eDNA and metabarcoding for rewilding projects monitoring, a dietary approach
- PDF / 1,426,489 Bytes
- 8 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 97 Downloads / 204 Views
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
eDNA and metabarcoding for rewilding projects monitoring, a dietary approach Laura Iacolina1,2,5 · Mie Bech Lukassen1 · Camilla Fløjgaard3 · Rita Buttenschøn4 · Jeppe Lund Nielsen1 · Cino Pertoldi1,2 Received: 18 April 2019 / Accepted: 23 April 2020 © Deutsche Gesellschaft für Säugetierkunde 2020
Abstract There is an increased interest in the possibility to use large animals in the restoration of degraded ecosystems and to increase the capacity of natural areas to sustain richer biodiversity. We quantify the dietary differences and similarities between five moose and 22 red deer introduced in a 2100 ha fenced area under restoration (Lille Vildmose, Denmark) and their potential in the restoration process. Moose and red deer were selected based on their biogeographic affinity and existing knowledge of their diet and feeding behaviour, and are expected to counteract encroachment on open habitats. Using eDNA metabarcoding of dung collected in the field and species identification through saliva recovered from browsed twigs, we investigated the species’ diets and diet overlap after the moose were released into the area, and assessed how their diets match the expected ecosystem function. Despite the partial overlap of some dietary items, such as Betulaceae and Salicaceae, we report a differential use in height of tree species and distinctive use of other food resources between the two species, with red deer eating more herbaceous plants and the moose diet also containing aquatic plants. This study exemplifies a monitoring approach to restoration projects where large herbivores are expected to provide a key ecosystem function through their browsing and grazing. Keywords Browsing · Diet · Alces alces · Cervus elaphus · Ungulates
Introduction There is a growing understanding of the importance of large herbivores in ecosystem functioning and biodiversity conservation (Danell et al. 2006; Malhi et al. 2016; Van Wieren 1995). Most existing species evolved in ecosystems Handling editor: Paul Grobler.
markedly influenced by dynamic natural processes and characterized by high structural diversity maintained by large herbivores (Coope 2004; Kurtén 2007; Sandom et al. 2014; Svenning 2002). Building on these top-down interactions and trophic cascades, rewilding often focuses on reintroducing locally extinct keystone species to achieve selfsustaining and diverse ecosystems (Svenning et al. 2016). Although there are different definitions of rewilding, they
* Laura Iacolina [email protected]
1
Department of Chemistry and Bioscience, Aalborg University, Fredrik Bajers Vej 7H, 9220 Aalborg, Denmark
Mie Bech Lukassen [email protected]
2
Aalborg Zoo, Mølleparkvej 63, 9000 Aalborg, Denmark
3
Department of Bioscience Kalø, Aarhus University, Grenåvej 14, 8410 Rønde, Denmark
4
Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, Copenhagen University, Rolighedsvej 23, 1958 Frederiksberg, Denmark
5
Present Address: Faculty of Agriculture, Apiculture, Wildlife Management and Special Zo
Data Loading...
