Vegetation–Microclimate Feedbacks in Woodland–Grassland Ecotones
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Sanderson Et Al., the Human Footprint and the Last of the Wild
Articles The Human Footprint and the Last of the Wild ERICW. SANDERSON,MALANDING JAITEH, MARC A. LEVY,KENT H. REDFORD, ANTOINETTEV. WANNEBO,AND GILLIANWOOLMER n Genesis,God blesses humanbeings and bids us to take dominion over the fish in the sea,the birdsin the air, THE HUMANFOOTPRINT IS A GLOBAL and other We are entreatedto be fruitful every living thing. MAPOF HUMANINFLUENCE ON THE and multiply,to fill the earth,and subdueit (Gen. 1:28).The bad news, and the good news, is that we have almost suc- LANDSURFACE, WHICH SUGGESTSTHAT ceeded. Thereis little debatein scientificcircles about the impor- HUMANBEINGS ARE STEWARDS OF tance of human influenceon ecosystems.According to sci- WE LIKEIT OR NOT entists'reports, we appropriateover 40%of the net primary NATURE,WHETHER productivity(the greenmaterial) produced on Eartheach year (Vitouseket al. 1986,Rojstaczer et al.2001). We consume 35% thislack of appreciationmay be dueto scientists'propensity of the productivityof the oceanicshelf (Pauly and Christensen to expressthemselves in termslike "appropriation of net pri- 1995), and we use 60% of freshwaterrun-off (Postel et al. maryproductivity" or "exponentialpopulation growth," ab- 1996). The unprecedentedescalation in both human popu- stractionsthat require some training to understand.It may lation and consumption in the 20th centuryhas resultedin be dueto historicalassumptions about and habits inherited environmentalcrises never before encountered in the history fromtimes when human beings, as a group,had dramatically of humankindand the world (McNeill2000). E. O. Wilson less influenceon the biosphere.Now the individualdeci- (2002) claims it would now take four Earthsto meet the consumptiondemands of the currenthuman population,if Eric Sanderson(e-mail: [email protected])is associatedirector, and every human consumed at the level of the averageUS in- W. -
The Ecology of Large Herbivores Native to the Coastal Lowlands of the Fynbos Biome in the Western Cape, South Africa
The ecology of large herbivores native to the coastal lowlands of the Fynbos Biome in the Western Cape, South Africa by Frans Gustav Theodor Radloff Dissertation presented for the degree of Doctor of Science (Botany) at Stellenbosh University Promoter: Prof. L. Mucina Co-Promoter: Prof. W. J. Bond December 2008 DECLARATION By submitting this dissertation electronically, I declare that the entirety of the work contained therein is my own, original work, that I am the owner of the copyright thereof (unless to the extent explicitly otherwise stated) and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it for obtaining any qualification. Date: 24 November 2008 Copyright © 2008 Stellenbosch University All rights reserved ii ABSTRACT The south-western Cape is a unique region of southern Africa with regards to generally low soil nutrient status, winter rainfall and unusually species-rich temperate vegetation. This region supported a diverse large herbivore (> 20 kg) assemblage at the time of permanent European settlement (1652). The lowlands to the west and east of the Kogelberg supported populations of African elephant, black rhino, hippopotamus, eland, Cape mountain and plain zebra, ostrich, red hartebeest, and grey rhebuck. The eastern lowlands also supported three additional ruminant grazer species - the African buffalo, bontebok, and blue antelope. The fate of these herbivores changed rapidly after European settlement. Today the few remaining species are restricted to a few reserves scattered across the lowlands. This is, however, changing with a rapid growth in the wildlife industry that is accompanied by the reintroduction of wild animals into endangered and fragmented lowland areas. -
Asia-Pacific's Ecological Footprint
ASIA-PACIFIC 2005 The Ecological Footprint and Natural Wealth ountries in Asia and the Pacific have made a firm nor extended worldwide without causing additional consumed like an average American or European?” We commitment to sustainable development. We want life-threatening damage to the global environment have only one planet, yet all people want, and have the Ca better quality of life for all, while safeguarding the and increasing social inequity. right to, fulfilling lives. The challenge for high income Earth’s capacity to support life in all its diversity and This report is a call for action, not just for the policy countries is to radically reduce footprint while maintaining respecting the limits of the planet’s natural resources. How community, but for the scientific and business com- quality of life. For lasting improvements in their quality of can we achieve this in the face of growing populations and munities as well. It echoes what the Millennium Ecosystem life, lower income countries are facing the complementary changing consumption patterns, both within the region Assessment found: that the health of natural systems has challenge of finding new paths to development that can and the world? a profound impact on our quality of life, but 60 percent of provide best living conditions without liquidating their As a first step to answering this question, we need to the ecosystem services that support life on Earth are being ecological wealth. know where we are today. How does the Asia-Pacific degraded or used unsustainably. This report provides a The Asia-Pacific region is in a unique position to shape region’s current demand for ecological resources compare frank assessment of what is at stake for Asia and the the development model for the whole world in the coming to the region’s (and the planet’s) supply? How does it Pacific and for the rest of the world. -
Sensitivity of Mangrove Range Limits to Climate Variability Kyle C
University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln USGS Staff -- ubP lished Research US Geological Survey 4-28-2017 Sensitivity of mangrove range limits to climate variability Kyle C. Cavanaugh Department of Geography, University of California, [email protected] Michael J. Osland U.S. Geological Survey, Wetland and Aquatic Research Center Remi Bardou Department of Geography, University of California Gustavo Hinojosa-Arango Academia de Biodiversidad, Centro Interdisciplinario de Investigacion para el Desarrollo Integral Regional Unidad Oaxaca (CIIDIR-IPN) Juan M. Lopez-Vivas Programa de Investigacion en Botanica Marina, Departamento Academico de Ciencias Marinas y Costeras, Universidad See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub Part of the Geology Commons, Oceanography and Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology Commons, Other Earth Sciences Commons, and the Other Environmental Sciences Commons Cavanaugh, Kyle C.; Osland, Michael J.; Bardou, Remi; Hinojosa-Arango, Gustavo; Lopez-Vivas, Juan M.; Parker, John D.; and Rovai, Andre S., "Sensitivity of mangrove range limits to climate variability" (2017). USGS Staff -- Published Research. 1041. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub/1041 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Geological Survey at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in USGS Staff -- ubP lished Research by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Authors Kyle C. Cavanaugh, Michael J. Osland, Remi Bardou, Gustavo Hinojosa-Arango, Juan M. Lopez-Vivas, John D. Parker, and Andre S. Rovai This article is available at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub/1041 Received: 28 April 2017 | Revised: 5 March 2018 | Accepted: 14 March 2018 DOI: 10.1111/geb.12751 RESEARCH PAPER Sensitivity of mangrove range limits to climate variability Kyle C. -
Major Biomes of the World Have You Visited Any Biomes Lately? a Biome Is a Large Ecosystem Where Plants, Animals, Insects, and P
Major Biomes of the World Have you visited any biomes lately? A biome is a large ecosystem where plants, animals, insects, and people live in a certain type of climate. If you were in northern Alaska, you would be in a frosty biome called the Arctic tundra. If you jumped on a plane and flew to Brazil, you could be in a hot and humid biome called the tropical rainforest. The world contains many other biomes: grasslands, deserts, and mountains, to name a few. The plants and animals living in each are as different as their climates. Which is your favorite? Arctic Tundra The Arctic tundra is a cold, vast, treeless area of low, swampy plains in the far north around the Arctic Ocean. It includes the northern lands of Europe (Lapland and Scandinavia), Asia (Siberia), and North America (Alaska and Canada), as well as most of Greenland. Another type of tundra is the alpine tundra, which is a biome that exists at the tops of high mountains. Special features: This is the earth's coldest biome. Since the sun does not rise for nearly six months of the year, it is not unusual for the temperature to be below -30°F in winter. The earth of the Arctic tundra has a permanently frozen subsoil, called permafrost, which makes it impossible for trees to grow. Frozen prehistoric animal remains have been found preserved in the permafrost. In summer, a thin layer of topsoil thaws and creates many pools, lakes, and marshes, a haven for mosquitoes, midges, and blackflies. More than 100 species of migrant birds are attracted by the insect food and the safe feeding ground of the tundra. -
Distribution Mapping of World Grassland Types A
Journal of Biogeography (J. Biogeogr.) (2014) SYNTHESIS Distribution mapping of world grassland types A. P. Dixon1*, D. Faber-Langendoen2, C. Josse2, J. Morrison1 and C. J. Loucks1 1World Wildlife Fund – United States, 1250 ABSTRACT 24th Street NW, Washington, DC 20037, Aim National and international policy frameworks, such as the European USA, 2NatureServe, 4600 N. Fairfax Drive, Union’s Renewable Energy Directive, increasingly seek to conserve and refer- 7th Floor, Arlington, VA 22203, USA ence ‘highly biodiverse grasslands’. However, to date there is no systematic glo- bal characterization and distribution map for grassland types. To address this gap, we first propose a systematic definition of grassland. We then integrate International Vegetation Classification (IVC) grassland types with the map of Terrestrial Ecoregions of the World (TEOW). Location Global. Methods We developed a broad definition of grassland as a distinct biotic and ecological unit, noting its similarity to savanna and distinguishing it from woodland and wetland. A grassland is defined as a non-wetland type with at least 10% vegetation cover, dominated or co-dominated by graminoid and forb growth forms, and where the trees form a single-layer canopy with either less than 10% cover and 5 m height (temperate) or less than 40% cover and 8 m height (tropical). We used the IVC division level to classify grasslands into major regional types. We developed an ecologically meaningful spatial cata- logue of IVC grassland types by listing IVC grassland formations and divisions where grassland currently occupies, or historically occupied, at least 10% of an ecoregion in the TEOW framework. Results We created a global biogeographical characterization of the Earth’s grassland types, describing approximately 75% of IVC grassland divisions with ecoregions. -
Variation in Xylem Structure from Tropics to Tundra: Evidence from Vestured Pits
Variation in xylem structure from tropics to tundra: Evidence from vestured pits Steven Jansen*†, Pieter Baas‡, Peter Gasson§, Frederic Lens*, and Erik Smets* *Laboratory of Plant Systematics, Institute of Botany and Microbiology, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg 31, B-3001 Leuven, Belgium; ‡Nationaal Herbarium Nederland, Universiteit Leiden Branch, P.O. Box 9514, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands; and §Jodrell Laboratory, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 3DS, United Kingdom Communicated by David L. Dilcher, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, April 13, 2004 (received for review December 4, 2003) Bordered pits play an important role in permitting water flow among adjacent tracheary elements in flowering plants. Variation in the bordered pit structure is suggested to be adaptive in optimally balancing the conflict between hydraulic efficiency (con- ductivity) and safety from air entry at the pit membrane (air seeding). The possible function of vestured pits, which are bor- dered pits with protuberances from the secondary cell wall of the pit chamber, could be increased hydraulic resistance or minimized vulnerability to air seeding. These functional hypotheses have to be harmonized with the notion that the vestured or nonvestured nature of pits contains strong phylogenetic signals (i.e., often characterize large species-rich clades with broad ecological ranges). A literature survey of 11,843 species covering 6,428 genera from diverse climates indicates that the incidence of vestured pits considerably decreases from tropics to tundra. The highest fre- quencies of vestured pits occur in deserts and tropical seasonal woodlands. Moreover, a distinctly developed network of branched vestures is mainly restricted to warm habitats in both mesic and dry (sub)tropical lowlands, whereas vestures in woody plants from Fig. -
Chapter 10. Amphibians of the Palaearctic Realm
CHAPTER 10. AMPHIBIANS OF THE PALAEARCTIC REALM Figure 1. Summary of Red List categories Brandon Anthony, J.W. Arntzen, Sherif Baha El Din, Wolfgang Böhme, Dan Palaearctic Realm contains 6% of all globally threatened amphibians. The Palaearctic accounts for amphibians in the Palaearctic Realm. CogĄlniceanu, Jelka Crnobrnja-Isailovic, Pierre-André Crochet, Claudia Corti, for only 3% of CR species and 5% of the EN species, but 9% of the VU species. Hence, on the The percentage of species in each category Richard Griffiths, Yoshio Kaneko, Sergei Kuzmin, Michael Wai Neng Lau, basis of current knowledge, threatened Palaearctic amphibians are more likely to be in a lower is also given. Pipeng Li, Petros Lymberakis, Rafael Marquez, Theodore Papenfuss, Juan category of threat, when compared with the global distribution of threatened species amongst Manuel Pleguezuelos, Nasrullah Rastegar, Benedikt Schmidt, Tahar Slimani, categories. The percentage of DD species, 13% (62 species), is also much less than the global Max Sparreboom, ùsmail Uøurtaû, Yehudah Werner and Feng Xie average of 23%, which is not surprising given that parts of the region have been well surveyed. Red List Category Number of species Nevertheless, the percentage of DD species is much higher than in the Nearctic. Extinct (EX) 2 Two of the world’s 34 documented amphibian extinctions have occurred in this region: the Extinct in the Wild (EW) 0 THE GEOGRAPHIC AND HUMAN CONTEXT Hula Painted Frog Discoglossus nigriventer from Israel and the Yunnan Lake Newt Cynops Critically Endangered (CR) 13 wolterstorffi from around Kunming Lake in Yunnan Province, China. In addition, one Critically Endangered (EN) 40 The Palaearctic Realm includes northern Africa, all of Europe, and much of Asia, excluding Endangered species in the Palaearctic Realm is considered possibly extinct, Scutiger macu- Vulnerable (VU) 58 the southern extremities of the Arabian Peninsula, the Indian Subcontinent (south of the latus from central China. -
Wetland and Grassland Restoration
Wetland and Grassland Restoration Name of Organization: North Dakota Natural Resources Trust Federal Tax ID#: 36-3512179 Contact Personrritle: Terry Allbee Address: 1605 E. Capitol Ave., Ste. 101 City: Bismarck State: North Dakota Zip Code: 58501-2102 E-mail Address: [email protected] Web Site Address: www.ndnrt.com Phone: 701-223-8501 Fax#: 701-223-6937 MAJOR Directive: 0 Directive A. Provide access to private and public lands for sportsmen, including projects that create fish and wildlife habitat and provide access for sportsmen; 0 Directive B. Improve, maintain, and restore water quality, soil conditions, plant diversity, animal systems and to support other practices of stewardship to enhance farming and ranching; X Directive C. Develop, enhance, conserve, and restore wildlife and fish habitat on private and public lands; and 0 Directive D. Conserve natural areas for recreation through the establishment and development of parks and other recreation areas. 1 Additional Directive: 0 Directive A. Provide access to private and public lands for sportsmen, including projects that create fish and wildlife habitat and provide access for sportsmen; X Directive B. Improve, maintain, and restore water quality, soil conditions, plant diversity, animal systems and to support other practices of stewardship to enhance farming and ranching; 0 Directive C. Develop, enhance, conserve, and restore wildlife and fish habitat on private and public lands; and 0 Directive D. Conserve natural areas for recreation through the establishment and development of parks and other recreation areas. Type of organization: 0 State Agency 0 Political Subdivision 0 Tribal Entity X Tax-exempt, nonprofit corporation, as described in United States Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. -
Threatened Ecosystems in South Africa: Descriptions and Maps
Threatened Ecosystems in South Africa: Descriptions and Maps DRAFT May 2009 South African National Biodiversity Institute Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism Contents List of tables .............................................................................................................................. vii List of figures............................................................................................................................. vii 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 8 2 Criteria for identifying threatened ecosystems............................................................... 10 3 Summary of listed ecosystems ........................................................................................ 12 4 Descriptions and individual maps of threatened ecosystems ...................................... 14 4.1 Explanation of descriptions ........................................................................................................ 14 4.2 Listed threatened ecosystems ................................................................................................... 16 4.2.1 Critically Endangered (CR) ................................................................................................................ 16 1. Atlantis Sand Fynbos (FFd 4) .......................................................................................................................... 16 2. Blesbokspruit Highveld Grassland -
Classification of Palaearctic Grasslands
Phytocoenologia Vol. 46 (2016), Issue 3, 233–239 Special Issue Palaearctic grasslands Stuttgart, November 2016 Editorial Classification of Palaearctic grasslands Monika Janišová*, Jürgen Dengler & Wolfgang Willner Abstract Along with a brief introduction to the four research articles of the Special Issue “Classification of Palaearctic grasslands”, we present a bibliometric analysis of publication trends regarding classification of Palaearctic grass- lands in journals included in the Web of Science database. Regional studies (covering only a part of a country’s territory) prevailed (51%), but supra-national studies were more numerous (34%) than national overviews (15%). Four European countries (Austria, the Czech Republic, Italy and Slovakia) were included in the highest number of grassland classification studies (12 each). The publication of grassland classification studies in Web of Science journals continuously increased during the last 15 years. Festuco-Brometea and Molinio-Arrhenatheretea were the most frequently studied grassland classes. Phytocoenologia and Tuexenia were the most popular outlets for origi- nal grassland classification studies, while Journal of Vegetation Science had a leading position in publishing meth- odological articles with relation to grassland vegetation. Methods of unsupervised hierarchical classification were most common in grassland classification studies. Publications outside the Web of Science were not analysed al- though they represent an important source of knowledge in grassland classification. Keywords: -
Ungulate Management in National Parks of the United States and Canada
Ungulate Management in National Parks of the United States and Canada Technical Review 12-05 December 2012 1 Ungulate Management in National Parks of the United States and Canada The Wildlife Society Technical Review 12-05 - December 2012 Citation Demarais, S., L. Cornicelli, R. Kahn, E. Merrill, C. Miller, J. M. Peek, W. F. Porter, and G. A. Sargeant. 2012. Ungulate management in national parks of the United States and Canada. The Wildlife Society Technical Review 12-05. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. Series Edited by Theodore A. Bookhout Copy Edit and Design Terra Rentz (AWB®), Managing Editor, The Wildlife Society Jessica Johnson, Associate Editor, The Wildlife Society Maja Smith, Graphic Designer, MajaDesign, Inc. Cover Images Front cover, clockwise from upper left: 1) Bull moose browsing on subalpine fir near Soda Butte Creek in Yellowstone National Park. Credit: Jim Peaco, National Park Service; 2) Bison in Stephens Creek pen in Yellowstone National Park. The Bison herds in Yellowstone are actively managed to maintain containment within park boundaries. Credit: Jim Peaco, National Park Service; 3) Bighorn sheep ram in Lamar Valley, Yellowstone National Park. Credit: Jim Peaco, National Park Service; 4) Biologists in Great Smokey Mountains National Park use non-lethal means, such as the use of a paintball gun depicted in this photo, to move elk from undesirable areas. Credit: Joseph Yarkovich; 5) National Park Service biologists Joe Yarkovich and Kim Delozier (now retired) working up an elk in Great Smokey Mountains National Park. Credit: Joseph Yarkovich; 6) Fencing protects willow (Salix spp.) and aspen (Populus spp.) from overgrazing by elk (Cervus elaphus) in Rocky Mountain National Park.