Ants, fire, and bark traits affect how African savanna trees recover following damage

Trunk spines of trees: a physical defence against bark removal and climbing by mammals?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The defensive role of spines has previously been related to leaves, young shoots and reproductive organs. However, some woody species harbour spines on their trunks where none of those organs are present. Several explanations are plausible: they could be (1) climbing aids, (2) remnants from defence of leaves or reproductive organs during an earlier development phase, or (3) an as-yet undescribed defence. Here we investigate whether they could play a role against either bark feeding or preventing climbing animals accessing food resources in the tree canopy.

METHODS

We described 31 woody species with spines on their trunk, growing in a botanical garden, to test whether morphological strategies could be identified and suggest what could be their most likely function. As testing their function is difficult experimentally for large pools of species, we performed virtual experiments to evaluate the potential roles of trunk spines against bark removal and climbing animals of different sizes. We then compared for each species and their confamilial non-spiny species the nutritional profiles of leaf, bark and reproductive organs to test whether trunk spines were associated with a nutritious organ (more likely targeted by herbivores).

KEY RESULTS

We identified four morphological syndromes of trunk spines. Two corresponded to already known functions (anchorage for lianas and crown defence against large ground mammals), and two strategies are newly described trait syndromes with traits suggesting a defence against bark feeding and climbing mammals. By simulation, we show how each strategy could translate into defence against debarking and prevent herbivores from climbing.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified trunk spine strategies and the criteria to classify them, their most likely function and the likely feeding mode and size of animal against which different trunk spine strategies may be effective. We discuss further perspectives for testing their function and their ecological significance.

Short duration overnight cattle kraaling in natural rangelands leads to increased tree damage by elephants

Elephants are attracted to nutrient hotspots created through short duration overnight cattle corralling (hereafter kraaling) in natural rangelands at Debshan, a mixed cattle-wildlife private ranch in central Zimbabwe, causing severe tree damage. We determined the effect of age of nutrient hotspot (i.e., time after kraal use) on elephant use and the extent of tree damage. Elephant use and tree damage were assessed in nutrient hotspots of varying ages (6, 12, 24, 36 and 48 months after kraal use) and in surrounding landscape. We also compared Acacia karroo bark nutrient and soil nutrient concentration between nutrient hotspots (24 months after kraal use) and the surrounding landscape. Elephant use of nutrient hotspots was highest at 12 and 24 months after kraaling. The most severely damaged trees were in the 12-, 24- and 36-month-old nutrient hotspots. Acacia karroo bark nutrient concentrations (nitrogen, potassium, calcium, magnesium and iron) were higher in nutrient hotspots than surrounding vegetation, while soil nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus, calcium and potassium) were higher in nutrient hotspots than surrounding landscape. We concluded that elephants mostly used nutrient hotspots 12 and 24 months after kraaling, while severe tree damage occurred 12, 24 and 36 months after kraal use.

Heterogeneity in African savanna elephant distributions and their impacts on trees in Kruger National Park, South Africa

Though elephants are a major cause of savanna tree mortality and threaten vulnerable tree species, managing their impact remains difficult, in part because relatively little is known about how elephant impacts are distributed throughout space.This is exacerbated by uncertainty about what determines the distribution of elephants themselves, as well as whether the distribution of elephants is even informative for understanding the distribution of their impacts.To better understand the factors that underlie elephant impacts, we modeled elephant distributions and their damage to trees with respect to soil properties, water availability, and vegetation in Kruger National Park, South Africa, using structural equation modeling.We found that bull elephants and mixed herds differed markedly in their distributions, with bull elephants concentrating in sparsely treed basaltic sites close to artificial waterholes and mixed herds aggregating around permanent rivers, particularly in areas with little grass.Surprisingly, we also found that the distribution of elephant impacts, while highly heterogeneous, was largely unrelated to the distribution of elephants themselves, with damage concentrated instead in densely treed areas and particularly on basaltic soils.Results underscore the importance of surface water for elephants but suggest that elephant water dependence operates together with other landscape factors, particularly vegetation community composition and historical management interventions, to influence elephant distributions.