Geology Reports⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70029797

The diversity-biomass-productivity relationships in grassland management and restoration

Q. Guo
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Diversity, biomass, and productivity, the three key community/ecosystem variables, are interrelated and pose reciprocal influences on each other. The relationships among the three variables have been a central focus in ecology and formed two schools of fundamentally different nature with two related applications: (1) management - how biomass manipulation (e.g., grazing, burning) affects diversity and productivity, and (2) restoration - how diversity manipulation (e.g., seeding, planting) affects biomass and productivity. In the past, the two apparently related aspects have been studied intensively but separately in basic research and the reciprocal effects of the three variables and applied aspects have not been jointly addressed. In most cases, optimal management often involves regulating biomass so that high diversity and productivity or other preferred habitat characteristics can be achieved and maintained, while restoration usually involves planting/seeding a certain number and/or combination of native species so that the native structure and function of the habitat can be restored and degraded ecosystems can recover faster. This article attempts to unify these two schools and discusses the significance and implications of the diversity-biomass-productivity relationships in practice, with particular emphasis on grassland ecosystems. ?? 2006 Gesellschaft fu??r O??kologie.

Explore related subjects

Basic and Applied EcologyArticle

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Q. Guo. 2007. The diversity-biomass-productivity relationships in grassland management and restoration. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2006.02.005

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2022

Numbers and presence of guarding dogs affect wolf and leopard predation on livestock in northeastern Iran

Livestock predation can pose socio-economic impacts on rural livelihoods and is the main cause of retaliatory killings of carnivores in many countries. Therefore, appropriate interventions to reduce livestock predation, lower conflict and promote coexistence are needed. Livestock guarding dogs have been traditionally used to reduce predation, yet details regarding the use of dogs, especially the number of dogs per herd effectively required, are rarely studied. In this study, we assessed how the number and presence of guarding dogs in a herd can reduce livestock losses to leopard and wolf in corrals at night and on grazing grounds in day-time. Using systematic interview surveys (2016-2019), we documented sheep/goat losses per attack (predation rates) from 139 shepherds across 32 villages around Golestan National Park, Iran. We analysed the effects of the number of dogs, presence of dogs, presence of shepherds, seasons, corral quality, livestock number, dog size, distance to villages and distance to reserve on predation rates using generalized linear models. For the leopard model, dog presence significantly decreased ( β = –1.80, 95% confidence interval –2.61 to –0.81) predation rates during day-time to 1.41 individuals per attack. For wolf attacks in corrals at night, predation rates significantly decreased ( β = –0.29, –0.54 to –0.04) with increasing dog numbers. Also, shepherd presence ( β = –0.56, –1.10 to –0.10) and herd size (β = –0.36, –0.60 to –0.12) significantly reduced predation rates. In the wolf day-time model, shepherd presence significantly decreased ( β = –0.93, –1.74 to –0.10) predation rates. Our study suggests that (1) using dogs can reduce, but not eliminate, predation by leopards during day-time; (2) with every additional dog, predation rates by wolves in corrals at night are likely to decrease on average by 25.2%; and (3) the presence of shepherds in corrals at night and during day-time can reduce predation rates.

Azizabad No-Hunting Area, Golestan National Park↗
USGS2021

Farmland in U.S. Conservation Reserve Program has unique floral composition that promotes bee summer foraging

Bee conservation is a topic of global concern, particularly in agroecosystems where their contribution to crop pollination is highly valued. Over a decade ago, bees and other pollinators were made a priority of the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), a U.S. federal program that pays land owners to establish a conservation cover, typically grassland, on environmentally sensitive farmland. Despite large financial investment in this program, few studies have measured the benefit of CRP to bees, particularly in complex agroecosystems with abundant alternative forage. To determine if CRP land seeded with pollinator-attractive native flowers and/or introduced legumes provides distinct floral composition that attracts more foraging bees than non-CRP habitats, we compared CRP land to paired non-CRP fields and roadsides at 31 sites in Michigan, U.S.A.. We found CRP land had unique floral species community composition, higher floral abundance, greater species richness, more native floral species, and greater inflorescence coverage. Greater inflorescence coverage on CRP land was associated with a greater abundance of both honey bees and wild bees than either non-CRP fields or roadsides, as was native flower abundance for wild bees. Showy native plant species were important forage resources on CRP land: Monarda fistulosa was the most foraged upon species by both honey bees and wild bees, and goldenrod species were important late-summer forage resources for honey bees. These findings demonstrate the benefit of managing CRP land with herbaceous seed mixes to create dense, showy, native plant communities that provide summer-long resources to both bee groups. Insights from this study could be used to enhance the composition of future conservation program investments and management of non-CRP land to benefit pollinators.

Michigan↗
USGS2020

Testing prediction accuracy in short-term ecological studies

Applied ecology is based on an assumption that a management action will result in a predicted outcome. Testing the prediction accuracy of ecological models is the most powerful way of evaluating the knowledge implicit in this cause-effect relationship, however, the prevalence of predictive modeling and prediction testing are spreading slowly in ecology. The challenge of prediction testing is particularly acute for small-scale studies, because withholding data for prediction testing (e.g., via k -fold cross validation) can reduce model precision. However, by necessity small-scale studies are common. We use one such study that explored small mammal abundance along an elevational gradient to test prediction accuracy of models with varying degrees of information content. For each of three small mammal species, we conducted 5000 iterations of the following process: (1) randomly selected 75 % of the data to develop generalized linear models of species abundance that used detailed site measurements as covariates, (2) used an information theoretic approach to compare the top model with detailed covariates to habitat type-only and null models constructed with the same data, (3) tested those models’ ability to predict the 25 % of the randomly withheld data, and (4) evaluated prediction accuracy with a quadratic loss function. Detailed models fit the model-evaluation data best but had greater expected prediction error when predicting out-of-sample data relative to the habitat type models. Relationships between species and detailed site variables may be evident only within the framework of explicitly hierarchical analyses. We show that even with a small but relatively typical dataset ( n = 28 sampling locations across 125 km over two years), researchers can effectively compare models with different information content and measure models’ predictive power, thus evaluating their own ecological understanding and defining the limits of their inferences. Identifying the appropriate scope of inference through prediction testing is ecologically valuable and is attainable even with small datasets.

Maine, New Hampshire↗