sunggau using a present–absent data set from the interview and (2) floral composition from vegetation analysis. A dendrogram was generated using binary distance methods and hierarchical clustering with single agglomeration methods using R [42].
Data gathered in the vegetation survey were tabulated and analyzed to characterize floral composition within the forest types (heath forest, swamp heath forest, and mangrove forest). The relative density, relative dominance, and relative frequency values for each species were determined to obtain the Importance Value Index (IVI), which gives the idea of the relative importance of each species in the community. The IVI indicates the species dominance and ecological success with a single value [40,44]. We also analyzed the importance of tree species with high IVI values for A. dorsata (i.e., sources of pollen, nectar, or both) in each forest type. Patterns of the forest types were analyzed based on the Shannon–Wiener index (H’) [45].

3. Results

3.1. The Distribution of Sunggau Types

A total of 95 sunggau were found in this study, including 57, 19, 10 and 9 at Perpat, Kembiri, Tanjung Rusa-Belitung Island, and Tanjung Rusa-Kampak Island, respectively (Figure 2, Table S3). We found ground sunggau: tunggak muke, ungad, and tanger; while bantayan and bersilang were found for climbing sunggau (Table 2). Tunggak muke is the most common and widespread sunggau found in all villages and all forest types (Figure 2). Ungad were found in all villages except in the swamp heath forests of Perpat and Tanjung Rusa-Kampak Island. Bantayan are commonly found in the heath forests with tree height of five to ten meters (personal observation). Bantayan are also found in swamp heath forests and mangroves (Figure 2).
Tunggak muke was measured in different villages and different forest types for comparison (Table 3). Based on pairwise analysis, tunggak muke was similar in all category measurements in both villages and forest types (p > 0.05), except the diameter of plank for tunggak muke in different villages (Table 3, p = 0.08). In Kembiri, the plank diameter of tunggak muke (0.39 ± 0.04) was significantly higher than those in Perpat.

3.2. Traditional Knowledge of Plant Species Used for Sunggau

Bee farmers used 65 plant species from 36 families for sunggau constructions (Figure 3, Table S4). The list of plant species for sunggau (Figure 3, Table S4) shows that Myrtaceae is the highest family with 15 species, followed by Callophylaceae, Lauraceae, and Malvaceae, respectively, with five, four, and three species. Combretaceae, Dipterocarpaceae, Euphorbiaceae, Fabaceae, Fagaceae, and Theaceae contributed two plant species for sunggau, while the remaining 26 families were represented by only one taxa used for sunggau.
Most of the plant species used for sunggau have other uses; at least one of these uses are (1) bee colony smokers, (2) source for pollen and nectar, (3) building and furniture material, (4) traditional medicine, (5) firewood material, and (6) additional food (Figure 3 and Figure 4). The species that have the most various uses are Syzygium urceolatum, Calophyllum sp., and Guioa diplopetala; they have a value of 6 for Uns. Other species have UNs ranging from 1–5, meaning they have one to five categories of uses (Figure 3 and Figure 4).
The distribution of ethnobotanical knowledge on plants for sunggau among the bee farmers is shown in Figure 5. Bee farmers informed ranges of 1–36 plant species for sunggau and 1–6 categories of uses other than sunggau (Figure 5). The bee farmer’s knowledge of plants for building and furniture material is in second place after sunggau, whereas bee forage and bee smoker plants are both in third place.
The experience of bee farmers in installing sunggau construction ranges from 8 to 62 years, mostly obtain from their fathers (Table S1). More than half of bee farmers (63%) had 25–50 years of experience in constructing sunggau, and 32% had less than 25 years of experience. We also found that about 5% of bee farmers have more than 50 years of experience (Figure 5). Based on the interviews, we found that several bee farmers with long experience installing sunggau do not always provide much information (Figure 5).
The important value of sunggau plants is determined based on ethnobotanical indices. Among the 65 species of sunggau plants, we obtained the top four species with the highest number of use reports (UR) and cultural importance index (CI), namely Callophylum sp. (UR 68; CI 1.789), Syzygium urceolatum (UR 60; CI 1.579), Cryptocarya sp. and Melaleuca cajuputi (UR 35; CI 0.921) (Figure 6, Table S4). The three highest RFC values of plant species were Syzygium urceolatum (RFC 0.737), Calophyllum sp. (RFC 0.684), and Aporosa frutescens (RFC 0.5) (Figure 7, Table S4).
We conducted a cluster analysis of forest type groups based on the diversity of plant species used for sunggau obtained from the interview (Figure 8, Table S5a). The dendogram shows that similar forest types (SHF and MF) in different villages are clustered, except the SHF in Kemiri, which clustered with HF in Perpat and Tanjung Rusa (Belitung). However, the HF in Tanjung Rusa (Kampak Island) is clustered with SHF and MF.
The respondents informed on the decline of several plant species for sunggau in three villages, such as Syzygium urceolatum, Tristaniopsis obovate, and Guioa diplopetala in Tanjung Rusa-Belitung Island; Lithocarpus sp. in Perpat; and Litsea accedens, Shorea balangeran in Kemiri (Table S6)

3.3. Vegetation Structure of the Forest Types

A total of 158 species were found in the three forest types. Heath forest in all villages showed a high number of species (32–74 species). The swamp heath forest in Kembiri also has 70 species, while approximately half of that was found in Perpat. The species richness in mangrove forests was the lowest (9–16 species) (Table S5b).
The dendrogram shows that the floristic composition of swamp heath forest is clustered with heath forest. However, the swamp heat forest in Tanjung Rusa village in Kampak Island (TR-Kam) has quite a different floristic composition compared to the swamp heath forests and heath forests in other villages (Figure 9, Table S5b). We confirm that the floral composition in mangrove forests is clustered and split from the branches of heath and swamp heath forests.
Across the three forest types, the plant diversity index value (H′) using the criteria of the Shannon–Wiener index is categorized as medium (1 < H′ < 3) (Figure 10). At each growth stage, we found that the H’ of heath forest in Perpat is higher than that of the heath forests in other villages. The swamp heath forest in Tanjung Rusa village in Belitung Island (TR-Bel) has a lower H′ than those in other villages. We found that the H′ of mangrove forests in all villages is mostly lower than that of other forest types. We note that the seedling phase of the mangrove forest in the village of Perpat has the lowest H′ (Figure 10).
Based on vegetation surveys, we found that the heath forest in Perpat village has dominant tree species that differ from those in Tanjung Rusa village in Belitung Island and Kampak Island (Table 4 and Table S7). Schima wallichii, Syzygium urceolatum, and Syzygium muelleri (Myrtaceae) are the three top trees with the highest IVI in the heath forest of Perpat village. Melaleuca cajuputi (Myrtaceae) and Salacia grandifolia (Celastraceae) are the dominant species in the Tanjung Rusa heath forest on Belitung Island and Kampak Island, respectively. Melaleuca cajuputi is also found to be dominant in the swamp heath forest of Kembiri and Perpat villages. Antidesma cuspidatum (Phyllanthaceae) had the highest IVI in the swamp heath forest of Tanjung Rusa village (Belitung Island). Mangrove forests are dominated (the highest IVI) by Lumnitzera littorea (Combretaceae) in Perpat and Tanjung Rusa (TR-Kam) and Excoecaria agallocha (Euphorbiaceae) in Kembiri.
Most of the dominant trees in each forest type are sources of nectar and pollen for A. dorsata (Table 4). Plants that provide both pollen and nectar include Syzygium urceolatum, Syzygium muelleri, and M. cajuputi. The last plant species is often found abundantly in swamp heath forests. Pollen source plants that do not provide nectar include S. walliciana (dominant in heath forests) and L. littorea (dominant in mangrove forests).

4. Discussion

Our study is the first report on the ethnobotany of plant species used for sunggau. We recorded the diversity of plant species used for sunggau through field observation and interviews (Figure 3, Figure 4, Figure 5, Figure 6 and Figure 7). Three plant species, i.e., medang (Litsea sp.), bettor (Callophyllum pulcherricum), and samak (Eugenia garcinaefolia), are used for sunggau [22]. Our current study added to the knowledge of more than 62 plant species for sunggau: the six most mentioned by bee farmers (high RFC) are samak (Syzygium urceolatum, Myrtaceae), bettor (Calophyllum sp., Callophylaceae), pelangas (Aporosa frutescens, Phyllantaceae), medang (Cryptocarya sp., Lauraceae), gelam (Melaleuca cajuputi, Myrtaceae), and pulas (Guioa diplopetala, Sapindaceae) (Figure 7, Table S4).
The bee farmers use the plants for sunggau for other purposes, such as for house material, furniture, the pole for pepper cultivation, and traditional medicine. The most relevant and useful plant species for bee farmers based on the use report (UR) and cultural importance (CI) value are Callophylum sp. (Callophylaceae), Syzygium urceolatum (Myrtaceae), Melaleuca cajuputi (Myrtaceae), and Cryptocarya sp. (Lauraceae) (Figure 4, Table S4). These species are dominant in the heath forest and the swamp heath forest, except Cryptocarya sp. Our study emphasized the importance of heath and swamp heath forests since both not only provide habitat and plants used for sunggau such as A. dorsata nesting, but also support the livelihood of the community in the villages. Previous research reported that many plant species in the Belitung heath forest have potential as medicinal plants [54].
The heath and swamp heath forest also provide sources of nectar and pollen for A. dorsata, such as Schima wallichii, Syzygium urceolatum, Salacia grandifolia, and Melaleuca cajuputi, which are dominant in this forest (Table 4), as confirmed by a previous study [14]. Thus, efforts should be taken to conserve these two types of forests for bee farmers who construct the sunggau as the nesting site of giant honey bees since they are important sources of income for bee farmers (Figure 2). However, the bee farmers are concerned about the decline of several species of trees for sunggau in the three villages, such as Syzy-gium urceolatum in Tanjung Rusa-Belitung Island (Table S6). Syzygium urceolatum is a favored species for sunggau and important for many uses; therefore, it has a high CI index. Other declining species are Lithocarpus sundaicus and Shorea balangeran due to the high demand for construction materials or poles in pepper cultivation (Figure 4, Table S6).
The conservation of mangrove forests Is also important for sunggau and the foraging site of A. dorsata. We found that plant species for sunggau in mangrove forest are highly similar to those in swamp heath forest (Figure 8). This similarity is due to the bee farmers taking the logs for sunggau construction in the mangrove forest from the swamp heath forest. We compare the knowledge of plants for sunggau from bee farmers with the vegetation survey (Figure 8 and Figure 9). The floral compositions in mangrove forests in the three villages are highly similar and differ from those in heath and swamp heath forests. Despite the low diversity index of plants in mangrove forests, this type of forest has high potential for sunggau, since many species serve as pollen sources, i.e., Lumnitzera littorea, Bruguiera gymnorhiza, and Melaleuca cajuputi, the latest also as a nectar source (Table 4). The fact that the giant bees also migrate to the sunggau in mangrove forests (Figure 2) [20] means that the canopy of mangrove forests also provides rendap. Therefore, sunrays (renak) penetration through the rendap guides the bees to find the sunggau.
Despite the decline of several important trees for sunggau, bee farmers in Belitung have local wisdom in maintaining the forest. This wisdom is to determine the forest for sunggau as a customary forest protected by customary law (hukum adat) in Kembiri or village regulation in Perpat. One type of customary forest known as riding is located at the border of two villages. The riding area ranges from 50–500 m; housing and agricultural activities are prohibited in this area. However, the community can collect firewood, logs for sunggau, and medicinal herbs and hunt wild animals within the area.
The practice of customary laws plays a crucial role in community-based conservation initiatives in Indonesia [55]. Bee farmers in Perpat, Kembiri, and Tanjung Rusa villages also have local wisdom related to sunggau management for conserving the forest and A. dorsata, such as prohibiting cutting down trees excessively. In addition to the local wisdom in protecting the forests for sunggau, the government of Belitung Regency has regulations prohibiting mangrove conversion for other purposes and limiting excessive use of forest products, such as in mangrove forest in Selat Nasik village, Mendanau Island, Belitung Regency [38]. The conservation of A. dorsata and their habitat should be comprehensively carried out in all migration destinations in Belitung Island and surrounding islands. We suggest that customary forest use for sunggau as the strategy for its conservation.
Bee farmers face other challenges, such as the development of monoculture plantations in Belitung, particularly at Kembiri. Several customary heads agreed to convert the customary forest to oil palm plantation because of the high income. This issue should be a concern of the government and the customary head for the sustainability of forests in Belitung. Forest conversion to monoculture plantations impacts habitat fragmentations in South-East Asia [1], including Indonesia [56], and also the loss of pollen and nectar plant sources [57].
The second issue also arises from the human resources needed to construct sunggau, as mostly the age of bee farmers is above 35 years. We found that 78% of the skilled bee farmers are in their thirties, and the youngest is 31 years old. There were no farmers in their twenties that were interested in learning sunggau construction. Based on the interviews, the experience in constructing sunggau ranges from 8–62 years, and it was learned from their fathers. To overcome this problem, the government and resource persons can socialize the importance of sunggau. Management concerning the sustainability of sunggau practice was established by LPHD (Village Forest Management Committees) under the Head of Villages in Perpat Village. The other management was organized by ‘Satgas Pelindung Hutan’ (Team for Forest Protection) in Tanjung Rusa.
We found good practice in management for sustainability of sunggau for ecotourism in Kembiri; although there is no formal organization to protect the habitat and sunggau, farmers work personally to introduce sunggau. One of the skilled bee farmers in Kembiri village, Ki Syar’ie, performs ecotourism activities for tourists who want to experience A. dorsata honey harvesting. Thus, we found another promising use of sunggau that has the potential as ecotourism. All of the above efforts aim to sustain the sunggau traditional knowledge, A. dorsata, and the forests. The ecotourism of A. dorsata nesting in natural bee trees has been practiced in Buloh Seuma, South Aceh Regency, Sumatra [58], and Batudulang Village, Sumbawa Regency in Sumbawa Island [59]. However, the sustainability of ecotourism activity needs support from government policy makers and other stakeholders.
In the Belitung Islands, protected mangrove forests have the potential as an ecotourism destination, such as the mangrove in Selat Nasik village, Mendanau Island [38]. Our research found sunggau in the mangrove forest in Perpat, Kembir,i and Tanjung Rusa villages (Figure 2). Enlightened with the ecotourism in Selat Nasik, mangrove forests in our study areas are also potential A. dorsata ecotourism destinations. The characteristic of ecotourism in this area is the A. dorsata nesting on sunggau which differs from those in Aceh [58] and Sumbawa [59]. According to this study, mangrove forests provide adequate nectar and pollen sources such as Lumnitzera littorea (pollen source) and Melaleuca kajuputi (nectar source), which have the highest importance value index in Perpat and Kampak Island (Table 4). However, the local communities need to prepare infrastructure in the mangrove forest [38], such as bridges to connect sunggau areas and observation spots. They also have to provide information of calendar visits based on A. dorsata migration to the mangrove.
The uniqueness of the Belitung Islands is its encirclement by many pristine satellite islands, such as the Kampak islands, that have the potential for ecotourism. A previous study reported the distribution of sunggau on mainland Belitung Island [20,22,23]. Our research expands the knowledge of sunggau distribution to Kampak Island (Figure 2) as the destination of A. dorsata during migration. These giant honey bees migrate to Kampak Island due to the flowering L. littorea and R. mucronate in mangrove forests as the nectar and pollen source for the bees (Table 4). The forests in Kampak Island also provide nectar and pollen sources for A. dorsata such as M. cajuputi, Syzygium urceolatum, and Syzygium cf. calophyllifolium in heath forest (Table 4).
The proposed ecotourism of A. dorsata nesting on sunggau in Belitung has several advantages, i.e., the low height of the nest (2–3 m), the diversity of sunggau types, and the traditional knowledge of sunggau. Two categories of sunggau based on construction are ground and climbing sunggau (Table 2). The ground sunggau consist of tunggak muke, ungad, and tanger (Table 2), and climbing sunggau have two variations: bantayan and bersilang (Table 2). Tunggak muke is the most common and widely distributed sunggau in Belitung (Figure 2). It is characterized by two short poles that are close to the ground. Therefore, the visitors can easily observe the bees and honey harvest. The climbing sunggau is inspired by the nest of A. dorsata in nature. Apis dorsata naturally constructs the nest on the branches of trees, which is locally named sambit [21]. Myrtaceae, Anacardiaceae, Combretaceae, and Moraceae are the common family trees for sambit [21].
Based on traditional knowledge, the log used for the plank should be straight with rugged bark, lack strong odor, and have a diameter about the same diameter as an adult man’s upper arm. The diameter measurement of the plank is important since it supports the weight of the A. dorsata nest. The bee farmer uses either the same or different tree species for plank and poles. This traditional knowledge is crucial for the sustainability of sunggau. By preserving their knowledge, they conserve the sustainability of forest structure, plant biodiversity, A. dorsata, and the sources of income from honey as a non-timber forest product.
Visitors can also learn the traditional knowledge to construct the sunggau. Based on this study, we found that the measurement of the poles and planks from all villages and types forest is transmitted through generations. Our measurements of parts of sunggau are the first data in the knowledge of sunggau. The measurements of tunggak muke in all villages and forest types apparently showed no difference (Table 3) despite the diversity of tree species used for sunggau (Table S4), thus showing that most villagers practice similar knowledge of tunggak muke in all forest types. This similarity suggests that the traditional knowledge of sunggau measurement has been taught through generations and among bee farmers in different villages.
The culture of constructing tunggak muke sunggau is similar to that for rafters in other Asian countries, such as Vietnam [60] and Thailand [61]. The rafter is called bang kad in Thailand and gac keo in Vietnam. Bee farmers in Tung Bang Nok Ohk forest in Thailand used Acacia auriculiformis, Peltophorum pterocarpum, Litsea grandis, and Ficus religiosa for the main structure of bang kad rafter [60]. Our study also found Litsea used for the sunggau rafter, especially Litsea accedens. Tung Bang Nok Ohk is an important resource area in Thailand dominated by Melaleuca forest. However, bee farmers do not use Melaleuca for bang kad because the bees usually do not build their nests on it, because it has a soft bark and is often overgrown by endophytic fungus. Although the Melaleuca are not used for constructing bang kad, Melaleuca serve as the nectar source for the bees [60].
The structure of bang kad is similar to tunggak muke sunggau; they have two poles to support the plank which is laid across the top. The high of bang kad is approximately two to three meters [60], while tunggak muke is an average 1.98 ± 0.37 m for the front poles and 1.27 ± 0.30 m for the back poles. Bee farmers in Khuan So (Thailand) also use other materials such as concrete beams for the plank of bang kad to make it more durable and reduce the use of natural wood [60]. In Belitung, we also found that bee farmers use bamboo for the plank, which is easy to find and can grow rapidly to reduce the use of logs by cutting trees in the forest.
The bee farmers in Khuan So face problems in the sustainability of the Melaleuca forest due to forest fires [60]. Similar to the problem faced by bee farmers in Belitung, particularly in Kembiri, bee farmers in Thailand also face the melaleuca forest transformation to oil palm and rubber plantations [60]. The strategies of the Khuan So community to conserve the knowledge of bang kad is to transfer the knowledge to the younger generation. They also work in teams to develop a honey market and gain support from various organizations [60].
The bee farmers in Vietnam build the rafter gac keo in U Minh Ha National Park; they use trees such as Melaleuca leucadendron and Areca catechu for the plank and poles [62]. U Minh Ha National Park consists of swamp forest and mangrove forest. Apis dorsata migrate and construct the nests between mangrove and swamp forests [62]. The swamp forest vegetation is dominated by M. lecandendron and M. cajuputi [63]. This swamp forest is similar to the swamp heath forest we found in Belitung. The mangrove serves plant species as nectar and pollen sources for A. dorsata, such as Sonneratia alba; Avicennia officinalis and A. alba; Ceriops tagal, C. decandra, Bruguiera gymnorhiza, Rhizophora mucronatam, and Excoecaria agallocha [62]. Land clearance of forest to agriculture found in Indonesia and Thailand is also faced by Vietnamese bee farmers. The other problem in Vietnam is overusing of both M. lecadendron and M. cajuputi for timber and firewood [62]. In addition, the Melaleuca swamp forest in Vietnam is also at risk of forest fires in the dry season due to climate change. Forest fires in Thailand also impact the loss of many herbaceous plants that are important as sources of pollen and nectar [63].
Across South-east Asia, the existence of rafters face the same challenge of forest conservation as the nesting habitat and foraging sites for A. dorsata. However, several promising uses of rafters arise from ecotourism. Therefore, the variations and traditional knowledge of rafters and their composition, diversity patterns, and vegetation structure of forest types that serve rafters in each country need to be protected by all stakeholders in the penta helix, i.e., government, investors, communities, scientists, and media, along with dissemination not only to bee farmers but also to scientists and governments. The knowledge of important plant diversities and traditional knowledge of sunggau in Belitung Islands can be used as the model for the conservation of forest and A. dorsata within the migration regions of this giant honey bee.

5. Conclusions

Sunggau rafter construction is a practice of the bee farmers in Belitung, Indonesia, to attract the forest honey bee A. dorsata for nesting by using traditional knowledge that has been passed through generations. Our study found sunggau distributed in the three types of forest in Belitung, i.e., heath forest, swamp heath forest, and mangrove forest. The bee farmers use local wisdom to choose the plants for constructing sunggau. By combining traditional knowledge and vegetation analysis, our study revealed the important plants for the sunggau. Based on traditional knowledge, plant species with the highest uses, either for sunggau or the other six uses, are Syzygium urceolatum, Calophyllum sp., and Guioa diplopetala. Based on vegetation surveys, the most important species in the heath forest are Schima wallichii, Acacia mangium, and Melaleuca cajuputi. The latest species and Antidesma cuspidatum dominated in the swamp heath forest, whereas Lumnitzera littorea and Excoecaria agallocha are dominant in mangrove forests. These plants are important for the sustainability of sunggau and bee forage; thus, efforts should be made to conserve them. Therefore, the traditional knowledge of sunggau by local people implies the conservation of A. dorsata as well. Moreover, management concerning the sustainability of sunggau has been established in village institutions such as LPHD (Village Forest Management Committees) and Satgas Pelindung Hutan’ (Team for Forest Protection) that support the sustainability of sunggau practice.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/f15040657/s1, Table S1: Profile of the bee farmers respondent; Table S2: Data source for the vegetation analysis in three types of forests in Perpat, Kembiri, Tanjung Rusa in Belitung Island and Kampak Island; Table S3: Distribution of sunggau types (village, coordinate) and plant species used for sunggau in three types of forest. SG = sunggau, Per = Perpat, Kem = Kembiri, TR-Bel = Tanjung Rusa-Belitung Island, TR-Kam = Tanjung Rusa-Kampak Island, HF = heath forest, SHF = swamp heath forest, MF = mangrove forest; Table S4: Ethnobotanical indices of plant species use for sunggau: Number of Uses (NU), Use Report (UR), Cultural Index (CI), Frequency of Citation (FC), Relative Frequency of Citation (RFC); Table S5: (a) The species use for sunggau (based on interview and field observation) and (b) species composition (based on vegetation analysis) at the three forest types (HF = Heath forest, SHF = Swamp heath forest, MF = Mangrove forest) in Perpat, Kembiri, and Tanjung Rusa Villages, (a: 1 = citated used for sunggau, 0 = not citated used for sunggau; b: 1 = present, 0 = absent); Table S6: Plant species for sunggau that is decreasing based on the information from bee farmers; Table S7: The analysis vegetation in three forest types. HF = Heath forest, SHF = Swamp heath forest, MF = Mangrove forest; Informed consent of bee farmer respondents; Questionnaire used for interviewing respondents;

Author Contributions

S.D.H. collected and analyzed the data. S.D.H. prepared the original draft of the manuscript. I.Q. supervised the research and revised the manuscript. R.R. conceived and designed the research, and prepared the original draft and developed the manuscript. N.S.A. (the corresponding manuscript author) contributed to data analysis of the ethnobotanical and vegetation survey, prepared the original draft, and developed the manuscript. W.P. contributed to data analysis of the ethnobotanical and vegetation survey and review of the manuscript. M.M. contributed to the review of the manuscript. All authors contributed to writing and revising the draft of the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was partly financially supported by the Regional Planning and Development Agency (BAPPEDA) of Belitung Regency (No: 050/0902.1/BAPPEDA-III/2020 and 2718/IT3.F7/HK.07.00/2020) and partly by the Rispro United Kingdom-Indonesia Consortium on Interdisiplinary Sciences (UKICIS) (Contract Number: 4345/E4/AL.04/2022) from LPDP and Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology of The Republic of Indonesia.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Permission was granted for this study by government agencies (the Agency for Conservation of Natural Resources (BKSDA) of South Sumatra, and the Regional Planning and Development Agency (BAPPEDA) of Belitung Regency), and local government leaders in each research area. The researcher obtained inform consent from respondents to collect relevant information about sunggau local knowledge and publication.

Data Availability Statement

Data is contained within the article or Supplementary Materials.

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the local people of Perpat, Kembiri, and Tanjung Rusa, especially the bee farmers, for sharing their knowledge and cooperating during the survey and interviews. We express our gratitude to Yohanes Purwanto from the Research Center for Ecology and Ethnobiology-the National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN) for discussion regarding ethnobotany. We thank Bonauli Pakpahan for the illustrations of sunggau types in Table 4.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Liow, L.H.; Sodhi, N.S.; Elmqvist, T. Bee diversity along a disturbance gradient in tropical lowland forests of south-east Asia. J. Appl. Ecol. 2001, 38, 180–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Nguyen, T.T.; Grote, U.; Neubacher, F.; Rahut, D.B.; Do, M.H.; Paudel, G.P. Security risks from climate change and environmental degradation: Implications for sustainable land use transformation in the Global South. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2023, 63, 101322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Potapov, P.; Hansen, M.C.; Pickens, A.; Hernandez-Serna, A.; Tyukavina, A.; Turubanova, S.; Zalles, V.; Li, X.; Khan, A.; Stolle, F.; et al. The Global 2000–2020 Land Cover and Land Use Change Dataset Derived from the Landsat Archive: First Results. Front. Remote Sens. 2022, 3, 856903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Ricciardi, L.; D’Odorico, P.; Galli, N.; Chiarelli, D.D.; Rulli, M.C. Hydrological implications of large-scale afforestation in tropical biomes for climate change mitigation. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. 2022, 377, 20210391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Miettinen, J.; Shi, C.; Liew, S.C. Deforestation rates in insular Southeast Asia between 2000 and 2010. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2011, 17, 2261–2270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Butler, R.A.; Laurance, W.F. Is oil palm the next emerging threat to the Amazon? Trop. Conserv. Sci. 2009, 2, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Laurance, W.F.; Koh, L.P.; Butler, R.; Sodhi, N.S.; Bradshaw, C.J.; Neidel, J.D.; Consunji, H.; Vega, J.M. Improving the performance of the roundtable on sustainable palm oil for nature conservation. Conserv. Biol. 2010, 24, 377–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Hermon, D.; Iskarni, P.; Oktorie, O.; Wilis, R. The Model of Land Cover Change into Settlement Area and Tin Mining and its Affecting Factors in Belitung Island, Indonesia. J. Environ. Earth Sci. 2017, 7, 32–39. [Google Scholar]
  9. Astari, A.J.; Asdak, C.; Abdoellah, O.S.; Lovett, J.C. The Development of Local Ecological Criteria for Sustainable Oil Palm Plantation in Belitung Island (A Case Study in Nyuruk and Tanjung Rusa). Ecodevelopment 2021, 4, 35–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Heaney, L.R. A synopsis of climatic and vegetational change in Southeast Asia. Clim. Chang. 1991, 19, 53–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Whitten, A.J.; Damanik, S.J.; Anwar, J.; Hisyam, N. The Ecology of Sumatra; UGM Press: Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 1984. [Google Scholar]
  12. Priambudi, A.S.; Chikmawati, T.; Sulistijorini, S.; Fakhrurrozi, Y. Diversity and ecology of Pteridophytes in Cendil heath forest and Gurok Beraye tropical rainforest, Belitung Island, Indonesia. Biodiversitas J. Biol. Divers. 2022, 23, 4775–4782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Irawan, A.; Chikmawati, T.; Sulistijorini, S. Diversity and zonation of mangrove flora in Belitung Island, Indonesia. Biodiversitas J. Biol. Divers. 2021, 22, 2981–2992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Oktavia, D.; Pratiwi, S.D.; Munawaroh, S.; Hikmat, A.; Hilwan, I. Floristic composition and species diversity in three habitat types of heath forest in Belitung Island, Indonesia. Biodiversitas J. Biol. Divers. 2021, 22, 5555–5563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Haryadi, D.; Ibrahim, I.; Darwance, D. Strategic ecological issues: Environmental problems in a perspective of regional development in Bangka Belitung. In E3S Web of Conferences, Proceedings of the International Conference on Environment Pollution and Prevention 2020, Sydney, Australia, 3–5 December 2020; EDP Sciences: Les Ulis, France, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  16. Fatansyah, F.; Lestari, Y.; Sonia, A.; Putri, J.E. Community’s local wisdom and its relationship with environmental conservation efforts in Bangka Belitung, Indonesia. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2022, 1115, 012036. [Google Scholar]
  17. Bruchac, M.M. Indigenous Knowledge and Traditional Knowledge. In Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology; Smith, C., Ed.; Springer Science and Business Media: New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 3814–3824. [Google Scholar]
  18. Chanthayod, S.; Zhang, W.; Chen, J. People’s perceptions of the benefits of natural beekeeping and its positive outcomes for forest conservation: A case study in Northern Lao PDR. Trop. Conserv. Sci. 2017, 10, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Berkes, F.; Folke, C.; Gadgil, M. Traditional ecological knowledge, biodiversity, resilience and sustainability. In Biodiversity Conservation: Problems and Policies. Papers from the Biodiversity Programme Beijer International Institute of Ecological Economics Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1994; pp. 269–287. [Google Scholar]
  20. Césard, N. An emic understanding of honey bees and their environment: Attracting bee swarms to nest on rafters in Belitung, Indonesia. Anthropozoologica 2022, 57, 223–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Hayati, S.D.; Qayim, I.; Raffiudin, R. Diversity of bee tree (sambit) for Apis dorsata conservation in Membalong, Belitung Regency, Indonesia. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2023, 1271, 012030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hadisoesilo, S. Diversity in traditional techniques for enticing Apis dorsata colonies in indonesia. In Proceedings of the 37th International Congress, Apimondia, Durban, 28 October–1 November 2001. [Google Scholar]
  23. Purwanto, D.B. Some Observations on Beekeeping Management with Apis dorsata in Belitung, South Sumatra, Indonesia. Master’s Thesis, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  24. Wongsa, K.; Duangphakdee, O.; Rattanawannee, A. Pollination efficacy of stingless bees, Tetragonula pagdeni Schwarz (Apidae: Meliponini), on greenhouse tomatoes (Solanum lycopersicum Linnaeus). PeerJ 2023, 11, e15367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Sajjad, A.; Ali, M.; Saeed, S. Yearlong association of Apis dorsata and Apis florea with flowering plants: Planted forest vs. agricultural landscape. Sociobiology 2017, 64, 18–25. [Google Scholar]
  26. Robinson, W.S. Migrating giant honey bees (Apis dorsata) congregate annually at Stopover Site in Thailand. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e44976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Robinson, W.S. Surfing the Sweet Wave: Migrating Giant Honey Bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Apis dorsata) Display Spatial and Temporal Fidelity to Annual Stopover Site in Thailand. J. Insect Sci. 2021, 21, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Zahara, I.; Fahri, F.; Lamerkabel, J.S.; Qashiratuttarafi, Q.; Juliandi, B.; Raffiudin, R. Landmark-Based Geometric Morphometric of Apis dorsata and A. d. binghami Wing Venation in Indonesian Archipelagos. HAYATI J. Biosci. 2022, 29, 658–668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Henri, H.; Erpandi, E. Local Ethnic Malay Community Knowledge in Traditional Medicine Utilization and Its Conservation Strategy in East Belitung Regency, Indonesia. Media Konserv. 2021, 26, 44–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. BPS-Statistic of Belitung Regency. Membalong Subdistrict in Figures. BPS-Statistics of Belitung Regency. 2022. Available online: https://belitungkab.bps.go.id/ (accessed on 14 December 2022).
  31. Supari, S.; Setiawan, N. Rainfall variability over Bangka Belitung Island based on validated TRMM product. J. Meteorol Geofis. 2013, 14, 9–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Sousa Araújo, T.A.; Almeida, A.L.S.; Melo, J.G.; Medeiros, M.F.T.; Ramos, M.A.; Silva, R.R.V.; Almeida, C.F.C.B.R.; Albuquerque, U.P. A new technique for testing distribution of knowledge and to estimate sampling sufficiency in ethnobiology studies. J. Ethnobiol. Ethnomed. 2012, 8, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Hoffman, B.; Gallaher, T. Importance indices in ethnobotany. Ethnobot. Res. Appl. 2007, 5, 201–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Gerique, A. An introduction to ethnoecology and ethnobotany: Theory and methods. Integrative Assessment and Planning Methods for Sustainable Agroforestry in Humid and Semiarid Regions, Advanced Scientific Training: Loja, Ecuador, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  35. Hilwan, I. Biophysical characteristic in various conditions of heath forest in east belitung residence, province of bangka belitung islands. J.-Siltrop 2015, 6, 59–65. [Google Scholar]
  36. Oktavia, D.; Setiadi, Y.; Hilwan, I. The comparison of soil properties in heath forest and post-tin mined land: Basic for ecosystem restoration. Procedia Environ. Sci. 2015, 28, 124–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Nishimua, T.B.; Suzuki, E.; Kohyama, T.; Tsuyuzaki, S. Mortality and growth of trees in peat-swamp and heath forests in Central Kalimantan after severe drought. Plant Ecol. 2007, 188, 165–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Manan, R.H. The Concept of Mangrove ECO Tourism Master Plan in Belitung District Indonesia. Int. J. Eng. Res. 2020, 9, 323–330. [Google Scholar]
  39. Bramasta, D.; Qayim, I.; Djuita, N.R.; Raffiudin, R.; Putra, R.E.; Soesilohadi, R.H.; Purnobasuki, H. Melissopalynology and vegetation analysis surrounding sunggau of giant honey bee Apis dorsata in Belitung Regency. HAYATI J. Biosci. 2023, 30, 1167–1174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Malabrigo, P.L., Jr.; Tobias, A.B.; Boncodin, J.C. Floristic composition, vegetation structure, and diversity pattern of Mt. Calavite Wildlife Sanctuary: Basis for management and conservation planning. Ecosyst. Dev. J. 2018, 8, 3–27. [Google Scholar]
  41. Basrowi, M.; Qayim, I.; Raffiudin, R. Modeling of potential bee forage habitat for Apis dorsata in Membalong, Belitung. J. Ilmu Pertan. Indones. 2022, 27, 562–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. 2010. Available online: https://www.R-project.org/ (accessed on 16 February 2024).
  43. Whitney, C.; EthnobotanyR: Calculate Quantitative Ethnobotany Indices. R Package Version 0.1.9. 2022. Available online: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ethnobotanyR (accessed on 16 February 2024).
  44. Natividad, E.M.C.; Hingabay, V.S.; Lipae, H.B.; Requieron, E.A.; Abalunan, A.J.; Tagaloguin, P.M.; Flamiano, R.S.; Jumawan, J.H.; Jumawan, J.C. Vegetation analysis and community structure of mangroves in Alabel and Maasim Sarangani Province, Philippines. ARPN J. Agric. Biol. Sci. 2015, 10, 97–102. [Google Scholar]
  45. Spellerberg, I.F.; Fedor, P.J. A tribute to Claude Shannon (1916–2001) and a plea for more rigorous use of species richness, species diversity and the ‘Shannon–Wiener’Index. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2003, 12, 177–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Adalina, Y. Assessing habitat of Apis dorsata honey bee colonies and its honey quality produced from Rantau Forest Research Station, South Kalimantan. J. Penelit. Hutan Konserv. Alam 2018, 15, 25–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Fakhrurrozi, Y. Landscape Units and Diversity of Wild Edible Fruits and Nuts in Belitong Melayu People Life. Master’s Thesis, Institut Pertanian Bogor, Bogor, Indonesia, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  48. Ashton, P. Notes on Northern Borneo Myrtaceae. Sandakania 2016, 22, 55–57. [Google Scholar]
  49. Rosmarlinasiah; Malamassam, D.; Paembonan, S.; Yusuf, Y. Resource potential analysis of honey bee feed Apis dorsata in mountain Tinanggo Kolaka. Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res. 2015, 4, 313–318. [Google Scholar]
  50. Khalil, M.I.; Mahaneem, M.; Jamalullail, S.M.S.; Alam, N.; Sulaiman, S.A. Evaluation of radical scavenging activity and colour intensity of nine malaysian honeys of different origin. J. ApiProd. ApiMed. Sci. 2011, 3, 4–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Raju, A.J.S.; Kumar, R.; Rajesh, B. Pollination ecology of Lumnitzera racemosa willd (Combretaceae), a non-viviparous mangrove tree. Taprobanica 2014, 06, 100–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Kevan, P.G.; Lack, A.J. Pollination in a cryptically dioecious plant Decaspermum parviflorum (Lam.) AJ Scott (myrtaceae) by pollen-collecting bees in Sulawesi, Indonesia. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 1985, 25, 319–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Ramadani, R.F.; Raffiudin, R.; Ariyanti, N.S.; Biagioni, S.; Treanore, E.; Behling, H. Stingless bee foraging behavior and pollen resource use in oil palm and rubber plantations in Sumatra. J. Entomol. Indones. 2021, 18, 81–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Oktavia, D.; Pratiwi, S.D.; Munawaroh, S.; Hikmat, A.; Hilwan, I. The potential of medicinal plants from heath forest: Local knowledge from Kelubi Village, Belitung Island, Indonesia. Biodiversitas J. Biol. Divers. 2022, 23, 3553–3560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Wadley, R.L.; Colfer, C.J.P. Sacred forest, hunting, and conservation in West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Hum. Ecol. 2004, 32, 313–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Voigt, M.; Supriatna, J.; Deere, N.J.; Kastanya, A.; Mitchell, S.L.; Rosa, I.M.; Santika, T.; Siregar, R.; Tasirin, J.S.; Widyanto, A.; et al. Emerging threats from deforestation and forest fragmentation in the Wallacea centre of endemism. Environ. Res. Lett. 2021, 16, 094048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Kremen, C.; Williams, N.M.; Thorp, R.W. Crop pollination from native bees at risk from agricultural intensification. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2002, 99, 16812–16816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Margo, M.L.; Widigdo, W. Fasilitas Wisata Lebah Madu Apis dorsata di Kemukiman Buloh Seuma. Edimensi Arsit. Petra 2023, 11, 401–408. [Google Scholar]
  59. Putri, W.A.; Suteja, I.W.; Abdullah, A. Enhancing edu-ecotourism in Batudulang Village, Batulanteh District, Sumbawa Regency: Strategies and potential development. Adv. Tour. Stud. 2023, 1, 48–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Bendem-Ahlee, S.; Kittitornkool, J.; Thungwa, S.; Parinyasutinun, U. Bang Kad: A reflection of local wisdom to find wild honey and ecological use of resources in Melaleuca forest in the Songkhla lake basin. Humanit. Arts Soc. Sci. Stud. 2014, 14, 77–100. [Google Scholar]
  61. Chuttong, B.; Somana, W.; Burgett, M. Giant honey bee (Apis dorsata f.) rafter beekeeping in Southern Thailand. Bee World 2019, 96, 66–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Crane, E.; Van Luyen, V.; Mulder, V.; Ta, T.C. Traditional management system for Apis dorsata in submerged forests in Southern Vietnam and Central Kalimantan. Bee World 1993, 74, 27–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Thanh, V.T.; Hoang, P.V.; Trong, K.H.; Thanh, P.H. Evaluation of current situation of melaleuca forest in the U Minh Ha National Park, Vietnam under the situation of climate change and proposed solutions for conservation and sustainable development. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2020, 736, 072014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Forests 15 00657 g001
Figure 1. Map shows the locations of sunggau (Forests 15 00657 i001) in three villages in the Sub Regency of Membalong, Belitung, Indonesia: a = Perpat (Per), b = Kembiri (Kem), c = Tanjung Rusa in Belitung Island (TR-Bel), and d = Tanjung Rusa in Kampak Island (TR-Kam).
Figure 1. Map shows the locations of sunggau (Forests 15 00657 i001) in three villages in the Sub Regency of Membalong, Belitung, Indonesia: a = Perpat (Per), b = Kembiri (Kem), c = Tanjung Rusa in Belitung Island (TR-Bel), and d = Tanjung Rusa in Kampak Island (TR-Kam).
Forests 15 00657 g001
Forests 15 00657 g002
Figure 2. Types of sunggau are constructed in heath forest, swamp heath forest, and mangrove forest. The coordinate of the sunggau is shown in Table S3. HF = Heath forest; SHF = Swamp heath forest; and MF = Mangrove forest; Per = Perpat; Kem = Kembiri; TR-Bel = Tanjung Rusa in Belitung Island; TR-Kam = Tanjung Rusa in Kampak Island.
Figure 2. Types of sunggau are constructed in heath forest, swamp heath forest, and mangrove forest. The coordinate of the sunggau is shown in Table S3. HF = Heath forest; SHF = Swamp heath forest; and MF = Mangrove forest; Per = Perpat; Kem = Kembiri; TR-Bel = Tanjung Rusa in Belitung Island; TR-Kam = Tanjung Rusa in Kampak Island.
Forests 15 00657 g002
Forests 15 00657 g003
Figure 3. The radial bar chart shows the Number of Uses (NU) of 65 plant species used in the sunggau construction. Each plant species is displayed in the form of a circular segment with a radius proportional to the number of uses; code species names are presented in Table S4.
Figure 3. The radial bar chart shows the Number of Uses (NU) of 65 plant species used in the sunggau construction. Each plant species is displayed in the form of a circular segment with a radius proportional to the number of uses; code species names are presented in Table S4.
Forests 15 00657 g003
Forests 15 00657 g004
Figure 4. Chord diagram depicting the distribution of 608 use reports (UR) for 65 plant species used for sunggau and other use categories among 38 bee farmer informants. The diagram shows the plant species (in the bottom half of the circle; code species names are presented in Table S4 and relate to seven use categories (in the top half circle; use_1 = sunggau construction; use_2 = bee colony smokers; use_3 = source for pollen and nectar; use_4 = building and furniture material; use_5 = traditional medicine; use_6 = firewood material; use_7 = additional food).
Figure 4. Chord diagram depicting the distribution of 608 use reports (UR) for 65 plant species used for sunggau and other use categories among 38 bee farmer informants. The diagram shows the plant species (in the bottom half of the circle; code species names are presented in Table S4 and relate to seven use categories (in the top half circle; use_1 = sunggau construction; use_2 = bee colony smokers; use_3 = source for pollen and nectar; use_4 = building and furniture material; use_5 = traditional medicine; use_6 = firewood material; use_7 = additional food).
Forests 15 00657 g004
Forests 15 00657 g005
Figure 5. The chord diagram depicts the distribution of 38 bee farmer respondents related to their knowledge of plant species used for sunggau and other uses. Numbers in brackets following the name of bee farmers indicate the length (in years) of their experience in installing sunggau constructions. The thickness of each bar (in the bottom of half circle) indicates the respondent’s knowledge of plant species used for sunggau construction and other use categories (shows in the top of half circle; use_1 = sunggau; use_2 = bee colony smokers; use_3 = source for pollen and nectar; use_4 = building and furniture material; use_5 = traditional medicine; use_6 = firewood material; use_7 = additional food).
Figure 5. The chord diagram depicts the distribution of 38 bee farmer respondents related to their knowledge of plant species used for sunggau and other uses. Numbers in brackets following the name of bee farmers indicate the length (in years) of their experience in installing sunggau constructions. The thickness of each bar (in the bottom of half circle) indicates the respondent’s knowledge of plant species used for sunggau construction and other use categories (shows in the top of half circle; use_1 = sunggau; use_2 = bee colony smokers; use_3 = source for pollen and nectar; use_4 = building and furniture material; use_5 = traditional medicine; use_6 = firewood material; use_7 = additional food).
Forests 15 00657 g005
Forests 15 00657 g006
Figure 6. The radial bar chart shows the Cultural Importance (CI) index of 65 species used in the sunggau construction. Each species is displayed in the form of a circular segment with a radius proportional to the CI values; code species names are presented in Table S4.
Figure 6. The radial bar chart shows the Cultural Importance (CI) index of 65 species used in the sunggau construction. Each species is displayed in the form of a circular segment with a radius proportional to the CI values; code species names are presented in Table S4.
Forests 15 00657 g006
Forests 15 00657 g007
Figure 7. The radial bar chart shows the Relative Frequency of Citation (RFC) index of 65 species used in the sunggau construction; each species is displayed in the form of a circular segment with a radius proportional to the RFC values; code species names are presented in Table S5.
Figure 7. The radial bar chart shows the Relative Frequency of Citation (RFC) index of 65 species used in the sunggau construction; each species is displayed in the form of a circular segment with a radius proportional to the RFC values; code species names are presented in Table S5.
Forests 15 00657 g007
Forests 15 00657 g008
Figure 8. Forest type groups based on the diversity of plant species used for sunggau were obtained from the interview. HF = Heath forest; SHF = Swamp heath forest; and MF = Mangrove forest; Per = Perpat; Kem = Kembiri; TR-Bel = Tanjung Rusa in Belitung Island; TR-Kam = Tanjung Rusa in Kampak Island.
Figure 8. Forest type groups based on the diversity of plant species used for sunggau were obtained from the interview. HF = Heath forest; SHF = Swamp heath forest; and MF = Mangrove forest; Per = Perpat; Kem = Kembiri; TR-Bel = Tanjung Rusa in Belitung Island; TR-Kam = Tanjung Rusa in Kampak Island.
Forests 15 00657 g008
Forests 15 00657 g009
Figure 9. Forest type groups based on the floral composition. HF = Heath forest; SHF = Swamp heath forest; and MF = Mangrove forest; Per = Perpat; Kem = Kembiri; TR-Bel = Tanjung Rusa in Belitung Island; TR-Kam = Tanjung Rusa in Kampak Island.
Figure 9. Forest type groups based on the floral composition. HF = Heath forest; SHF = Swamp heath forest; and MF = Mangrove forest; Per = Perpat; Kem = Kembiri; TR-Bel = Tanjung Rusa in Belitung Island; TR-Kam = Tanjung Rusa in Kampak Island.
Forests 15 00657 g009
Forests 15 00657 g010
Figure 10. Diversity index (H′) of heath forest, swamp heath forest, and mangrove forest at Perpat (Per), Kembiri (Kem), Tanjung Rusa in Belitung Island (TR-Bel) and Kampak Island (TR-Kam).
Figure 10. Diversity index (H′) of heath forest, swamp heath forest, and mangrove forest at Perpat (Per), Kembiri (Kem), Tanjung Rusa in Belitung Island (TR-Bel) and Kampak Island (TR-Kam).
Forests 15 00657 g010
Table 1. The ethnobotanical basic values and indices analyzed using ethnobotanyR package in R [34,43].
Table 1. The ethnobotanical basic values and indices analyzed using ethnobotanyR package in R [34,43].
NoBasic Value/IndicesCriteria
1Number of Uses (NU)The total of all categories (i.e., sunggau and other used) for which a species is considered useful
2Use Report (UR)The sum of all the times that individual informants named the species for a specific use category and the sum of all those categories
3Cultural Importance index (CI)The overall proportion of informants who mentioned the use of each species by considering the distribution of use (number of informants) of each species, and the range of its uses. The CI is given by the formula CI = UR/N, where UR (use reports) is the use recorded for each species and N is the total number of informants.
4Frequency of Citation (FC)The total of informants that cite the use for a species used for sunggau and other uses categories
5Relative Frequency Citation (RFC)The RFC determines the importance of each species depending on the number of informants reporting a species compared to the total number of informants. The RFC is given by the formula RFC = FC/N, where FC is the total number of informants that referred to the species, and N is the total number of informants.
Table 2. Category and descriptions of sunggau types found in this study. Forests 15 00657 i002 = front poles; Forests 15 00657 i003 = back poles; Forests 15 00657 i004 = plank, Forests 15 00657 i005 = A. dorsata comb.
Table 2. Category and descriptions of sunggau types found in this study. Forests 15 00657 i002 = front poles; Forests 15 00657 i003 = back poles; Forests 15 00657 i004 = plank, Forests 15 00657 i005 = A. dorsata comb.
Category and Type of SunggauDescription Figures
Ground Sunggau: constructed close to the ground, consisting of three types, i.e., tunggak muke, ungad, and tanger.
  • Tunggak muke
Constructed by three parts of a small log: front pole, back poles, and plank. The front or/and back poles can be substituted with tree trunks.Forests 15 00657 i006
b.
Ungad
Built with only one pole in the middle of the plank, the back end of the plank touches the ground or sometimes is tied to branches. Forests 15 00657 i007
c.
Tanger
A variant of tunggak muke, with two nests found on the same plank.Forests 15 00657 i008
Climbing Sunggau: constructed high above the ground, consisting of two types, i.e., bantayan and bersilang
d.
Bantayan
Constructed on two living trees as the poles with one plank and equipped with a horizontal log as the ladder to reach the plank.Forests 15 00657 i009
e.
Bersilang
Variant of bantayan, constructed by two planks cross each other on the same living tree as the pole.Forests 15 00657 i010
Table 3. Measurement of parts of tunggak muke sunggau in three villages and three forest types.
Table 3. Measurement of parts of tunggak muke sunggau in three villages and three forest types.
Parts of sunggauVillagesForest TypesMean
PerpatKembiriTanjung RusaHeath ForestSwamp Heath ForestMangrove
HFP (m)1.96 ± 0.38 a2.03 ± 0.15 a2.07 ± 0.40 a2.03 ± 0.46 a2.20 ± 0.42 a1.85 ± 0.21 a1.98 ± 0.37
HBP (m)1.26 ± 0.31 a1.30 ± 0.35 a1.30 ± 0.26 a1.34 ± 0.32 a1.45 ± 0.07 a1.11 ± 0.26 a1.27 ± 0.30
LP (m)3.20 ± 0.41 a3.30 ± 0.36 a2.87 ± 0.64 a3.16 ± 0.44 a3.40 ± 0.28 a3.04 ± 0.52 a3.14 ± 0.45
DP (m)0.31 ± 0.04 b0.39 ± 0.04 a0.32 ± 0.04 ab0.31 ± 0.04 a0.36 ± 0.00 a0.34 ± 0.05 a0.33 ± 0.04
IP (degree)21.64 ± 5.90 a17.33 ± 3.05 a21.33 ± 3.21 a22.74 ± 5.08 a16.50 ± 3.53 a21.57 ± 6.13 a21.59 ± 5.47
HFP = Height of front pole; HBP = Height of back pole; LP = Length of plank; DP = Diameter of plank; IP = Incline of plank; The different letter in the same raw showed the significant difference.
Table 4. Top 5 trees with the highest Importance Value Index (IVI) and its role as a food source for A. dorsata (P = pollen source, N = nectar source) in three forest types in Perpat, Kembiri, Tanjung Rusa (Belitung Island and Kampak Island). (cs) = current study; * = bee farmers information.
Table 4. Top 5 trees with the highest Importance Value Index (IVI) and its role as a food source for A. dorsata (P = pollen source, N = nectar source) in three forest types in Perpat, Kembiri, Tanjung Rusa (Belitung Island and Kampak Island). (cs) = current study; * = bee farmers information.
Village/Type of ForestTotal SpeciesSpeciesIVI (%)Food Source Citation of Food Source
Perpat
Heath forest [41]27Schima wallichii53.45P[46]
Syzygium urceolatum38.15P, N *[47]
Syzygium muelleri33.71P, N[48]
Calophyllum pulcherrimum31.81P *[47]
Shorea balangeran19.49P[49]
Swamp heath forest (cs)22Malaleuca cajuputi71.73P, N[50]
Syzygium urceolatum23.69P[47]
Schima wallichii23.60P[46]
Syzygium cf. calophyllifolium22.81N[47]
Cratoxylum glaucum21.58P *, N *
Mangrove forest (cs)6Lumnitzera littorea83.21P[51]
Bruguiera gymnorhiza45.69P[39]
Bruguiera sexangula25.50na
Malaleuca cajuputi19.17P, N[50]
Podocarpus nerrfoliius10.50na
Kembiri
Swamp heath forest [41]12Malaleuca cajuputi143.46P, N[50]
Schima wallichii33.85P[46]
Syzygium urceolatum28.79P, N *[47]
Cratoxylum glaucum23.25P *, N *
Decaspermum parviflorum15.75P, N[41,52]
Mangrove forest (cs)10Excoecaria agallocha70.04na
Bruguiera gymnorhiza65.11P[39]
Lumnitzera littorea53.54P[51]
Bruguiera sexangula50.39na
Xylocarpus granatum38.28na
Tanjung Rusa-Belitung Island
Heath forest [39]9Acacia mangium64.44na
Schima wallichii42.69P[46]
Hevea braciliensis41.31P, N[53]
Salacia grandifolia37.78na
Lepisanthes amoena34.35na
Swamp heath forest [39]5Antidesma cuspidatum144.62 na
Malaleuca cajuputi40.46 P, N[50]
Salacia grandifolia20.20na
Lepisanthes amoena19.67na
Vitex pinata18.45na
Tanjung Rusa-Kampak Island
Heath forest [39]16M. cajuputi165.43 P, N[50]
Syzygium urceolatum36.65 P, N *[47]
Syzygium cf. calophyllifolium25.23N[47]
Adinandra dumosa22.32na
Baccaurea deflexa16.08na
Mangrove forest [39]3L. littorea214.58 P[51]
R. mucronata65.91 P[39]
Pandanus tectorius19.65na
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Hayati, S.D.; Qayim, I.; Raffiudin, R.; Ariyanti, N.S.; Priawandiputra, W.; Miftahudin, M. Traditional Knowledge of Plants for Sunggau Rafters on Three Forest Types for Conservation of Apis dorsata in Indonesia. Forests 2024, 15, 657. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15040657

AMA Style

Hayati SD, Qayim I, Raffiudin R, Ariyanti NS, Priawandiputra W, Miftahudin M. Traditional Knowledge of Plants for Sunggau Rafters on Three Forest Types for Conservation of Apis dorsata in Indonesia. Forests. 2024; 15(4):657. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15040657

Chicago/Turabian Style

Hayati, Suci Dian, Ibnul Qayim, Rika Raffiudin, Nunik Sri Ariyanti, Windra Priawandiputra, and Miftahudin Miftahudin. 2024. "Traditional Knowledge of Plants for Sunggau Rafters on Three Forest Types for Conservation of Apis dorsata in Indonesia" Forests 15, no. 4: 657. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15040657

APA Style

Hayati, S. D., Qayim, I., Raffiudin, R., Ariyanti, N. S., Priawandiputra, W., & Miftahudin, M. (2024). Traditional Knowledge of Plants for Sunggau Rafters on Three Forest Types for Conservation of Apis dorsata in Indonesia. Forests, 15(4), 657. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15040657

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop