Impact of land management on herbaceous vegetation diversity and forage provision in the Great Green Wall in Burkina Faso

Issouf Zerbo, Sambo Ouédraogo, Daouda Savadogo, Aliou Guissé, Issaka J. Boussim
{"title":"Impact of land management on herbaceous vegetation diversity and forage provision in the Great Green Wall in Burkina Faso","authors":"Issouf Zerbo,&nbsp;Sambo Ouédraogo,&nbsp;Daouda Savadogo,&nbsp;Aliou Guissé,&nbsp;Issaka J. Boussim","doi":"10.1002/glr2.70004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>In West African semi-arid areas, grazing ecosystems are exposed to severe anthropogenic and climatic pressures. However, little is known about the contribution of local land management practices to increasing herbaceous forage in semi-arid environments. To recommend sustainable practices, this study therefore assessed the effect of three land management types on the diversity, functional structure and forage provision of the herbaceous vegetation in the Great Green Wall in Burkina Faso.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Floristic diversity, functional structure and the aboveground biomass of the herbaceous vegetation were assessed in 60 plots across three land management types, including fenced land (less disturbed), community forest (moderately disturbed) and fallow land (highly disturbed).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The herbaceous vegetation species richness increased with disturbance, where fenced land (71 species) had lower richness than community forest (95 species) and fallow land (103 species). The dominant life forms in each land management type were therophytes (fenced land: 75.73%, community forest: 78.87% and fallow land: 77.89%). The average cover of grasses (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001) and forbs (<i>p</i> = 0.049) varied significantly and showed a trend opposite to that of anthropogenic pressure. However, the net pastoral value (<i>p</i> = 0.002) and the total biomass (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001) decreased significantly according to the disturbance gradient. The net pastoral value ranged from 32.83% in fenced land to 27.69% in fallow land. The total biomass was higher in fenced land (1317 kg ha<sup>−1</sup>) than in community forest (1205 kg ha<sup>−1</sup>) and fallow land (1009 kg ha<sup>−1</sup>).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>This study highlights an increase in herbaceous vegetation diversity, which is offset by a decline in the pastoral value of the grazing lands across the disturbance gradient.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":100593,"journal":{"name":"Grassland Research","volume":"4 2","pages":"105-120"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/glr2.70004","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Grassland Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/glr2.70004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

In West African semi-arid areas, grazing ecosystems are exposed to severe anthropogenic and climatic pressures. However, little is known about the contribution of local land management practices to increasing herbaceous forage in semi-arid environments. To recommend sustainable practices, this study therefore assessed the effect of three land management types on the diversity, functional structure and forage provision of the herbaceous vegetation in the Great Green Wall in Burkina Faso.

Methods

Floristic diversity, functional structure and the aboveground biomass of the herbaceous vegetation were assessed in 60 plots across three land management types, including fenced land (less disturbed), community forest (moderately disturbed) and fallow land (highly disturbed).

Results

The herbaceous vegetation species richness increased with disturbance, where fenced land (71 species) had lower richness than community forest (95 species) and fallow land (103 species). The dominant life forms in each land management type were therophytes (fenced land: 75.73%, community forest: 78.87% and fallow land: 77.89%). The average cover of grasses (p < 0.001) and forbs (p = 0.049) varied significantly and showed a trend opposite to that of anthropogenic pressure. However, the net pastoral value (p = 0.002) and the total biomass (p < 0.001) decreased significantly according to the disturbance gradient. The net pastoral value ranged from 32.83% in fenced land to 27.69% in fallow land. The total biomass was higher in fenced land (1317 kg ha−1) than in community forest (1205 kg ha−1) and fallow land (1009 kg ha−1).

Conclusions

This study highlights an increase in herbaceous vegetation diversity, which is offset by a decline in the pastoral value of the grazing lands across the disturbance gradient.

Abstract Image

土地管理对布基纳法索“绿色长城”草本植被多样性和饲料供应的影响
在西非半干旱地区,放牧生态系统面临着严重的人为和气候压力。然而,人们对半干旱环境中当地土地管理实践对增加草本饲料的贡献知之甚少。为了推荐可持续的做法,本研究评估了三种土地管理类型对布基纳法索绿色长城地区草本植被多样性、功能结构和饲料供应的影响。方法对60个样地的草本植被的区系多样性、功能结构和地上生物量进行了评价,并对3种土地管理类型进行了分析,包括围栏(较少受干扰)、群落林(中度受干扰)和休耕地(高度受干扰)。结果草本植被物种丰富度随着干扰的增加而增加,其中围栏地(71种)的丰富度低于群落林(95种)和休耕地(103种)。各土地经营类型的优势生物形式均为植物(围栏占75.73%,群落林占78.87%,休耕地占77.89%)。禾草类(p < 0.001)和草本类(p = 0.049)的平均盖度变化显著,与人为压力变化趋势相反。净牧带值(p = 0.002)和总生物量(p < 0.001)随扰动梯度显著降低。净牧值在围栏地为32.83%,休耕地为27.69%。总生物量在围栏林地(1317 kg ha−1)高于群落林(1205 kg ha−1)和休耕地(1009 kg ha−1)。结论:在扰动梯度上,牧草植被多样性的增加被放牧价值的下降所抵消。
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
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信