Simplicity or complexity? Important aspects of high nature value grassland management in nature conservation

Abstract

Local, adaptive traditional grassland management systems have played a fundamental role in the creation, maintenance and conservation of high nature value (HNV) grasslands. The state of diverse HNV grasslands has deteriorated across Europe in conjunction with changes in various management factors, such as management type and management intensity. To conserve the species-rich vegetation of HNV grasslands and to avoid undesirable shifts in plant functional type dominance, it is important to explore the effects of management factors crucial for nature conservation and to adapt them to local circumstances. In our study, we focus on three of the main factors in the management of valuable meadow steppes in the Great Hungarian Plain region (Central Hungary). We studied management types (mowing, grazing and combined), different levels of herbage removal intensity (low, medium, high) and spatio-temporal complexity (low, medium and high) of grassland management. Altogether 172 plots (1 m × 1 m) were designated in 17 sites. Plant diversity indexes and plant functional types were calculated according to the presence and percentage cover of plant species in the plots. Regarding plant diversity and the dominance of plant functional types, herbage removal intensity and spatio-temporal complexity of management had, for the most part, stronger effects than the type of management. Higher spatio-temporal complexity of management resulted in higher plant diversity, while higher intensity of management led to significantly lower diversity. Proper application of type, intensity and spatio-temporal complexity of management practices (separately and in combination) proved to be determining factors in the long-term maintenance and conservation of diversity and species composition of HNV grasslands.

Assessment of Grasslands Improvements for Faunistic Purposes in a Mountain Area of Central Italy

“…Management is acknowledged to affect remarkably different characteristics of semi-natural grassland, under productive and ecological point of view (Kun et al 2021). Shrub clearing is one of Restoration techniques were also important for ecological parameters, concerning diversity, richness and dominance of some species in the sward.…”

Study of Forage Quality of Grasslands on the Southern Margin of the Pannonian Basin

“…To the first group, we can assign mesic meadows in the broader sense: mesic meadows in a strict sense (number 2 in the ordination plane), semi-dry meadows (number 1), mesic to wet meadows in the eastern (9) and western part of the area (4) and montane meadows (6); and salt grasslands (10) are transitional to pastures. The second group consists of pastures in the broader sense: mesic pastures (3), wet pastures (13), and wet fringe pastures (11), and the third group consists of wet meadows in the broader sense: wet oligotrophic meadows (5), wet eutrophic meadows (7), intermittent wet meadows (8), and wet fringe meadows (12).…”

“…The ecological signatures of the grassland types are based on the ecological strategies of the species and show how species or plant communities cope with stress and disturbance (Figure 3). It can be seen that the most disturbed (near the R angle) are wet pastures (13), salt grasslands (10) and mesic pastures (3) and that the least disturbed are wet fringe meadows (12). The most stressful conditions (near the S angle) are in salt grasslands (10) and wet pastures (13) as well as wet meadows in the broader sense, oligotrophic (5), intermittent (8), and eutrophic wet meadows (7); the least stressful conditions are in semidry (1) and mesic (2) meadows.…”

“…It can be seen that the most disturbed (near the R angle) are wet pastures (13), salt grasslands (10) and mesic pastures (3) and that the least disturbed are wet fringe meadows (12). The most stressful conditions (near the S angle) are in salt grasslands (10) and wet pastures (13) as well as wet meadows in the broader sense, oligotrophic (5), intermittent (8), and eutrophic wet meadows (7); the least stressful conditions are in semidry (1) and mesic (2) meadows. The most favorable conditions (near angle C) are for wet fringe meadows (12), semi-dry (1) and mesic (2) meadows, and wet fringe pastures (11), and least favorable conditions are in salt grasslands (10) and wet pastures 13).…”

“…A large database was based on floristic inventory [10] was elaborated in combination with a functional strategies [11], ecological conditions, and management [12], all which provide a conceptual and methodological framework for the analysis of the relationships among biodiversity, ecological processes, and function, and we tried to evaluate the forage quality of these grasslands using this database. Such integrative research is necessary as we seek solutions and ideas to maintain the balance between economic interests and sustainability [13].…”