Advertisement

Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems

, Volume 88, Issue 2, pp 275–288 | Cite as

Coupling of spatial and temporal pattern of cattle excreta patches on a low intensity pasture

  • Karl Auerswald
  • Franziska Mayer
  • Hans Schnyder
Research Article

Abstract

Excreta deposition redistributes, separates and concentrates nutrients and thus affects sward heterogeneity and environment. Concentration occurs within excrement patches, but also at a larger scale when excreta are not randomly deposited. Thus, detecting excrement patterns and their underlying rules is essential to understand nutrient heterogeneity within a pasture. Two urine and six dung-patch distributions from six grazing periods were mapped on a 0.6 ha rotationally grazed cattle pasture. Excreta density was determined by creating Thiessen polygons. The Thiessen method was preferred to previously used predefined grids, because the resulting pattern is not obscured by the layout and resolution of such a grid. GIS, geostatistical simulation and geostatistical analysis were then applied to detect patterns. All urine and dung distributions had a similar dominant pattern with only small (<5%) random variation. Excreta density increased with distance to the fence, decreasing slope gradient and towards the crest. The pattern evolved preferably during night at preferred resting areas when the animals rarely moved while urination and defecation were still served. Feed-back mechanisms attenuated some of the nocturnal pattern because resting places with high excrement density were avoided during grazing despite their high productivity. Validation with data from two independent studies showed that excrement patterns are common and governed by similar principles where site conditions are similar. Excrement pattern may be enhanced or attenuated by deliberate adjustment of pasture properties relative to terrain properties and the placement of installations such as fences. Placing watering or feeding stations close to preferred resting places and fences at a large distance to them will increase heterogeneity while night shedding would reduce it.

Keywords

Autocorrelation Diurnal pattern Geostatistics Nutrient cycle Productivity Spatial pattern Thiessen area Anisotropic semivariogram 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The present study was part of the research network “Forschungsverbund Agrarökosysteme München” (FAM) and financially supported by the Federal Ministry of Research and Technology (BMBF 0339370) and the Bavarian State Ministry for Education and Culture, Science and Art. We wish to thank Dr Herta König and Ulrike Schütz for making the data set available for analysis.

References

  1. Arnold GW (1981) Grazing behaviour. In: Morley FHW (ed) Grazing Animals. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 79–104Google Scholar
  2. Braun PW, Lachnit B (1994) Kennzeichnung der räumlichen Verteilung von Pflanzenpopulationen. Z Agrarinformatik 4:67–71Google Scholar
  3. Browns JE (1971) Sheep behaviour under unherded conditions on mountain summer ranges. J Range Manage 24:105–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Burrough PA (1983) Multiscale sources of spatial variation in soil. II. A non-Brownian fractal model and its application in soil survey. J Soil Sci 34:599–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Clark PJ, Evans FC (1954) Distance to nearest neighbor as a measure of spatial relationships in populations. Ecology 35:445–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Day TA, Detling JK (1990) Grassland patch dynamics and herbivore grazing preference following urine deposition. Ecology 71:180–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Deutsch CV, Journel AG (1992) GSLIB—Geostatistical software library and user’s guide. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Goovaerts P (2000) Geostatistical approaches for incorporating elevation into the spatial interpolation of rainfall. J Hydrol 228:113–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Green RH (1966) Measurement of non-randomness in spatial distribution. Res Popul Ecol 8:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hastings MH (2002) Circadian rhythms: a gut feeling for time. Nature 417:391–392CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Haynes RJ, Williams PH (1993) Nutrient cycling and soil fertility in the grazed pasture ecosystem. Adv Agron 49:119–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hirata M, Sugimoto Y, Ueno M (1987) Distribution of dung pats and ungrazed areas in Bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum Flügge) pasture. J Jpn Soc Grassland Sci 33:128–139Google Scholar
  13. Hirata M, Sugimoto Y, Ueno M (1991) Use of a mathematical model to evaluate the effects of dung from grazing animals on pasture production and utilization and animal production. J Jpn Soc Grassland Sci 37:303–323Google Scholar
  14. Huber-Sannwald E, Jackson RB (2001) Heterogeneous soil-resource distribution and plant responses—from individual-plant growth to ecosystem functioning. Progress Bot 62:451–476Google Scholar
  15. Jaramillo VJ, Detling JK (1992) Small-scale heterogeneity in a semi-arid North American grassland. I. Tillering, N-uptake and retranslocation in simulated urine patches. J Appl Ecol 29:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kirkham FW, Kent M (1997) Soil seed bank composition in relation to the above-ground vegetation in fertilized and unfertilized hay meadows on a Somerset peat moor. J Appl Ecol 34:889–902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Krysl LJ, Hess BW (1993) Influence of supplementation on behavior of grazing cattle. J Anim Sci 71:2546–2555PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Landsberg J, James CD, Maconochie J, Nicholls AO, Stol J, Tynan R (2002) Scale-related effects of grazing on native plant communities in an arid rangeland region of South Australia. J Appl Ecol 39:427–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lantinga EA, Keuning JA, Groenwold J, Deenen PJAG (1987) Distribution of excreted nitrogen by grazing cattle and its effects on sward quality, herbage production and utilization. In: van der Meer HG (ed) Animal manure on grassland and fodder crops. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 103–117Google Scholar
  20. Lark RM (2002) Robust estimation of the pseudo cross-variogram for cokriging soil properties. Eur J Soil Sci 53:253–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Linnane MI, Brereton AJ, Giller PS (2001) Seasonal changes in circadian grazing patterns of Kerry cows (Bos taurus) in semi-feral conditions in Killarney National Park, Co. Kerry, Ireland. Appl Anim Behav Sci 71:177–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Luetge BU, Hatch GP, Hardy MB (1995) The influence of urine and dung deposition on patch grazing patterns of cattle and sheep in the Southern Tall Grassveld. African J Range Forage Sci 12:104–110Google Scholar
  23. MacDiarmid BN, Watkin BR (1971) The cattle dung patch. J Br Grassland Soc 26:239–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Marten GC, Donker JD (1964) Selective grazing induced by animal excreta I. Evidence of occurrence and superficial remedy. J Dairy Sci 47:773–777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Papritz A, Künsch HR, Webster R (1993) On the pseudo cross-variogram. Math Geol 25:1015–1026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pebesma EJ (2004) Multivariable geostatistics in S: the gstat package. Comput Geosci 30:683–691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Petersen RG, Lucas HL, Woodhouse WW (1956) The distribution of excreta by freely grazing cattle and its effect on pasture fertility. I. Excretal distribution. Agron J 48:440–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Peterson PR, Gerrish JR (1995) Grazing management affects manure distribution by beef cattle. In: Proc. Am. Forage Grassland Council, Lexington, pp 170–174Google Scholar
  29. Radeloff VC, Miller FT, He HS, Mladenoff DJ (2000) Periodicity in spatial data and geostatistical models: autocorrelation between patches. Ecography 23:81–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Richards IR, Wolton KM (1976) The spatial distribution of excreta under intensive cattle grazing. J Br Grassland Soc 31:89–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Schnyder H, Locher F, Auerswald K (this volume) Nutrient cycling by grazing cattle controls soil N and P patterns and vegetation nutrient status in a low-input pasture ecosystem. Nutr Cycl AgroecosysGoogle Scholar
  32. Shiyomi M, Okada M, Takahashi S, Tang YH (1998) Spatial pattern changes in aboveground plant biomass in a grazing pasture. Ecol Res 13:313–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Silverman BW (1986) Density estimation for statistics and data analysis, Monographs on Statistics and Applied Probability. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  34. Sinowski W, Auerswald K (1999) Using relief parameters in a discriminant analysis to stratify geological areas of different spatial variability of soil properties. Geoderma 89:113–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Steffee WP, Anderson CF, Young VR (1981) An evaluation of the diurnal rhythm of urea excretion in healthy young adults. J Parenter Enteral Nutr 5:378–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Thiessen AH, Alter JC (1911) Climatological Data for July, 1911: District No. 10, Great Basin. Mon Weather Rev 1911:1082–1089Google Scholar
  37. Van Groenigen JW, Stein A (1998) Constrained optimization of spatial sampling using continuous simulated annealing. J Environ Qual 27:1078–1086CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Van Soest PJ (1994) Nutritional ecology of the ruminant. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  39. Victor N (1978) Alternativen zum klassischen Histogramm. Methods Inform Med 17:120–126Google Scholar
  40. Voltz M, Webster R (1990) A comparison of kriging, cubic splines and classification for predicting soil properties from sample information. J Soil Sci 41:473–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Warren SD, Mitasova H, Auerswald K, Hohmann MG (2004) An evaluation of methods to determine slope using digital elevation data. Catena 58:215–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. White SL, Sheffield RE, Washburn SP, King LD, Green JT (2001) Spatial and time distribution of dairy cattle excreta in an intensive pasture system. J Environ Qual 30:2180–2187CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Whitehead DC (2000) Nutrient elements in grassland. CABI Publishing, WallingfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zimmerman DL (1993) Another look at anisotropy in geostatistics. Math Geol 25:453–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Karl Auerswald
    • 1
  • Franziska Mayer
    • 2
  • Hans Schnyder
    • 1
  1. 1.Lehrstuhl für Grünlandlehre Technische Universität MünchenFreisingGermany
  2. 2.Institut für AgrarökologieLandesanstalt für LandwirtschaftFreisingGermany

Personalised recommendations