ABSTRACT Many studies on the ecology of tropical trees occur in protected areas such as national parks. But we know little of the composition and structure of trees in areas outside protected forests, such as urban areas or along roads. Our goal was to contrast trees in three different land‐use types that represent an unmanaged or rural to urban gradient in Guanacaste, Costa Rica: forests inside conservation areas, fencerows, and urban parks. We hypothesized that: (1) trees in fencerows and urban parks have larger mean diameters, lower densities, and less plot‐level canopy cover and basal area; (2) tree diversity does not vary along rural to urban gradients, but trees in urban parks have comparatively more non‐native species and fewer native species. We measured and identified trees ≥ 7 cm diameter in replicated plots. Consistent with expectations, tree density and canopy cover were higher in conservation areas compared to fencerows or urban parks. However, basal area was lower in fencerows compared to both other land uses. Parks were dominated by large diameter trees, while conservation areas had smaller stems. When comparing land uses from the perspectives of biodiversity and provisioning ecosystem services such as edible fruit and shade, trees inside forests in conservation areas and outside forests in urban parks in Guanacaste provide complementary benefits to people and are not substitutable. We conclude that understanding trees both inside and outside of forests provides a broader context for studies situated in protected areas and an informative comparison for studies in urban areas.
Powers et al. (Sun,) studied this question.