Original Research
Browser impacts in Mapungubwe National Park, South Africa: Should we be worried?
Submitted: 19 August 2015 | Published: 16 September 2016
About the author(s)
Corli Coetsee, School of Natural Resource Management, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University; Scientific Services, South African National Parks, South AfricaBenjamin J. Wigley, School of Natural Resource Management, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, South Africa; Centre for Biological Sciences, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, India, India
Abstract
This study explores the impact of browsers on vegetation types within the Mapungubwe National Park and specifically whether rocky outcrops or ridges in the park serve as refugia from browsers, particularly elephants. We sampled 80 transects at 20 sites and recorded 1740 plants comprising 65 species. We found that a high proportion (> 80%) of the woody vegetation sampled indicated browser utilisation. Although certain woody species (e.g. Albizia harveyi, Boscia albitrunca, Lannea schweinfurthii) appeared to be preferred by browsers, browsing levels were relatively high among all woody species. High levels of browsing by herbivores other than elephants suggest that they have a significant impact on the park’s vegetation. We did not find that rocky ridges acted as refugia to browsers, but instead found that vegetation in rocky ridges was more severely impacted by browsers than vegetation in flat areas, despite vegetation being more accessible in flat areas. If elephant numbers continue to increase at the current rate (e.g. elephant numbers doubled between 2007 and 2010), we predict that some of the heavily utilised species will become locally rare over time.
Conservation implications: High levels of browsing by both elephant and smaller herbivores contribute to significant impacts on vegetation away from rivers in Mapungubwe National Park. Without management interventions that address both types of impact, structural and species diversity are bound to decrease over the short to medium term.
Keywords
Metrics
Total abstract views: 4873Total article views: 8342
Crossref Citations
1. Protecting and connecting landscapes stabilizes populations of the Endangered savannah elephant
Ryan M. Huang, Celesté Maré, Robert A. R. Guldemond, Stuart L. Pimm, Rudi J. van Aarde
Science Advances vol: 10 issue: 1 year: 2024
doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adk2896
2. Mapping the spatial distribution of tree species selected by elephants (Loxodonta africana) in Venetia-Limpopo Nature Reserve using Sentinel-2 imagery
S. E. Nkosi, E. Adam, A. S. Barrett, L. R. Brown
Applied Geomatics vol: 13 issue: 4 first page: 701 year: 2021
doi: 10.1007/s12518-021-00386-z
3. Fine‐scale habitat heterogeneity influences browsing damage by elephant and giraffe
Duncan M. Kimuyu, David Kenfack, Paul M. Musili, Robert O. Ang’ila
Biotropica vol: 53 issue: 1 first page: 86 year: 2021
doi: 10.1111/btp.12848
4. Long‐term high densities of African elephants clear the understorey and promote a new stable savanna woodland community
Nicolas Ferry, Stéphane Dray, Hervé Fritz, Audrey Ipavec, Benjamin J. Wigley, Tristan Charles‐Dominique, Mathieu Bourgarel, Lovelater Sebele, Marion Valeix, Alessandra Fidelis
Journal of Vegetation Science vol: 32 issue: 6 year: 2021
doi: 10.1111/jvs.13101