Phytodiversity of temperate permanent grasslands: ecosystem services for agriculture and livestock management for diversity conservation

Abstract

Plant diversity has been reported to increase productivity. Farming practices aiming at conserving or increasing plant diversity are, however, usually less profitable than conventional ones. In this review, we aim to find reasons for this discrepancy, discuss ecosystem services of grassland phytodiversity that are useful for farmers, and ways of livestock management most beneficial for diversity. Under agricultural conditions, a clear effect of species richness on a site's primary or secondary production has not yet been demonstrated. Reasons could be that species numbers in permanent grassland are above the threshold of five species found effective in experimental plots or that the conditions are more in equilibrium with management than in weeded experimental plots. Other diversity effects on production stability, nutrient and water retention or product quality might convince farmers to increase diversity. However, these should be tested in agricultural situations, as most research has again been carried out in experimental plots. To enhance phytodiversity, grazing has been found superior over mowing, as selective grazing, treading and excreta deposition increase the heterogeneity of a sward and thus the niches available. Especially rotational grazing with intermediate intensity may be advantageous for phytodiversity. However, complex interactions between environmental conditions, sward composition, management and livestock behaviour make it difficult to forecast grazing effects. Thus, ecological and agricultural researchers should cooperate more, e.g. either in interdisciplinary projects or by hiring researchers from the respective other profession and thus diversifying research groups, in order to integrate agricultural management into biodiversity research and biodiversity measurements into agricultural research to 123Biodivers Conserv (2011) 20:3317-3339 DOI 10.1007 advance our understanding of how to make conservation and enhancement of grassland phytodiversity both feasible and sustainable.

Management Regimes within Syntaxa of Semi-Natural Grasslands in West Bulgaria

“…Grazing management of Arrhenatherion grasslands, for example, increases the species diversity ( Figure 5), as it reduces the strong dominant role of Arrhenatherum elatius. The potential of grazing for biodiversity enhancement and restoration of pastures in this way is reported by Metera et al (2010) and Wrage et al (2011). In contrast, the Cynosurion alliance shows increased species diversity within its abandoned grasslands (Fig.…”

Comparing mobile and static assessment of biomass in heterogeneous grassland with a multi-sensor system

“…This disparity may indicate the influence of sward structure on the conducted measurement methods: while CSH reflects the resistance of biomass according to stem density and sward height (Hakl et al, 2012), USH predominantly detects protruding objects regardless of other sward conditions in subordinate layers (Fricke et al, 2011). This fact indicates the limitations of biomass predictions based on pure USH, as it may not directly reflect the biomass, particularly if swards are composed by plants of varying phenology, which is common in leniently grazed swards (Rook and Tallowin, 2003;Wrage et al, 2011). NDSI wavelength locations associated with maximum accuracy of biomass prediction differed between years.…”

Dry matter intake, performance and carcass characteristics of hair sheep reared under different grazing systems

“…The selectivity and forage quality requirements for cattle and sheep are different and can be influenced by vegetation composition and diversity (Wrage et al, 2011). Cattle can encircle forage with their tongues with no selectivity for plant quality as they eat to increase bulk in the rumen; however, sheep, on the other hand, have considerable selectivity for high quality plants although they graze with their tongues just like cattle.…”