Patterns of livestock activity on heterogeneous subalpine pastures reveal distinct responses to spatial autocorrelation, environment and management

Movement Ecology

Manuel K. Schneider¹  Michael Scherer-Lorenzen²  Andreas Lüscher¹  Hermel Homburger² 

[1] Agroscope, Institute of Sustainability Sciences, Reckenholzstrasse 191, Zurich, CH-8046, Switzerland;University of Freiburg, Faculty of Biology, Geobotany, Schaenzlestrasse 1, Freiburg, D-79104, Germany

关键词: Pasture ecology;    Animal behavior;    Alps;    Stocking rate;    Spatial autocorrelation;    INLA;    Grazing;    GPS tracking;   

Others  :  1229057
DOI  :  10.1186/s40462-015-0053-6

 received in 2014-12-29, accepted in 2015-09-06,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

In order to understand the impact of grazing livestock on pasture ecosystems, it is essential to quantify pasture use intensity at a fine spatial scale and the factors influencing its distribution. The observation and analysis of animal activity is greatly facilitated by remote tracking technology and new statistical frameworks allowing for rapid inference on spatially correlated data. We used these advances to study activity patterns of GPS-tracked cows in six summer-grazing areas in the Swiss Alps that differed in environmental conditions as well as livestock management.

Results

Recorded GPS positions were assigned to the activities of grazing, resting, and walking, and were discretized on a regular grid. Regression models with spatially structured effects were fitted to the spatial activity patterns using Integrated Nested Laplace Approximation. They indicated that terrain slope, forage quality, and stocking rate were the primary factors determining cow activity in the six study areas. Terrain slope significantly reduced livestock activity in five of the six areas and sparse forage availability significantly reduced grazing in all areas. In three areas, grazing pressure imposed by the pasture rotation was observable in the grazing pattern. Insolation, distance to the shed, and distance to water were less important for cow activity. In addition to the main factors identified across all study areas, we found effects operating only in individual areas, which were partly explained by specific environmental and management characteristics. In study areas with few paddocks, environmental variables exerted a stronger control on livestock activity than in areas with a short stocking period per paddock.

Conclusions

The data demonstrated that a strict pasture rotation with short stocking periods is necessary to influence livestock activity, and hence potential effects on ecosystem processes. Without grazing management, livestock activity is primarily determined by the environment. Such insight is indispensable for studying relationships between grazing animals and ecosystem characteristics, and for developing management strategies to optimize ecosystem services. The analysis also highlighted the need for an appropriate statistical treatment of bio-logging data, since various estimates were biased if spatial autocorrelation was ignored.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Homburger et al.

【 图 表 】

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 6.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Asner GP, Elmore AJ, Olander LP, Martin RE, Harris AT. Grazing systems, ecosystem responses, and global change. Annu Rev Environ Resour. 2004; 29:261-299.
• [2]Matches A. Plant-response to grazing - a review. J Prod Agric. 1992; 5:1-7.
• [3]McSherry ME, Ritchie ME. Effects of grazing on grassland soil carbon: a global review. Glob Change Biol. 2013; 19:1347-1357.
• [4]Dumont B, Rook AJ, Coran C, Röver K-U. Effects of livestock breed and grazing intensity on biodiversity and production in grazing systems. 2. Diet selection. Grass Forage Sci. 2007; 62:159-171.
• [5]Adler PB, Raff DA, Lauenroth WK. The effect of grazing on the spatial heterogeneity of vegetation. Oecologia. 2001; 128:465-479.
• [6]Kampmann D, Herzog F, Jeanneret P, Konold W, Peter M, Walter T, et al. Mountain grassland biodiversity: Impact of site conditions versus management type. J Nat Conserv. 2008;16:12–25.
• [7]Laliberté E, Tylianakis JM. Cascading effects of long-term land-use changes on plant traits and ecosystem functioning. Ecology. 2012;93:145–55.
• [8]Hiltbrunner D, Schulze S, Hagedorn F, Schmidt MWI, Zimmmermann S. Cattle trampling alters soil properties and changes soil microbial communities in a Swiss sub-alpine pasture. Geoderma. 2012; 170:369-377.
• [9]Badía D, Martí C, Sánchez JR, Fillat F, Aguirre J, Gómez D Influence of livestock soil eutrophication on floral composition in the Pyrenees mountains. J Mt Sci. 2008;5:63–72.
• [10]Gillet F. Modelling vegetation dynamics in heterogeneous pasture-woodland landscapes. Ecol Model. 2008; 217:1-18.
• [11]Probo M, Massolo A, Lonati M, Bailey DW, Gorlier A, Maurino L, et al. Use of mineral mix supplements to modify the grazing patterns by cattle for the restoration of sub-alpine and alpine shrub-encroached grasslands. Rangel J. 2013;35:85–93.
• [12]Tappeiner U, Borsdorf A, Tasser E. Mapping the Alps: Society - Economy - Environment. Spektrum, Heidelberg; 2008.
• [13]Flury C, Huber R, Tasser E. Future of mountain agriculture in the Alps. In: The Future of Mountain Agriculture. Mann S, editor. Springer, Berlin; 2013: p.105-126.
• [14]Pornaro C, Schneider MK, Macolino S. Plant species loss due to forest succession in Alpine pastures depends on site conditions and observation scale. Biol Conserv. 2013; 161:213-222.
• [15]Peter M, Gigon A, Edwards PJ, Lüscher A. Changes over three decades in the floristic composition of nutrient-poor grasslands in the Swiss Alps. Biodivers Conserv. 2009; 18:547-567.
• [16]Pringle HJR, Landsberg J. Predicting the distribution of livestock grazing pressure in rangelands. Austral Ecol. 2004; 29:31-39.
• [17]Barnes MK, Norton BE, Maeno M, Malechek JC. Paddock size and stocking density affect spatial heterogeneity of grazing. Rangel Ecol Manag. 2008; 61:380-388.
• [18]Ropert-Coudert Y, Wilson RP. Trends and perspectives in animal-attached remote sensing. Front Ecol Environ. 2005; 3:437-444.
• [19]Homburger H, Schneider MK, Hilfiker S, Lüscher A. Inferring behavioral states of grazing livestock from high-frequency position data alone. PLoS One. 2014; 9: Article ID e114522
• [20]Bailey DW, VanWagoner HC, Weinmeister R, Jensen D. Comparison of low-moisture blocks and salt for manipulating grazing patterns of beef cows. J Anim Sci. 2008; 86:1271-1277.
• [21]Ganskopp D. Manipulating cattle distribution with salt and water in large arid-land pastures: a GPS/GIS assessment. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2001; 73:251-262.
• [22]Meisser M, Deléglise C, Freléchoux F, Chassot A, Jeangros B, Mosimann E. Foraging behaviour and occupation pattern of beef cows on a heterogeneous pasture in the Swiss Alps. Czech J Anim Sci. 2014; 59:84-95.
• [23]Ganskopp DC, Bohnert DW. Landscape nutritional patterns and cattle distribution in rangeland pastures. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2009; 116:110-119.
• [24]Putfarken D, Dengler J, Lehmann S, Härdtle W. Site use of grazing cattle and sheep in a large-scale pasture landscape: A GPS/GIS assessment. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2008; 111:54-67.
• [25]Probo M, Lonati M, Pittarello M, Bailey DW, Garbarino M, Gorlier A, et al. Implementation of a rotational grazing system with large paddocks changes the distribution of grazing cattle in the south-western Italian Alps. Rangel J. 2014;36:445–58.
• [26]Illian JB, Sørbye S, Rue H, Hendrichsen D. Using INLA to fit a complex point process model with temporally varying effects – a case study. J Environ Stat. 2012; 3:1-25.
• [27]Beguin J, Martino S, Rue H, Cumming SG. Hierarchical analysis of spatially autocorrelated ecological data using integrated nested Laplace approximation. Methods Ecol Evol. 2012; 3:921-929.
• [28]Hooten MB, Johnson DS, Hanks EM, Lowry JH. Agent-based inference for animal movement and selection. J Agric Biol Environ Stat. 2010; 15:523-538.
• [29]Kohler F, Gillet F, Reust S, Wagner HH, Gadallah F, Gobat J-M, et al. Spatial and seasonal patterns of cattle habitat use in a mountain wooded pasture. Landsc Ecol. 2006;21:281–95.
• [30]Rue H, Martino S, Chopin N. Approximate Bayesian inference for latent Gaussian models by using integrated nested Laplace approximations. J R Stat Soc Ser B Stat Methodol. 2009; 71:319-392.
• [31]Delarze R, Gonseth Y, Galland P. Lebensräume der Schweiz. Ökologie - Gefährdung - Kennarten. 2nd ed. Ott, Bern; 2008.
• [32]Schubiger FX, Bosshard HR, Dietl W. Nährwert von Alpweidepflanzen. Agrarforschung. 1998; 5:285-288.
• [33]Zuur A, Ieno EN, Walker N, Saveliev AA, Smith GM. Mixed Effects Models and Extensions in Ecology with R. Springer, New York; 2009.
• [34]Dormann CF, McPherson JM, Araújo MB, Bivand R, Bolliger J, Carl G, et al. Methods to account for spatial autocorrelation in the analysis of species distributional data: a review. Ecography. 2007;30:609–28.
• [35]Rue H, Held L. Gaussian Markov Random Fields: Theory and Applications. Chapman & Hall, Boca Raton; 2005.
• [36]Sørbye SH, Rue H. Scaling intrinsic Gaussian Markov random field priors in spatial modelling. Spat Stat. 2014; 8:39-51.
• [37]Papoila AL, Riebler A, Amaral-Turkman A, São-João R, Ribeiro C, Geraldes C, et al. Stomach cancer incidence in Southern Portugal 1998–2006: A spatio- temporal analysis. Biom J. 2014;56:403–15.
• [38]Fong Y, Rue H, Wakefield J. Bayesian inference for generalized linear mixed models. Biostatistics. 2010; 11:397-412.
• [39]Core Team R. A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna; 2013.
• [40]Paciorek CJ. Spatial models for point and areal data using Markov random fields on a fine grid. Electron J Stat. 2013; 7:946-972.
• [41]Frey MP, Stamm C, Schneider MK, Reichert P. Using discharge data to reduce structural deficits in a hydrological model with a Bayesian inference approach and the implications for the prediction of critical source areas. Water Resour Res. 2011; 47:W12529.
• [42]Jewell PL, Güsewell S, Berry NR, Käuferle D, Kreuzer M, Edwards PJ. Vegetation patterns maintained by cattle grazing on a degraded mountain pasture. Bot Helvetica. 2005; 115:109-124.
• [43]Suter M, Siegrist-Maag S, Connolly J, Lüscher A. Can the occurrence of Senecio jacobaea be influenced by management practice? Weed Res. 2007; 47:262-269.
• [44]Gillen R, Krueger W, Miller R. Cattle distribution on mountain rangeland in Northeastern Oregon. J Range Manag. 1984; 37:549-553.
• [45]Ganskopp D, Vavra M. Slope use by cattle, feral horses, deer, and bighorn sheep. Northwest Sci. 1987; 61:74-81.
• [46]Bailey DW, Gross JE, Laca EA, Rittenhouse LR, Coughenour MB, Swift DM, et al. Mechanisms that result in large herbivore grazing distribution patterns. J Range Manag. 1996;49:386–400.
• [47]Searle KR, Hunt LP, Gordon IJ. Individualistic herds: Individual variation in herbivore foraging behavior and application to rangeland management. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2010; 122:1-12.
• [48]Hiebl J, Auer I, Böhm R, Schöner W, Maugeri M, Lentini G, et al. A high-resolution 1961–1990 monthly temperature climatology for the greater Alpine region. Meteorol Z. 2009;18:507–30.