10.5061/DRYAD.85223
Archer, Steve R.
University of Arizona
Predick, Katharine I.
University of Arizona
Archer, Steven R.
University of Arizona
Data from: An ecosystem services perspective on brush management: research
priorities for competing land use objectives
Dryad
dataset
2014
woody weeds
shrub encroachment
state change
woody plant encroachment
bush clearing
vegetation change
2014-11-11T17:50:35Z
2014-11-11T17:50:35Z
en
https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12314
70807 bytes
1
CC0 1.0 Universal (CC0 1.0) Public Domain Dedication
1. The vegetation of semi-arid and arid landscapes is often comprised of
mixtures of herbaceous and woody vegetation. Since the early 1900s, shifts
from herbaceous to woody plant dominance, termed woody plant encroachment
and widely regarded as a state change, have occurred world-wide. This
shift presents challenges to the conservation of grassland and savanna
ecosystems and to animal production in commercial ranching systems and
pastoral societies. 2. Dryland management focused on cattle and sheep
grazing has historically attempted to reduce the abundance of encroaching
woody vegetation (hereafter, ‘brush management’) with the intent of
reversing declines in forage production, stream flow or groundwater
recharge. Here, we assess the known and potential consequences of brush
management actions, both positive and negative, on a broader suite of
ecosystem services, the scientific challenges to quantifying these
services and the trade-offs among them. 3. Our synthesis suggests that
despite considerable investments accompanying the application of brush
management practices, the recovery of key ecosystem services may be
short-lived or absent. However, in the absence of such interventions,
those and other ecosystem services may be compromised, and the persistence
of grassland and savanna ecosystem types and their endemic plants and
animals threatened. 4. Addressing the challenges posed by woody plant
encroachment will require integrated management systems using diverse
theoretical principles to design the type, timing and spatial arrangement
of initial management actions and follow-up treatments. These management
activities will need to balance cultural traditions and preferences,
socio-economic constraints and potentially competing land-use objectives.
5. Synthesis. Our ability to predict ecosystem responses to management
aimed at recovering ecosystem services where grasslands and savannas have
been invaded by native or exotic woody plants is limited for many
attributes (e.g. primary production, land surface–atmosphere interactions,
biodiversity conservation) and inconsistent for others (e.g. forage
production, herbaceous diversity, water quality/quantity, soil erosion,
carbon sequestration). The ecological community is challenged with
generating robust information about the response of ecosystem services and
their interactions if we are to position land managers and policymakers to
make objective, science-based decisions regarding the many trade-offs and
competing objectives for the conservation and dynamic management of
grasslands and savannas.
Figure 2, 3 & 5 dataData used in Table 1 and Figures 2, 3 and 5
were derived from published papers obtained from Web of Knowledge search
strings about brush management. These searches yielded 1350 unique papers
published in refereed journals which were distilled to 364 papers that
report quantitative responses to brush management. This database was
further refined to 59 papers that directly quantified herbaceous
production after brush management and these papers contribute the data
shown in Figures 2, 3 and 5. Brush management was defined as mechanical,
herbicide, fire, or treatments in combination and excluded studies that
were confounded by continued sheep or cattle grazing on treatment sites.
Of those 59 papers, 18 provided mean changes in herbaceous production with
error on both control and treatment sites. Data from these 18 papers were
used to generate Figures 2 and 3. Among those in the database of 1350
papers were 46 papers that directly measured changes in herbaceous
diversity after brush management. Of those 46 papers, 29 provided mean
changes in diversity (richness or Shannon diversity) with error on both
control and treatment sites. Data from these papers were used to generate
Figure 5. When multiple tables or figures are listed they represent data
reported by site or year and were averaged in our dataset. Data originally
published in figure format was quantified using Adobe Illustrator CS6 or
DataThief III.Archer_Predick_JoE.xlsx