Summary
The anatomical study of wood used in Brazilian heritage, in association with other areas of knowledge, has provided important information about the cultural and social aspects of past generations and the composition and use of the flora of different regions. Our goal was to identify the wood used in the construction of two old bridges for the transport of people and cargo between Vila Dois Rios and Praia da Parnaioca, Ilha Grande, Angra dos Reis, state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Anatomical features of the sampled woods were used for taxonomic identification by multiple-entry key for wood identification, followed by comparisons with anatomical descriptions of wood samples from xylarium, the literature, and databases. The search for information considered the common and/or scientific names of taxa attributed to the woods from the bridges, and whose natural occurrence is registered for Ilha Grande and/or the state of Rio de Janeiro. The results showed that the bridges were built with the wood of Zollernia ilicifolia (Brongn.) Vogel and Handroanthus sp. Mattos. Knowing that the site had labor, infrastructure, and raw materials during the period when the bridges were built, the results reveal aspects of the composition of the current and past flora of Ilha Grande.
Introduction
The development of human society has always been driven by the use of environmental resources, of which wood is the main raw material with the oldest and most uses (Lourenço & Branco 2013). Brazilian traditional culture always used wood as a noble raw material (Gonzaga 2006). For the Brazilian colonial period (late 16th century), for example, Maioli et al. (2020) identified 445 wood species from the Atlantic Forest biome for use in civil construction. Thus, Brazilian woods were widely used due to their beauty, abundance, versatility, and different degrees of usefulness and application (Mainieri & Chimelo 1989; Paula & Alves 1997; Gonzaga 2006; Nahuz 2013), making them part of the Brazilian heritage (Melo Júnior 2012).
Wood anatomical studies can provide important information, both historical and archaeological, for understanding the types of wood used in construction (Andreacci & Melo Júnior 2011; Melo Júnior 2012, 2017; Boschetti et al. 2014; Maioli-Azevedo 2014; Dong et al. 2017; Haneca et al. 2018; Bernabei et al. 2019), and determining the genus or even species of the taxa used.
In this sense, several studies have sought to obtain information about the taxa of wood used over the years in Brazilian national heritage and determine whether they are native or exotic (Schulze-Hofer & Marchiori 2008; Marchiori & Schulze-Hofer 2009; Andreacci & Melo Júnior 2011; Melo Júnior 2012, 2017; Boschetti et al. 2014; Maioli-Azevedo 2014; Gonçalves et al. 2015; Melo Júnior & Boeger 2015; Silva 2020). These studies indicate that the preferred woods for use in construction come from the following botanical taxa: Aspidosperma sp. (Apocynaceae); Araucaria sp. (Araucariaceae); Handroanthus sp. (Bignoniaceae); Buchenavia sp. (Combretaceae); Bowdichia sp., Centrolobium sp., Dalbergia sp., Dipteryx sp. and Melanoxylon sp. (Fabaceae); Nectandra sp. and Ocotea sp. (Lauraceae); Pinus sp. (Pinaceae); and Chrysophylum sp. and Manilkara sp. (Sapotaceae).
Ilha Grande, one of the largest islands of Brazil, protects an important remnant of the Atlantic Forest (INEA 2019; Bergallo et al. 2020). Floristic surveys indicate high species richness for the island (Araujo & Oliveira 1988; Delamonica 1997; Oliveira 2002; Manão 2011; Rosa 2013) and that about 36% of its cataloged tree species have wood with some economic use (Callado et al. 2009). The historical and biological richness of Ilha Grande led to its recognition by UNESCO in 2019 as a world heritage site, the only mixed site in Brazil recognized simultaneously for its importance in culture and biodiversity (UNESCO 2020). The earliest records of human activities on Ilha Grande date approximately to 3000 BP (Tenório 2006), while in recent history, there were the installation of farms, a quarantine hospital, and penitentiary institutions (Mello 1987; Santos 2007; Santiago et al. 2009; Santos & Ribeiro Filho 2018), the last being the most memorable period in history and determinant in the configuration of the landscape, constructions and the remains of constructions existing today.
The first correctional colony on Ilha Grande was installed at the end of the 19th century, 1894, (Mello 1987; Santos 2006; Santiago et al. 2009; Santos & Ribeiro Filho 2018), and functioned until 1938, when it was replaced by the prison Penitenciária Agrícola do Distrito Federal, later called Instituto Penal Cândido Mendes, which operated until 1994 (Santiago et al. 2009; Santos & Ribeiro Filho 2018). During construction of the buildings of Instituto Penal Cândido Mendes, which was completed in April 1941 (Santiago et al. 2009), two roads were opened — the Dois Rio-Abraão road and the Dois Rios-Parnaioca road — to allow the transit of people and vehicles of the penitentiary (Santiago 2010), including cargo trucks. Along with the construction of these roads was the construction of the infrastructure associated with them, such as two bridges for the Dois Rios-Parnaioca road (Santiago 2010; Santos 2016).
In this context, this study aimed to identify, using anatomical features, the taxa whose wood was used to construct the two bridges on the old Dois Rios-Parnaioca road in Ilha Grande and to relate the identified taxa to the current composition of the flora. There are no cataloged records or information regarding the wood of the two bridges except that all the wood used in the constructions of the penitentiary Instituto Penal Cândido Mendes was taken from local forests (Arquivo Nacional 1943).
Materials and methods
Study site and sampled botanical material
The study involved two bridges located on the southeast slope of Ilha Grande, Angra dos Reis, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil: Bridge 1 at 23°11′35.88″S, 44°13′24.96″W (Figs. 1 and 2A–B) and Bridge 2 at 23°11′35.38″S, 44°13′45.18″W (Fig. 2A, C). The infra- and mesostructure of the bridges were built with concrete and rocks, while the superstructure was produced with wood.
Bridge 1 (7.10 m long). Photograph in 1944. Collection of Ecomuseu Ilha Grande, Angra dos Reis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Unidentified photographer (Arquivo Nacional).
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Bridge 1 (7.10 m long). Photograph in 1944. Collection of Ecomuseu Ilha Grande, Angra dos Reis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Unidentified photographer (Arquivo Nacional).
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Bridge 1 (7.10 m long). Photograph in 1944. Collection of Ecomuseu Ilha Grande, Angra dos Reis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Unidentified photographer (Arquivo Nacional).
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Location and general aspect of the studied bridges with indications of the wood sampled. (A) Map of Ilha Grande and sampling points, with detail of the location of Bridge 1 and Bridge 2. (B–C) Sketch representing the mesostructure and infrastructure in concrete and rocks and the superstructure in the wood from the two bridges. (B) Bridge 1 in front view, from bottom-up, and side view, wood of the fixed end beam (FEB1) highlighted (dark coloring). (C) Bridge 2 in front view, from the bottom up, and side view, wood of the fixed end beam (FEB2) and beam support point (BSP2) highlighted (dark colouring).
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Location and general aspect of the studied bridges with indications of the wood sampled. (A) Map of Ilha Grande and sampling points, with detail of the location of Bridge 1 and Bridge 2. (B–C) Sketch representing the mesostructure and infrastructure in concrete and rocks and the superstructure in the wood from the two bridges. (B) Bridge 1 in front view, from bottom-up, and side view, wood of the fixed end beam (FEB1) highlighted (dark coloring). (C) Bridge 2 in front view, from the bottom up, and side view, wood of the fixed end beam (FEB2) and beam support point (BSP2) highlighted (dark colouring).
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Location and general aspect of the studied bridges with indications of the wood sampled. (A) Map of Ilha Grande and sampling points, with detail of the location of Bridge 1 and Bridge 2. (B–C) Sketch representing the mesostructure and infrastructure in concrete and rocks and the superstructure in the wood from the two bridges. (B) Bridge 1 in front view, from bottom-up, and side view, wood of the fixed end beam (FEB1) highlighted (dark coloring). (C) Bridge 2 in front view, from the bottom up, and side view, wood of the fixed end beam (FEB2) and beam support point (BSP2) highlighted (dark colouring).
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
The botanical material includes woods of the two bridges on the old Dois Rios-Parnaioca road (Fig. 2B–C), currently in ruins. Samples of about 10 cm3 were obtained with the aid of handsaw, chisel, and hammer. The wood samples were from parts of the bridges that were still intact, namely the fixed end beam (FEB1) of Bridge 1 (Fig. 2B) and the fixed end beam (FEB2), and the beam support point (BSP2) of Bridge 2 (Fig. 2C). The length of FEB1 was 7.10 m, FEB2 was 4.40 m, and BSP2 was 5.06 m.
Wood anatomy
Standardized blocks of wood (Burger & Richter 1991) were made for each of the remaining structures of the two studied bridges. Six of these blocks were used to calculate the basic wood density (Coradin & Muniz 1992). Another part was softened in 10% ethylenediamine (Carlquist 1982), gradually included in polyethylene glycol 1500 in an oven at 60°C (Barbosa et al. 2010) and sectioned with a sliding microtome (Leica SM 2010R) in transverse, tangential longitudinal, and radial longitudinal planes, with thicknesses varying from 14 to 20 μm. Sections were double-stained by Astra Blue and Safranin (Burger & Richter 1991) and mounted on permanent slides with Entellan® Merk synthetic resin. A final part of the blocks was subjected to maceration by the Franklin method (Jane 1956 modified in Fedalto 1982), stained with 50% Safranin and mounted on histological slides with 50% glycerol (Johansen 1940).
Histological analyses were performed using an Olympus BX41 optical microscope and the images were obtained using a Q Collor 5 camera with ImagePro Express 6.0 software. Measurements and counts of cellular elements, as well as the description of wood anatomical features, followed the standards of the IAWA Committee (Wheeler et al. 1989), with the addition of measurements of the aperture diameter of intervessel, vessel-ray, and vessel-parenchyma pits (Scheel-Ybert & Gonçalves 2017).
Taxonomic identification
Anatomical descriptions of each sample were submitted for analysis in the interactive, multiple-entry key for wood identification of the InsideWood Database (InsideWood 2004-onwards). For the determination, no mismatch was allowed for the fixed end beam of Bridge 1 and the beam support point of Bridge 2, and only one mismatch was allowed for the fixed end beam of Bridge 2. After matches were found, the anatomical descriptions were compared to other descriptions obtained from: (1) papers and books about wood anatomy research (Table 1); (2) histological slides of the Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro Xylarium (RBw in Table 1); and (3) histological slides of live trees sampled in the Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro Arboretum (RBv) and of Ilha Grande (Table 1). The criteria for selecting species for comparisons took into account the following, respecting the current nomenclatural status of taxa (Flora do Brasil 2020 2020): (1) species with the common name “moçutaíba”, as mentioned for the manufacture of bridges in the region (Callado et al. 2009), that naturally occur in the state of Rio de Janeiro (Camargos et al. 1996); (2) same species or taxonomically close genera to the species indicated by the identification key of InsideWood Database (InsideWood 2004-onwards); and (3) species with occurrences registered for Ilha Grande (Araujo & Oliveira 1988; Delamonica 1997; Oliveira 2002; Callado et al. 2009; Manão 2011; Rosa 2013; JBRJ 2019) and/or to the state of Rio de Janeiro (JBRJ 2019; Flora do Brasil 2020 2020). The report of activities carried out by the penitentiary institutions that operated in the studied region cites the use of local wood for different purposes and does not mention the purchase of wood during the period (Arquivo Nacional 1943).
Studied samples, species for comparative anatomical analysis, species inclusion criteria and sources of data used in the analysis.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Studied samples, species for comparative anatomical analysis, species inclusion criteria and sources of data used in the analysis.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Studied samples, species for comparative anatomical analysis, species inclusion criteria and sources of data used in the analysis.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Statistical analysis
To order the samples and species (Table 1) according to the similarities and differences in wood anatomical features, qualitative and quantitative data were organized in a binary matrix (Tables 3 and 5) and submitted for Principal Component Analysis (PCA) (Gotelli & Ellison 2011), using Statistica version 7 (Statsoft 1993). The descriptive data for each studied sample and each species used in the comparative analysis (Table 1) were organized according to the species suggested by the identification key of the InsideWood Database (InsideWood 2004-onwards) and taxa correlated with each of these identifications (Tables 3 and 5). The scores for each analysis were generated by the loadings shown in Tables 4 and 6.
Results
Anatomical descriptions of the studied historical woods
Bridge 1: fixed end beam
The wood from the fixed end beam has: high basic density with 1.1 ± 0.2 g/cm3; distinct growth ring boundaries marked by axial parenchyma in marginal or in seemingly marginal bands (Fig. 3A); diffuse porosity; solitary vessels and in radial multiples of 2–3 (3 rare), circular to oval vessel outline, mean tangential diameter of 127 ± 16 μm, mean wall thickness of 5 ± 2 μm, mean frequency of 6 ± 2 vessels/mm2; storied vessel elements with simple perforation plates, without tails, mean length of 302 ± 84 μm and gum/resin obliterating vessel lumina (Fig. 3A); alternate, polygonal, vestured and small intervessel pits; shape and size of vessel-ray and vessel-parenchyma pits similar to intervessel pits; non-septate libriform fibres, mean length of 784 ± 353 μm, mean diameter of 15 ± 3 μm, mean lumina of 2 ± 1 μm and very thick-walled (7 ± 1 μm), with pits <3 μm; storied axial parenchyma (Fig. 3B), in combination of the scanty and confluent paratracheal parenchyma; and parenchyma bands of 3–7 cells wide, narrower at boundary between consecutive growth rings (Fig. 3A), and in strands of 2–4 cells, with a mean height of 363 ± 24 μm; storied rays (Fig. 3B), mean frequency of 9 ± 1 rays/mm, uniseriate (rare) and multiseriate, mean width of 2–3 cells and 30 ± 6 μm, mean height of 261 ± 81 μm and composed of procumbent cells only or body ray cells procumbent with upright and/or square marginal cells (Fig. 3C); and mineral inclusions forming strands of 3–7 prismatic crystals in axial parenchyma cells (Fig. 4C) and solitary prismatic crystals in upright and/or square ray cells. Table 2 shows the quantitative anatomical features of the wood from the fixed end beam of Bridge 1.
Anatomical features. (A–C) Wood from FEB1. (A) Growth ring boundary delimited by marginal parenchyma (arrow). (B) Storied axial and ray parenchyma (rectangle). (C) Rays composed of procumbent (asterisk) and square (arrow) cells. (D–F) Wood from FEB2. (D) Growth ring boundary delimited by marginal parenchyma (arrow). (E) Storied vessel elements and axial and ray parenchyma (rectangle). (F) Rays composed of procumbent cells (arrow). (G–I) Wood from BSP2. (G) Diffuse porosity and axial parenchyma. (H) Storied axial and ray parenchyma (rectangle). (I) Rays composed of procumbent (asterisk) and square (arrow) cells. (A, D and G) Transverse section. (B, C, E–H) Longitudinal section. Scale bars: A, G = 300 μm; B, D, E, H= 200 μm; C, F, I= 100 μm.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Anatomical features. (A–C) Wood from FEB1. (A) Growth ring boundary delimited by marginal parenchyma (arrow). (B) Storied axial and ray parenchyma (rectangle). (C) Rays composed of procumbent (asterisk) and square (arrow) cells. (D–F) Wood from FEB2. (D) Growth ring boundary delimited by marginal parenchyma (arrow). (E) Storied vessel elements and axial and ray parenchyma (rectangle). (F) Rays composed of procumbent cells (arrow). (G–I) Wood from BSP2. (G) Diffuse porosity and axial parenchyma. (H) Storied axial and ray parenchyma (rectangle). (I) Rays composed of procumbent (asterisk) and square (arrow) cells. (A, D and G) Transverse section. (B, C, E–H) Longitudinal section. Scale bars: A, G = 300 μm; B, D, E, H= 200 μm; C, F, I= 100 μm.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Anatomical features. (A–C) Wood from FEB1. (A) Growth ring boundary delimited by marginal parenchyma (arrow). (B) Storied axial and ray parenchyma (rectangle). (C) Rays composed of procumbent (asterisk) and square (arrow) cells. (D–F) Wood from FEB2. (D) Growth ring boundary delimited by marginal parenchyma (arrow). (E) Storied vessel elements and axial and ray parenchyma (rectangle). (F) Rays composed of procumbent cells (arrow). (G–I) Wood from BSP2. (G) Diffuse porosity and axial parenchyma. (H) Storied axial and ray parenchyma (rectangle). (I) Rays composed of procumbent (asterisk) and square (arrow) cells. (A, D and G) Transverse section. (B, C, E–H) Longitudinal section. Scale bars: A, G = 300 μm; B, D, E, H= 200 μm; C, F, I= 100 μm.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Anatomical features. (A–B) Intervessel pits. (A) Wood from BSP2, polygonal shape of alternate pits (arrow). (B) Wood from FEB2, circular to oval shape of alternate pits (arrow). (C) Wood from FEB1, prismatic crystals forming strands in axial parenchyma cells (arrow). (A–C) Tangential section. Scale bars: A, B = 10 μm; C = 100 μm.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Anatomical features. (A–B) Intervessel pits. (A) Wood from BSP2, polygonal shape of alternate pits (arrow). (B) Wood from FEB2, circular to oval shape of alternate pits (arrow). (C) Wood from FEB1, prismatic crystals forming strands in axial parenchyma cells (arrow). (A–C) Tangential section. Scale bars: A, B = 10 μm; C = 100 μm.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Anatomical features. (A–B) Intervessel pits. (A) Wood from BSP2, polygonal shape of alternate pits (arrow). (B) Wood from FEB2, circular to oval shape of alternate pits (arrow). (C) Wood from FEB1, prismatic crystals forming strands in axial parenchyma cells (arrow). (A–C) Tangential section. Scale bars: A, B = 10 μm; C = 100 μm.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Bridge 2: fixed end beam
The wood from the fixed end beam has: high basic density with 0.7 ± 0.1 g/cm3; distinct growth ring boundaries marked by axial parenchyma in marginal or in seemingly marginal bands (Fig. 3D); diffuse porosity; solitary vessels and in radial multiples of 2–3, circular to oval vessel outline, mean tangential diameter of 103 ± 14 μm, mean wall thickness of 6 ± 1 μm and mean frequency of 18 ± 3 vessels/mm2; storied vessel elements (Fig. 3E) with simple perforation plates, without tails, mean length of 215 ± 33 μm and tyloses blocking vessel lumina; alternate, circular and medium to large intervessel pits (Fig. 4B); shape of vessel-ray and vessel-parenchyma pits similar to intervessel pits but smaller in size; non-septate libriform fibres, mean length of 1047 ± 152 μm, mean diameter of 13 ± 2 μm, mean lumina of 2 ± 0.4 μm and very thick-walled (6 ± 1 μm), with pits <3 μm; storied axial parenchyma (Fig. 3E), in a combination of aliform and confluent paratracheal parenchyma; and parenchyma lines at ring boundary (Fig. 3D), and in strands of 2–3 cells, with a mean height of 226 ± 14 μm; storied rays (Fig. 3E), mean frequency of 6 ± 1 rays/mm, uniseriate (rare) and multiseriate, with mean width of 2–3 cells and 27 ± 9 μm, mean height of 124 ± 23 μm and composed of procumbent cells only (Fig. 3F); absence of mineral inclusions. Table 2 shows the quantitative anatomical features of the wood from the fixed end beam of Bridge 2.
Quantitative anatomical features of the studied samples.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Quantitative anatomical features of the studied samples.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Quantitative anatomical features of the studied samples.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Bridge 2: beam support point
The wood from the beam support point has: high basic density with 1.1 ± 0.1 g/cm3; indistinct growth ring boundaries; diffuse porosity (Fig. 3G); solitary vessels and in radial multiples of 2–3, circular to oval vessel outline, mean tangential diameter of 118 ± 16 μm, mean wall thickness of 7 ± 2 μm and mean frequency of 7 ± 2 vessels/mm2; storied vessel elements with simple perforation plates, without tails, mean length of 281 ± 45 μm and gum/resin obliterating the vessel lumina (Fig. 3G); alternate, polygonal (Fig. 4A), vestured, minute to small intervessel pits; shape and size of vessel-ray and vessel-parenchyma pits similar to intervessel pits; non-septate libriform fibres, mean length of 975 ± 200 μm, mean diameter of 16 ± 3 μm, mean lumina of 1 ± 0.4 μm, very thick-walled (7 ± 1 μm), with pits <3 μm; storied axial parenchyma (Fig. 3H), in combination of the scanty and confluent paratracheal parenchyma forming bands (rare); and parenchyma bands of 2–8 cells wide, and in strands of 2–3 cells, with a mean height of 335 ± 13 μm; storied rays (Fig. 3H), mean frequency of 8 ± 2 rays/mm, uniseriate (rare) and multiseriate, with a mean width of 2–3 cells and 30 ± 10 μm, sometimes, fused, mean height of 242 ± 55 μm and composed of procumbent cells only or body ray cells procumbent with upright and/or square marginal cells (Fig. 3I); and solitary prismatic crystals or in strands of 2–6 in axial parenchyma cells and solitary prismatic crystals or in pairs in upright and/or square ray cells. Table 2 shows the quantitative anatomical features of the wood from the beam support point of Bridge 2.
Identification of the studied historical woods
The inclusion of wood anatomical features in the identification key of the InsideWood Database suggested that the samples from the fixed end beam of Bridge 1 and beam support point of Bridge 2 belong to the species Zollernia ilicifolia (Brongn.) Vogel (Fabaceae) and the sample from the fixed end beam of Bridge 2 as belonging to the genus Handroanthus Mattos (Bignoniaceae).
The first Principal Component Analysis (PCA) compared the historical woods from the fixed end beam of Bridge 1 and beam support point of Bridge 2 with correctly identified samples of Zollernia ilicifolia and with taxa correlated with this species (Tables 1 and 3). The analysis evidenced proximity among fixed end beam of Bridge 1, beam support point of Bridge 2, and Zollernia ilicifolia, including the samples obtained from live trees of Ilha Grande and RBv. The first three axes together explain 69.5% of the total variance (Fig. 5A; Table 4). Axis 1, responsible for 33.7% of this variance, segregated Swartzia sp. and Exostyles venusta from the other samples, which were projected close to zero or negatively on this axis. The anatomical features with the greatest contribution to axis 1 for positive ordering were vessels in multiples with more than three elements, medium intervessel pits, and thin-to-thick-walled fibres, and, negatively on this axis, small intervessel pits, very thick-walled fibres, scanty paratracheal parenchyma, and in strands of 3–4 cells and presence of crystals in ray cells. Axis 2 is responsible for 24.3% of the total variance and ordered Zollernia ilicifolia, fixed end beam of Bridge 1 and beam support point the Bridge 2 in the same quadrant (Fig. 5A), due to storied rays, procumbent body ray cells with upright and/or square marginal cells, confluent parenchyma and parenchyma in marginal lines, and crystals in axial parenchyma cells. Axis 3, responsible for 11.5% of the total variance, had ray cells procumbent as anatomical features of the greatest contribution. Axis 3, together with axis 2, shows the proximity between the fixed end beam of Bridge 1 and the beam support point of Bridge 2 with Zollernia ilicifolia (Fig. 5A).
Anatomical features used in the PCA of the studied samples (FEB1 and BSP2), samples of Zollernia ilicifolia and samples of taxa correlated with this species.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Anatomical features used in the PCA of the studied samples (FEB1 and BSP2), samples of Zollernia ilicifolia and samples of taxa correlated with this species.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Anatomical features used in the PCA of the studied samples (FEB1 and BSP2), samples of Zollernia ilicifolia and samples of taxa correlated with this species.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Axes score plots. (A) Comparison between studied samples (black circle) and species of Fabaceae used in identification (gray circle). Ev: Exostyles venusta. So: Swartzia oblata. Ss: Swartzia simplex var. grandiflora. Zi: Zollernia ilicifolia. Zg: Zollernia glabra. Zf: Zollernia falcata. FEB1: Wood from the fixed end beam of Bridge 1. BSP2: Wood from the beam support point of Bridge 2. Ellipse: gathers wood samples from Zollernia ilicifolia, FEB1 and BSP2. (B) Comparison between the studied sample (black circle) and species of Bignoniaceae used in identification (grey circle). Ca, Cybistax antisyphilitica; Ha, Handroanthus albus; Hc, Handroanthus chrysotrichus; Hh, Handroanthus heptaphyllus; Hi, Handroanthus impetiginosus; Ho, Handroanthus ochraceus; Hpu, Handroanthus pulcherrimus; Hs, Handroanthus serratifolius; Hu, Handroanthus umbellatus; Sl, Sparattosperma leucanthum; Tc, Tabebuia cassinoides; Tro, Tabebuia rosea; Tra, Tabebuia roseoalba; Ts, Tabebuia stenocalyx; FEB2, Wood from the fixed end beam of Bridge 2; ellipse, wood samples gathered from Handroanthus and FEB2.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Axes score plots. (A) Comparison between studied samples (black circle) and species of Fabaceae used in identification (gray circle). Ev: Exostyles venusta. So: Swartzia oblata. Ss: Swartzia simplex var. grandiflora. Zi: Zollernia ilicifolia. Zg: Zollernia glabra. Zf: Zollernia falcata. FEB1: Wood from the fixed end beam of Bridge 1. BSP2: Wood from the beam support point of Bridge 2. Ellipse: gathers wood samples from Zollernia ilicifolia, FEB1 and BSP2. (B) Comparison between the studied sample (black circle) and species of Bignoniaceae used in identification (grey circle). Ca, Cybistax antisyphilitica; Ha, Handroanthus albus; Hc, Handroanthus chrysotrichus; Hh, Handroanthus heptaphyllus; Hi, Handroanthus impetiginosus; Ho, Handroanthus ochraceus; Hpu, Handroanthus pulcherrimus; Hs, Handroanthus serratifolius; Hu, Handroanthus umbellatus; Sl, Sparattosperma leucanthum; Tc, Tabebuia cassinoides; Tro, Tabebuia rosea; Tra, Tabebuia roseoalba; Ts, Tabebuia stenocalyx; FEB2, Wood from the fixed end beam of Bridge 2; ellipse, wood samples gathered from Handroanthus and FEB2.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Axes score plots. (A) Comparison between studied samples (black circle) and species of Fabaceae used in identification (gray circle). Ev: Exostyles venusta. So: Swartzia oblata. Ss: Swartzia simplex var. grandiflora. Zi: Zollernia ilicifolia. Zg: Zollernia glabra. Zf: Zollernia falcata. FEB1: Wood from the fixed end beam of Bridge 1. BSP2: Wood from the beam support point of Bridge 2. Ellipse: gathers wood samples from Zollernia ilicifolia, FEB1 and BSP2. (B) Comparison between the studied sample (black circle) and species of Bignoniaceae used in identification (grey circle). Ca, Cybistax antisyphilitica; Ha, Handroanthus albus; Hc, Handroanthus chrysotrichus; Hh, Handroanthus heptaphyllus; Hi, Handroanthus impetiginosus; Ho, Handroanthus ochraceus; Hpu, Handroanthus pulcherrimus; Hs, Handroanthus serratifolius; Hu, Handroanthus umbellatus; Sl, Sparattosperma leucanthum; Tc, Tabebuia cassinoides; Tro, Tabebuia rosea; Tra, Tabebuia roseoalba; Ts, Tabebuia stenocalyx; FEB2, Wood from the fixed end beam of Bridge 2; ellipse, wood samples gathered from Handroanthus and FEB2.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Loadings of the three axes of the PCA. Comparison of woods of FEB1 and BSP2 with woods of species used for comparison.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Loadings of the three axes of the PCA. Comparison of woods of FEB1 and BSP2 with woods of species used for comparison.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Loadings of the three axes of the PCA. Comparison of woods of FEB1 and BSP2 with woods of species used for comparison.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
The second PCA compared the historical wood fixed end beam of Bridge 2 with correctly identified samples of Handroanthus sp. and with taxa correlated with this genus (Tables 1 and 5). The analysis evidenced the proximity between the fixed end beam of Bridge 2 and Handroanthus sp. samples. The first three axes together explain 41.3% of the total variance (Fig. 5B; Table 6). Axis 1, responsible for 17.8% of this variance, segregated Tabebuia sp., Cybistax antisyphilitica, and Sparattosperma leucanthum from the other samples, which were projected close to zero or negatively on this axis (Fig. 5B). The anatomical features with the greatest contribution to axis 1 for positive ordering are minute intervessel pits, and, negatively on this axis, medium to large intervessel pits and very thick-walled fibres. Axes 2 and 3 were responsible for 13.4 and 10.1% of the total variance, respectively. The anatomical features with the greatest contribution to these axes were: the presence of rays with exclusively procumbent cells and procumbent body ray cells with upright and/or square marginal cells, vasicentric parenchyma, and parenchyma in bands of more than three cells wide. Despite the low correlation, a grouping is formed with the fixed end beam of Bridge 2 and species of Handroanthus (Fig. 5B).
Anatomical features used in the PCA of the studied sample (FEB2), samples of Handroanthus sp. and samples of taxa correlated with this genus.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Anatomical features used in the PCA of the studied sample (FEB2), samples of Handroanthus sp. and samples of taxa correlated with this genus.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Anatomical features used in the PCA of the studied sample (FEB2), samples of Handroanthus sp. and samples of taxa correlated with this genus.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Loadings of the three axes of the PCA: Comparison of wood of FEB2 wood and with woods of species used for comparison.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Loadings of the three axes of the PCA: Comparison of wood of FEB2 wood and with woods of species used for comparison.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Loadings of the three axes of the PCA: Comparison of wood of FEB2 wood and with woods of species used for comparison.
Citation: IAWA Journal 44, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/22941932-bja10085
Discussion
Anatomy and distribution of species
Analyses of wood anatomy and density allowed the identification of the wood used in the studied bridges as of the families Fabaceae and Bignoniaceae. The wood samples of the fixed end beam of Bridge 1 and the beam support point of Bridge 2 have features specific to the Fabaceae subfamily Papilionoideae (Solereder 1908; Metcalfe & Chalk 1950; Baretta-Kuipers 1981) and tribe Swartzieae, according to the characteristics highlighted by Gasson (1996). Among the species of Swartzieae with the common name “moçutaíba” and occurrence in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Zollernia ilicifolia has wood similar to the wood samples from the fixed end beam of Bridge 1 and the beam support point of Bridge 2 (Mainieri & Chimelo 1989; Barros et al. 2008; Zanne et al. 2009; Table 3). The wood from the fixed end beam of Bridge 2 has features specific to Bignoniaceae (Solereder 1908; Metcalfe & Chalk 1950; Pace & Angyalossy 2013; Pace et al. 2015) and is similar to wood of genera belonging to the Neotropical Tabebuia alliance clade (Pace & Angyalossy 2013; Pace et al. 2015). Among the genera of this clade that occur in the state of Rio de Janeiro, species of Handroanthus have wood similar to that of the fixed end beam of Bridge 2 (Dos Santos & Miller 1992; León 2007; Zanne et al. 2009; Pace & Angyalossy 2013; Yajure & Yorgana 2014; Pace et al. 2015).
Of the nine Brazilian species of Zollernia, three occur in the Atlantic Forest of the state of Rio de Janeiro: Z. glabra, Z. glaziovii Yakovlev, and Z. ilicifolia (Flora do Brasil 2020 2020). Zollernia ilicifolia, known as “moçutaíba” (Mainieri & Chimelo 1989; Camargos et al. 1996), has wood with great resistance and durability, and it is indicated for internal finishing, external constructions such as bridges and poles, and for use in floors and musical instruments (Mainieri & Chimelo 1989; Paula & Alves 1997; Lorenzi 1998).
The genus Handroanthus, commonly known as “ipê” (Mainieri & Chimelo 1989; Camargos et al. 1996), has 27 Brazilian species, 11 of which occur in the state of Rio de Janeiro: H. albus (Cham.) Mattos, H. botelhensis (A.H. Gentry) S. Grose, H. bureavii (Sandwith) S. Grose, H. chrysotrichus (Mart. ex DC.) Mattos, H. heptaphyllus (Vell.) Mattos, H. impetiginosus (Mart. ex DC.) Mattos, H. ochraceus (Cham.) Mattos, H. pulcherrimus (Sandwith) Mattos, H. serratifolius (Vahl) S.Grose, H. umbellatus (Sond.) Mattos and H. vellosoi (Toledo) Mattos (Flora do Brasil 2020 2020). The wood of “ipê” is widely used in external constructions, such as bridges and poles, and even in shipbuilding (Mainieri & Chimelo 1989; Lorenzi 1992; Paula & Alves 1997).
Physical properties (density)
The utilisation of wood is related to its anatomical and physical features. Anatomical features, such as the presence of mineral inclusions, tyloses, silica, gums, and other deposits, give wood greater resistance to attack by xylophagous organisms (Silva et al. 2004; Gonçalves et al. 2013). Features such as density are related to anatomical and chemical factors of wood and provide mechanical resistance and durability (Trugilho et al. 1996; Abruzzi et al. 2012). Therefore, the presence of these features has been a factor in the selection of wood.
The taxa identified in the present study — Zollernia ilicifolia and Handroanthus sp. — have a high density. This feature, in addition to mineral inclusions and other deposits in the wood structure, contributes to resistance and durability, even in adverse conditions (Mainieri & Chimelo 1989; Lorenzi 1992, 1998; Paula & Alves 1997), which would explain the good present-day condition of the wood used in construction in the late 1930s and early 1940s (Santiago 2010; Santos 2016). It should be noted that Z. ilicifolia has a higher basic density than most species of Handroanthus (Mainieri & Chimelo 1989; Zanne et al. 2009), including the wood studied here. The wood of Z. ilicifolia was used in the longest structures of the studied bridges, namely the fixed end beam of Bridge 1 (7.10 m) and the beam support point of Bridge 2 (5.06 m), which is likely related to the need for a more dense and resistant wood.
Studies of wood used in historical constructions in Brazil have indicated a general preference for using wood of medium to high density, especially when exposed outdoors. Melo Júnior (2012) investigated the use of wood in different historical construction in Brazil and found the identified woods were mainly of high density. Maioli-Azevedo (2014) identified wood used in the slave quarters of the Ponte Alta Farm in Rio de Janeiro and found it to comprise woods of different densities, with a preference for the use of high-density wood, such as Aspidosperma polyneuron Müll.Arg. with a density of 0.79 g/cm3, for structures with direct contact with the soil. Boschetti et al. (2014) identified the use of high-density woods in the construction of bridges on Fortaleza Farm in the state of Espírito Santo, namely the species Melanoxylon brauna Schott and Dipteryx odorata (Aubl.) Forsyth f., with densities of 1.05 and 1.09 g/cm3 (Mainieri & Chimelo 1989), respectively.
Cultural aspects
In different parts of the Brazilian territory, wood was widely used and met different demands that arose over time (Paula & Alves 1997; Gonzaga 2006; Boschetti & Barbosa 2010). Due to different cultural knowledge, the technological use of these woods varied in the different regional parts of the country (Gonzaga 2006), the wood having different applications, being used in civil and naval construction as well as the elaboration of instruments and handcrafted compositions (Mainieri & Chimelo 1989; Paula & Alves 1997; Gonzaga 2006; Nahuz 2013).
The use of wood, both in the structural and ornamental parts, is a striking element in many Brazilian historical buildings, with most of the woods used taken from the region itself (Schulze-Hofer & Marchiori 2008; Marchiori & Schulze-Hofer 2009; Melo Júnior 2012, 2017; Boschetti et al. 2014; Maioli-Azevedo 2014; Melo Júnior & Boeger 2015). According to Boschetti & Barbosa (2010), the variety and number of woody species available in forests would be one of the main reasons that contributed to the use of this raw material in large quantities in Brazilian constructions.
The good quality of the woods of Ilha Grande and their possible uses have been reported since the late 16th century (Santiago et al. 2009), when many were used for ship repair and construction and firewood supply, as well as for charcoal production for sugar mills (Mello 1987; Callado et al. 2009; Santiago et al. 2009).
According to Araujo & Oliveira (1988), the wood of “moçutaíba” was applied on floors of old farms on Ilha Grande, while the use of “ipê” is mentioned in old letters or documents throughout the history of the region (Santiago et al. 2009). Surveys of the current flora registered one species of “ipê”, Handroanthus heptaphyllus (Rosa 2013), and only one individual of “moçutaíba”, Zollernia ilicifolia.
During the prison period on Ilha Grande (1894–1994), it was believed that prisoners would obtain recovery through work performed on crops and in workshops (Santos 2006; Santiago et al. 2009; Santos & Ribeiro Filho 2018). The prisoners learned, with the execution of daily tasks, to recognize the different types of wood and their applications. As a result, the region had excellent labour and infrastructure for cutting and preparing native wood, with sawmills and well-assembled carpentry (Arquivo Nacional 1943; Santos 2006; Santiago et al. 2009), which would have intensified the use of local wood for different purposes, contributing to current aspects of the flora of Ilha Grande.
In addition to labour and existing infrastructure, the availability of raw materials, as reported in letters and documents that describe the taxa identified in this study, supports the hypothesis that the woods from the studied bridges came from the forest. According to Stefel & Moro (2013), local wood was used to construct small bridges that do not require concrete and steel beams, as they are constructions of lesser investment and generally easier to maintain if necessary. These authors highlight that this type of construction is very common in places with lower purchasing power, which is also compatible with the situation of Ilha Grande due to its difficult access.
Conclusions
The analysis of wood anatomy and density revealed that the wood of the studied bridges belongs to the species Zollernia ilicifolia and the genus Handroanthus. Although there is a preference for using an identified taxon in constructions, and the literature on the use of Brazilian wood indicates the potential of both taxa in bridge construction, the present work was the first to identify the use of Z. ilicifolia and Handroanthus sp. in the historical construction of bridges. These results corroborate the importance of anatomical studies for the identification of taxa whose wood was used in historical and/or archaeological sites.
The period of construction of both studied bridges represents a time of investment in works and intense use of forest resources to meet both common demands and those of the penitentiary institutions on Ilha Grande. In this regard, the gathering of historical and biological data carried out in this work is of great relevance to Ilha Grande, in view of its designation as the only Brazilian site recognized by UNESCO as a world heritage of culture and biodiversity. In addition, the results of this study contribute to understanding current aspects of flora as a reflection of the past exploitation of natural resources.
Corresponding author; email: catia.callado@gmail.com; ccallado@uerj.br
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to J.A.T. Glória for the valuable technical assistance; to J.V.S. Castelar for help in sampling material; to D.B. Silva for assistance with figures; to G.U.C.A. Santos for critical reading and suggestions to the text; to Centro de Estudos Ambientais e Desenvolvimento Sustentável (CEADS) and Parque Botânico do Ecomuseu Ilha Grande (PaB/ECOMIG) for infrastructure for fieldwork; to Instituto de Pesquisas Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro and curator N. Tamaio for the loan of xylarium material (RBw); and to Instituto Estadual do Ambiente (INEA) for scientific research authorization (INEA 063/2018). The authors are also grateful to two anonymous reviewers and the associate editor, Dr. Arno Brandes, for their comments and valuable suggestions on the earlier version of the manuscript. This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior–Brasil (CAPES)–Finance Code 001; Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq); and Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ). This paper was derived from the master dissertation of the first author.
References
Abruzzi RC, Pires MR, Dedavid BA, Kali SB. 2012. Relação das propriedades mecânicas e densidade de postes de Madeira de eucalipto com seu estado de deterioração. Rev. Árvore 36: 1173–1182. DOI: 10.1590/S0100-67622012000600018.
Andreacci F, Melo Júnior JCF. 2011. Madeiras históricas do barroco mineiro: interfaces entre o patrimônio cultural material e a anatomia da Madeira. Rodriguésia 62: 241–251. DOI: 10.1590/2175-7860201162202.
Angyalossy-Alfonso V, Miller RB. 2002. Wood anatomy of the Brazilian species of Swartzia and considerations within the tribe Swartzieae. IAWA J. 23: 359–390. DOI: 10.1163/22941932-90000310.
Araujo DSD, Oliveira RR. 1988. Reserva Biológica Estadual da Praia do Sul (Ilha Grande, Estado do Rio de Janeiro): Lista preliminar da flora. Acta Bot. Bras. 1: 83–94. DOI: 10.1590/S0102-33061987000300009.
Arquivo Nacional. 1943. Relatório do Diretor da Colônia Agrícola do Distrito Federal, Nestor Verissimo da Fonseca, ao Ministro de Justiça e Negócios Interiores, de 30 de Junho de 1943. Fundo: Série Justiça — Administração (IJ2-1287).
Barbosa ACF, Pace MR, Witovisk L, Angyalossy V. 2010. New method to obtain good anatomical slides of heterogeneous plant parts. IAWA J. 31: 373–383. DOI: 10.1163/22941932-90000030.
Baretta-Kuipers T. 1981. Wood anatomy of Leguminosae: its relevance to taxonomy. Advances in legume systematics. In: Polhill RM, Raven PH (eds.), Advances in legume systematics: 677–705. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.
Barros CF, Callado CH. 1997. Madeiras da Mata Atlântica: Anatomia do lenho de espécies ocorrentes nos remanescentes florestais do Estado do Rio de Janeiro — Brasil. Instituto de Pesquisas Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ.
Barros CF, Callado CH, Da Cunha M, Ferreira MLM, Tamaio N, Marquete O, Costa CG. 2008. Madeiras da Mata Atlântica: anatomia do lenho de espécies ocorrentes nos remanescentes florestais do Estado do Rio de Janeiro — Brasil. Vol. III. Instituto de Pesquisas Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ.
Bergallo HG, Cronemberger C, Hipólito J, Magnusson WE, Rocha CFD. 2020. Integrating researchers for understanding biodiversity in Atlantic forest. In: Marques MCM, Grelle CEV (eds.), The Atlantic forest: history, biodiversity, threats and opportunities of-the mega-diverse forest: 469–485. Springer, Cham. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-55322-7.
Bernabei M, Macchioni N, Pizzo B, Sozzi L, Lazzeri S, Fiorentino L, Calcagnile L. 2019. The wooden foundations of Rialto Bridge (Ponte di Rialto) in Venice: technological characterisation and dating. J. Cult. Herit. 36: 85–93. DOI: 10.1016/j.culher.2018.07.015.
Boschetti WT, Barbosa AA. 2010. A madeira e a tradição construtiva capixaba no século 19. In: Anais do II Seminário de Patrimônio Agroindustrial Lugares de memória. São Carlos.
Boschetti WTN, Barbosa AA, Oliveira JTS, Santos AR. 2014. Identificação de madeiras do patrimônio histórico usadas em estruturas: estudo de caso da fazenda Fortaleza. Braz. J. Wood Sci. 5: 118–126. DOI: 10.15210/cmad.v5i2.4821.
Burger LM, Richter HG. 1991. Anatomia da Madeira. Nobel, São Paulo, SP.
Callado CH, Barros AAM, Ribas LA, Albarello N, Gagliardi RF, Jascone CES. 2009. Flora e cobertura vegetal. In: M Bastos, CH Callado (org.), O ambiente da Ilha Grande: 91–162. EDUERJ, Rio de Janeiro, RJ.
Camargos JAA, Coradin VTR, Czarneski CM, Oliveira D, Meguerditchian I. 1996. Catálogo de árvores do Brasil. Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis, Laboratório de Recursos Florestais, Brasília.
Carlquist S. 1982. The use of ethylenediamine in softening hard plant structures for paraffin sectioning. Stain Technol. 57: 311–317. DOI: 10.3109/10520298209066729.
Coradin VT, Muniz GIB. 1992. Normas e procedimentos em estudos de anatomia da madeira: I — Angiospermae II — Gimnospermae. LPF-série técnica n° 15, Brasília.
Delamonica PS. 1997. Florística e estrutura de floresta atlântica secundária — Reserva Biológica Estadual da Praia do Sul, Ilha Grande, RJ. Master’s dissertation. Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP.
Dong M, Zhou H, Jiang X, Lu Y, Wang W, Yin Y. 2017. Wood used in ancient timber architecture in Shanxi Province, China. IAWA J. 38: 182–200. DOI: 10.1163/22941932-20170167.
Dos Santos G, Miller RB. 1992. Wood anatomy of Tecomeae. In: Gentry AH (ed.), Bignoniaceae, Part II (tribe Tecomeae). Flora Neotropica Monograph 25 (II): 336–358. New York Botanical Garden Press, New York, NY.
Fedalto LC. 1982. Estudo anatômico do lenho de Bixa arborea Huber. Acta Amazon. 12: 389–399. DOI: 10.1590/1809-43921982122389.
Flora do Brasil 2020. 2020. Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro. Available online at http://floradobrasil.jbrj.gov.br/ (accessed 15 April 2020).
Gasson P. 1996. Wood anatomy of the tribe Swartzieae with comments on related Papilionoid and Caesalpinioid Leguminosae. IAWA J. 17: 45–75. DOI: 10.1163/22941932-90000624.
Gasson P, Dobbins DR. 1991. Wood anatomy of the Bignoniaceae, with a comparison of trees and lianas. IAWA J. 12: 389–417. DOI: 10.1163/22941932-90000541.
Gerolamo CS, Angyalossy V. 2017. Wood anatomy and conductivity in lianas, shrubs and trees of Bignoniaceae. IAWA J. 38: 412–432. DOI: 10.1163/22941932-20170177.
Gonçalves FG, Pinheiro DTC, Paes JB, Carvalho AG, Oliveira GL. 2013. Durabilidade natural de espécies florestais madeireiras ao ataque de cupim de madeira seca. Floresta e Ambiente 20: 110–116. DOI: 10.4322/floram.2012.063.
Gonçalves MR, Gatto DA, Mattos BD, Stangerlin DM, Calegari L. 2015. Caracterización de la madera existente en un predio histórico de Pelotas-RS. Braz. J. Wood Sci. 6: 63–70. DOI: 10.12953/2177-6830/rcm.v6n1p63-70.
Gonzaga AL. 2006. Madeira: uso e conservação. (Cadernos técnicos: 6). IPHAN/Monumenta, Brasília, DF, Haneca K, Daalen S, Beeckman H. 2018. Timber for the trenches: a new perspective on archaeological wood from First World War trenches in Flanders Fields. Antiquity 92: 1619–1639. DOI: 10.15184/aqy.2018.172.
Gotelli NJ, Ellison AM. 2011. Princípios de estatística em ecologia. Editora Artmed, Porto Alegre, RS.
INEA (Instituto Estadual do Ambiente). 2019. Parque Estadual da Ilha Grande. Available online at http://www.inea.rj.gov.br/cs/groups/public/documents/document/zwew/mdi2/~edisp/inea0026733.pdf.
Insidewood. 2004-onwards. Available online at http://insidewood.lib.ncsu.edu/search.
Jane FW. 1956. The structure of wood. A. & C. Black, London.
JBRJ (Instituto de Pesquisas Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro). 2019. Jabot — Banco de Dados da Flora Brasileira. Published on the Internet. http://jabot.jbrj.gov.br/ (accessed 20 August 2019).
Johansen DA. 1940. Plant microtechnique. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Leme CLD. 2016. Wood anatomy of seven species known as “Pau-Para-Tudo” in Brazil. Cerne 22: 261–270. DOI: 10.1590/01047760201622032119.
León WJ. 2007. Anatomía del xilema secundario de diez especies de la familia Bignoniaceae de Venezuela. Acta Bot. Venez. 30: 361–384.
Lorenzi H. 1992. Árvores brasileiras: manual de identificação e cultivo de plantas arbóreas nativas do Brasil. Vol. 1. Plantarum, Nova Odessa, São Paulo, SP.
Lorenzi H. 1998. Árvores brasileiras: manual de identificação e cultivo de plantas arbóreas nativas do Brasil. Vol. 2. Plantarum, Nova Odessa, São Paulo, SP.
Lourenço PB, Branco JM. 2013. Dos abrigos da pré-história aos edifícios de madeira do século XXI. In: AS Melo, MC Ribeiro (coord.), História da Construção — Arquiteturas e Técnicas Construtivas: 199–212. CITCEM, Lisbon.
Mainieri C, Chimelo JP. 1989. Fichas de características das madeiras brasileiras. IPT, São Paulo, SP.
Maioli-Azevedo V. 2014. Uso de madeiras da Mata Atlântica em construções históricas do Rio de Janeiro. Doctor’s thesis, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ.
Maioli V, Belharte S, Stuker Kropf M, Callado C. 2020. Timber exploitation in colonial Brazil: a historical perspective of the Atlantic forest. Historia Ambiental Latinoamericana Y Caribeña (HALAC) Revista De La Solcha 10: 46–73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32991/2237-2717.2020v10i2.p74-101.
Manão CYG. 2011. Composição florística e estrutura da comunidade arbustivo-arbórea de um trecho de Floresta Ombrófila Densa submontana na vertente sudeste do Parque Estadual da Ilha Grande, Angra dos Reis/RJ. Master’s dissertation, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ.
Marchiori JNC, Schulze-Hofer MC. 2009. O uso da madeira nas Reduções Jesuítico-Guarani do Rio Grande do Sul. VII — Viga do coro da Igreja de São Miguel Arcanjo. Balduinia 17: 29–33. DOI: 10.5902/2358198014079.
Mello CEHV. 1987. Apontamentos para a história Fluminense (Ilha Grande), Angra dos Reis. Edição do Conselho Municipal de Cultura, Angra dos Reis, RJ.
Melo Júnior JCF. 2012. Anatomia de madeiras históricas: um olhar biológico sobre o patrimônio cultural. Editora Univille, Joinville, SC.
Melo Júnior JCF. 2017. O uso da madeira em uma serraria do século XIX em Santa Catarina. Balduinia 59: 19–26. DOI: 10.5902/2358198025748.
Melo Júnior JCF, Boeger MRT. 2015. The use of wood in cultural objects in 19th Century Southern Brazil. IAWA J. 36: 98–116. DOI: 10.1163/22941932-00000088.
Metcalfe CR, Chalk L. 1950. Anatomy of the dicotyledons. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Nahuz MAR. 2013. Catálogo de madeiras brasileiras para a construção civil. IPT, São Paulo, SP.
Oliveira RR. 2002. Ação antrópica e resultantes sobre a estrutura e composição da Mata Atlântica na Ilha Grande, RJ. Rodriguésia 53: 33–58. DOI: 10.1590/2175-78602002538203.
Pace MR, Angyalossy V. 2013. Wood anatomy and evolution: a case study in the Bignoniaceae. Int. J. Plant Sci. 174: 1014–1048. DOI: 10.1086/670258.
Pace MR, Lohmann LG, Olmstead RG, Angyalossy V. 2015. Wood anatomy of major Bignoniaceae clades. Plant Syst. Evol. 301: 967–995. DOI: 10.1007/s00606-014-1129-2.
Paula JE, Alves JLH. 1997. Madeiras nativas. Gráfica Gutenberg, Brasília.
Rosa LPG. 2013. Florística e fitossociologia da Floresta Atlântica Montana no Parque Estadual da Ilha Grande — RJ. Master’s dissertation, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ.
Santiago AMA. 2010. De “caldeirão do diabo” a “paraíso ecológico”: a conversão da Ilha Grande. Doctor’s thesis, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ.
Santiago AMA, Guimaraes C, Nogueira I, Santos MS, Sant’anna T. 2009. História da Ilha Grande e patrimônio cultural material e imaterial. In: M Bastos, CH Callado (org.), O ambiente da Ilha Grande: 299–370. EDUERJ, Rio de Janeiro, RJ.
Santos MS. 2006. Os porões da República: A Colônia Correcional de Dois Rios entre 1908 e 1930. TOPOI 7: 445–476. DOI: 10.1590/2237-101X006013006.
Santos MS. 2007. Lazareto da Ilha Grande: isolamento, aprisionamento e vigilância nas áreas de saúde e política (1884–1942). História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos 14: 1173–1196. DOI: 10.1590/S0104-59702007000400005.
Santos MS. 2016. A invisibilidade da pena: Dois Rios como imagem do paraíso. Tempo Soc. 28: 261–283. DOI: 10.11606/0103-2070.ts.2016.105854.
Santos MS, Ribeiro Filho Y. 2018. Memórias das prisões da Ilha Grande 1940 a 1970: Quatro historias, duas colônias, uma Ilha. Garamond, Rio de Janeiro, RJ.
Scheel-Ybert R, Gonçalves TAP. 2017. Primeiro atlas antracológico de espécies brasileiras. Museu Nacional, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ.
Schulze-Hofer C, Marchiori JNC. 2008. O uso da madeira nas Reduções Jesuítico-Guarani do Rio Grande do Sul. II — Verga da frontaria da Igreja de São Miguel Arcanjo. Balduinia 14: 29–32. DOI: 10.5902/2358198014060.
Silva JC, Lopes AGC, Oliveira JTS. 2004. Influência da idade na resistência natural da madeira de Eucalyptus grandis w. HILL ex. Maiden ao ataque de cupim de madeira seca (Cryptotermes brevis). Revista Árvore 28: 583–587. DOI: 10.1590/S0100-67622004000400012.
Silva SN. 2020. Identificação das madeiras históricas das instituições carcerárias da Ilha Grande, Angra dos Reis, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil. Master’s dissertation, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ.
Solereder H. 1908. Systematic anatomy of the dicotyledons: a handbook for laboratories of pure and applied botany. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Statsoft. 1993. Statistica: statsoft for windows: general conventions and statistics I. User’s handbook. Microsoft, Tulsa, OK.
Stefel C, Moro D. 2013. Dimensionamento de uma ponte de madeira para regiões rurais. Monography, Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, PR.
Tenório MC. 2006. Povoamento pré-histórico da Ilha Grande. In: RM Prado (org.), Ilha Grande: do sambaqui ao turismo: 1–16. EDUERJ, Rio de Janeiro, RJ.
Trugilho PF, Lima JT, Mendes LM. 1996. Influência da idade nas características físico-químicas e anatômicas da madeira de Eucalyptus saligna. Cerne 2: 94–111.
UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization). 2020. Paraty and Ilha Grande — Culture and Biodiversity. Availabler online at https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1308 (accessed 10 April 2020).
Wheeler EA, Baas P, Gasson PE. 1989. List of microscopic features for hardwood identification. IAWA Bull. 10: 219–332.
Yajure P, Yorgana C. 2014. Identification of the Bignoniaceae of the city of Merida using wood anatomy. Pittieria 38: 121–134.
Zanne AE, Lopez-Gonzalez G, Coomes DA, Ilic J, Jansen S, Lewis SL, Miller RB, Swenson NG, Wiemann MC, Chave J. 2009. Global wood density database. Dryad. Available online at http://hdl.handle.net/10255/dryad.235.
Footnotes
Edited by Arno Fritz das Neves Brandes