IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i14p7930-d595144.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of Domestic and Wild Ungulate Management on Young Oak Size and Architecture

Author

Listed:
  • Aida López-Sánchez

    (Departamento de Sistemas y Recursos Naturales, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain)

  • Sonia Roig

    (Departamento de Sistemas y Recursos Naturales, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain)

  • Rodolfo Dirzo

    (Department of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA)

  • Ramón Perea

    (Departamento de Sistemas y Recursos Naturales, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain
    Department of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA)

Abstract

Scattered oaks in traditional silvopastoral systems (i.e., “dehesas”) provide important ecological services. However, livestock intensification applied to these systems over the last century has affected the architecture of young oak plants. This unsuitable rangeland management practice jeopardizes the long-term system sustainability. Here we examine the alterations in architecture of regenerating oak plants in Mediterranean dehesas under three representative management regimes: (1) traditional management with extensive sheep grazing; (2) commercially driven management with extensive cattle grazing, and (3) native deer grazing at moderate stocking rates (<0.11 livestock units × ha −1 ). Plant architecture was considerably altered in cattle-grazed “dehesas”, finding a 50% reduction in plant height–diameter ratios, compared to sheep-grazed dehesas where plants with higher height–diameter ratios predominated. Young oak plants, however, showed less altered architecture and less probability of damage on shoot apex (0.20-fold difference) in areas with deer grazing at moderate stocking rates. In addition, those young oak plants with multi-stemmed individual architecture were more stunted (lower values of crown height–diameter ratio) in areas with livestock grazing than wildlife areas (0.78-fold difference). Shrub presence, under all management schemes, helped to increase in plant height, except when shrubs were located under tree canopies. Conversely, plants without shrub protection showed stunted architecture with well-developed basal diameters but short stature. Appropriate sustainable practices should include cattle stocking rate reduction, traditional sheep grazing promotion, nurse shrub preservation and fencing stunted individuals along with pruning basal sprouts. Our study indicates that management may have important consequences on dehesa regeneration via alterations of plant architecture and therefore on system sustainability.

Suggested Citation

  • Aida López-Sánchez & Sonia Roig & Rodolfo Dirzo & Ramón Perea, 2021. "Effects of Domestic and Wild Ungulate Management on Young Oak Size and Architecture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-14, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:14:p:7930-:d:595144
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/14/7930/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/14/7930/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Norman Myers & Russell A. Mittermeier & Cristina G. Mittermeier & Gustavo A. B. da Fonseca & Jennifer Kent, 2000. "Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities," Nature, Nature, vol. 403(6772), pages 853-858, February.
    2. Bates, Douglas & Mächler, Martin & Bolker, Ben & Walker, Steve, 2015. "Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 67(i01).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Víctor Rolo, 2022. "Agroforestry for Sustainable Food Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-3, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Scheiter, Simon & Kumar, Dushyant & Pfeiffer, Mirjam & Langan, Liam, 2024. "Modeling drought mortality and resilience of savannas and forests in tropical Asia," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 494(C).
    2. Juan L. Celis-Diez & Cesar E. Muñoz & Sebastián Abades & Pablo A. Marquet & Juan J. Armesto, 2017. "Biocultural Homogenization in Urban Settings: Public Knowledge of Birds in City Parks of Santiago, Chile," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-14, March.
    3. JANSSENS, Jochen & DE CORTE, Annelies & SÖRENSEN, Kenneth, 2016. "Water distribution network design optimisation with respect to reliability," Working Papers 2016007, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    4. Laxmi D. Bhatta & Sunita Chaudhary & Anju Pandit & Himlal Baral & Partha J. Das & Nigel E. Stork, 2016. "Ecosystem Service Changes and Livelihood Impacts in the Maguri-Motapung Wetlands of Assam, India," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-14, June.
    5. Raymond Hernandez & Elizabeth A. Pyatak & Cheryl L. P. Vigen & Haomiao Jin & Stefan Schneider & Donna Spruijt-Metz & Shawn C. Roll, 2021. "Understanding Worker Well-Being Relative to High-Workload and Recovery Activities across a Whole Day: Pilot Testing an Ecological Momentary Assessment Technique," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-17, October.
    6. Christopher Hassall & Michael Nisbet & Evan Norcliffe & He Wang, 2024. "The Potential Health Benefits of Urban Tree Planting Suggested through Immersive Environments," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-12, February.
    7. Jie Zhao & Ji Chen & Damien Beillouin & Hans Lambers & Yadong Yang & Pete Smith & Zhaohai Zeng & Jørgen E. Olesen & Huadong Zang, 2022. "Global systematic review with meta-analysis reveals yield advantage of legume-based rotations and its drivers," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, December.
    8. Elisabeth Beckmann & Lukas Olbrich & Joseph Sakshaug, 2024. "Multivariate assessment of interviewer-related errors in a cross-national economic survey (Lukas Olbrich, Elisabeth Beckmann, Joseph W. Sakshaug)," Working Papers 253, Oesterreichische Nationalbank (Austrian Central Bank).
    9. McLennan, D. & Sharma, R., 2012. "The Delivering Ecological Services Index (DESI)," Working papers 119, Rimisp Latin American Center for Rural Development.
    10. F J Heather & D Z Childs & A M Darnaude & J L Blanchard, 2018. "Using an integral projection model to assess the effect of temperature on the growth of gilthead seabream Sparus aurata," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(5), pages 1-19, May.
    11. Caviedes, Julián & Ibarra, José Tomás & Calvet-Mir, Laura & Álvarez-Fernández, Santiago & Junqueira, André Braga, 2024. "Indigenous and local knowledge on social-ecological changes is positively associated with livelihood resilience in a Globally Important Agricultural Heritage System," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    12. Valentina Krenz & Arjen Alink & Tobias Sommer & Benno Roozendaal & Lars Schwabe, 2023. "Time-dependent memory transformation in hippocampus and neocortex is semantic in nature," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-17, December.
    13. Maeda, Eduardo Eiji & Clark, Barnaby J.F. & Pellikka, Petri & Siljander, Mika, 2010. "Modelling agricultural expansion in Kenya's Eastern Arc Mountains biodiversity hotspot," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(9), pages 609-620, November.
    14. Morán-Ordóñez, Alejandra & Ameztegui, Aitor & De Cáceres, Miquel & de-Miguel, Sergio & Lefèvre, François & Brotons, Lluís & Coll, Lluís, 2020. "Future trade-offs and synergies among ecosystem services in Mediterranean forests under global change scenarios," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    15. Jack McDonnell & Thomas McKenna & Kathryn A. Yurkonis & Deirdre Hennessy & Rafael Andrade Moral & Caroline Brophy, 2023. "A Mixed Model for Assessing the Effect of Numerous Plant Species Interactions on Grassland Biodiversity and Ecosystem Function Relationships," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 28(1), pages 1-19, March.
    16. Jaiswal, Sreeja & Balietti, Anca & Schäffer, Daniel, 2023. "Environmental Protection and Labor Market Composition," Working Papers 0736, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    17. Ana Pinto & Tong Yin & Marion Reichenbach & Raghavendra Bhatta & Pradeep Kumar Malik & Eva Schlecht & Sven König, 2020. "Enteric Methane Emissions of Dairy Cattle Considering Breed Composition, Pasture Management, Housing Conditions and Feeding Characteristics along a Rural-Urban Gradient in a Rising Megacity," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-18, December.
    18. Damian M. Herz & Manuel Bange & Gabriel Gonzalez-Escamilla & Miriam Auer & Keyoumars Ashkan & Petra Fischer & Huiling Tan & Rafal Bogacz & Muthuraman Muthuraman & Sergiu Groppa & Peter Brown, 2022. "Dynamic control of decision and movement speed in the human basal ganglia," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, December.
    19. Chomitz, Kenneth M. & Thomas, Timothy S. & Brandão, Antônio Salazar P., 2005. "The economic and environmental impact of trade in forest reserve obligations: a simulation analysis of options for dealing with habitat heterogeneity," Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural (RESR), Sociedade Brasileira de Economia e Sociologia Rural, vol. 43(4), January.
    20. Kathrin Stenchly & Marc Victor Hansen & Katharina Stein & Andreas Buerkert & Wilhelm Loewenstein, 2018. "Income Vulnerability of West African Farming Households to Losses in Pollination Services: A Case Study from Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-12, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:14:p:7930-:d:595144. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.