Oecologia

, Volume 107, Issue 3, pp 364–372 | Cite as

Relationships between graminoid growth form and levels of grazing by caribou (Rangifer tarandus) in Alaska

  • Eric S. Post
  • David R. Klein
Population Ecology
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Herbivores and their forage interact in many ways, in some instances to the benefit or detriment of herbivore and vegetation. Studies of wildebeest (Connochaetes taurinus) in Africa and snow geese (Chen caerulescens) in the Arctic have suggested that these grazers enhance graminoid production in certain sites by repeatedly using them. Other studies have concluded that herbivores are sensitive to local variation in forage quality and quantity, and preferentially use those sites that are intrinsically more productive. In this study, caribou (Rangifer tarandus) were observed foraging at different densities on two adjacent Alaskan ranges, within which particular feeding sites contained predictably high, medium, or low densities of caribou. Vegetation from one high- and one low-use site on each of the high- and low-density ranges was sampled and monitored for productivity, measured as re-growth following clipping, with the objectives of determining which forage characteristics influence usage by grazers and whether the productivity and nature of graminoid growth after clipping were related to grazing history. Forage biomass density (g/m3), shoot density (number/m2), stand densities of nutrients and minerals (g/m3), and forage concentrations of nutrients and minerals (g/100 g tissue) correlated positively with use of sites by caribou. Productivity was independent of previous use by grazers, but consistent within ranges. These results indicate that caribou are sensitive to local variation in forage quality and quantity, preferentially use those sites with higher returns of nutrients and minerals, and have the potential to enhance graminoid growth on sites that are inherently more productive.

Key words

Grazing Herbivores Caribou Alaska Foraging theory 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Albon SD, Langvatn R (1992) Plant phenology and the benefits of migration in a temperate ungulate. Oikos 65: 502–513Google Scholar
  2. Archer S, Tieszen LL (1980) Growth and physiological responses of tundra plants to defoliation. Arc Alp Res 12:531–552Google Scholar
  3. Bauer JJ (1990) The analysis of plant-herbivore interactions between ungulates and vegetation on alpine grasslands in the Himalayan region of Nepal. Vegetatio 90: 15–34Google Scholar
  4. Belovsky GE (1978) Diet optimization in a generalist herbivore: the moose. Theor Popul Biol 14: 105–134Google Scholar
  5. Belovsky GE (1986) Optimal foraging and community structure: implications for a guild of generalist grassland herbivores. Oecologia 70: 35–52Google Scholar
  6. Belsky AJ (1986) Does herbivory benefit plants? A review of the evidence. Am Nat 127: 870–892Google Scholar
  7. Bøving PS (1994) Comparative behavioral ecology of caribou. Part 1. Behavioral comparison of two caribou populations, one with (Alaska) and one without (West Greenland) natural predation. M.S. thesis, University of Copenhagen, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  8. Bryant JP, Chapin FS, Klein DR (1983) Carbon/nutrient balance of boreal plants in relation to vertebrate herbivory. Oikos 40: 357–368Google Scholar
  9. Caldwell MM, Richards JH, Johnson DA, Nowak RS, Dzurec RS (1981) Coping with herbivory: photosynthetic capacity and resource allocation in two semiarid Agropyron bunchgrasses. Oecologia 50: 14–24Google Scholar
  10. Cargill SM, Jeffries RL (1984) The effects of grazing by lesser snow geese on the vegetation of a sub-arctic salt marsh. J Appl Ecol 21: 669–686Google Scholar
  11. Chapin FS (1980) Nutrient allocation and responses to defoliation in tundra plants. Arct Alp Res 12: 553–563Google Scholar
  12. Chapin FS (1983) Direct and indirect effects of temperature on arctic plants. Polar Biol 2: 47–52Google Scholar
  13. Chapin FS, Fetcher N, Kielland K, Everett KR, Linkins AE (1988) Productivity and nutrient cycling of Alaskan tundra: enhancement by flowing soil water. Ecology 69: 693–702Google Scholar
  14. Clutton-Brock TH, Guinness FE, Albon SD (1982) Red deer, behavior and ecology of two sexes. Edinburgh University Press, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  15. Day TA, Detling JK (1990) Grassland patch dynamics and herbivore grazing preference following urine deposition. Ecology 71: 180–188Google Scholar
  16. Etchberger RC, Mazaika R, Bowyer RT (1988) White-tailed deer, Odocoileus virginianus, fecal groups relative to vegetation biomass and quality in Maine. Can Field Nat 102: 671–674Google Scholar
  17. Frank DA, McNaughton SJ (1992) The ecology of plants, large mammalian herbivores, and drought in Yellowstone National Park. Ecology 73: 2043–2058Google Scholar
  18. Frank DA, McNaughton SJ (1993) Evidence for the promotion of aboveground grassland production by native large herbivores in Yellowstone National Park. Oecologia 96: 157–161Google Scholar
  19. Fryxell JM (1991) Forage quality and aggregation by large herbivores. Am Nat 138: 478–498Google Scholar
  20. Georgiadis NJ, Ruess RW, McNaughton SJ, Wester D (1989) Ecological conditions that determine when grazing stimulates grass production. Oecologia 81: 316–322Google Scholar
  21. Grime PJ (1977) Evidence for the existence of three primary strategies in plants and its relevance to ecological and evolutionary theory. Am Nat 111: 1169–1194Google Scholar
  22. Henry GHR, Svoboda J (1989) Comparisons of grazed and nongrazed high arctic sedge meadows. In: Flood PF (ed) Proceedings of the 2nd International Muskox Symposium, Saskatoon, Canada, 1987. Ottawa: National Research Council of Canada, p A47Google Scholar
  23. Hik DS, Jeffries RL (1990) Increases in the net above-ground primary production of salt-marsh forage grass: a test of the predictions of the herbivore-optimization model. J Ecol 78: 180–195Google Scholar
  24. Hobbs NT, Swift DW (1988) Grazing in herds: when are nutritional benefits realized? Am Nat 131: 760–764Google Scholar
  25. Holland EA, Detling JK (1990) Plant response to herbivory and belowground nitrogen cycling. Ecology 71: 1040–1049Google Scholar
  26. Holland EA, Parton WJ, Detling JK, Coppock DL (1992) Physiological responses of plant populations to herbivory and their consequences for ecosystem nutrient flow. Am Nat 140: 685–706Google Scholar
  27. Jaramillo VJ, Detling JK (1992) Small-scale heterogeneity in a semi-arid North American grassland. I. Tillering, N uptake and retranslocation in simulated urine patches. J Appl Ecol 29: 1–8Google Scholar
  28. Klein DR (1970) Tundra ranges north of the boreal forest. J Range Manage 23: 8–14Google Scholar
  29. Klein DR, Bay C (1994) Resource partitioning by mammalian herbivores in the high arctic. Oecologia 97: 439–450Google Scholar
  30. Langvatn R, Hanley TA (1993) Feeding-patch choice by red deer in relation to foraging efficiency, an experiment. Oecologia 95: 164–170Google Scholar
  31. Lent PC (1966) Calving and related social behavior in the barrenground caribou. Z Tierpsychol 23: 701–756Google Scholar
  32. Lock JM (1972) The effects of hippopotamus grazing on grasslands. J Ecol 60: 445–467Google Scholar
  33. McKendrick JD, Batzli GO, Everett KR, Swanson JC (1980) Some effects of mammalian herbivores and fertilization on tundra soils and vegetation. Arct Alp Res 12: 565–578Google Scholar
  34. McNaughton SJ (1979) Grazing as an optimization process: grassungulate relationships in the Serengeti. Am Nat 113: 691–703Google Scholar
  35. McNaughton SJ (1983) Compensatory plant growth as a response to herbivory. Oikos 40: 329–336Google Scholar
  36. McNaughton SJ (1984) Grazing lawns: animals in herds, plant form, and coevolution. Am Nat 124: 863–886Google Scholar
  37. McNaughton SJ (1985) Ecology of a grazing ecosystem: the Serengeti. Ecol Monogr 55: 259–294Google Scholar
  38. McNaughton SJ (1990) Mineral nutrition and seasonal movements of African migratory ungulates. Nature 345: 613–615Google Scholar
  39. McNaughton SJ, Ruess RW, Seagle SW (1988) Large mammals and process dynamics in African ecosystems. BioScience 38: 794–800Google Scholar
  40. McNaughton SJ, Oesterheld M, Frank DA, Williams KJ (1989) Ecosystem-level patterns of primary productivity and herbivory in terrestrial habitats. Nature 341: 142–144Google Scholar
  41. Molvar EM, Bowyer RT, Van Ballenberghe V (1993) Moose herbivory, browse quality, and nutrient cycling in an Alaskan treeline community. Oecologia 94: 472–479Google Scholar
  42. Naiman RJ (1988) Animal influences on ecosystem dynamics. BioScience 38: 750–752Google Scholar
  43. Oesterheld M, McNaughton SJ (1988) Intraspecific variation in the response of Themeda triandra to defoliation: the effect of time of recovery and growth rates on compensatory growth. Oecologia 77: 181–186Google Scholar
  44. Oesterheld M, McNaughton SJ (1991) Effect of stress and time of recovery on the amount of compensatory growth after grazing. Oecologia 85: 305–313Google Scholar
  45. Ouellet JP, Boutin S, Heard DC (1994) Responses to simulated grazing and browsing of vegetation available to caribou in the Arctic. Can J Zool 72: 1426–1435Google Scholar
  46. Pandey CB, Singh JS (1992) Rainfall and grazing effects on net primary productivity in a tropical savanna, India. Ecology 73: 2007–2021Google Scholar
  47. Polley HW, Detling JK (1990) Grazing-mediated differentiation in Agropyron smithii: evidence from populations with different grazing histories. Oikos 57: 326–332Google Scholar
  48. Ruess RW, McNaughton SJ (1984) Urea as a promotive coupler of plant-herbivore interactions. Oecologia 63: 331–337Google Scholar
  49. Ruess RW, McNaughton SJ (1987) Grazing and the dynamics of nutrient and energy regulated microbial processes in the Serengeti grasslands. Oikos 49: 101–110Google Scholar
  50. Ruess RW, Seagle SW (1994) Landscape patterns in soil microbial processes in the Serengeti National Park, Tanzania. Ecology 75: 892–904Google Scholar
  51. Skogland T (1989) Comparative social organization of wild reindeer in relation to food mates and predator avoidance. (Advances in Ethology 29). Paul Parey, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  52. SYSTAT (1992) SYSTAT for Windows: statistics, version 5 edn. SYSTAT, EvanstonGoogle Scholar
  53. Thing H (1984) Feeding ecology of the West Greenland caribou (Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus) in the Sisimiut-Kangerlussuaq region. Dan Rev Game Biol 12: 1–53Google Scholar
  54. Westoby M (1974) An analysis of diet selection by large generalist herbivores. Am Nat 108: 290–304Google Scholar
  55. White RG (1979) Nutrient acquisition and utilization in arctic herbivores. In: Underwood LS, Tieszen LL, Callahan AB, Folk GE (eds) Comparative mechanisms of cold adaptation. Academic Press, New York, pp 13–50Google Scholar
  56. White RG (1983) Foraging patterns and their multiplier effects on productivity of northern ungulates. Oikos 40: 377–384Google Scholar
  57. White RG, Trudell J (1980) Habitat preference and forage consumption by reindeer and caribou near Atkasook, Alaska. Arct Alp Res 12: 511–529Google Scholar
  58. Zar JH (1984) Biostatistical analysis, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eric S. Post
    • 1
  • David R. Klein
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Biology and WildlifeUniversity of AlaskaFairbanksUSA
  2. 2.Alaska Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research UnitUniversity of AlaskaFairbanksUSA

Personalised recommendations