Vegetation diversity and structure influence small‐mammal communities in native and restored northern mixed grasslands
Current grassland restoration strategies aim to recreate grassland vegetation communities, and often rely on high‐diversity native seeding to promote vegetation diversity. Questions remain concerning the influence of vegetation richness and diversity on grassland fauna. Small‐mammal communities are...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of wildlife management 2024-07, Vol.88 (5), p.n/a |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | n/a |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | |
container_title | The Journal of wildlife management |
container_volume | 88 |
creator | Minor, Ashlee K. Eichholz, Michael W. |
description | Current grassland restoration strategies aim to recreate grassland vegetation communities, and often rely on high‐diversity native seeding to promote vegetation diversity. Questions remain concerning the influence of vegetation richness and diversity on grassland fauna. Small‐mammal communities are integral parts of grassland ecosystems, but their responses to restoration are often mixed or overlooked. During July 2014 to 2016, we used Sherman live traps to survey grassland small‐mammal communities of 24 study sites in northeastern South Dakota and southeastern North Dakota, USA, to better understand their responses to vegetation cover type, diversity, richness, and site‐specific vegetation structure. Sites represented a vegetation species richness gradient and 3 vegetation cover types including low‐diversity restorations planted with dense nesting cover (DNC) seed mix, high‐diversity seeded restorations, and unseeded reference grasslands. Small‐mammal abundance was highest at low‐diversity DNC restoration sites and lowest in reference grassland. Small‐mammal diversity was highest at high‐diversity restoration sites and lowest at low‐diversity DNC restoration sites. Models assessing the influence of vegetation structure on the abundance of focal taxa differed. Deer mice (Peromyscus spp.) were negatively influenced by percent native vegetation cover, and voles (Microtus spp.) showed yearly variation and were influenced positively by litter depth and negatively by vegetation richness. Small‐mammal communities of low‐diversity DNC restorations differed from reference sites, but high‐diversity restorations were not different from reference or low‐diversity DNC sites. Thirteen‐lined ground squirrel (Ictidomys tridecemlineatus) abundance was higher at reference and high‐diversity restored sites, while low‐diversity DNC sites had higher deer mice abundance. Results indicate small mammals are unlikely to respond uniformly to vegetation characteristics, and diversity of seed mixes used in grassland restoration is likely to influence grassland small‐mammal communities.
Current grassland restoration strategies aim to recreate grassland vegetation communities, and often rely on high‐diversity native seeding to promote vegetation diversity. We studied small mammal communities on 24 mixed‐grassland sites in North Dakota and South Dakota, USA that represented three vegetation cover types: unseeded native reference prairie, low‐diversity non‐native seed mix, and high‐dive |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/jwmg.22581 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3066576858</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3066576858</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3291-29432a1348f874dad61f60fbe43cb1295ed70d2a3c67e631fd68e4220c26a2cc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp90btOwzAUBmALgUQpLDyBJRaElOJL4qQjqrgKxMJts4xzUlzFdrETaDcegWfkSXApEwOTbfk7R7_0I7RPyYgSwo5n73Y6Yqyo6AYa0DEvM1bRchMN0ifLipw-baOdGGeEcEorMUCLB5hCpzrjHa7NG4RouiVWrsaxC73u-gDYuKbtwWnA0aq2_fr4tMqmG9be2t6ZzkBMCLu05g1-hgPEzgeosfOhe4HgsDWL9JwGFWObRNxFW41qI-z9nkN0f3Z6N7nIrm_PLycn15nmbEwzNs45U5TnVVOVea1qQRtBmmfIuX6mbFxAXZKaKa5FCYLTphYV5IwRzYRiWvMhOlzvnQf_2qdY0pqooU0hwPdRclpwQYTISaIHf-jM98GldJInUZSiKqqkjtZKBx9jgEbOg7EqLCUlclWCXJUgf0pImK7xu2lh-Y-UV4835-uZb_T7jVM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3066576858</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Vegetation diversity and structure influence small‐mammal communities in native and restored northern mixed grasslands</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Minor, Ashlee K. ; Eichholz, Michael W.</creator><creatorcontrib>Minor, Ashlee K. ; Eichholz, Michael W.</creatorcontrib><description>Current grassland restoration strategies aim to recreate grassland vegetation communities, and often rely on high‐diversity native seeding to promote vegetation diversity. Questions remain concerning the influence of vegetation richness and diversity on grassland fauna. Small‐mammal communities are integral parts of grassland ecosystems, but their responses to restoration are often mixed or overlooked. During July 2014 to 2016, we used Sherman live traps to survey grassland small‐mammal communities of 24 study sites in northeastern South Dakota and southeastern North Dakota, USA, to better understand their responses to vegetation cover type, diversity, richness, and site‐specific vegetation structure. Sites represented a vegetation species richness gradient and 3 vegetation cover types including low‐diversity restorations planted with dense nesting cover (DNC) seed mix, high‐diversity seeded restorations, and unseeded reference grasslands. Small‐mammal abundance was highest at low‐diversity DNC restoration sites and lowest in reference grassland. Small‐mammal diversity was highest at high‐diversity restoration sites and lowest at low‐diversity DNC restoration sites. Models assessing the influence of vegetation structure on the abundance of focal taxa differed. Deer mice (Peromyscus spp.) were negatively influenced by percent native vegetation cover, and voles (Microtus spp.) showed yearly variation and were influenced positively by litter depth and negatively by vegetation richness. Small‐mammal communities of low‐diversity DNC restorations differed from reference sites, but high‐diversity restorations were not different from reference or low‐diversity DNC sites. Thirteen‐lined ground squirrel (Ictidomys tridecemlineatus) abundance was higher at reference and high‐diversity restored sites, while low‐diversity DNC sites had higher deer mice abundance. Results indicate small mammals are unlikely to respond uniformly to vegetation characteristics, and diversity of seed mixes used in grassland restoration is likely to influence grassland small‐mammal communities.
Current grassland restoration strategies aim to recreate grassland vegetation communities, and often rely on high‐diversity native seeding to promote vegetation diversity. We studied small mammal communities on 24 mixed‐grassland sites in North Dakota and South Dakota, USA that represented three vegetation cover types: unseeded native reference prairie, low‐diversity non‐native seed mix, and high‐diversity seed mix. Results indicated small mammals are unlikely to respond uniformly to vegetation characteristics, and diversity of seed mixes used in grassland restoration, as well as the resulting grassland structure, is likely to influence grassland small mammal communities.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-541X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1937-2817</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/jwmg.22581</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Bethesda: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Abundance ; deer ; Environmental restoration ; fauna ; grassland restoration ; grassland small mammal ; Grasslands ; Ground squirrels ; high‐diversity restoration ; Ictidomys tridecemlineatus ; indigenous species ; Mammals ; Microtus ; Nesting ; North Dakota ; Peromyscus ; Restoration strategies ; Small mammals ; South Dakota ; Species richness ; Vegetation ; Vegetation cover ; vegetation structure ; wildlife management</subject><ispartof>The Journal of wildlife management, 2024-07, Vol.88 (5), p.n/a</ispartof><rights>2024 The Authors. published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The Wildlife Society.</rights><rights>2024. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3291-29432a1348f874dad61f60fbe43cb1295ed70d2a3c67e631fd68e4220c26a2cc3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9911-9885</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fjwmg.22581$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fjwmg.22581$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1416,27915,27916,45565,45566</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Minor, Ashlee K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eichholz, Michael W.</creatorcontrib><title>Vegetation diversity and structure influence small‐mammal communities in native and restored northern mixed grasslands</title><title>The Journal of wildlife management</title><description>Current grassland restoration strategies aim to recreate grassland vegetation communities, and often rely on high‐diversity native seeding to promote vegetation diversity. Questions remain concerning the influence of vegetation richness and diversity on grassland fauna. Small‐mammal communities are integral parts of grassland ecosystems, but their responses to restoration are often mixed or overlooked. During July 2014 to 2016, we used Sherman live traps to survey grassland small‐mammal communities of 24 study sites in northeastern South Dakota and southeastern North Dakota, USA, to better understand their responses to vegetation cover type, diversity, richness, and site‐specific vegetation structure. Sites represented a vegetation species richness gradient and 3 vegetation cover types including low‐diversity restorations planted with dense nesting cover (DNC) seed mix, high‐diversity seeded restorations, and unseeded reference grasslands. Small‐mammal abundance was highest at low‐diversity DNC restoration sites and lowest in reference grassland. Small‐mammal diversity was highest at high‐diversity restoration sites and lowest at low‐diversity DNC restoration sites. Models assessing the influence of vegetation structure on the abundance of focal taxa differed. Deer mice (Peromyscus spp.) were negatively influenced by percent native vegetation cover, and voles (Microtus spp.) showed yearly variation and were influenced positively by litter depth and negatively by vegetation richness. Small‐mammal communities of low‐diversity DNC restorations differed from reference sites, but high‐diversity restorations were not different from reference or low‐diversity DNC sites. Thirteen‐lined ground squirrel (Ictidomys tridecemlineatus) abundance was higher at reference and high‐diversity restored sites, while low‐diversity DNC sites had higher deer mice abundance. Results indicate small mammals are unlikely to respond uniformly to vegetation characteristics, and diversity of seed mixes used in grassland restoration is likely to influence grassland small‐mammal communities.
Current grassland restoration strategies aim to recreate grassland vegetation communities, and often rely on high‐diversity native seeding to promote vegetation diversity. We studied small mammal communities on 24 mixed‐grassland sites in North Dakota and South Dakota, USA that represented three vegetation cover types: unseeded native reference prairie, low‐diversity non‐native seed mix, and high‐diversity seed mix. Results indicated small mammals are unlikely to respond uniformly to vegetation characteristics, and diversity of seed mixes used in grassland restoration, as well as the resulting grassland structure, is likely to influence grassland small mammal communities.</description><subject>Abundance</subject><subject>deer</subject><subject>Environmental restoration</subject><subject>fauna</subject><subject>grassland restoration</subject><subject>grassland small mammal</subject><subject>Grasslands</subject><subject>Ground squirrels</subject><subject>high‐diversity restoration</subject><subject>Ictidomys tridecemlineatus</subject><subject>indigenous species</subject><subject>Mammals</subject><subject>Microtus</subject><subject>Nesting</subject><subject>North Dakota</subject><subject>Peromyscus</subject><subject>Restoration strategies</subject><subject>Small mammals</subject><subject>South Dakota</subject><subject>Species richness</subject><subject>Vegetation</subject><subject>Vegetation cover</subject><subject>vegetation structure</subject><subject>wildlife management</subject><issn>0022-541X</issn><issn>1937-2817</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><recordid>eNp90btOwzAUBmALgUQpLDyBJRaElOJL4qQjqrgKxMJts4xzUlzFdrETaDcegWfkSXApEwOTbfk7R7_0I7RPyYgSwo5n73Y6Yqyo6AYa0DEvM1bRchMN0ifLipw-baOdGGeEcEorMUCLB5hCpzrjHa7NG4RouiVWrsaxC73u-gDYuKbtwWnA0aq2_fr4tMqmG9be2t6ZzkBMCLu05g1-hgPEzgeosfOhe4HgsDWL9JwGFWObRNxFW41qI-z9nkN0f3Z6N7nIrm_PLycn15nmbEwzNs45U5TnVVOVea1qQRtBmmfIuX6mbFxAXZKaKa5FCYLTphYV5IwRzYRiWvMhOlzvnQf_2qdY0pqooU0hwPdRclpwQYTISaIHf-jM98GldJInUZSiKqqkjtZKBx9jgEbOg7EqLCUlclWCXJUgf0pImK7xu2lh-Y-UV4835-uZb_T7jVM</recordid><startdate>202407</startdate><enddate>202407</enddate><creator>Minor, Ashlee K.</creator><creator>Eichholz, Michael W.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7S9</scope><scope>L.6</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9911-9885</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202407</creationdate><title>Vegetation diversity and structure influence small‐mammal communities in native and restored northern mixed grasslands</title><author>Minor, Ashlee K. ; Eichholz, Michael W.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3291-29432a1348f874dad61f60fbe43cb1295ed70d2a3c67e631fd68e4220c26a2cc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Abundance</topic><topic>deer</topic><topic>Environmental restoration</topic><topic>fauna</topic><topic>grassland restoration</topic><topic>grassland small mammal</topic><topic>Grasslands</topic><topic>Ground squirrels</topic><topic>high‐diversity restoration</topic><topic>Ictidomys tridecemlineatus</topic><topic>indigenous species</topic><topic>Mammals</topic><topic>Microtus</topic><topic>Nesting</topic><topic>North Dakota</topic><topic>Peromyscus</topic><topic>Restoration strategies</topic><topic>Small mammals</topic><topic>South Dakota</topic><topic>Species richness</topic><topic>Vegetation</topic><topic>Vegetation cover</topic><topic>vegetation structure</topic><topic>wildlife management</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Minor, Ashlee K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eichholz, Michael W.</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Wiley Free Content</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>AGRICOLA</collection><collection>AGRICOLA - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Journal of wildlife management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Minor, Ashlee K.</au><au>Eichholz, Michael W.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Vegetation diversity and structure influence small‐mammal communities in native and restored northern mixed grasslands</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of wildlife management</jtitle><date>2024-07</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>88</volume><issue>5</issue><epage>n/a</epage><issn>0022-541X</issn><eissn>1937-2817</eissn><abstract>Current grassland restoration strategies aim to recreate grassland vegetation communities, and often rely on high‐diversity native seeding to promote vegetation diversity. Questions remain concerning the influence of vegetation richness and diversity on grassland fauna. Small‐mammal communities are integral parts of grassland ecosystems, but their responses to restoration are often mixed or overlooked. During July 2014 to 2016, we used Sherman live traps to survey grassland small‐mammal communities of 24 study sites in northeastern South Dakota and southeastern North Dakota, USA, to better understand their responses to vegetation cover type, diversity, richness, and site‐specific vegetation structure. Sites represented a vegetation species richness gradient and 3 vegetation cover types including low‐diversity restorations planted with dense nesting cover (DNC) seed mix, high‐diversity seeded restorations, and unseeded reference grasslands. Small‐mammal abundance was highest at low‐diversity DNC restoration sites and lowest in reference grassland. Small‐mammal diversity was highest at high‐diversity restoration sites and lowest at low‐diversity DNC restoration sites. Models assessing the influence of vegetation structure on the abundance of focal taxa differed. Deer mice (Peromyscus spp.) were negatively influenced by percent native vegetation cover, and voles (Microtus spp.) showed yearly variation and were influenced positively by litter depth and negatively by vegetation richness. Small‐mammal communities of low‐diversity DNC restorations differed from reference sites, but high‐diversity restorations were not different from reference or low‐diversity DNC sites. Thirteen‐lined ground squirrel (Ictidomys tridecemlineatus) abundance was higher at reference and high‐diversity restored sites, while low‐diversity DNC sites had higher deer mice abundance. Results indicate small mammals are unlikely to respond uniformly to vegetation characteristics, and diversity of seed mixes used in grassland restoration is likely to influence grassland small‐mammal communities.
Current grassland restoration strategies aim to recreate grassland vegetation communities, and often rely on high‐diversity native seeding to promote vegetation diversity. We studied small mammal communities on 24 mixed‐grassland sites in North Dakota and South Dakota, USA that represented three vegetation cover types: unseeded native reference prairie, low‐diversity non‐native seed mix, and high‐diversity seed mix. Results indicated small mammals are unlikely to respond uniformly to vegetation characteristics, and diversity of seed mixes used in grassland restoration, as well as the resulting grassland structure, is likely to influence grassland small mammal communities.</abstract><cop>Bethesda</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1002/jwmg.22581</doi><tpages>20</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9911-9885</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0022-541X |
ispartof | The Journal of wildlife management, 2024-07, Vol.88 (5), p.n/a |
issn | 0022-541X 1937-2817 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_3066576858 |
source | Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
subjects | Abundance deer Environmental restoration fauna grassland restoration grassland small mammal Grasslands Ground squirrels high‐diversity restoration Ictidomys tridecemlineatus indigenous species Mammals Microtus Nesting North Dakota Peromyscus Restoration strategies Small mammals South Dakota Species richness Vegetation Vegetation cover vegetation structure wildlife management |
title | Vegetation diversity and structure influence small‐mammal communities in native and restored northern mixed grasslands |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T04%3A47%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Vegetation%20diversity%20and%20structure%20influence%20small%E2%80%90mammal%20communities%20in%20native%20and%20restored%20northern%20mixed%20grasslands&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20wildlife%20management&rft.au=Minor,%20Ashlee%20K.&rft.date=2024-07&rft.volume=88&rft.issue=5&rft.epage=n/a&rft.issn=0022-541X&rft.eissn=1937-2817&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/jwmg.22581&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3066576858%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3066576858&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |