, Volume 162, Issue 2, pp 427–434 | Cite as

Spatial pattern of grazing affects influence of herbivores on spatial heterogeneity of plants and soils

  • Yu Yoshihara
  • Toshiya Ohkuro
  • Bayarbaatar Buuveibaatar
  • Undarmaa Jamsran
  • Kazuhiko Takeuchi
Plant-Animal interactions - Original Paper


With our enhanced understanding of the factors that determine biodiversity and assemblage structure has come increasing acknowledgment that the use of an appropriate disturbance regime to maintain spatial heterogeneity is an effective conservation technique. A herbivore’s behavior affects its disturbance regime (size and intensity); this, in turn, may modify the associated spatial heterogeneity of plants and soil properties. We examined whether the pattern of spatial disturbance created by the Siberian marmot (Marmota sibirica) affects the spatial heterogeneity of vegetation and soils at a colony scale on the Mongolian steppe. We expected that the difference in management between two types of area (protection against hunting marmots vs. hunting allowed) would result in different behavioral patterns; therefore, we estimated the patterns of spatial disturbance separately in protected and unprotected areas. We then surveyed plant communities and soil nutrients in these areas to assess their spatial heterogeneity. We found that disturbance of both vegetation and soil was more concentrated near marmot burrows in the unprotected area than in the protected area. In addition, the degrees of spatial heterogeneity of vegetation and soil NO3-N were greater in the unprotected area than in the protected area, where disturbance was more widely distributed. These results indicate that the spatial pattern of disturbance by herbivores affects the spatial heterogeneity of vegetation and soil properties through changes in the disturbance regime. Our findings also suggest that the intensity of disturbance is more important than its size in determining community structure in Mongolian grasslands.


Disturbance intensity Disturbance size Disturbance regime Marmots Mongolian grassland 



We thank the project members, and especially T. Okayasu of the University of Tokyo, for their kind help with the field survey. We also thank the staff at Hustai National Park for all their help during the study. This work was carried out with support from the Global Environmental Research Fund (G-071) of Japan’s Ministry of the Environment. The authors declare that this work was conducted in compliance with the laws of Mongolia.

Supplementary material

442_2009_1481_MOESM1_ESM.doc (100 kb)
(DOC 100 kb)


  1. Adler PB, Raff DA, Lauenroth WK (2001) The effect of grazing on the spatial heterogeneity of vegetation. Oecologia 128:465–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Augustine DJ, Frank DA (2001) Effects of migratory grazers on spatial heterogeneity of soil nitrogen properties in a grassland ecosystem. Ecology 82:3149–3162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benton TG, Vickery JA, Wilson JD (2003) Farmland biodiversity: is habitat heterogeneity the key? Trends Ecol Evol 18:182–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bergeron Y, Dansereau PR (1993) Predicting the composition of Canadian southern boreal forest in different fire cycles. J Veg Sci 4:827–832CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Branch LC (1993) Intergroup and intragroup spacing in the plains vizcacha, Lagostomus maximus. J Mammal 74:890–900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Collins SL, Smith MD (2006) Scale-dependent interaction of fire and grazing on community heterogeneity in tallgrass prairie. Ecology 87:2058–2067CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Davidson AD, Lightfoot DL (2006) Keystone rodent interactions: prairie dogs and kangaroo rats structure the biotic composition of a desertified grassland. Ecography 29:755–756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Denslow JS (1987) Tropical rain forest gaps and tree species-diversity. Annu Rev Ecol Evol S 18:431–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fortin MJ, Dale MRT (2005) Spatial analysis: a guide for ecologists. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Griffin SC, Valois T, Taper ML, Mills LS (2007) Effects of tourists on behavior and demography of Olympic marmots. Conserv Biol 21:1070–1081CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Gurney WSC, Lawton JH (1996) The population dynamics of ecosystem engineers. Oikos 76:273–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Holland EA, Detling JK (1990) Plant-response to herbivory and belowground nitrogen cycling. Ecology 71:1040–1049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Karels TJ, Koppel L, Hik DS (2004) Fecal pellet counts as a technique for monitoring an alpine-dwelling social rodent, the hoary marmot (Marmota caligata). Arct Antarct Alp Res 36:490–494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Magle S, Zhu J, Crooks KR (2005) Behavioral responses to repeated human intrusion by black-tailed prairie dogs (Cynomys ludovicianus). J Mammal 86:524–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Morgan JW (1998) Importance of canopy gaps for recruitment of some forbs in Themeda triandra-dominated grasslands in south-eastern Australia. Aust J Bot 46:609–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Questad EJ, Foster BL (2007) Vole disturbances and plant diversity in a grassland metacommunity. Oecologia 153:341–351CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Shure DJ, Phillips DL, Bostick PE (2006) Gap size and succession in cutover southern Appalachian forests: an 18 year study of vegetation dynamics. Plant Ecol 185:299–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sparks DL, Page AL, Helmke PA, Loeppert RH, Soltanpour PN, Tabatabai MA, Johnston CT, Sumner ME (1996) Methods of soil analysis. 3. Chemical methods. Soil Science Society of America. MadisonGoogle Scholar
  19. Stoyan D, Penttinen A (2000) Recent applications of point process methods in forestry statistics. Stat Sci 15:61–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Takenaka A (2008) PPA-R: point process analysis programming, Japan. http://takenaka-akio.cool.ne.jp/etc./ppa-r/
  21. Tews J, Brose U, Grimm V, Tielbörger K, Wichmann MC, Schwager M (2004) Animal species diversity driven by habitat heterogeneity/diversity: the importance of keystone structures. J Biogeogr 31:79–92Google Scholar
  22. Turner MG, Baker WL, Peterson CJ, Peet RK (1998) Factors influencing succession: lessons from large, infrequent natural disturbances. Ecosystems 1:511–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Van Staalduinen MA, Werger MJA (2007) Marmot disturbances in a Mongolian steppe vegetation. J Arid Environ 69:344–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Van Staalduinen MA, During H, Werger MJA (2007) Impact of grazing regime on a Mongolian forest steppe. Appl Veg Sci 10(3):299-306Google Scholar
  25. Warren SD, Holbrook SW, Dale DA, Whelan NL, Elyn M, Grimm W, Jentsch A (2007) Biodiversity and the heterogeneous disturbance regime on military training lands. Restor Ecol 15:606–612Google Scholar
  26. Wesche K, Nadrowski K, Retzer V (2007) Habitat engineering under dry conditions: the impact of pikas (Ochotona pallasi) on vegetation and site conditions in southern Mongolian steppes. J Veg Sci 18:665–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. White PS, Harrod J (1997) Disturbance and diversity in a landscape context. In: Bissonette JA (ed) Wildlife and landscape ecology effects and pattern of scale. Springer, New York, pp 128–159Google Scholar
  28. Wiegand T, Moloney KA (2004) Rings, circles, and null-models for point pattern analysis in ecology. Oikos 104:209–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wingard JR, Zahler P (2006) Silent steppe: the illegal wildlife trade crisis in Mongolia: Mongolia discussion papers. East Asia and Pacific Environment and Social Development Department, World Bank, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Wright JP, Flecker AS, Jones CG (2003) Local vs. landscape controls on plant species richness in beaver meadows. Ecology 84:3162–3173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Yoshihara Y, Chimeddorj B, Buuveibaatar B, Lhagvasuren B, Takatsuki S (2008) Effects of livestock grazing on pollination on a steppe in eastern Mongolia. Biol Conserv 141:2376–2386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yoshihara Y, Ohkuro T, Buuveibaatar B, Takeuchi K (2009) Effects of disturbance by Siberian marmots (Marmota sibirica) on spatial heterogeneity of vegetation at multiple spatial scales. Grassland Sci 55:89–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zar JH (1996) Biostatistical analysis, 3rd edn. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New JerseyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yu Yoshihara
    • 1
  • Toshiya Ohkuro
    • 1
  • Bayarbaatar Buuveibaatar
    • 2
  • Undarmaa Jamsran
    • 3
  • Kazuhiko Takeuchi
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratory of Landscape Ecology and Planning, School of Agriculture and Life SciencesThe University of TokyoBunkyo-kuJapan
  2. 2.Institute of BiologyMongolian Academy of SciencesUlaanbaatarMongolia
  3. 3.Center for Ecosystem StudyMongolian State University of AgricultureUlanbaatarMongolia

Personalised recommendations