Severely degraded high mountain vegetation recovers under different levels of wild herbivore grazing pressure, 1991–2021

IF 0.9 4区 生物学 Q4 PLANT SCIENCES
Jamie B. Kirkpatrick, Kerry L. Bridle
{"title":"Severely degraded high mountain vegetation recovers under different levels of wild herbivore grazing pressure, 1991–2021","authors":"Jamie B. Kirkpatrick, Kerry L. Bridle","doi":"10.1071/bt23085","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<strong> Context</strong><p>It is important to understand the way in which wild herbivore grazing affects decadal vegetation dynamics after cessation of unnatural disturbances, especially in a context of climate change.</p><strong> Aims</strong><p>We investigated the decadal effects of different grazing regimes on treeless subalpine vegetation recovery from stock grazing and burning, on sites of different environmental character and initial state.</p><strong> Methods</strong><p>At each of four sites, two fenced areas that excluded mammalian herbivores, two that allowed in only rabbits and two grazed control plots were monitored every 5 years between 1991 and 2021. General linear models were developed to explain variation in change over the 30 years in different cover types. The years in which peak and trough values occurred were also determined, as were the incidence and direction of differences between treatments in sites and years.</p><strong> Key results</strong><p>There was marked variation in change over 30 years between the sites and lifeforms. Exclusion of mammalian herbivores increased the slow rate of revegetation. There was little effect from rabbits by themselves. Unexpectedly, the cover of both short and tall herbs was not promoted by grazing exclusion. Short term climatic variation affected some cover types, with many peaks and troughs in the dry year of 2001, but it was not possible to disentangle decades scale climate change effects from the process of recovery after disturbance.</p><strong> Conclusions</strong><p>The slight increase in revegetation rates in the absence of native herbivores and rabbits does not justify culling. Restoration interventions appear to be unnecessary. The prospect of increasing fire incidence and deer numbers suggests that it is desirable to continue monitoring the plots.</p>","PeriodicalId":8607,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Botany","volume":"94 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Botany","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1071/bt23085","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PLANT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Context

It is important to understand the way in which wild herbivore grazing affects decadal vegetation dynamics after cessation of unnatural disturbances, especially in a context of climate change.

Aims

We investigated the decadal effects of different grazing regimes on treeless subalpine vegetation recovery from stock grazing and burning, on sites of different environmental character and initial state.

Methods

At each of four sites, two fenced areas that excluded mammalian herbivores, two that allowed in only rabbits and two grazed control plots were monitored every 5 years between 1991 and 2021. General linear models were developed to explain variation in change over the 30 years in different cover types. The years in which peak and trough values occurred were also determined, as were the incidence and direction of differences between treatments in sites and years.

Key results

There was marked variation in change over 30 years between the sites and lifeforms. Exclusion of mammalian herbivores increased the slow rate of revegetation. There was little effect from rabbits by themselves. Unexpectedly, the cover of both short and tall herbs was not promoted by grazing exclusion. Short term climatic variation affected some cover types, with many peaks and troughs in the dry year of 2001, but it was not possible to disentangle decades scale climate change effects from the process of recovery after disturbance.

Conclusions

The slight increase in revegetation rates in the absence of native herbivores and rabbits does not justify culling. Restoration interventions appear to be unnecessary. The prospect of increasing fire incidence and deer numbers suggests that it is desirable to continue monitoring the plots.

严重退化的高山植被在不同程度的野生食草动物放牧压力下的恢复情况,1991-2021 年
背景了解野生食草动物放牧如何影响非自然干扰停止后的十年植被动态非常重要,尤其是在气候变化的背景下。目的我们在不同环境特征和初始状态的地点研究了不同放牧制度对放牧和焚烧后无树亚高山植被恢复的十年影响。方法在1991年至2021年期间,每隔5年对4个地点中的两个围栏区域、两个仅允许兔子进入的区域和两个放牧对照地块进行监测。建立了一般线性模型来解释不同植被类型在 30 年间的变化情况。此外,还确定了出现峰值和谷值的年份,以及不同处理地点和年份之间差异的发生率和方向。主要结果30年间,不同地点和不同生物形式之间的变化存在明显差异。排除哺乳类食草动物会增加植被重建的缓慢速度。兔子本身的影响很小。出乎意料的是,高矮草本植物的覆盖率并没有因为禁牧而提高。短期的气候变化影响了一些植被类型,在 2001 年干旱的一年中出现了许多波峰和波谷,但无法将几十年尺度的气候变化影响与干扰后的恢复过程区分开来。结论在没有本地食草动物和野兔的情况下,重新植被率略有提高,但这并不能证明捕杀是合理的。恢复干预似乎没有必要。火灾发生率和鹿数量增加的前景表明,继续监测这些地块是可取的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Australian Journal of Botany
Australian Journal of Botany 生物-植物科学
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
18.20%
发文量
26
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Australian Journal of Botany is an international journal for publication of original research in plant science. We seek papers of broad interest with relevance to Southern Hemisphere ecosystems. Our scope encompasses all approaches to understanding plant biology. Australian Journal of Botany is published with the endorsement of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) and the Australian Academy of Science.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信