Impacts of savanna trees on forage quality for a large African herbivore

Recently, cover of large trees in African savannas has rapidly declined due to elephant pressure, frequent fires and charcoal production. The reduction in large trees could have consequences for large herbivores through a change in forage quality. In Tarangire National Park, in Northern Tanzania, we studied the impact of large savanna trees on forage quality for wildebeest by collecting samples of dominant grass species in open grassland and under and around large Acacia tortilis trees. Grasses growing under trees had a much higher forage quality than grasses from the open field indicated by a more favourable leaf/stem ratio and higher protein and lower fibre concentrations. Analysing the grass leaf data with a linear programming model indicated that large savanna trees could be essential for the survival of wildebeest, the dominant herbivore in Tarangire. Due to the high fibre content and low nutrient and protein concentrations of grasses from the open field, maximum fibre intake is reached before nutrient requirements are satisfied. All requirements can only be satisfied by combining forage from open grassland with either forage from under or around tree canopies. Forage quality was also higher around dead trees than in the open field. So forage quality does not reduce immediately after trees die which explains why negative effects of reduced tree numbers probably go initially unnoticed. In conclusion our results suggest that continued destruction of large trees could affect future numbers of large herbivores in African savannas and better protection of large trees is probably necessary to sustain high animal densities in these ecosystems

Below-ground competition between trees and grasses may overwhelm the facilitative effects of hydraulic lift

Contains fulltext : 60125.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)Under large East African Acacia trees, which were known to show hydraulic lift, we experimentally tested whether tree roots facilitate grass production or compete with grasses for below-ground resources. Prevention of tree-grass interactions through root trenching led to increased soil water content indicating that trees took up more water from the topsoil than they exuded via hydraulic lift. Biomass was higher in trenched plots compared to controls probably because of reduced competition for water. Stable isotope analyses of plant and source water showed that grasses which competed with trees used a greater proportion of deep water compared with grasses in trenched plots. Grasses therefore used hydraulically lifted water provided by trees, or took up deep soil water directly by growing deeper roots when competition with trees occurred. We conclude that any facilitative effect of hydraulic lift for neighbouring species may easily be overwhelmed by water competition in (semi-) arid regions