Advertisement

Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 28, Issue 3, pp 729–750 | Cite as

Management effects on botanical composition of species-rich meadows within the Natura 2000 network

  • Meike BoobEmail author
  • Barbara Truckses
  • Melanie Seither
  • Martin Elsäßer
  • Ulrich Thumm
  • Iris Lewandowski
Original Paper

Abstract

Species-rich hay meadows have evolved through traditional management. They are important habitats for plant and animal species and therefore protected by the EU Habitats Directive. The maintenance of these meadows requires regular cutting, but this can only be guaranteed if farmers benefit in some way. Both agricultural productivity and botanical composition are fundamentally affected by management practices. For this reason, a management that balances productivity and conservation goals is necessary. The purpose of this study is to determine the site-specific influence of extensive fertilisation and date of first cut on the botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows. Three fertilisation variants (none, PK and NPK) and four cutting-date variants (based on phenological stage: first cut before, at beginning of, at end of and after flowering of main grasses) were tested on lowland hay meadows at two sites. However, after the 3 years of the trial, the date of first cut had still not significantly influenced botanical composition at the first site. By contrast, annual fertilisation was found to have a significant effect on botanical composition. The conservation status of the species-rich meadows was downgraded (grades given according to assessment parameters) mainly through the application of NPK fertiliser (35 kg P2O5, 120 kg K2O and 35 kg N ha−1) each year. At one site, cutting before flowering led to declining proportions of annuals and biennials. Surprisingly, at the other site, the date of first cut had still not significantly influenced botanical composition by the end of the 3-year trial.

Keywords

Fertilization Cutting date Lowland hay meadow Grassland vegetation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the laboratories of Ihinger Hof for the soil analyses, as well as D. Mezger, J. Class, S. Rothenhäusler and students for their technical support. We are grateful to landowners and farmers for providing the species-rich meadows. We thank J. Möhring and A. Bernal for their statistical advice and N. Gaudet for improving the language quality of the manuscript. This work was supported by earmarked contributions of the Gluecksspirale and Stiftung Naturschutzfonds Baden-Wuerttemberg.

Supplementary material

10531_2018_1689_MOESM1_ESM.docx (74 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 79 kb)

References

  1. Blažek P, Lepš J (2015) Victims of agricultural intensification. Agric Ecosyst Environ 211:10–16.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2015.04.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Breunig T, Hummel R, Reifenstein V, Wiest K (2015) Mähwiesen-Monitoring -erste Auswertung der Ergebnisse von 2012 bis 2014. Naturschutzinfo 24–32Google Scholar
  3. Bullock JM, Pywell RF (2005) Rhinanthus. Folia Geobot. 40:273–288.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02803240 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buse J, Boch S, Hilgers J, Griebeler EM (2015) Conservation of threatened habitat types under future climate change—lessons from plant-distribution models and current extinction trends in southern Germany. J. Nat. Conserv. 27:18–25.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2015.06.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Core Team R (2016) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  6. Council of the European Communities (1992) Council Directive 92/43/ECC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (Habitats Directive). Official Journal of the European Communities 35:7–50Google Scholar
  7. Couvreur J-M, Fiévet V, Smits Q, Dufrene M (2015) Evaluation of the “observer effect” in botanical surveys of grasslands. Biotechnol Agron Soc Environ. 19:132–142Google Scholar
  8. Crawley MJ, Johnston AE, Silvertown J, Dodd M, de Mazancourt C, Heard MS, Henman DF, Edwards GR (2005) Determinants of species richness in the Park Grass Experiment. Am Nat 165:179–192.  https://doi.org/10.1086/427270 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Di Giulio M, Edwards PJ, Meister E (2001) Enhancing insect diversity in agricultural grasslands. J Appl Ecol 38:310–319.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2664.2001.00605.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Elgersma A, Søegaard K (2016) Effects of species diversity on seasonal variation in herbage yield and nutritive value of seven binary grass-legume mixtures and pure grass under cutting. Eur J Agron 78:73–83.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2016.04.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eriksson O, Bolmgren K, Westin A, Lennartsson T (2015) Historic hay cutting dates from Sweden 1873–1951 and their implications for conservation management of species-rich meadows. Biol Conserv 184:100–107.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.01.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. European Commission, DG Environment (2007) Interpretation Manual of European Union Habitats. Version EUR 27, Brussels, 80–81. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/legislation/habitatsdirective/docs/2007_07_im.pdf. Accessed 28 Nov 2017
  13. Grime JP (1974) Vegetation classification by reference to strategies. Nature 250:26–31.  https://doi.org/10.1038/250026a0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Harpole WS, Tilman D (2007) Grassland species loss resulting from reduced niche dimension. Nat. (Nature) 446:791–793.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05684 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hejcman M, Klaudisová M, Schellberg J, Honsová D (2007) The Rengen grassland experiment. Agric Ecosyst Environ 122:259–266.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2006.12.036 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hejcman M, Hejcmanová P, Pavlů V, Beneš J (2013) Origin and history of grasslands in Central Europe - a review. Grass Forage Sci 68:345–363.  https://doi.org/10.1111/gfs.12066 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Isselstein J, Michaelis T, Bellof G (2015) The Grassland Expert Forum, State 12/2015. German Agricultural Research Alliance (DAFA), BraunschweigGoogle Scholar
  18. Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain. Grass and Forage Sci 60:322–331.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.2005.00489.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kirkham FW, Tallowin JR (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the Somerset Levels. Grass and Forage Sci 50:365–377.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.1995.tb02331.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kirkham FW, Tallowin JR, Sanderson RA, Bhogal A, Chambers BJ, Stevens DP (2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities. Biol Conserv 141:1411–1427.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2008.03.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kirkham FW, Tallowin JRB, Dunn RM, Bhogal A, Chambers BJ, Bardgett RD, Kleijn D (2014) Ecologically sustainable fertility management for the maintenance of species-rich hay meadows. J Appl Ecol 51:152–161.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12169 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Koch B, Schiess-Bühler C (2003) 3.4 Förderung der Artenvielfalt durch gezielte Bewirtschaftung artenreicher Wiesen. In: Oppermann R, Gujer HU (eds) Artenreiches Grünland Bewerten und fördern. Ulmer, Stuttgart, pp 116–119Google Scholar
  23. Lepš J, Šmilauer P (2003) Multivariate analysis of ecological data using CANOCO. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  24. LUBW (2014) Natura 2000. Handbuch für die Erstellung von Managementplänen für Natura 2000-Gebiete in Baden-Württemberg. Version 1.3. https://www4.lubw.baden-wuerttemberg.de/servlet/is/13930/handbuch_erstellung_managementplaenen.pdf?command=downloadContent&filename=handbuch_erstellung_managementplaenen.pdf. Accessed 28 Nov 2017
  25. Mielke H, Wohlers W (2016) Praxishandbuch Grünland. ERLING Verlag GmbH&Co, KGGoogle Scholar
  26. Moog D, Poschlod P, Kahmen S, Schreiber K-F (2002) Comparison of species composition between different grassland management treatments after 25 years. Appl Veg Sci 5:99–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mücher CA, Hennekens SM, Bunce RG, Schaminée JH, Schaepman ME (2009) Modelling the spatial distribution of Natura 2000 habitats across Europe. Landsc Urban Plan 92:148–159.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2009.04.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Oppermann R, Briemle G (2009) Artenreiche Wiesen und Weiden - Umfang und Bedeutung in Baden-Württemberg. In: Schreiber K-F, Briemle G (eds) Artenreiches Grünland in der Kulturlandschaft. Regionalkultur, Ubstadt-WeiherGoogle Scholar
  29. Orford KA, Murray PJ, Vaughan IP, Memmott J (2016) Modest enhancements to conventional grassland. J Appl Ecol 53:906–915.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12608 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ostermann OP (1998) The need for management of nature conservation sites designated under Natura 2000. J Appl Ecol 35:968–973.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.1998.tb00016.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pärtel M, Bruun HH, Sammul M (2005) Biodiversity in temperate European grasslands: origin and conservation. In: Lillak R, Viiralt R, Linke A, Geherman V (eds) Integrating efficient grassland farming and biodiversity. Tartu, EstoniaGoogle Scholar
  32. Raufer B, Seither M, Bauer R, Thumm U, Elsaesser M (2015) Erhaltungszustand und derzeitige Situation von Mageren Flachland-Mähwiesen in Baden-Württemberg am Beispiel des Landkreises Esslingen. In: LAZBW Aulendorf (eds) Tagungsband der 59. Jahrestagung der AGGF in Aulendorf 2015. https://www.grassland-organicfarming.uni-kiel.de/de/pdf/aggf_2015_alle.pdf (accessed 28.11.2017)
  33. Smith RS, Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of mesotrophic (Meadow) grassland in Northern England. J Appl Ecol 31:13.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2404595 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Smith RS, Buckingham H, Bullard MJ, Shiel RS, Younger A (1996) The conservation management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England. 1. Effects of grazing, cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward. Grass Forage Sci 51:278–291.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.1996.tb02063.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Socher SA, Prati D, Boch S, Müller J, Klaus VH, Hölzel N, Fischer M (2012) Direct and productivity-mediated indirect effects of fertilization, mowing and grazing on grassland species richness. J Ecol 100:1391–1399.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2745.2012.02020.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Socher SA, Prati D, Boch S, Müller J, Baumbach H, Gockel S, Hemp A, Schöning I, Wells K, Buscot F, Kalko EK, Linsenmair KE, Schulze E-D, Weisser WW, Fischer M (2013) Interacting effects of fertilization, mowing and grazing on plant species diversity of 1500 grasslands in Germany differ between regions. Basic and Appl. Ecol 14:126–136.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2012.12.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. ter Braak C, Smilauer P (2006) Canoco for Windows. Biometris-Plant Research International, WageningenGoogle Scholar
  38. Tonn, B. and Elsaesser, M., Ministerium für Ländlichen Raum und Verbraucherschutz (2013) Infoblatt Natura 2000. Wie bewirtschafte ich eine FFH-Mähwiese? http://www.landwirtschaft-bw.info/site/pbs-bw-new/get/documents/MLR.LEL/PB5Documents/lazbw_gl/Extensivgr%C3%BCnland/Ver%C3%B6ffentlichungen/FFH/Infoblatt%20Natura%202000.pdf. Accessed 25 Jan 2017
  39. VDLUFA (1991) VDLUFA Methodenbuch Band I Die Untersuchung von Böden, fourth ed. VDLUFA-VerlagGoogle Scholar
  40. Vickery JA, Tallowin JR, Feber RE, Asteraki EJ, Atkinson PW, Fuller RJ, Brown VK (2001) The management of lowland neutral grasslands in Britain. J Appl Ecol 38:647–664.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2664.2001.00626.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Voigtländer G, Voss N (1979) Methoden der Grünlanduntersuchung und -bewertung. Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart, pp 21–24Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Meike Boob
    • 1
    Email author
  • Barbara Truckses
    • 1
  • Melanie Seither
    • 2
  • Martin Elsäßer
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ulrich Thumm
    • 1
  • Iris Lewandowski
    • 1
  1. 1.Biobased Products and Energy Crops (340b), Institute of Crop Science (340)University of HohenheimStuttgartGermany
  2. 2.Grassland DivisionAgricultural Centre for Cattle Production, Grassland Management, Dairy Management, Wildlife and Fisheries Baden-WuerttembergAulendorfGermany

Personalised recommendations