Wildlife Biology in Practice, Vol 3, No 2 (2007)

Wildl. Biol. Pract., 2007; 2(3); 60-72;

Open Access Policy
Online ISSN: 1646-2742
doi: 10.2461/wbp.2007.3.8
Copyright © 2007 Crespí, Monzon, Pinto, Castro, Fernandes, Rodrigues, Costa, Bernardos.
Published by: Portuguese Wildlife Society

Creative Commons License This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


The electronic version of this article can be found at:
http://www.socpvs.org/journals/index.php/wbp/article/view/10.2461-wbp.2007.3.8

Evaluation of roe deer effects upon forest structure in Nogueira Mountain (NE of Portugal)


Printer Friendly PDF

Abstract


Analytical methodologies that describe ecological functionalities in the landscape are decisive to quantify the effects of their apparent modifications. When dealing with game resource management it is necessary to understand how landscape variables respond to changes in the abundance of particular species.
The main goal of the present work is to evaluate how a forest ecosystem reacts to an increment of roe deer (Capreolus capreolus L.) abundance in a reproduction enclosure.
This experience has been developed in the Nogueira Mountains (Trás-os-Montes, NE of Portugal), where a relict nucleus of roe deer persists. In order to promote a roe deer increment, a 15 ha enclosure was installed eight years ago in a natural forest of Quercus pyrenaica.
The methodology presently proposed is based on a phytostructural approach, where structural basic matrices of vegetation diversity, abundance and cover, obtained from 10 x 10 m sampling areas along two transepts (inside and outside the enclosure) are resumed in a contingency structural matrix. This contingency matrix is characterised according to a set of multivariate statistical analysis (Principal Component Analysis, Discriminant Canonical Analysis, ANOVAs) and results are correlated with roe deer food preferences (previously typified in four classes according to selectivity). The present results emphasised the roe deer’s capacity to transform the structural organization of the vegetation and therefore, the methodology used is a functional tool to describe landscape changes processes promoted by ungulates.


Keywords

Impact on vegetation, Methodological approach, Roe deer, Vegetation structure..

Supplementary files

References

1 Baudry, J., Burel, F., Thenail, C. & Le Coeur, D., 2000. A holistic landscape ecological study of the interactions between farming activities and ecological patterns in Brittany, France. Landsc. Urban Plan. 50: 119-128.
doi: 10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00084-0.

2 Foster, D.R., Motzkin, G., Bernardos, D. & Cardoza, J. 2002. Wildlife dynamics in the changing New England Landscape. J. Biogeogr. 29: 1337-1357.
doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2699.2002.00759.x.

3 Naveh, Z., 1998. From biodiversity to ecodiversity - holistic conservation of the biological and cultural diversity of Mediterranean landscapes. In: Rundel, P.W., Montenegro, G., Jaksic, F.M. (Eds.). Landscape Degradation and Biodiversity in Mediterranean-type Ecosystems, Ecological Studies, vol. 136. SpringierñVerlag, New York: 23-53.

4 Fonseca, J. 1999. Corço (Capreolus capreolus L.) em Portugal. [The roe deer (Capreolus capreolus L.) in Portugal]. Caça e Pesca 22:332-33.

5 Paixão, P. 2002. O corço (Capreolus capreolus) na Beira Interior. [The roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) in the Beira Interior]. Estágio em Engenharia Florestal. UTAD. Portugal.

6 Robalo, P. 2005. A reintrodução do corço (Capreolus capreolus) na Beira Interior. [Reintroduction of Roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) in the Beira Interior]. Santo Huberto, Boletim da CNCP 2: 19-21.

7 Brito, T. 2001. Modelo preditivo da ocorrência do corço (Capreolus capreolus Linnaeus, 1758) no distrito de BraganÁa. [A predictive model for roe deer (Capreolus capreolus Linnaeus, 1758) occurrence in the BraganÁa district]. Master em gestão de recursos naturais, Universidade Técnica de Lisboa, Inst. Sup. de Agronomia, Portugal.

8 Martins, L.M.C. 1999. Contributo para a gestão do corço (Capreolus capreolus) na Zona de Caça Nacional da Lombada. [Contribute for roe deer management (Capreolus capreolus) in the Lombada National hunting area]. Relatório final de estágio da Licenciatura em Engenharia Florestal. UTAD, Vila Real, Portugal.

9 Pimenta, V. & Correia, J. 2001. Distribuição do corço (Capreolus capreolus) no Parque Natural do Douro Internacional, Análise dos factores ambientais que a condicionam. [Roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) distribution in the International Douro Natural Park; Analysis of explanatory environmental factors]. Relatório final de estágio, Inst. Politécnico de BraganÁa, Portugal.

10 Teixeira, R.M.V. 2003. Avaliação da ocorrência do corço (Capreolus capreolus) na Região Alvão-Marão. [Evaluating the roe deer occurrence (Capreolus capreolus) in the Alvão-Marão Region]. Relatório final de estágio da Licenciatura em Engenharia Florestal. UTAD, Vila Real, Portugal.

11 Stanley, H.A. & Gutzwiller, K.J. 1994. Habitat evolution methods. In: Bookhout T.A. (ed), Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats. The Wildlife Society. Bethesda, Maryland, pp. 592-606.

12 Staines, B.W. & Welch, D. 1984. Habitat selection and impact of red (Cervus elaphus) and roe (Capreolus capreolus) deer in a sitka spruce plantation. Proc. R. Soc. Edin. B 82: 303-319.

13 Kuiters, A.T., Mohren, G.M.J. & Van Wieren, S.E. 1996. Ungulates in temperate forest ecosystems. Forest Ecol. Manag. 88: 1-5.
doi: 10.1016/S0378-1127(96)03876-5.

14 Felix, A.B., Campa H., Millenbah K.F., Panken S.L, Winterstein S.R. & Moritz W.E. 2002. Applications of using a landscape-scale model to quantify white-tailed deer habitat potential in Michigan, U.S.A. Z. Jagdwiss (European Journal of Wildlife Reseach). Proceedings from the XXV Congress of the International Union of Game Biologists and the IX International Symposium Perdix 48 (Supplement) 1: 107-114.

15 Bolen, E.G & Robinson, W.L. 1995.Wildlife ecology and management. Prentice Hall. USA.

16 Dasmann, R.F. 1981. Wildlife biology. John Wiley & Sons. New York.

17 Gill, R. 2000. The impact of deer on woodland biodiversity. Forestry Commission. Information Note 36. Edinburgh: 1-6.

18 Crespi, A.L., Santos M., Monzón A., Castro A., Fernandes C.P., Pereira A., Fernandes M.J., Amich F. & Bernardos S. 2003. Phytostructural analysis of the vegetation in an agroecosystem of the North of Portugal. I. A resistance and resilience approach. Ecol. Medit. 29(1): 49-59.

19 Costa, J.C., Aguiar, C., Capelo, J.H., Lousã, M. & Neto, C. 1999. Biogeografia de Portugal Continental. [Biogeography of Continental Portugal]. Quercetea 0: 5-56.

20 Bernardos, S. Cresp', A.L., Aguiar, C., Fernández, J. & Amich, F. 2004. The plant communities of the Rumici indurati-Dianthion lusitani alliance in the Lusitan Duriensean biogeographical sector (NE Portugal and CW Spain). Acta Bot. Gallica 151(2): 147-164.

21 Cresp', A.L., Bernardos, S., Paiva, J., Amich, F., Fernandes, C.P. & Castro, A. 2004. An approach to phenotypic analysis and environmental varibility. The examples of the genera Dianthus L. and Lotus L. in the North of Portugal. Acta Bot. Croat. 63(1): 35-48.

22 Kent, M. & Coker, P. 1992. Vegetation description and analysis: a practical approach. Belhaven Press, London.

23 Oliveira Filho, A.T. & Martins, F.R. 1986. Distribuição, caracterização e composição flor'stica das formações vegetais da região da Salgadeira, na Chapada dos Guimarães (MT). [Floristical distribution, characterization and composition of the vegetal formations in the Salgadeira region, in Chapada dos Guimarães (MT)]. Rev. Bras. Bot. 9: 207-223.

24 McIntyre, S. & Barret, G.W. 1992. Habitat variegation, an alternative to fragmentação. Conserv. Biol. 6: 146-147.
doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1992.610146.x.

25 Pinto, S.I.P. 2002. Estudo de uma área destinada à constituição de um cercado para a produção de corços em cativeiro. [Study of a fenced area for roe deer reproduction]. Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Vila Real.

26 Hosey, G.R. 1981. Annual foods of the roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) in the south of England. J. Zool 42: 276-278.

27 Martinho, A.M.V. 1990. Hábitos alimentares do corço (Capreolus capreolus) no carvalhal da serra da Nogueira. [Roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) feeding behaviour in the oak forest of Nogueira mountain]. Relatório final de estágio em Engenharia Florestal. Utad, Vila Real.

28 Gotelli, N.J. & Ellison, A.M. 2004. A primer of ecological statistics. Sinauer Associates, Inc. Sunderland.

29 Ludwig, J.A. & Reynolds, J.F. 1988. Statistical ecology. A primer on methods and computing. Wiley-Interscience Pub., John Wiley & Sons. New York.

30 Tutin, T.G. Heywood, V.H., Burges, N.A., Moore, D M., Valentine, D.H., Walters, S.M. & Webb, D.A. 1964-1980. Flora Europaea, vol. 1-5. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

31 Castroviejo, S., Aedo, C., Gómez-Campo, C., La'nz, M., Montserrat, P., Morales, R., Muñoz, F., Nieto Feliner, G., Rico, E., Talavera, S., Villar, L. & Navarro, C. 1986-2004. Flora Iberica, vol. 1-8 and 14. C.S.I.C. Madrid.

32 Ammer, C. 1996. Impact of ungulates on structure and dynamics of natural regeneration of mixed mountain forest in the Bavarian Alps. Forest Ecol. Manag. 88: 43-53.
doi: 10.1016/S0378-1127(96)03808-X.

33 Gill, R.M.A., Johnson, A.L., Francis, A., Hiscocks, K. & Peace, A.J. 1996. Changes in roe deer (Capreolus capreolus L.) population density in response to forest habitat succession. Forest Ecol. Manag. 88: 31-41.
doi: 10.1016/S0378-1127(96)03807-8.

34 Harmer, R. 2001. The effect of plant competition and simulated summer browsing by deer on tree regeneration. J. Appl. Ecol. 38:1094-1103.
doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2664.2001.00664.x.

35 Negi, G.C.S., Rikhari, H.C., Ram, J. & Singh, S.P. 1993. Foraging niche characteristics of horses, sheep and goats in an alpine meadow of the Indian Central Himalaya. J. Appl. Ecol. 30: 383-394.
doi: 10.2307/2404180.

36 Putman, R.J. & Moore, N.P. 1998. Impact of deer in lowland Britain on agriculture, forestry and conservation habitats. Mammal Rev. 28(4):141-164.
doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2907.1998.00031.x.

37 Casado, M.A., Castro, I., Ram'rez-Sanz, L., Costa-Tenorio, M., Miguel, J.M. & Pineda, F.D. 2004. Herbaceous plant richness and vegetation cover in Mediterranean grasslands and shrublands. Plant Ecol. 170: 83-91.
doi: 10.1023/B:VEGE.0000019021.62054.62.

38 Gill, R. 2000. The impact of deer on woodland biodiversity. Forestry commission. Information note 36. Forestry commission. Edinburgh.

39 Van Hess, F.M., Kuiters, L.A.T. & Slim, P. A. 1996. Effects of browsing on silver birch, pedunculate oak and beech regeneration. Forest Ecol. Manag. 88: 55-64.
doi: 10.1016/S0378-1127(96)03809-1.

40 Welch, D., Staines, B.W., Scott, D. & French, D.D. 1992. Leader browsing by red and roe deer on young sitka spruce trees in western Scotland. II. Effects on growth and tree form. Forestry 65: 309-330.
doi: 10.1093/forestry/65.3.309.

41 Gill, R.M.A. 1992. A review of damage by mammals in north temperate forests. 3. Impact on trees and forests. Forestry 65(4): 362 363-388.
doi: 10.1093/forestry/65.4.363-a.

42 Doerr, J.G. & Sandburg, N.H. 1986. Effects on precommercial thining on understorey vegetation and deer habitat utilization on Big Level island in Southeast Alaska. Forest Sci. 32: 1092-1095.

43 Connell, J.H. 1990. Apparent vs. "real" competition in plants. Pages 445-474. In: Grace, J.B. & Tilman, D. (eds). Perspectives on plant competition. Academic Press, New York, New York, USA.