Generalist trophic ecology in a changing habitat: The case of the four‐striped mouse in a woody‐encroached savannah

Tropical savanna small mammals respond to loss of cover following disturbance: A global review of field studies

Small-mammal faunas of tropical savannas consist of endemic assemblages of murid rodents, small marsupials, and insectivores on four continents. Small mammals in tropical savannas are understudied compared to other tropical habitats and other taxonomic groups (e.g., Afrotropical megafauna or Neotropical rainforest mammals). Their importance as prey, ecosystem engineers, disease reservoirs, and declining members of endemic biodiversity in tropical savannas compels us to understand the factors that regulate their abundance and diversity. We reviewed field studies published in the last 35 years that examined, mostly experimentally, the effects of varying three primary endogenous disturbances in tropical savanna ecosystems—fire, large mammalian herbivory (LMH), and drought—on abundance and diversity of non-volant small mammals. These disturbances are most likely to affect habitat structure (cover or concealment), food availability, or both, for ground-dwelling small mammalian herbivores, omnivores, and insectivores. Of 63 studies (included in 55 published papers) meeting these criteria from the Afrotropics, Neotropics, and northern Australia (none was found from southern Asia), 29 studies concluded that small mammals responded (mostly negatively) to a loss of cover (mostly from LMH and fire); four found evidence of increased predation on small mammals in lower-cover treatments (e.g., grazed or burned). Eighteen studies concluded a combination of food- and cover-limitation explained small-mammal responses to endogenous disturbances. Only two studies concluded small-mammal declines in response to habitat-altering disturbance were caused by food limitation and not related to cover reduction. Evidence to date indicates that abundance and richness of small savanna mammals, in general (with important exceptions), is enhanced by vegetative cover (especially tall grass, but sometimes shrub cover) as refugia for these prey species amid a “landscape of fear,” particularly for diurnal, non-cursorial, and non-fossorial species. These species have been called “decreasers” in response to cover reduction, whereas a minority of small-mammal species have been shown to be “increasers” or disturbance-tolerant. Complex relationships between endogenous disturbances and small-mammal food resources are important secondary factors, but only six studies manipulated or measured food resources simultaneous to habitat manipulations. While more such studies are needed, designing effective ones for cryptic consumer communities of omnivorous dietary opportunists is a significant challenge.

Multiple trade-offs regulate the effects of woody plant removal on biodiversity and ecosystem functions in global rangelands

Woody plant encroachment is a major land management issue. Woody removal often aims to restore the original grassy ecosystem, but few studies have assessed the role of woody removal on ecosystem functions and biodiversity at global scales. We collected data from 140 global studies and evaluated how different woody plant removal methods affected biodiversity (plant and animal diversity) and ecosystem functions (plant production, hydrological function, soil carbon) across global rangelands. Our results indicate that the impact of removal is strongly context dependent, varying with the specific response variable, removal method, and traits of the target species. Over all treatments, woody plant removal increased grass biomass and total groundstorey diversity. Physical and chemical removal methods increased grass biomass and total groundstorey biomass (i.e., non-woody plants, including grass biomass), but burning reduced animal diversity. The impact of different treatment methods declined with time since removal, particularly for total groundstorey biomass. Removing pyramid-shaped woody plants increased total groundstorey biomass and hydrological function but reduced total groundstorey diversity. Environmental context (e.g., aridity and soil texture) indirectly controlled the effect of removal on biomass and biodiversity by influencing plant traits such as plant shape, allelopathic, or roots types. Our study demonstrates that a one-size-fits-all approach to woody plant removal is not appropriate, and that consideration of woody plant identity, removal method, and environmental context is critical for optimizing removal outcomes. Applying this knowledge is fundamental for maintaining diverse and functional rangeland ecosystems as we move toward a drier and more variable climate.