Abstract
Interactions among nutrients and plant secondary metabolites (PSM) may influence how herbivores mix their diets and use food resources. We determined intake of a food containing a mix of terpenoids identified in sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) when present in isoenergetic diets of increasing concentrations of protein (6, 9, 15, or 21% CP) or in isonitrogenous diets of increasing concentrations of energy (2.17, 2.55, 3.30, or 3.53 Mcal/kg). Lambs were offered choices between those diets with or without terpenes or between diets with terpenes and alfalfa hay. Intake of the diets with terpenes was lowest with the lowest concentrations of protein (6%) and energy (2.17 Mcal/kg) in the diets, and highest with diets of 15% CP and 3.53~Mcal/kg. In contrast, when terpenes were absent from the diets, lambs consumed similar amounts of all four diets with different concentrations of protein, and more of the diets with intermediate amounts of energy. When given a choice between the diet with or without terpenes, lambs preferred the diet without terpenes. When lambs were offered choices between terpene-containing diets and alfalfa, energy and protein concentrations influenced the amount of terpenes animals ingested. Energy densities higher than alfalfa, and protein concentrations higher than 6%, increased intake of the terpene-containing diet. Thus, the nutritional environment interacted with terpenes to influence preference such that lambs offered diets of higher energy or protein concentration ate more terpenes when forced, but not when offered alternative food without terpenes. The nutrients supplied by a plant and its neighbors likely influence how much PSM an animal can ingest, which in turn may affect the dynamics of plant communities, and the distribution of herbivores in a landscape. We discuss implications of these findings for traditional views of grazing refuges and varied diets in herbivores.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aoac. (Association of Official Analytical Chemists). 1975. Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 12th ed. Washington, DC, USA.
Atsatt, P. R. and O’Dowd, D. J. 1976. Plant defense guilds. Science 193:24–29.
Augner, M. 1995. Low nutritive quality as a plant defense: Effects of herbivore mediated interactions. Evol. Ecol. 9:605–616.
Banner, R. E., Rogosic, J., Burritt, E. A., and Provenza, F. D. 2000. Supplemental barley and activated charcoal increase intake of sagebrush by lambs. J. Range Manag. 53:415–420.
Baraza, E., Villalba, J. J., and Provenza, F. D. 2005. Nutritional context influences preferences of lambs for foods with plant secondary metabolites. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci.
Belovsky, G. E. and Schmitz, O. J. 1991. Mammalian herbivore optimal foraging and the role of plant defenses, pp. 1–28, R. T. Palo and C. T. Robbins (eds.). Plant Defenses Against Mammalian Herbivory. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA.
Behmer, S. T., Simpson, S. J., and Raubenheimer, D. 2002. Herbivore foraging in chemically heterogeneous environments: Nutrients and secondary metabolites. Ecology 83:2489–2501.
Berec, L. and Krivan, V. 2000. A mechanistic model for partial preferences. Theor. Pop. Biol. 58:279–289.
Bray, R. O., Wambolt, C. L., and Kelsey, R. G. 1991. Influence of sagebrush terpenoids on mule deer preference. J. Chem. Ecol. 17:2053–2062.
Cheeke, P. and Shull, L. R. 1985. Natural Toxicants in Feeds and Poisonous Plants. Avi Publishing Co. CT, USA.
Connolly, G. E., Ellison, B. O., Fleming, J. W., G eng, S., Kepner, R. E., Longhurst, W. M., Oh, J. H., and Russell, G. F. 1980. Deer browsing of Douglas-fir trees in relation to volatile terpene composition and in vitro fermentability. Forest Sci. 26:179–193.
Crouch, G. L. and Radwan, M. A. 1981. Effects of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizers on deer browsing and growth of young Douglas-fir. USDA For. Serv. Res. Note PNW-368, 15 p. Pac. Northwest For. and Range Exp. Station., Portland, Oregon, USA.
Dearing, M. D., Mangione, A. M., and Karasov, W. H. 2000. Diet breadth of mammalian herbivores: Nutrient versus detoxification constraints. Oecologia 123:397–405.
Engel, C. 2002. Wild Health: How Animals Keep Themselves Well and What We Can Learn from Them. Houghton Mifflin Co., New York, NY.
Foley, W. J., Mclean, S., and Cork, S. J. 1995. Consequences of biotransformation of plant secondary metabolites on acid–base metabolism in mammals–A final common pathway? J. Chem. Ecol. 21:721–743.
Forbes, J. M. 1995. Voluntary Food Intake and Diet Selection in Farm Animals. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.
Freeland, W. J. and Janzen, D. H. 1974. Strategies in herbivory by mammals: The role of plant secondary compounds. Am. Nat. 108:269–289.
Garcia, J. 1989. Food for Tolman: Cognition and cathexis in concert, pp. 45–85, T. Archer and L. Nilsson (eds.). Aversion, Avoidance and Anxiety. Erlbaum, Hillside, NJ.
Harper, A. E. 1974. Amino acid excess, P. L. White and D. C. Fletcher (eds.). Nutrients in Processed Foods—Proteins. Acton, MA.
Haukioja, E., Ruohomaki, K., Suomela, J., and Vuorisalo, T. 1991. Nutritional quality as a defense against herbivores. Forest Ecol. Manag. 39:237–245.
Hay, M. E. 1986. Associational plant defenses and the maintenance of species diversity: Turning competitors into accomplices. Am. Nat. 128:617–641.
Hjalten, J., Dannell, K., and Lundberg, P. 1993. Herbivore avoidance by association: Vole and hare utilization of woody plants. Oikos 68:125–131.
Hobbs, N. T. 1996. Modification of ecosystems by ungulates. J. Wild. Manag. 60:695–713.
Illius, A. W. and Jessop N. S. 1995. Modeling metabolic costs of allelochemical ingestion by foraging herbivores. J. Chem. Ecol. 21:693–719.
Illius, A. W. and Jessop, N. S. 1996. Metabolic constraints on voluntary intake in ruminants. J. Anim. Sci. 74:3052–3062.
Littell, R. C., Milliken, G. A., Stroup, W. A., and Wolfinger, R. D. 1996. Statistical Analysis Systems for Mixed Models. SAS Institute, Cary, NC.
Mcnamara, J. M. and Houston, A. I. 1987. Partial preferences and foraging. Anim. Behav. 35:1084–1099.
Milchunas, D. G. and Noy-meir, I. 2002. Grazing refuges, external avoidance of herbivory and plant diversity. Oikos 99:113–130.
Nrc. 1985. Nutrient Requirements of Sheep, 6th ed. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Oh, J. H., Jones, M. B., Longhurst, W. M., and Connolly, G. E. 1970. Deer browsing and rumen microbial fermentation of Douglas-fir as affected by fertilization and growth stage. Forest Sci. 16:21–27.
Owens, F. N. 1988. Protein metabolism of ruminant animals. pp. 227–249. D. C. Church (ed.). The Ruminant Animal: Digestive Physiology and Nutrition. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Personius, T. L., Wambolt, C. L., Stephens, J. R., and Kelsey, R. G. 1987. Crude terpenoid influence on mule deer preference for sagebrush. J. Range Manag. 40:84–88.
Pfister, C. A. and Hay, M. E. 1988. Associational plant refuges: convergent patterns in marine and terrestrial communities result from differing mechanisms. Oecologia 77:118–129.
Provenza, F. D. 1996. Acquired aversions as the basis for varied diets of ruminants foraging on rangelands. J. Anim. Sci. 74:2010–2020.
Provenza, F. D., Villalba, J. J., and Bryant, J. P. 2003. Foraging by herbivores: Linking the biochemical diversity of plants to herbivore culture and landscape diversity, pp. 387–421, J. A. Bissonette and I. Storch (eds.). Landscape Ecology and Resource Management: Linking Theory with Practice. Island Press, NY.
Raubenheimer, D. 1992. Tannic acid, protein and digestible carbohydrates: Dietary imbalances and nutritional compensation in locusts. Ecology 73:1012–1027.
Rhoades, D. F. 1979. Evolution of chemical defense against herbivores, pp. 3–54, G. A. Rosenthal and D. H. Janzen (eds.). Herbivores: Their Interaction with Secondary Plant Metabolites. Academic Press, NY, USA.
Simpson, S. J. and Raubenheimer, D. 2001. The geometric analysis of nutrient–allelochemical interactions: A case study using locusts. Ecology 82:422–439.
Singer, M. S., Bernays, E. A., and Carriere, Y. 2002. The interplay between nutrient balancing and toxin dilution in foraging by a generalist insect herbivore. Anim. Behav. 64:629–643.
Tuomi, J. and Augner, M. 1993. Synergistic selection of unpalatability in plants. Evolution 47:668–672.
Villalba, J. J. and Provenza, F. D. 1999. Nutrient-specific preferences by lambs conditioned with intraruminal infusions of starch, casein, and water. J. Anim. Sci. 77:378–387.
Villalba, J. J., Provenza, F. D., and Bryant, J. P. 2002a. Consequences of the interaction between nutrients and plant secondary metabolites on herbivore selectivity: Benefits or detriments for plants? Oikos 97:282–292.
Villalba, J. J., Provenza, F. D., and Banner, R. E. 2002b. Influence of macronutrients and activated charcoal on intake of sagebrush by sheep and goats. J. Anim. Sci. 80:2099–2109.
Villalba, J. J., Provenza, F. D., and Banner, R. E. 2002c. Influence of macronutrients and polyethylene glycol on intake of a quebracho tannin diet by sheep and goats. J. Anim. Sci. 80:3154–3164.
Villalba, J. J., Provenza, F. D., and Goudong, H. 2004. Experience influences diet mixing by herbivores: Implications for plant biochemical diversity. Oikos. 107:100–109.
Wang, J. and Provenza, F. D. 1996. Food deprivation affects preference of sheep for foods varying in nutrients and a toxin. J. Chem. Ecol. 22:2011–2021.
Westoby, M. 1978. What are the biological bases of varied diets? Am. Nat. 112:627–631.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
VILLALBA, J.J., PROVENZA, F.D. FORAGING IN CHEMICALLY DIVERSE ENVIRONMENTS: ENERGY, PROTEIN, AND ALTERNATIVE FOODS INFLUENCE INGESTION OF PLANT SECONDARY METABOLITES BY LAMBS. J Chem Ecol 31, 123–138 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10886-005-0979-z
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10886-005-0979-z