Sığır veya Koyun ile Otlatılan Eskişehir Ovası Taban Meralarının Bitki Örtülerinin Karşılaştırılması

Abstract

This research was carried out in Eskişehir Plain in 2014, to compare sub-irrigated rangelands vegetation of Eskişehir Plain which have been grazing by sheep and cattle. Measurements were made according to loop method with 40 transect for each rangeland sites in the period of dominant species flowering. In both rangeland sites, it was estimated that Bermuda grass was dominant, Common rush could be suppressed by sheep grazing and species composition was different at rangeland vegetation depend on grazing animal species. Although canopy was dense in investigated rangeland sites, species components were adversely affected from heavy grazing in both rangeland sites. It was concluded from the results that botanical composition of the sub-irrigated rangelands in Eskisehir Plain were shaped differently depending grazing animal type, heavy grazing is main problem and new studies on carried capacity, grazing season and animal type are needed to improve and sustainable use of these natural resources.

Uzun süre farklı otlatma baskısında bir veya birden fazla hayvan türü ile otlatılan meraların bazı vejetasyon karakteristikleri (Durum çalışması: Zonguldak ili, Türkiye)

“…This difference between two studies can be related to the structural difference between the studied rangelands (semi-mountainous and lowland rangelands vs. highland or upland rangelands) and the GAS (goat, sheep and cattle herds vs. sheep and cattle herds) in MSG system. The rangeland condition and canopy data in the present study indicate that the SSG and MSG rangelands were overgrazed, as reported by Koç and İleri (2016). As noted by Animut et al (2005) and in Experiment I, overgrazing suppresses the desirable pasture species, which can allow undesirable species like shrub and weeds to establish while high stocking rates limits forage selectivity and forces the animals to consume all species present.…”

“…The BC of the SSG and MSG rangelands consisted of a mixture of 54 and 36 plant families, respectively, dominated by Fabaceae, Poaceae, Asteraceae and Rosacea based on the frequencies of families (Table 3). As reported by Koç and İleri (2016), species composition was different at rangeland vegetation depend on the GAS. In the previous studies in Turkey (Yavuz et al, 2012;Çınar et al, 2014;Ünal et al, 2014;Uzun et al, 2015;İspirli et al, 2016;Seydoşoğlu et al, 2018), it has been noted that the abundance of invasive species in the BC of rangelands is high due to both regional conditions and utilization methods (Seydoşoğlu et al, 2018), which is an indicator of overgrazing.…”

“…The RCS and carrying capacity for the SSG and MSG rangelands were classified as poor and fair, and calculated as 2.34 and 3.90 LUM ha -1 , respectively (Table 3). Rangeland health class was healthy for both rangeland communities, as a consequence of the high canopy coverage (Koç and İleri, 2016). Cheng et al (2011) reported that RCS, health class and species diversity in a rangeland were strongly associated with rainfall availability and that precipitation would be more important than GP on the BC changes in rangelands with high rainfall variability.…”

“…Livestock grazing strategies (continuous grazing vs. no grazing) and intensities (heavy to light grazing) can influence plant composition (Koc and Kadioglu, 2012;Alay et al, 2016;Koç and İleri, 2016;Bremm et al, 2016) which is vital for the sustainable use of rangelands over the years (Tallowin et al, 2005;Allred et al, 2012). This situation is depending on that the GAS is proficient of consuming all plant species, including alien species in rangelands (Erkovan et al, 2016).…”

“…Therefore, to investigate long-term consequences of grazing on vegetation structure of a rangeland is important not only to understand range forage species, but also to be able to deal with the primary factors that can threaten livestock productivity. Indeed, degradation of rangelands subjected to the SSG and MSG for a long time is a fundamental problem (Ouédraogo-Koné et al, 2006;Koç and İleri, 2016;Ahmed et al, 2017;Asmare, 2018) in the countries like Turkey, since nutrition of domestic ruminants in Turkey is mainly based on the exploitation of rangelands (Uzun et al, 2015;Alay et al, 2016;Koç and İleri, 2016). Therefore, invasion of rangelands by weed species is a threat to animal production in Turkey.…”