误读还是否认?驯鹿过度放养及其对植被的长期影响:一种实验方法

IF 2.7 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY
Ecosphere Pub Date : 2025-02-05 DOI:10.1002/ecs2.70174
Bård-Jørgen Bårdsen, Hans Tømmervik, Marius Warg Næss, Jarle Werner Bjerke
{"title":"误读还是否认?驯鹿过度放养及其对植被的长期影响:一种实验方法","authors":"Bård-Jørgen Bårdsen,&nbsp;Hans Tømmervik,&nbsp;Marius Warg Næss,&nbsp;Jarle Werner Bjerke","doi":"10.1002/ecs2.70174","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In an era marked by accelerating climate change, habitat loss, and shifting land use patterns, it is crucial to understand the intricate effects of multiple stressors on ecosystems. This long-term study sheds light on the complex interplay between grazing and habitat characteristics on pasture dynamics and offers insights into how various stressors affect ecosystems facing environmental challenges. Our experimental study documents that manipulation in restricting reindeer grazing and trampling through fencing led to higher ground-lichen biomass, volume, height (particularly in one habitat), and cover compared with open-control plots. The effect of fencing varied depending on habitat, and for lichen biomass, volume, and height, the lowest values were observed in windswept exposed ridges and mountain heaths (exposed/mountain), and the highest values were observed in forested and leeward-heath (forest/leeward) habitat. The average (past five years) number of reindeer per square kilometer had indirect effects that varied across habitats. We observed negative density dependence in the open plots for height in the exposed/mountain habitats. Fencing reduced this effect, which was also valid for biomass except that habitat did not affect the effect of density. Surprisingly, in the forest/leeward areas, the estimated effects of reindeer density on biomass, volume, and height were positive for the fenced plots. Negative density dependence was evident for lichen cover irrespective of habitats and manipulation, even though this effect had little biological significance, whereas cover at the initiation of the experiment positively affected later recordings (particularly for the controls). Our models showed high explanatory power, highlighting the significance of reindeer density and habitat as predictors of ground-lichen dynamics. Overall, negative density-dependent effects were observed in the open plots in the most exposed areas, and fencing mitigated the negative impact of reindeer on lichens, particularly in less exposed areas. We challenge the “equilibrium” and “nonequilibrium” frameworks for explaining livestock-pasture dynamics. We propose future studies to estimate the relative importance of density-dependent and density-independent factors, such as climate, using models considering both mechanisms simultaneously.</p>","PeriodicalId":48930,"journal":{"name":"Ecosphere","volume":"16 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ecs2.70174","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Misreading or living in denial? Reindeer overstocking and long-term effects on vegetation: An experimental approach\",\"authors\":\"Bård-Jørgen Bårdsen,&nbsp;Hans Tømmervik,&nbsp;Marius Warg Næss,&nbsp;Jarle Werner Bjerke\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ecs2.70174\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>In an era marked by accelerating climate change, habitat loss, and shifting land use patterns, it is crucial to understand the intricate effects of multiple stressors on ecosystems. This long-term study sheds light on the complex interplay between grazing and habitat characteristics on pasture dynamics and offers insights into how various stressors affect ecosystems facing environmental challenges. Our experimental study documents that manipulation in restricting reindeer grazing and trampling through fencing led to higher ground-lichen biomass, volume, height (particularly in one habitat), and cover compared with open-control plots. The effect of fencing varied depending on habitat, and for lichen biomass, volume, and height, the lowest values were observed in windswept exposed ridges and mountain heaths (exposed/mountain), and the highest values were observed in forested and leeward-heath (forest/leeward) habitat. The average (past five years) number of reindeer per square kilometer had indirect effects that varied across habitats. We observed negative density dependence in the open plots for height in the exposed/mountain habitats. Fencing reduced this effect, which was also valid for biomass except that habitat did not affect the effect of density. Surprisingly, in the forest/leeward areas, the estimated effects of reindeer density on biomass, volume, and height were positive for the fenced plots. Negative density dependence was evident for lichen cover irrespective of habitats and manipulation, even though this effect had little biological significance, whereas cover at the initiation of the experiment positively affected later recordings (particularly for the controls). Our models showed high explanatory power, highlighting the significance of reindeer density and habitat as predictors of ground-lichen dynamics. Overall, negative density-dependent effects were observed in the open plots in the most exposed areas, and fencing mitigated the negative impact of reindeer on lichens, particularly in less exposed areas. We challenge the “equilibrium” and “nonequilibrium” frameworks for explaining livestock-pasture dynamics. We propose future studies to estimate the relative importance of density-dependent and density-independent factors, such as climate, using models considering both mechanisms simultaneously.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48930,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecosphere\",\"volume\":\"16 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ecs2.70174\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecosphere\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecs2.70174\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecosphere","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecs2.70174","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在一个以气候变化加速、栖息地丧失和土地利用模式转变为标志的时代,了解多种压力源对生态系统的复杂影响至关重要。这项长期研究揭示了放牧和生境特征之间复杂的相互作用对牧场动态的影响,并为各种压力因素如何影响面临环境挑战的生态系统提供了见解。我们的实验研究表明,与开放对照地相比,限制驯鹿放牧和通过围栏踩踏的操作导致了更高的地衣生物量、体积、高度(特别是在一个栖息地)和覆盖度。封育对地衣生物量、体积和高度的影响因生境的不同而不同,在风吹暴露的山脊和山地荒原(暴露/山地)地衣生物量、体积和高度最低,在森林和背风荒原(森林/背风)地衣生物量、体积和高度最高。过去五年每平方公里驯鹿的平均数量对不同栖息地的驯鹿数量产生了间接影响。在暴露/山地生境中,开放样地的密度与高度呈负相关关系。除了生境不影响密度效应外,围栏降低了这种效应,这对生物量也是有效的。令人惊讶的是,在森林/背风区,驯鹿密度对生物量、体积和高度的估计影响在围栏样地是正的。无论生境和操作方式如何,地衣覆盖的负密度依赖性都很明显,尽管这种影响几乎没有生物学意义,而在实验开始时覆盖对后来的记录有积极影响(特别是对对照组)。我们的模型具有很高的解释力,突出了驯鹿密度和栖息地作为地地衣动态预测因子的重要性。总体而言,在暴露程度最高地区的开放地块中观察到负密度依赖效应,围栏减轻了驯鹿对地衣的负面影响,特别是在暴露程度较低的地区。我们挑战“均衡”和“非均衡”框架来解释牲畜-牧场动态。我们建议未来的研究使用同时考虑两种机制的模型来估计密度依赖因子和密度独立因子(如气候)的相对重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Misreading or living in denial? Reindeer overstocking and long-term effects on vegetation: An experimental approach

Misreading or living in denial? Reindeer overstocking and long-term effects on vegetation: An experimental approach

In an era marked by accelerating climate change, habitat loss, and shifting land use patterns, it is crucial to understand the intricate effects of multiple stressors on ecosystems. This long-term study sheds light on the complex interplay between grazing and habitat characteristics on pasture dynamics and offers insights into how various stressors affect ecosystems facing environmental challenges. Our experimental study documents that manipulation in restricting reindeer grazing and trampling through fencing led to higher ground-lichen biomass, volume, height (particularly in one habitat), and cover compared with open-control plots. The effect of fencing varied depending on habitat, and for lichen biomass, volume, and height, the lowest values were observed in windswept exposed ridges and mountain heaths (exposed/mountain), and the highest values were observed in forested and leeward-heath (forest/leeward) habitat. The average (past five years) number of reindeer per square kilometer had indirect effects that varied across habitats. We observed negative density dependence in the open plots for height in the exposed/mountain habitats. Fencing reduced this effect, which was also valid for biomass except that habitat did not affect the effect of density. Surprisingly, in the forest/leeward areas, the estimated effects of reindeer density on biomass, volume, and height were positive for the fenced plots. Negative density dependence was evident for lichen cover irrespective of habitats and manipulation, even though this effect had little biological significance, whereas cover at the initiation of the experiment positively affected later recordings (particularly for the controls). Our models showed high explanatory power, highlighting the significance of reindeer density and habitat as predictors of ground-lichen dynamics. Overall, negative density-dependent effects were observed in the open plots in the most exposed areas, and fencing mitigated the negative impact of reindeer on lichens, particularly in less exposed areas. We challenge the “equilibrium” and “nonequilibrium” frameworks for explaining livestock-pasture dynamics. We propose future studies to estimate the relative importance of density-dependent and density-independent factors, such as climate, using models considering both mechanisms simultaneously.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ecosphere
Ecosphere ECOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
3.70%
发文量
378
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: The scope of Ecosphere is as broad as the science of ecology itself. The journal welcomes submissions from all sub-disciplines of ecological science, as well as interdisciplinary studies relating to ecology. The journal''s goal is to provide a rapid-publication, online-only, open-access alternative to ESA''s other journals, while maintaining the rigorous standards of peer review for which ESA publications are renowned.
×
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