| Literature DB >> 28498334 |
Torsten Wronski1,2, Jean Damascene Bariyanga3, Ping Sun4, Martin Plath5, Ann Apio6.
Abstract
Lantana camara L. (Verbenaceae) originates from tropical Central and South America and has become invasive in about 50 countries. It causes problems when invading rangelands due to its toxicity to livestock and its tendency to form dense, monotonous thickets. Its invasiveness can partly be explained by the high tannin content largely protecting the species from being browsed, its tolerance to a wide range of environmental conditions, as well as its general preference for anthropogenically disturbed habitats. The dispersal of L. camara is facilitated by birds and other animals consuming its drupes (endozoochory), and so both wild and domestic ungulates could contribute to its spread. In our study, we investigated the distribution of L. camara in the Mutara rangelands of north-eastern Rwanda, an area that faced dramatic landscape changes in recent decades. We assessed 23 ecological factors and factors related to land-use and conservation-political history. Major effects on the local abundance of L. camara were found in that the relative canopy cover of L. camara was negatively correlated with the occurrence of other shrubs (suggesting competition for space and nutrients), while encounter rates of houses, 'living fences' (Euphorbia tirucalli L.) and cattle tracks were positively correlated with L. camara cover. Hence, the spread of non-native L. camara in the Mutara rangelands appears to be linked to landscape alterations arising from the transformation of rangelands supporting traditional pastoralist communities to other agricultural land-use forms.Entities:
Keywords: Cymbopogon; Dichrostachys; cattle grazing; goat browsing; grassland degradation; living fences
Year: 2017 PMID: 28498334 PMCID: PMC5489791 DOI: 10.3390/plants6020019
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Figure 1(A) Invasive Lantana camara, an exotic (non-native) shrub species from tropical South-central America in the Mutara rangelands; (B) an isolated stand of invasive Dichrostachys cinerea in Akagera NP; and (C) tufts of invasive Cymbopogon nardus, an unpalatable, aromatic Poaceae (© www.NatureLoveYou.sg); (D) living fence comprising of Euphorbia tirucalli and L. camara; (E) Dichrostachys cinerea invasion of a flood plain in Akagera NP; (F) domestic goat browsing on L. camara pods in the Mutara rangelands.
Results of principal component analysis of the 23 explanatory variables. Variables were measured in 44 quadrants along three transect belts across the Mutara rangelands. PC loadings > 0.5 are shown in bold font type.
| Variable | PC1 | PC2 | PC3 | PC4 | PC5 | PC6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eigenvalue | 5.43 | 3.75 | 2.74 | 2.11 | 1.68 | 1.35 |
| % variance explained | 23.62 | 16.29 | 11.90 | 9.18 | 7.31 | 5.89 |
| Eco-climate | −0.202 | −0.023 | 0.244 | −0.027 | 0.202 | |
| Conservation-political history | 0.076 | −0.351 | −0.015 | −0.416 | 0.029 | |
| Cattle density | −0.053 | 0.198 | 0.021 | 0.137 | 0.043 | |
| Goat density | −0.066 | 0.025 | −0.100 | 0.333 | 0.386 | |
| Ungulate encounter frequency | −0.005 | −0.134 | −0.113 | −0.012 | −0.172 | |
| Primate encounter frequency | 0.033 | −0.076 | −0.214 | 0.066 | −0.140 | |
| Bird species richness | 0.002 | −0.140 | 0.236 | −0.349 | 0.286 | |
| House encounter rate | −0.247 | −0.080 | −0.082 | −0.137 | 0.068 | |
| Human encounter rate | −0.287 | −0.034 | −0.056 | −0.076 | −0.151 | |
| Ranch/garden ratio | −0.103 | −0.197 | −0.095 | 0.069 | −0.057 | |
| Living fences | −0.212 | −0.288 | 0.434 | 0.039 | 0.471 | |
| Cattle tracks | −0.201 | −0.012 | 0.217 | 0.456 | −0.015 | |
| Tree cutting | 0.125 | −0.158 | 0.352 | −0.274 | 0.245 | |
| Charcoal burning | 0.136 | 0.012 | 0.258 | −0.100 | 0.074 | |
| Watering troughs | 0.024 | 0.093 | 0.356 | 0.300 | 0.297 | |
| Erosion | −0.101 | 0.072 | 0.018 | −0.053 | −0.026 | |
| Tree canopy cover | 0.397 | −0.117 | 0.100 | −0.091 | 0.310 | |
| Shrub canopy cover | −0.219 | −0.132 | −0.123 | 0.062 | −0.171 | |
| Monocotyledonous biomass | −0.231 | 0.391 | −0.036 | 0.004 | −0.309 | |
| Grass frequency | 0.096 | −0.212 | 0.494 | −0.140 | −0.077 | |
| Herb frequency | −0.018 | 0.015 | −0.066 | 0.252 | −0.101 | |
| Soil water holding potential | −0.019 | −0.068 | 0.061 | −0.093 | −0.460 | |
| Soil porosity | 0.056 | −0.231 | −0.050 | −0.323 | 0.068 |
Results of GLMs using the seven eco-climatic, conservation history-related and ecological principal components (PCs) as covariates. Interaction terms were excluded if p > 0.1.
| Factor | df | Mean Square | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PC1 | 1 | 1.454 | 2.291 | 0.139 |
| PC2 | ||||
| PC3 | ||||
| PC4 | 1 | 1.491 | 2.350 | 0.134 |
| PC5 | 1 | 0.003 | 0.005 | 0.943 |
| PC6 | 1 | 0.853 | 1.345 | 0.254 |
| PC3 × PC6 | ||||
| Error | 36 | 0.634 | ||
| PC1 | 1 | 0.799 | 0.760 | 0.389 |
| PC2 | 1 | 2.018 | 1.919 | 0.174 |
| PC3 | 1 | 0.079 | 0.075 | 0.786 |
| PC4 | 1 | 0.569 | 0.541 | 0.467 |
| PC5 | 1 | 1.235 | 1.175 | 0.285 |
| PC6 | 1 | 0.399 | 0.380 | 0.542 |
| Error | 37 | 1.051 | ||
| PC1 | 1 | 2.223 | 2.284 | 0.139 |
| PC2 | ||||
| PC3 | 1 | 0.281 | 0.289 | 0.594 |
| PC4 | 1 | 0.105 | 0.108 | 0.745 |
| PC5 | 1 | 0.326 | 0.335 | 0.566 |
| PC6 | 1 | 0.289 | 0.297 | 0.589 |
| Error | 37 | 0.973 | ||
Post-hoc Spearman rank correlations between percentage cover of Lantana camara (as well as Cymbopogon nardus) and factors with high axis loadings (see Table 1) contained in PC2, PC3 and PC6.
| PC2 | Tree Cutting | Charcoal Burning | Shrub Canopy Cover | Grass Frequency |
| +0.147 | −0.071 | +0.014 | ||
| 0.341 | 0.648 | 0.926 | ||
| PC3 | House encounter rate | People encounter rate | Living fences | Watering troughs |
| +0.211 | +0.227 | |||
| 0.167 | 0.137 | |||
| PC6 | Cattle tracks | Erosion | ||
| +0.276 | ||||
| 0.069 | ||||
| PC2 | Tree cutting | Charcoal burning | Shrub canopy cover | Grass frequency |
| +0.203 | +0.097 | +0.157 | −0.172 | |
| 0.184 | 0.532 | 0.307 | 0.264 | |
Figure 2Post-hoc Spearman rank correlations for significant effects between percentage Lantana camara cover and (A) percentage shrub canopy cover; (B) house encounter rate; (C) living fences and (D) cattle tracks. Linear fits were included to show the tendency (positive or negative) of relationships.
Figure 3Our study area (forty-four 2.5 × 2.5 km squares) extending along three transect belts across the Mutara rangelands in the Akagera ecosystem in Rwanda. Conservation-political history and eco-climate (modified from [40] and separated by dashed lines) are: (A, west) Mutara rangelands, never protected, (B, central west) Mutara Game Reserve, degazetted between 1971 and 1990, (C, central) Mutara Game Reserve, degazetted in 1997, (D, central east) former Akagera National Park, degazetted in 1997, (E, east) modern Akagera National Park; (1, dark green) below Byumba Escarpment (900–1000 mm annual precipitation), (2, light green) higher Mutara (800–900 mm), (3, yellow) lower Mutara (700–800 mm), (4, orange) drier Mutara (600–700 mm), (5, pink) drier Kagera (500–600 mm).