Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Dataset . 2018
License: CC 0
Data sources: ZENODO
DRYAD
Dataset . 2018
License: CC 0
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Data from: Arboreality increases reptile community resistance to disturbance from livestock grazing

Authors: Neilly, Heather; Nordberg, Eric J.; VanDerWal, Jeremy; Schwarzkopf, Lin;

Data from: Arboreality increases reptile community resistance to disturbance from livestock grazing

Abstract

Domestic livestock grazing directly alters ground-level habitat but its effects on arboreal habitat are poorly known. Similarly, the response to grazing of ground-dwelling fauna has been examined, but there are few studies of arboreal fauna. Globally, grazing has been implicated in the decline of vertebrate fauna species, but some species appear resistant to the effects of grazing, either benefiting from the structural changes at ground level or avoiding them, as may be the case with arboreal species. Here we examine arboreal and terrestrial habitat responses and reptile community responses to grazing, to determine whether arboreal reptile species are more resistant than terrestrial reptile species. We conducted arboreal and terrestrial reptile surveys on four different grazing treatments, at a 19-year experimental grazing trial in northern Australia. To compare the grazing response of arboreal and terrestrial reptile assemblages, we used community, functional group and individual species-level analyses. Species responses were modelled in relation to landscape-scale and microhabitat variables. Arboreal reptile species were resistant to the impact of grazing, whereas terrestrial reptiles were negatively affected by heavy grazing. Terrestrial reptiles were positively associated with complex ground structures, which were greatly reduced in heavily grazed areas. Arboreal lizards responded positively to microhabitat features such as tree hollows. Synthesis and applications. Arboreal and terrestrial reptiles have different responses to the impact of livestock grazing. This has implications for rangeland management, particularly if management objectives include goals relating to conserving certain species or functional groups. Arboreal reptiles showed resistance in a landscape that is grazed, but where trees have not been cleared. We highlight the importance of retaining trees in rangelands for both terrestrial and arboreal microhabitats.

Wambiana Reptile CommunityThe abundance of reptile species and micro-habitat measures at the Wambiana Grazing Trial. Data comes from biodiversity surveys conducted in April 2014, October 2014, April 2015 and October 2015.Dryad_JApEc_ReptilePaperData.xlsx

Related Organizations
Keywords

Cattle grazing, reptile community, off-reserve conservation, herpetofauna, habitat fragmentation, response mechanisms, rangelands

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    OpenAIRE UsageCounts
    Usage byUsageCounts
    visibility views 4
    download downloads 1
  • 4
    views
    1
    downloads
    Powered byOpenAIRE UsageCounts
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
visibility
download
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
views
OpenAIRE UsageCountsViews provided by UsageCounts
downloads
OpenAIRE UsageCountsDownloads provided by UsageCounts
0
Average
Average
Average
4
1
Related to Research communities
Italian National Biodiversity Future Center