Ecosystem engineering varies spatially: a test of the vegetation modification paradigm for prairie dogs. Issue 2 (4th April 2012)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Baker, Bruce W.; Augustine, David J.; Sedgwick, James A.; Lubow, Bruce C.
• Is Part Of: Ecography. Volume 36:Issue 2(2013:Feb.)
• Page Start: 230
• Page End: 239
• Publication Date: 2012-04-04
• Subjects: Ecology -- Periodicals; Biodiversity -- Periodicals; 574.5
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2012.07614.x
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0906-7590

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main" xml:lang="en"> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <p>Colonial, burrowing herbivores can be engineers of grassland and shrubland ecosystems worldwide. Spatial variation in landscapes suggests caution when extrapolating single‐place studies of single species, but lack of data and the need to generalize often leads to 'model system' thinking and application of results beyond appropriate statistical inference. Generalizations about the engineering effects of prairie dogs (<italic>Cynomys</italic> sp.) developed largely from intensive study at a single complex of black‐tailed prairie dogs <italic>C. ludovicianus</italic> in northern mixed prairie, but have been extrapolated to other ecoregions and prairie dog species in North America, and other colonial, burrowing herbivores. We tested the paradigm that prairie dogs decrease vegetation volume and the cover of grasses and tall shrubs, and increase bare ground and forb cover. We sampled vegetation on and off 279 colonies at 13 complexes of 3 prairie dog species widely distributed across 5 ecoregions in North America. The paradigm was generally supported at 7 black‐tailed prairie dog complexes in northern mixed prairie, where vegetation volume, grass cover, and tall shrub cover were lower, and bare ground and forb cover were higher, on colonies than at paired off‐colony sites. Outside the northern mixed prairie, all 3 prairie dog species consistently reduced vegetation volume, but their effects on cover of plant functional groups varied with prairie dog species and the grazing tolerance of dominant perennial grasses. White‐tailed prairie dogs <italic>C. leucurus</italic> in sagebrush steppe did not reduce shrub cover, whereas black‐tailed prairie dogs suppressed shrub cover at all complexes with tall shrubs in the surrounding habitat matrix. Black‐tailed prairie dogs in shortgrass steppe and Gunnison's prairie dogs <italic>C. gunnisoni</italic> in Colorado Plateau grassland both had relatively minor effects on grass cover, which may reflect the dominance of grazing‐tolerant shortgrasses at both complexes. Variation in modification of vegetation structure may be understood in terms of the responses of different dominant perennial grasses to intense defoliation and differences in foraging behavior among prairie dog species. Spatial variation in the engineering role of prairie dogs suggests spatial variation in their keystone role, and spatial variation in the roles of other ecosystem engineers. Thus, ecosystem engineering can have a spatial component not evident from single‐place studies.</p> </abstract>