Different moose densities and accompanied changes in tree morphology and browse production

Ecological Applications

Volumn 15, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 1296-1305

  Persson, Inga Lill ^a   Danell, Kjell ^a   Bergström, Roger ^a,b  

^a SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

^b THE FORESTRY RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF SWEDEN   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Alces alces; Birch; Boreal forest; Browse production; Moose; Morphology; Pine; Sweden; Wildlife management

Indexed keywords

BROWSING; PLANT COMMUNITY; POPULATION DENSITY; UNGULATE;

ALCES ALCES; BETULA PUBESCENS; PINUS SYLVESTRIS;

EID: 23044442733     PISSN: 10510761     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1890/04-0499     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Ahti, T., L. Hämet-Ahti, and J. Jalas. 1968. Vegetation zones and their sections in northwestern Europe. Annales Botanici Fennici 5:169-211.
2. Aldous, S. E. 1952. Deer browse clipping study in the lake states region. Journal of Wildlife Management 16:401-409.
3. Ball, J. P., K. Danell, and P. Sunesson. 2000. Response of a herbivore community to increased food quality and quantity: an experiment with nitrogen fertilizer in a boreal forest. Journal of Applied Ecology 37:247-255.
4. Baskerville, G. L. 1972. Use of logarithmic regression in the estimation of plant biomass. Canadian Journal of Forestry 2:49-53.
5. Bedard, J., M. Crête, and E. Audy. 1978. Short-term influence of moose upon woody plants of an early seral wintering site in Gaspé Peninsula, Quebec. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 8:407-415.
6. Begon, M., J. L. Harper, and C. R. Townsend. 1990. Ecology: individuals, populations and communities. Second edition. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Cambridge, UK.
7. Belsky, A. J. 1986. Does herbivory benefit plants? American Naturalist 127:870-892.
8. Bergstrom, R., and L. Edenius. 2003. From twigs to landscapes - methods for studying ecological effects of forest ungulates. Journal for Nature Conservation 10:203-211.
9. Bergström, R., and O. Hjeljord. 1987. Moose and vegetation interactions in northwestern Europe and Poland. Swedish Wildlife Research Supplement 1:213-227.
10. Bernes, C., and C. Grundsten, editors. 1996. The environment. National Atlas of Sweden, Bokförlaget Bra Böcker, Höganäs, Sweden.
11. Canham, C. D., J. B. McAninch, and D. M. Wood. 1994. Effects of frequency, timing and intensity of simulated browsing on growth and mortality of tree seedlings. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 24:817-825.
12. Cederlund, G., and R. Bergström. 1996. Trends in the moose-forest system in Fennoscandia, with special reference to Sweden. Pages 265-281 in R. M. DeGraaf and R. I. Miller, editors. Conservation of faunal diversity in forested landscapes. Chapman and Hall, London, UK.
13. Cederlund, G., H. Ljungqvist, G. Markgren, and F. Stålfeldt. 1980. Foods of moose and roe deer at Grimsö in central Sweden - results of rumen content analyses. Swedish Wildlife Research 11:169-247.
14. Cederlund, G., and G. Markgren. 1987. The development of the Swedish moose population, 1970-1983. Swedish Wildlife Research, Supplement 1:55-61.
15. Crawley, M. J. 1989. The relative importance of vertebrate and invertebrate herbivores in plant population dynamics. Pages 45-71 in E. A. Bernays, editor. Insect-plant interactions. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.
16. Danell, K., R. Bergström, and L. Edenius. 1994. Effects of large mammalian browsers on architecture, biomass and nutrients of woody plants. Journal of Mammalogy 75:833-844.
17. Danell, K., R. Bergström, L. Edenius, and G. Ericsson. 2003. Ungulates as drivers of tree population dynamics at module and genet levels. Forest Ecology and Management 181:67-76.
18. Danell, K., E. Haukkioja, and K. Huss-Danell. 1997. Morphological and chemical responses of mountain birch leaves and shoots to winter browsing along a gradient of plant productivity. Ecoscience 4:296-303.
19. Edenius, L., K. Danell, and R. Bergström. 1993. Impact of herbivory and competition on compensatory growth of woody plants: winter browsing by moose on Scots pine. Oikos 66:286-292.
20. Elfving, B., and A. Kiviste. 1997. Construction of site index equations for Pinus sylvestris L. using permanent plot data in Sweden. Forest Ecology and Management 98:125-134.
21. Flanagan, P. W., and K. Van Cleve. 1983. Nutrient cycling in relation to decomposition and organic-matter quality in taiga ecosystems. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 13:795-817.
22. Fridman, J., G. Kempe, P. Nilsson, H. Toet, and B. Westerlund. 2001. Forestry statistics 2001. Official statistics of Sweden. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå, Sweden. [In Swedish with English summary.]
23. Fry, J. C. 1999. Biological data analysis: a practical approach. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
24. Gill, R. M. A. 1992. A review of damage by mammals in north temperate forests: 3. Impact on trees and forests. Forestry 65:365-388.
25. Gordon, I. J., and W. K. Lindsay. 1990. Could mammalian herbivores "manage their resources"? Oikos 59:270-280.
26. Hägglund, B., and J.-E. Lundmark. 1987. Handledning i bonitering med Skogshögskolans boniteringssystem. Del 2, diagram och tabeller. Skogsstyrelsen, Jönköping, Sweden.
27. Heikkilä, R., and S. Härkönen. 1993. Moose (Alces alces L.) browsing in young Scots pine stands in relation to the characteristics of their winter habitats. Silva Fennica 27:127-143.
28. Hester, A. J., L. Edenius, R. M. Buuterschön, and A. T. Kuiters. 2000. Interactions between forest and herbivores: the role of controlled grazing experiments. Forestry 73:381-391.
29. Hester, A. J., P. Millard, G. J. Baillie, and R. Wendler. 2004. How does timing of browsing affect above- and below-ground of Betula pendula, Pinus sylvestris and Sorbus aucuparia? Oikos 105:536-550.
30. Hilbert, D. W., D. M. Swift, J. K. Detling, and M. I. Dyer. 1981. Relative growth rates and the grazing optimization hypothesis. Oecologia 51:14-18.
31. Hjeljord, O. 1987. Research on moose nutrition in the Nordic countries. Swedish Wildlife Research Supplement 1:389-397.
32. Huisman, J., J. P. Grover, R. van der Wal, and J. van Andel. 1999. Competition for light, plant-species replacement and herbivore abundance along productivity gradients. Pages 239-269 in H. Olff, V. K. Brown, and R. H. Drent, editors. Herbivores: between plants and predators. Blackwell Science, Oxford, UK.
33. Hörnberg, S. 2001. Changes in population density of moose (Alces alces) and damage to forests in Sweden. Forest Ecology and Management 149:141-151.
34. Illius, A. W., and I. J. Gordon. 1999. From functional to numerical response. Pages 397-425 in H. Olff, V. K. Brown, and R. H. Drent, editors. Herbivores: between plants and predators. Blackwell Science, Oxford, UK.
35. Ims, R. A., and N. G. Yoccoz. 2000. Ecological methodology: study design and statistical analysis. Department of Biology, University of Oslo, Norway.
36. Jameson, D. A. 1963. Responses of individual plants to harvesting. Botanical Review 29:532-594.
37. Krefting, L. W., M. H. Stenlund, and R. K. Seemel. 1966. Effect of simulated and natural deer browsing on mountain maple. Journal of Wildlife Management 30:481-488.
38. Kuznetsov, G. V. 1984. Impact of moose Alces alces L. on woodland vegetation. Acta Zoologici Fennici 172:19-20.
39. Lindgren, D., C. C. Ying, B. Elfving, and K. Lindgren. 1994. Site index variation with latitude and altitude in IUFRO Pinus contorta provenance experiments in western Canada and northern Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 9:270-274.
40. Maschinski, J., and T. G. Whitham. 1989. The continuum of plant responses to herbivory: the influence of plant association, nutrient availability, and timing. American Naturalist 134:1-19.
41. McInnes, P., R. J. Naiman, J. Pastor, and Y. Cohen. 1992. Effects of moose browsing on vegetation and litter of the boreal forest, Isle Royale, Michigan, USA. Ecology 73:2059-2975.
42. McNaughton, S. J. 1979. Grazing as an optimization process: grass-ungulate relationships in the Serengeti. American Naturalist 113:691-703.
43. McNaughton, S. J. 1983. Compensatory plant growth as a response to herbivory. Oikos 40:329-336.
44. Niemelä, P., and K. Danell. 1988. Comparison of moose browsing on Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) and lodgepole pine (P. contorta). Journal of Applied Ecology 25:761-775.
45. Oksanen, L., S. D. Fretwell, J. Arruda, and P. Niemelä. 1981. Exploitation ecosystems in gradients of primary productivity. American Naturalist 118:240-261.
46. Oldemeyer, J. L. 1983. Browse production and its use by moose and snowshoe hare at the Kenai moose research center, Alaska. Journal of Wildlife Management 47:486-496.
47. Oliver, C. D., and B. C. Larson. 1996. Forest stand dynamics. John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York, USA.
48. Owen, D. F. 1980. How plants may benefit from the animals that eat them. Oikos 35:230-235.
49. Owen, D. F., and R. G. Wiegert. 1976. Do consumers maximize plant fitness? Oikos 27:488-492.
50. Paige, K. N., and T. G. Whitham. 1987. Overcompensation in response to mammalian herbivory: the advantage of being eaten. American Naturalist 129:407-416.
51. Pastor, J., and R. Naiman. 1992. Selective foraging and ecosystem processes in boreal forests. American Naturalist 139:690-705.
52. Pastor, J., K. Stadke, K. Farnsworth, R. Moen, and Y. Cohen. 1999. Further development of the Spalinger-Hobbs mechanistic foraging model for free ranging moose. Canadian Journal of Zoology 77:1505-1512.
53. Persson, I.-L. 2003. Moose population density and habitat productivity as drivers of ecosystem processes in northern boreal forests. Dissertation. Department of Animal Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå, Sweden.
54. Persson, I.-L., K. Danell, and R. Bergström. 2000. Disturbance by large herbivores in boreal forests with special reference to moose. Annales Zoologici Fennici 37:251-263.
55. Persson, I.-L., J. Pastor, K. Danell, and R. Bergström. 2005. Impact of moose population density on the production and composition of litter in boreal forests. Oikos 108:297-306.
56. Renecker, L. A., and C. C. Schwartz. 1998. Food habits and feeding behavior. Pages 403-439 in A. W. Franzmann and C. C. Schwartz, editors. Ecology and management of the North American moose. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
57. Risenhoover, K. L. 1986. Winter activity patterns of moose in interior Alaska. Journal of Wildlife Management 50:727-734.
58. Rooney, T. P., and D. M. Waller. 2003. Direct and indirect effects of white-tailed deer in forest ecosystems. Forest Ecology and Management 181:165-176.
59. SAS. 2001. SAS system for Windows, version 8.2. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, North Carolina, USA.
60. Senn, J., and W. Suter. 2003. Ungulate browsing on Silver fir (Abies alba) in the Swiss Alps: beliefs in search of supporting data. Forest Ecology and Management 181:151-164.
61. Shipley, L. A., S. Blomquist, and K. Danell. 1998. Diet choices made by free-ranging moose in northern Sweden in relation to plant distribution, chemistry, and morphology. Canadian Journal of Zoology 76:1722-1733.
62. Shipley, L. A., A. W. Illius, K. Danell, N. T. Hobbs, and D. E. Spalinger. 1999. Predicting bite size selection of mammalian herbivores: a test of a general model of diet optimization. Oikos 84:55-68.
63. Spalinger, D. E., and N. T. Hobbs. 1992. Mechanisms of foraging in mammalian herbivores: new models of functional response. American Naturalist 140:325-348.
64. Vivås, H. J., and B. E. Sæther. 1987. Interactions between a generalist herbivore, the moose Alces alces and its food resources: an experimental study of winter foraging behaviour in relation to browse availability. Journal of Animal Ecology 56:509-520.
65. Wolfe, M. L., W. H. Babcock, and R. M. Welch. 1983. Effects of simulated moose browsing on Drummond's willow. Alces 19:14-35.
66. Wolff, J. O. 1976. Burning and browsing effects on willow growth in interior Alaska. Journal of Wildlife Management 42:135-140.