Teak (Tectona grandis L.f.) demonstrates robust adaptability to climate change scenarios in central India

*Article not assigned to an issue yet

, , , , , ,

Research Articles | Published:

Print ISSN : 0970-4078.
Online ISSN : 2229-4473.
Pub Email: contact@vegetosindia.org
Doi: 10.1007/s42535-022-00444-w
First Page: 0
Last Page: 0
Views: 161

Keywords: Climate change, Habitat, High-value timber, MaxEnt, Tectona grandis


Central India, predicted to be one of the most severe hotspots for extreme climatic events, is a recognised major center of genetic diversity for the teak (Tectona grandis L.f.)—a high-value timber species. Understanding the impact of climate change on the sustainability of teak is critical for planning and management strategies for this important timber species. We used MaxEnt, to ascertain the current habitats of teak and projected its suitable habitats for the year 2050. We considered 19 bioclimatic variables from the WorldClim database for global climatic models (GCM), IPSL_CM5A_LR, and NIMR_HADGEM2_AO under different representative concentration pathways (RCP) scenarios such as RCP 2.6, 4.5, 6.0, and 8.5. Our findings showed that at present, ~ 4.53% (41,054.3 km2) of the studied area provides suitable habitats for teak and a range expansion of ~ 5.68–7.01% by the year 2050, depending upon RCPs and GCMs. The findings indicated an increase in the habitat range of teak in the northern and eastern part but a decrease in the southern part of central India by 2050. Bioclimatic variable isothermality (Bio_3) contributed most in limiting the distribution of teak for the current climatic scenario, whereas, temperature seasonality (Bio_4) and precipitation of the driest month (Bio_14) contributed most for 2050 projections under both the scenarios. The study indicated robust adaptability of teak to climate change, and in the future, the suitable habitat is likely to increase in the central Indian region. The study provides vital insight into the likely distribution scenario of teak in the face of climate change, and offers valuable information for strategizing teak management initiatives in the region.

Climate change, Habitat, High-value timber, MaxEnt, 
              Tectona grandis


Baek HJ, Lee J, Lee HS, Hyun YK, Cho C, Kwon WT, Lee J (2013) Climate change in the 21st century simulated by HadGEM2-AO under representative concentration pathways. Asia-Pac J Atmos Sci 49(5):603–618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13143-013-0053-7

Balakrishnan S, Dev SA, Sakthi AR, Vikashini B, Bhasker TR, Magesh NS, Ramasamy Y (2021) Gene-ecological zonation and population genetic structure of Tectona grandis L.f. in India revealed by genome-wide SSR markers. Tree Genet Genomes 17:33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11295-021-01514-x.

Ball BD, Pandey HS (1999) Global Overview of Teak Plantations. In: Proceedings Site Technology and Productivity of Teak Plantations, 26–29 January 1999, Chiang Mai, Thailand, 1999

Bargali SS, Padalia K, Bargali K (2019) Effects of tree fostering on soil health and microbial biomass under different land use systems in central Himalaya. Land Degrad Dev 30(16):1984–1998. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.3394

Bussotti F, Pollastrini M, Holland V, Brueggemann W (2015) Functional traits and adaptive capacity of European forests to climate change. Environ Exp Bot 111:91–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2014.11.006

Chandra A, Fauzi D, Khatimah FH, Wicaksono SA (2022) Assessing drivers of forest conservation in Simancuang Village Forest, West Sumatra. Small-Scale For 21(1):93–118

Deb JC, Phinn S, Butt N, McAlpine CA (2017) Climatic-induced shifts in the distribution of teak (Tectona grandis) in Tropical Asia, implications for forest management and planning. Environ Manage 60:422–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-017-0884-6

Dufresne J, Foujols M, Denvil S (2013) Climate change projections using the IPSL-CM5 Earth System Model: from CMIP3 to CMIP5. Clim Dyn 40:2123–2126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-012-1636-1

Elith J, Graham CH, Anderson RP, Dudik M, Ferrier S, Guisan A, Hijmans RJ, Huettmann F, Leathwick JR, Lehmann A, Li J, Lohmann LG, Loiselle BA, Manion G, Moritz C, Nakamura M, Nakazawa Y, Overton JM, Peterson AT, Phillips SJ, Richardson K, Scachetti-Pereira R, Schapire RE, Soberon J, Williams S, Wisz MS, Zimmermann NE (2006) Novel methods improve prediction of species distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29:129–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2006.0906-7590.04596.x

Fei S, Desprez JM, Potter KM, Jo I, Knott JA, Oswalt CM (2017). Divergence of species responses to climate change. Sci Adv 3(5):p.e1603055. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1603055.

Fick SE, Hijmans RJ (2017) WorldClim 2: new 1km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. Int J Climatol 37(12):4302–4315. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.5086

Fofana IJ, Ofori D, Poitel M, Verhaegen D (2009) Diversity and genetic structure of teak (Tectona grandis L.f) in its natural range using DNA microsatellite markers. New for 37:175–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-008-9116-5

Fraser DJ, Debes PV, Bernatchez L, Hutchings JA (2014 Sep 7) Population size, habitat fragmentation, and the nature of adaptive variation in a stream fish. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 281(1790):20140370

Fried M, Sulla-Menashe D (2019). MCD12Q1 MODIS/Terra+Aqua Land Cover Type Yearly L3 Global 500m SIN Grid V006. NASA EOSDIS Land Processes DAAC. https://doi.org/10.5067/MODIS/MCD12Q1.006. Accessed 03 Aug 2021

Ghosh BG, Garai S, Rahaman SM, Khatun M, Mohammad N, Mishra Y, Ranjan A, Tiwari S (2021). Assessing potential habitat distribution range of the endangered tree species Pterocarpus marsupium Roxb. under the climate change scenario in India. Trees For People 6:100124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2021.100124

Gopalakrishnan R, Jayaraman M, Swarnim S, Chaturvedi RK, Bala G, Ravindranath NH (2011) Impact of climate change at species level: a case study of teak in India. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 16(2):199–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2021.100124

Gosain AK, Rao S, Ganeriwala S, Singh P, Arora A, Mahajan A (2017) Climate change vulnerability assessment report for Madhya Pradesh. Environment planning and coordination organisation (EPCO), Bhopal

Hansen OK, Changtragoon S, Ponoy B, Kjær ED, Minn Y, Finkeldey R, Nielsen KB, Graudal L (2015). Genetic resources of teak (Tectona grandis Linn. f.)—strong genetic structure among natural populations. Tree Genet Genomes 11:802. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11295-014-0802-5.

Harwood TD, Love J, Drielsma M, Brandon C, Ferrier S (2022) Staying connected: assessing the capacity of landscapes to retain biodiversity in a changing climate. Res Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1360584/v1

Kaosa-ard A (1981) Teak (Tectona grandis Linn. f)- Its natural distribution and related factors. Nat Hist Bull Siam Soc 29:5–74

Kariyawasam CS, Kumar L, Ratnayake SS (2019) Invasive plant species establishment and range dynamics in Sri Lanka under climate change. Entropy 21(6):571

Katwal RPS (2005) Teak in India: status prospects and perspectives. In: Bhat KM, Nair KKN, Bhat KV¸ Muralidharan EM, Sharma JK (eds) Quality timber products of teak from sustainable forest management. Kerala Forest Research Institute, India and International Tropical Timber Organization, Yokohama, pp 1–17

Kulkarni DH (1951) Distribution of Teak (Tectona grandis) on the northern slopes of the Satpuras with reference to geology. Proc. 8th Silvicultural Conference, DehraDun. India Part 2:112–117

Mani M, Bandyopadhyay S, Chonabayashi S, Markandya A, Mosie T (2018) South Asia’s hotspots: the impact of temperature and precipitation changes on living standards. World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1155-5

Moya R, Bond B, Quesada H (2014) A review of heartwood properties of Tectona grandis trees from fast growth plantations. Wood Sci Technol 48:411–433

Navarro-Racines C, Tarapues J, Thornton P, Jarvis A, Ramirez-Villegas J (2020) High-resolution and bias-corrected CMIP5 projections for climate change impact assessments. Sci Data 7(1):1–14

Padalia H, Srivastava V, Kushwaha SPS (2014) Modeling potential invasion range of alien invasive species, Hyptis suaveolens (L.) Poit. in India: comparison of MaxEnt and GARP. Eco Inform 22:36–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2014.04.002

Palanisamy K, Hegde M, Yi JS (2009) Teak (Tectona grandis Linn. F.): a renowned commercial timber species. J For Environ Sci 25(1):1–24

Palanisamy K (2014) Cultivation techniques for Teak. Pp 1–5. In: Buvaneswaran C et al (eds) Transfer of tree cultivation technologies to Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs) of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry. Institute of Forest Genetics and Tree Breeding, Coimbatore

Panda RM, Behera MD, Roy PS (2018) Assessing distributions of two invasive species of contrasting habits in future climate. J Environ Manage 213:478–488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.12.053

Pawar KV, Rothkar RV (2015) Forest conservation & environmental awareness. Procedia Earth Planet Sci 11:212–215

Phillips SJ, Anderson RP, Schapire RE (2006) Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecol Model 190(3–4):231–259

Phillips SJ, Miroslav D, Robert ES (2020) Maxent software for modeling species niches and distributions (Version 3.4.1). http://biodiversityinformatics.amnh.org/open_source/maxent/. Accessed 14 Apr 2021

Ratnayake SS, Kariyawasam CS, Kumar L, Hunter D, Liyanage ASU (2021) Potential distribution of crop wild relatives under climate change in Sri Lanka: implications for conservation of agricultural biodiversity. Curr Res Environ Sustainab 3:100092

Reich PB (2014) The world-wide ‘fast-slow’ plant economics spectrum: a traits manifesto. J Ecol 102(2):275–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12211

Saha S (2001) Vegetation composition and structure of Tectona grandis (teak, Family Verbanaceae) plantations and dry deciduous forests in central India. For Ecol Manage 148(1–3):159–167

Shamsabad MM, Assadi M, Parducci L (2018) Impact of climate change implies the northward shift in distribution of the Irano-Turanian subalpine species complex Acanthophyllum squarrosum. J Asia-Pacific Biodiver 11(4):566–572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japb.2018.08.009

Slattery B, Reshetiloff K, Zwicker SM (2003) Native plants for wildlife habitat and conservation landscaping: Chesapeake Bay Watershed. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Chesapeake Bay Field Office

Sreekanth PM, Balasundaran M, Nazeem PA, Suma TB (2012) Genetic diversity of nine natural Tectona grandis L.f. populations of the Western Ghats in Southern India. Conserv Genet 13:1409–1419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-012-0383-5

Sreekumar VB, Sanil MS (2021) Teak biology and ecology. In: The teak genome. Springer, Cham, pp 67–81

Tewari DN (1992) A monograph on teak (Tectona grandis L.f.). International Book Distributors, Dehra Dun, India

Tiwari S, Ghosh BG, Vaidya SN, Rahaman SM, Khatun M, Garai S, Saikia P, Kumar A (2021) Modeling potentially suitable lac cultivation zones of Butea monosperma to promote livelihood security in rural India. Vegetos 34:630–637. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42535-021-00222-0

Tiwari S, Mishra SN, Kumar D, Kumar B, Vaidya SN, Ghosh BG et al (2022) Modelling the potential risk zone of Lantana camara invasion and response to climate change in eastern India. Ecol Process 11(1):1–13

Troup RS (1921) The Silviculture of Indian Trees. Clarendon Press, Oxford

Vaishnav V, Mohammad N, Wali SA, Kumar R, Tripathi SB, Negi MS, Ansari SA (2015) AFLP markers for analysis of genetic diversity and structure of teak (Tectona grandis) in India. Can J for Res 45(3):297–306. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2014-0279

Vaishnav V, Wali S, Tripathi S, Negi M, Ansari S (2018) A preliminary investigation on AFLP marker-wood density trait association in teak (Tectona grandis L. f.). Ann For Res 61(1): 49–63. https://doi.org/10.15287/afr.2018.1018

Van Vuuren DP, Edmonds J, Kainuma M, Riahi K, Thomson A, Hibbard K, Hurtt GC, Kram T, Krey V, Lamarque JF (2011) The representative concentration pathways: an overview. Clim Change 109(1–2):5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0148-z

Verhaegen D, Fofana IJ, Logossa ZA, Ofori D (2010) What is the genetic origin of teak (Tectona grandis L.) introduced in Africa and in Indonesia? Tree Genet Genomes 6:717–733. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11295-010-0286-x

Kramer AT, Ison JL, Ashley MV, Howe HF (2008) The paradox of forest fragmentation genetics. Conserv Biol 22(4):878–85

Lobo JM, Jimenez-Valverde A, Real R (2008) AUC: a misleading measure of the performance of predictive distribution models. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 17:145–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2007.00358.x



We extend our heartfelt thanks to the Directors of Tropical Forest Research Institute, Jabalpur, and Institute of Forest Productivity, Ranchi, for their support during the study. We are also thankful to the respective Forest Departments of Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh, and Odisha for their support during the field survey. Technical support provided by the staff of TFRI is also acknowledged. The study was part of research Project ID 193/TFRI/2012/Gen-2(26)/ (Sub-project-4) and financial support extended by the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education, Dehradun for the same is duly acknowledged.

Author Information

Mohammad Naseer
Tropical Forest Research Institute, Jabalpur, India
Rahaman Sk Mujibar
Institute of Forest Productivity, Ranchi, India

Khatun Masjuda
Institute of Forest Productivity, Ranchi, India

Rajkumar Muthu
Tropical Forest Research Institute, Jabalpur, India

Garai Sanjoy
Institute of Forest Productivity, Ranchi, India
Ranjan Ashish
Institute of Forest Productivity, Ranchi, India
Tiwari Sharad
Institute of Forest Productivity, Ranchi, India