Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Interactions between wild boar and cattle in Patagonian temperate forest: cattle impacts are worse when alone than with wild boar

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biological Invasions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The global phenomenon of introduced species has caused serious, negative impacts on biodiversity and human productive activities. Often, introduced species become invasive and impact and modifies the availability of resources in native ecosystem. Cattle and wild boar are two species that have been introduced on all continents for food and sport hunting. Both species cause detrimental changes in ecosystem processes and biodiversity. Particularly in Patagonia, it has been shown in different studies that in isolation these species can cause damage to native plants, alter the structure of the soil and its processes. This study sought to assess and compare the ecosystem impacts of cattle and wild boar upon ecosystem structure and function in different scenarios with the presence of both, one or none of these focal species. Our study area is the Nahuel Huapi National Park where both species have significant presence on temperate forest. In order to evaluate the species impact we combined experimental and observational methods across sites with the presence of one species, both species, and sites without either species. Our data showed that sites with both species or only wild boar showed fewer impacts than expected. However, when cattle is presence, this species seriously threaten the native ecosystems by affecting plant biomass, reducing the shrub cover and number of native plants, and enhancing exotic plant species. Our study found no evidence to support of additive effects or impacts a between both species, but the presence of both cattle and wild boar could have an antagonistic effect or interactions through resource competition. Although cattle and wild boar are considered valuable socio-economic resources, we believe that the free-range populations of these mammals that inhabit temperate forests of Patagonia should have focused management plans that prioritize the control of cattle, to subsequently focus on the management of the wild boar.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams CE, Higginbotham BJ, Rollins D, Taylor RB, Skiles R, Mapston M, Turman S (2005) Regional perspectives and opportunities for feral hog management in Texas. Wildl Soc Bull 33:1312–1320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson MJ, Gorley RN, Clarke KR (2008) PERMANOVA+ for primer: guide to software and statistical methods. Primer-E Ltd, Plymouth

    Google Scholar 

  • APN “Administración de Parques Nacionales, Argentina” (2019) Plan de Gestión Parque Nacional Nahuel Huapi - Parte 1, 2 y 3 Res. HD 96-08

  • Ballari SA, Cuevas MF, Cirignoli S, Valenzuela AEJ (2015) Invasive wild boar in Argentina: using protected areas as a research platform to determine distribution, impacts and management. Biol Invasions 17:1595–1602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballari SA, Anderson CB, Valenzuela AE (2016a) Understanding trends in biological invasions by introduced mammals in southern South America: a review of research and management. Mammal Rev 46:229–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballari SA, Kuebbing SE, Nuñez MA (2016b) Potential problems of removing one invasive species at a time: a meta-analysis of the interactions between invasive vertebrates and unexpected effects of removal programs. PeerJ 4:e2029

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Barasona JA, Latham MC, Acevedo P, Armenteros JA, Latham ADM, Gortazar C, Carro F, Soriguer RC, Vicente J (2014) Spatiotemporal interactions between wild boar and cattle: implications for cross-species disease transmission. Vet Res 45:122

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett RH, Birmingham GH (1994) Wild Pigs; damage prevention and control methods. Cooperative Extension Division, Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Nebraska, Lincoln

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrios-Garcia MN, Ballari SA (2012) Impact of wild boar (Sus scrofa) in its introduced and native range: a review. Biol Invasions 14:2283–2300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrios-Garcia MN, Simberloff D (2013) Linking the pattern to the mechanism: how an introduced mammal facilitates plant invasions. Austral Ecol 38:884–890

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrios-Garcia MN, Relva MA, Kitzberger T (2012) Patterns of use and damage by exotic deer on native plant communities in northwestern Patagonia. Eur J Wildlife Res 58:137–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrios-Garcia MN, Classen AT, Simberloff D (2014) Disparate responses of above-and belowground properties to soil disturbance by an invasive mammal. Ecosphere 5:1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn T, Scrivens S, Heinrich S, Cassey P (2017) Patterns of selectivity in introductions of mammal species worldwide. NeoBiota 33:33–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braga RR, Gómez-Aparicio L, Heger T, Vitule JRS, Jeschke JM (2018) Structuring evidence for invasional meltdown: broad support but with biases and gaps. Biol Invasions 20:923–936

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bueno CG (2011) Las perturbaciones de jabalí en los pastos alpinos del Pirineo Central: una aproximación multiescalar. Departamento de Agricultura y Economía Agraria. Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza, Spain, p 191

  • Bueno CG, Jiménez JJ (2014) Livestock grazing activities and wild boar rooting affect alpine earthworm communities in the Central Pyrenees (Spain). Appl Soil Ecol 83:71–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bueno CG, Alados CL, Gómez-García D, Barrio IC, García-González R (2009) Understanding the main factors in the extent and distribution of wild boar rooting on alpine grasslands. J Zool 279:195–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bueno CG, Barrio IC, García-González R, Alados CL, Gómez-García D (2010) Does wild boar rooting affect livestock grazing areas in alpine grasslands? Eur J Wildl Res 56:765–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caruso N, Valenzuela AEJ, Burdett CL, Luengos Vidal EM, Birochio D, Casanave EB (2018) Summer hábitat use and activity patterns of wild boar Sus scrofa in rangelands of central Argentina. PLoS ONE 13:e0206513

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dénes FV, Tella JL, Zulian V, Prestes NP, Martínez J, Hiraldo F (2018) Combined impacts of multiple non-native mammals on two life stages of a critically endangered Neotropical tree. Biol Invasions 20:3055–3068

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desbiez AL (2007) Wildlife conservation in the Pantanal: habitat alteration, invasive species and bushmeat hunting. Doctoral dissertation, University of Kent, UK, p 302

  • Gaw CCM, Mitchell J (1998) Feral Pig (Sus scrofa) in Queensland. Pet Status Review Series. Land Protection. Department of Natural Resources and Mines. Queensland Government, Australia, p 30

  • Jackson MC (2015) Interactions among multiple invasive animals. Ecology 96:2035–2041

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jeschke JM, Heger T (2018) Invasion Biology. Hypotheses and Evidence. CABI Invasives Series. In: Jeschke J (ed), Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries (IGB), Freie Universität Berlin and Berlin-Brandenburg Institute of Advanced Biodiversity Research, Germany, T Heger, University of Potsdam, Technical University of Munich and Berlin-Brandenburg Institute of Advanced Biodiversity Research (BBIB), Germany, p 188

  • Jeschke JM, Gómez Aparicio L, Haider S, Heger T, Lortie CJ, Pyšek P, Strayer DL (2012) Support for major hypotheses in invasion biology is uneven and declining. NeoBiota 14:1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuebbing SE, Nuñez MA (2015) Negative, neutral, and positive interactions among nonnative plants: patterns, processes, and management implications. Glob Change Biol 21:926–934

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kueffer C, Pyšek P, Richardson DM (2013) Integrative invasion science: model systems, multi-site studies, focused meta-analysis and invasion syndromes. New Phytol 200:615–633

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kuiters AT, Bruinderink GWG, Lammertsma DR (2005) Facilitative and competitive interactions between sympatric cattle, red deer and wild boar in Dutch woodland pastures. Acta Theriol 50:241–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Long JL (2003) Introduced mammals of the world: their history, distribution and influence. CSIRO Publishers, Collingwood

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Martin CE, Mermoz MA (2005) Mapa de vegetación del Parque y la Reserva Nacional Nahuel Huapi. In: Administración de Parques Nacionales (ed) Anales de Parques Nacionales Tomo XVII, Buenos Aires, Argentina, pp 51–62

  • Navarro-Gonzalez N, Fernández-Llario P, Pérez-Martín JE, Mentaberre G, López-Martín JM, Lavín S, Serrano E (2013) Supplemental feeding drives endoparasite infection in wild boar in Western Spain. Vet Parasitol 196:114–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nuñez MA, Relva MA, Simberloff D (2008) Enemy release or invasional meltdown? Deer preference for exotic and native trees on Isla Victoria, Argentina. Austral Ecol 33:317–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nuñez MA, Bailey JK, Schweitzer JA (2010) Population, community and ecosystem effects of exotic herbivores: a growing global concern. Biol Invasions 12:297–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nystrom P, Svensson O, Lardner B, Bronmark C, Graneli W (2001) The influence of multiple introduced predators on a littoral pond community. Ecology 82:1023–1039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oduor AM, Gómez JM, Strauss SY (2010) Exotic vertebrate and invertebrate herbivores differ in their impacts on native and exotic plants: a meta-analysis. Biol Invasions 12:407–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pejchar L, Mooney HA (2009) Invasive species, ecosystem services and human well-being. Trends Ecol Evol 24:497–504

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pescador M, Sanguinetti J, Pastore H, Peris S (2009) Expansion of the introduced wild boar (Sus scrofa) in the Andean region, Argentinean Patagonia. Galemys Span J Mammal 21:121–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Raffaele E, Kitzberger T, Veblen T (2007) Interactive effects of introduced herbivores and post-flowering die-off of bamboos in Patagonian Nothofagus forests. J Veg Sci 18:371–378

    Google Scholar 

  • Relva MA, Veblen TT (1998) Impacts of introduced large herbivores on Austrocedrus chilensis forests in northern Patagonia, Argentina. For Ecol Manag 108:27–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Relva MA, Nuñez MA, Simberloff D (2010) Introduced deer reduce native plant cover and facilitate invasion of non-native tree species: evidence for invasional meltdown. Biol Invasions 12:303–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandom CJ, Hughes J, Macdonald DW (2013) Rooting for rewilding: quantifying wild boar’s Sus scrofa rooting rate in the Scottish Highlands. Restor Ecol 21:329–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanguinetti J, Kitzberger T (2010) Factors controlling seed predation by rodents and non-native Sus scrofa in Araucaria araucana forests: potential effects on seedling establishment. Biol Invasions 12:689–706

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanguinetti J, Buria L, Malmierca L, Valenzuela AE, Núñez C, Pastore H, Chauchard L, Ferreyra N, Massaccesi G, Gallo E, Chehébar C (2014) Manejo de especies exóticas invasoras en Patagonia, Argentina: priorización, logros y desafíos de integración entre ciencia y gestión identificados desde la Administración de Parques Nacionales. Ecol Austral 24:183–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiaffini MI, Vila AR (2012) Habitat use of the wild boar, Sus scrofa Linnaeus 1758, in Los Alerces National Park, Argentina. Stud Neotrop Fauna Environ 47:11–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlaepfer MA, Sax DF, Olden JD (2011) The potential conservation value of non-native species. Conserv Biol 25:428–437

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D, Von Holle B (1999) Positive interactions of nonindigenous species: invasional meltdown? Biol Invasions 1:21–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D, Martin JL, Genovesi P, Maris V, Wardle DA, Aronson J et al (2013) Impacts of biological invasions: what’s what and the way forward. Trends Ecol Evol 28:58–66

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spear D, Chown SL (2009) Non-indigenous ungulates as a threat to biodiversity. J Zool 279:1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valenzuela AE, Anderson CB, Fasola L, Cabello JL (2014) Linking invasive exotic vertebrates and their ecosystem impacts in Tierra del Fuego to test theory and determine action. Acta Oecol 54:110–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vavra M, Parks CG, Wisdom MJ (2007) Biodiversity, exotic plant species, and herbivory: the good, the bad, and the ungulate. For Ecol Manag 246:66–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaz AS, Kueffer C, Kull CA, Richardson DM, Vicente JR, Kühn I, Schröter M, Hauck J, Bonn A, Honrado JP (2017) Integrating ecosystem services and disservices: insights from plant invasions. Ecosyst Serv 23:94–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vila AR, Borrelli L (2011) Cattle in the Patagonian forests: feeding ecology in Los Alerces National Reserve. For Ecol Manag 261:1306–1314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead AL, Byrom AE, Clayton RI, Pech RP (2014) Removal of livestock alters native plant and invasive mammal communities in a dry grassland–shrubland ecosystem. Biol Invasions 16:1105–1118

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The project was carried out within the framework of a CONICET postdoctoral fellowship. We thank you for the support to the project Rufford Small Grants, CONICET, Nahuel Huapi National Park, and National Park Administration (Research Authorization Nº1343), thanks for the help in data analysis and fieldwork to M. Noelia Barrios-García (CENAC-CONICET) and Brece D. Hendrix (PRESS NSF-NAU Project, USA), and help in with the language revision of the manuscript to Genevieve Conley (NAU, USA).

Funding

Funding was provided by Rufford Foundation (Grant No. 15915-2).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Parque Nacional Nahuel Huapi (CENAC-APN). Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), San Carlos de Bariloche, Río Negro, Argentina

    Sebastián A. Ballari

  2. Instituto de Ciencias Polares, Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (ICPA), Universidad Nacional de Tierra del Fuego (UNTDF), Ushuaia, Tierra del Fuego, Argentina

    Alejandro E. J. Valenzuela

  3. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Ushuaia, Tierra del Fuego, Argentina

    Alejandro E. J. Valenzuela

  4. Grupo de Ecología de Invasiones, INIBIOMA, CONICET-Universidad Nacional del Comahue, San Carlos de Bariloche, Río Negro, Argentina

    Martín A. Nuñez

Authors
  1. Sebastián A. Ballari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alejandro E. J. Valenzuela
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Martín A. Nuñez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sebastián A. Ballari.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ballari, S.A., Valenzuela, A.E.J. & Nuñez, M.A. Interactions between wild boar and cattle in Patagonian temperate forest: cattle impacts are worse when alone than with wild boar. Biol Invasions 22, 1681–1689 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-020-02212-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-020-02212-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation