Oecologia

, Volume 162, Issue 2, pp 453–462

Why should a grazer browse? Livestock impact on winter resource use by bharal Pseudois nayaur

  • Kulbhushansingh Ramesh Suryawanshi
  • Yash Veer Bhatnagar
  • Charudutt Mishra
Community Ecology - Original Paper

Abstract

Many mammalian herbivores show a temporal diet variation between graminoid-dominated and browse-dominated diets. We determined the causes of such a diet shift and its implications for conservation of a medium-sized ungulate—the bharal Pseudois nayaur. Past studies show that the bharal diet is dominated by graminoids (>80%) during summer, but the contribution of graminoids declines to about 50% in winter. We tested the predictions generated by two alternative hypotheses explaining the decline: low graminoid availability during winter causes bharal to include browse in their diet; bharal include browse, with relatively higher nutritional quality, in their diet to compensate for the poor quality of graminoids during winter. We measured winter graminoid availability in areas with no livestock grazing, areas with relatively moderate livestock grazing, and those with intense livestock grazing pressures. The chemical composition of plants contributing to the bharal diet was analysed. The bharal diet was quantified through signs of feeding on vegetation at feeding locations. Population structures of bharal populations were recorded using a total count method. Graminoid availability was highest in areas without livestock grazing, followed by areas with moderate and intense livestock grazing. The bharal diet was dominated by graminoids (73%) in areas with highest graminoid availability. Graminoid contribution to the bharal diet declined monotonically (50, 36%) with a decline in graminoid availability. Bharal young to female ratio was 3 times higher in areas with high graminoid availability than areas with low graminoid availability. The composition of the bharal winter diet was governed predominantly by the availability of graminoids in the rangelands. Our results suggest that bharal include more browse in their diet during winter due to competition from livestock for graminoids. Since livestock grazing reduces graminoid availability, creation of livestock-free areas is necessary for the conservation of grazing species such as the bharal and its predators including the endangered snow leopard in the Trans-Himalaya.

Keywords

Forage Diet Ungulate Competition Trans-Himalaya 

References

  1. AOAC (1990) Official methods of analysis, 15th edn. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, ArlingtonGoogle Scholar
  2. Aswal BS, Mehrotra BN (1994) Flora of Lahaul-Spiti. Bishen Singh Mahendra Pal Singh, DehradunGoogle Scholar
  3. Aunapuu M, Dhalgren J, Oksanen T, Grellman D, Oksanen L, Olofsson J, Rammul U, Scheider M, Johansen B, Hygen HO (2008) Spatial patterns and dynamic responses of arctic food webs corroborate the exploitation ecosystems hypothesis (EEH). Am Nat 171:249–262CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bodmer RE (1990) Responses of ungulates to seasonal inundations in the Amazon floodplain. J Trop Ecol 6:191–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown DT, Doucet GT (1991) Temporal changes in winter diet selection by white-tailed deer in a northern deer yard. J Wildl Manage 55:361–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Christianson D, Creel S (2009) Effects of grass and browse consumption on the winter mass dynamics of elk. Oecologia 158:603–613CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Clutton-Brock TH, Major M, Albon SD, Guinness FE (1987) Early development and population dynamics in red deer. I. Density-dependent effects on juvenile survival. J Anim Ecol 56:53–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crete M, Huot J (1993) Regulation of a large herd of migratory caribou: summer nutrition affects calf growth and body reserves of dams. Can J Zool 71:2291–2296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gaillard J, Festa-Bianchet M, Yoccoz NG (1998) Population dynamics of large herbivores: variable recruitment with constant adult survival. Trees 13:58–63Google Scholar
  10. Goodson NJ, Stevens DR, Bailey JA (1991) Effects of snow on foraging ecology and nutrition of bighorn sheep. J Wildl Manage 55:214–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gordon IJ (2003) Browsing and grazing ruminants: are they different beasts? For Ecol Manage 181:13–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hairston NG, Smith FE, Slobodkin LB (1960) Community structure, population control, and competition. Am Nat 94:421–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hofmann RR (1989) Evolutionary steps of ecophysiological adaptation and diversification of ruminants: a comparative view of their digestive system. Oecologia 78:443–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hulbert IAR, Andersen R (2001) Food competition between a large ruminant and a small hindgut fermentor: the case of the roe deer and mountain hare. Oecologia 128:499–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hulbert IAR, Iason GR, Mayes RW (2001) The flexibility of an intermediate feeder: dietary selection by mountain hares measured using faecal n-alkanes. Oecologia 129:197–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Iason GR, Van Wieren SE (1999) Digestive and ingestive adaptations of mammalian herbivores to low-quality forage. In: Olf H, Brown VK, Brent R (eds) Herbivores: between plants and predators. Proceedings of the Symposium of the British Ecological Society. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 337–369Google Scholar
  17. Illius AW, Gordon IJ (1999) Scaling up from functional response to numerical response in vertebrate herbivores. In: Olf H, Brown VK, Brent R (eds) Herbivores: between plants and predators. Proceedings of the Symposium of the British Ecological Society. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 397–427Google Scholar
  18. Krebs CJ (1989) Ecological methodology. Harper & Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Loison A, Langvatn R, Solberg EJ (1999) Body mass and winter mortality in red deer calves: disentangling sex and climatic effects. Ecography 22:20–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mattson WJ (1980) Herbivory in relation to plant nitrogen content. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 11:119–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mishra C (2001) High altitude survival: conflicts between pastoralism and wildlife in the Trans-Himalaya. Ph.D. thesis, Wageningen University, WageningenGoogle Scholar
  22. Mishra C, Prins HHT, Van Wieren SE (2001) Overstocking in the Trans-Himalayan rangelands of India. Environ Conserv 28:279–283Google Scholar
  23. Mishra C, Van Wieren S, Ketner P, Heitkonig IMA, Prins HHT (2004) Competition between domestic livestock and wild bharal Pseudois nayaur in the Indian Trans-Himalaya. J Appl Ecol 41:344–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Morgantini LE, Hudson RJ (1985) Changes in diets of wapiti during a hunting season. J Range Manage 38:77–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Murdoch WW (1966) “Community structure, population control, and competition”—a critique. Am Nat 100:219–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Robbins CT, Hagerman AE, Hjelijord O, Baker DL (1987) Role of tannins in defending plants against ruminants: reduction in protein availability. Ecology 68:98–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Robbins CT, Spalinger DE, Van Hoven W (1995) Adaptation to ruminant browse and grass diet: are anatomical-based browser-grazer interpretations valid? Oecologia 103:208–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Short HL (1971) Forage digestibility and diet of deer on southern upland range. J Wildl Manage 35:698–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shrestha R, Wegge P, Koirala RA (2005) Summer diets of wild and domestic ungulates in Nepal Himalaya. J Zool 266:111–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tempel Cvd, Vriji Md (2008) Cranial and appendicular morphologies functionally related to feeding type and habitat of Trans-Himalayan Caprinae. M.Sc. dissertation, Wageningen Agriculture University, WageningenGoogle Scholar
  31. Turchin P, Batzli GO (2001) Availability of food and the population dynamics of arvicoline rodents. Ecology 82:1521–1534Google Scholar
  32. Van Soest PJ (1982) Nutritional ecology of the ruminant. O & B, CorvallisGoogle Scholar
  33. Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA (1991) Method for dietary fibre, neutral detergent fibre and non starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J Dairy Sci 74:3583–3597PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Van Wieren SE (1996) Digestive strategy in ruminants and nonruminants. Ph.D. dissertation, Wagningen Agriculture University, WageningenGoogle Scholar
  35. Vanderploeg HA, Scavia D (1979) Two electivity indices for feeding with special reference to zooplankton grazing. J Fish Res Bd Can 36:362–365Google Scholar
  36. Wallace LL, Turner MG, Romme WH, O’Neil RV, Wu Yegang (1995) Scale of heterogeneity of forage production and winter foraging by elk and bison. Landscape Ecol 10:75–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zhong W, Wang G, Zhou Q, Wan X, Wang G (2008) Effects of winter food availability on the abundance of Daurian pikas (Ochotona dauurica) in Inner Mongolian grasslands. J Arid Environ 72:1383–1387CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kulbhushansingh Ramesh Suryawanshi
    • 1
    • 2
  • Yash Veer Bhatnagar
    • 3
  • Charudutt Mishra
    • 3
  1. 1.Post-Graduate Program in Wildlife Biology and ConservationNational Centre for Biological SciencesBangaloreIndia
  2. 2.Wildlife Conservation Society-India ProgramCentre for Wildlife StudiesBangaloreIndia
  3. 3.Snow Leopard Trust and Nature Conservation FoundationMysoreIndia

Personalised recommendations