| Literature DB >> 31592180 |
Chiaki Otsu1, Hayato Iijima2, Takuo Nagaike1.
Abstract
Exclosures that exclude large herbivores are effective tools for the protection and restoration of grazed plant communities. However, previous studies have shown that the installation of an exclosure does not ensure plant community recovery. Our study aimed to determine the effects of the domination of unpalatable plants and the timing of exclosure installation on the plant community recovery process in montane grassland overgrazed by sika deer (Cervus nippon) in Japan. In this study we compared plant species composition and their cover with inside and outside exclosures installed at different times. Furthermore, we also compared them with those in 1981, when density of sika deer was very low. We used quadrats inside and outside fenced areas established in 2010 and 2011 to record both the cover and the height of species in each quadrat between 2011 and 2015. Plant cover, with the exception of graminoid species, increased in later years in all treatments. Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) plots showed significantly differentiated treatment trends. The species composition within the 2010 fenced area gradually shifted to greater similarity with the species composition reported in 1981. The plant community in the 2011 fenced area was slower to recover. Compositions of plant communities outside the fenced areas hardly changed from 2011 to 2015. Chao's dissimilarity index decreased over time between the plant community surveyed between 2011 and 2015 and the past plant community in 1981 within the exclosures, and was higher in the 2011 fenced area than in the 2010 fenced area. In conclusion, we show that the reduction of graminoids and the time after exclosure installation were important for plant community recovery from deer grazing damage. A delay in exclosure installation of one year could result in a delay in plant community recovery of more than one year. ©2019 Otsu et al.Entities:
Keywords: Deer exclosure; Graminoid; Grazing; Monocot; Restoration success; Sika deer
Year: 2019 PMID: 31592180 PMCID: PMC6777482 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7833
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Figure 1The change of mean coverage of each life form group in each treatment and year.
Species with a coverage score of ≧1 on the Braun-Blanquet scale were excluded from calculation. Covers were calculated by converting the Braun-Blanquet scores (+, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5) into percentage cover values (0.5%, 5.5%, 17.5%, 37.5%, 62.5%, and 87.5%, respectively). (A) Fence 2010, (B) Fence 2011, (C) Outside.
Summary of CLMM with the lowest AIC.
| Estimated coefficients | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SE | |||
| The protected year | 0.329 | 0.032 | 10.175 | 0.000 |
| Life form | ||||
| Graminoids | 1.591 | 0.127 | 12.538 | 0.000 |
| Monocots | −0.930 | 0.407 | −2.285 | 0.022 |
| Ferns | −2.422 | 0.883 | −2.744 | 0.006 |
| Woody plants | −2.490 | 0.775 | −3.213 | 0.001 |
| Interaction term | ||||
| The protected year:Graminoids | −0.362 | 0.048 | −7.466 | 0.000 |
| The protected year:Monocots | 0.417 | 0.116 | 3.603 | 0.000 |
| The protected year:Ferns | 0.547 | 0.227 | 2.411 | 0.016 |
| The protected year:Woody plants | 0.492 | 0.202 | 2.431 | 0.015 |
Notes.
SE is standard error of estimated coefficients.
The coefficients of the life form was estimated when the category of graminoid was set as reference category.
In this table, only final model after model selection based on AIC is shown. Please see Table S2 for AIC of models with all possible combinations of explanatory variables.
Figure 2Non-metric Multi-dimensional Scaling (NMDS) ordination of all sample plots in a two-dimensional space.
Bold arrows in each figure indicate the changes of mean scores of NMDS by each treatment from 2011 to 2015. (A) 1981 and fence 2010, (B) 1981 and fence 2011, (C) 1981 and outside.
Figure 3The change of dissimilarity index of each treatment and year.
Error bars indicate standard deviation of dissimilarity index.
Summary of GLMM with the lowest AIC.
| Estimated coefficient | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SE | |||
| Treatments | ||||
| Fence 2011 | 1.268 | 0.135 | 9.398 | 0.000 |
| Outside | 0.749 | 0.157 | 4.772 | 0.000 |
| The protected year | −0.376 | 0.026 | −14.466 | 0.000 |
| Coverage of graminoids | 0.009 | 0.001 | 6.434 | 0.000 |
Notes.
SE is standard error of estimated coefficients.
The coefficient of treatment was estimated when the category of fence 2010 was set as reference category.
In this table, only final model after model selection based on AIC is shown. Please see Table S3 for AIC of models with all possible combinations of explanatory variables.
Figure 4Relationships between the maximum heights of graminoid species and that of forb species in each quadrat in each treatment in 2011 and 2015. A: 2011, B: 2015.
.