Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
    • Front Matter Portal
    • Journal Club
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses
  • Submit
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Accessibility Statement
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Home
Home
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
    • Front Matter Portal
    • Journal Club
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses
  • Submit
Perspective

Combining paleo-data and modern exclosure experiments to assess the impact of megafauna extinctions on woody vegetation

Elisabeth S. Bakker, Jacquelyn L. Gill, Christopher N. Johnson, Frans W. M. Vera, Christopher J. Sandom, Gregory P. Asner, and Jens-Christian Svenning
  1. aDepartment of Aquatic Ecology, Netherlands Institute of Ecology, 6708 PB Wageningen, The Netherlands;
  2. bSchool of Biology and Ecology, Climate Change Institute, University of Maine, Orono, ME 04469;
  3. cSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia;
  4. dCommunity and Conservation Ecology, Institute for Evolutionary Life Sciences, University of Groningen, 9700 CC Groningen, The Netherlands;
  5. eThe Recanati–Kaplan Centre, Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, Oxford University, Tubney OX13 5QL, United Kingdom;
  6. fDepartment of Global Ecology, Carnegie Institution for Science, Stanford, CA 94305;
  7. gSection for Ecoinformatics & Biodiversity, Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark

See allHide authors and affiliations

PNAS January 26, 2016 113 (4) 847-855; first published October 26, 2015; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1502545112
Elisabeth S. Bakker
aDepartment of Aquatic Ecology, Netherlands Institute of Ecology, 6708 PB Wageningen, The Netherlands;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: l.bakker@nioo.knaw.nl
Jacquelyn L. Gill
bSchool of Biology and Ecology, Climate Change Institute, University of Maine, Orono, ME 04469;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christopher N. Johnson
cSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Frans W. M. Vera
dCommunity and Conservation Ecology, Institute for Evolutionary Life Sciences, University of Groningen, 9700 CC Groningen, The Netherlands;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christopher J. Sandom
eThe Recanati–Kaplan Centre, Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, Oxford University, Tubney OX13 5QL, United Kingdom;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gregory P. Asner
fDepartment of Global Ecology, Carnegie Institution for Science, Stanford, CA 94305;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jens-Christian Svenning
gSection for Ecoinformatics & Biodiversity, Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  1. Edited by Christopher E. Doughty, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom, and accepted by the Editorial Board August 25, 2015 (received for review March 18, 2015)

  • Article
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Until recently in Earth history, very large herbivores (mammoths, ground sloths, diprotodons, and many others) occurred in most of the World’s terrestrial ecosystems, but the majority have gone extinct as part of the late-Quaternary extinctions. How has this large-scale removal of large herbivores affected landscape structure and ecosystem functioning? In this review, we combine paleo-data with information from modern exclosure experiments to assess the impact of large herbivores (and their disappearance) on woody species, landscape structure, and ecosystem functions. In modern landscapes characterized by intense herbivory, woody plants can persist by defending themselves or by association with defended species, can persist by growing in places that are physically inaccessible to herbivores, or can persist where high predator activity limits foraging by herbivores. At the landscape scale, different herbivore densities and assemblages may result in dynamic gradients in woody cover. The late-Quaternary extinctions were natural experiments in large-herbivore removal; the paleoecological record shows evidence of widespread changes in community composition and ecosystem structure and function, consistent with modern exclosure experiments. We propose a conceptual framework that describes the impact of large herbivores on woody plant abundance mediated by herbivore diversity and density, predicting that herbivore suppression of woody plants is strongest where herbivore diversity is high. We conclude that the decline of large herbivores induces major alterations in landscape structure and ecosystem functions.

  • browsers
  • ecosystem functions
  • herbivore diversity
  • landscape structure
  • megaherbivore

During the late Quaternary, megafaunas were drastically reduced in most regions (1, 2), representing the start of an ongoing trophic downgrading that has resulted in the loss of entire functional guilds and relaxation of top-down control in today’s ecosystems (3). A high proportion of the large herbivores that have survived into the Anthropocene (4) are now drastically reduced in range and abundance, rendering them functionally extinct, or have been replaced by livestock in much of their historic ranges (5⇓⇓–8). How has this loss of wild-living large herbivores affected landscape structure and ecosystem functioning?

Contemporary large herbivores have strong effects on the abundance of woody species, plant diversity, nutrient cycling, and other biota (9). Most likely, the ecological effects of preextinction herbivores were as large, possibly much more so given the great size and diversity of the lost large herbivore assemblages (10, 11). We hypothesize that Pleistocene herbivore assemblages, including large and megaherbivore browsers, would have greatly reduced woody plant abundance and altered species composition and landscape structure, if present at sufficient densities. We review the impact of large herbivores (≥45 kg in body weight) on woody vegetation, with a focus on megaherbivores (≥1,000 kg), and combine information from modern exclosure experiments with paleoecological records to estimate herbivore impacts and the consequences of their late-Quaternary declines.

Impact of Large-Herbivore Assemblages on Woody Plant Abundance

Much of our understanding of the impact of large herbivores on woody vegetation comes from Africa, where the Pleistocene herbivore assemblage has remained fairly intact, albeit at a much reduced distribution and abundance (8). Exclosure studies in African savannas reveal that species-rich herbivore assemblages may reduce woody species cover by 15–95% (Fig. 1A) (12⇓⇓⇓⇓–17). This broad range reflects factors such as body size and feeding mode (18) and soil fertility, topography, and hydrology (12, 19, 20).

Fig. 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

Modern exclosure experiments demonstrate strong impacts of large herbivore assemblages on woody plants. (A) In subtropical savanna, a diverse large herbivore assemblage (>5 kg) greatly reduces the abundance of woody plants outside the 302-ha exclosure (upper part of the picture) (12). The 3D infrared color indicates woody vegetation (in red, more intense red revealing more gross primary productivity) and herbaceous vegetation (in green–blue). Fire is controlled both inside and outside of the exclosure [Carnegie Airborne Observatory image (122), Kruger National Park, South Africa (12)]. (B) In temperate wetland grasslands, Heck cattle, Konik horses, and red deer (Cervus elaphus) break down the established elderberry woodland (Sambucus nigra) where it is not protected by fencing (123) (Oostvaardersplassen, The Netherlands). (C) In the boreal forest, after logging, white-tailed deer strongly influence the recruitment of woody species, with the exclosure dominated by palatable deciduous species whereas a spruce parkland developed under intense browsing (38) (Anticosti Island, Quebec, Canada). (D) Thorny shrubs (Prunus spinosa) function as natural exclosures, where they protect establishing palatable oak (Quercus sp.) from herbivory (35, 47) (Borkener Paradies, Germany). (E) In temperate sagebrush and grassland vegetation, American bison (Bison bison) and elk (Cervus elaphus) strongly suppress establishment of palatable trees (Populus sp.), which abundantly regenerate inside the exclosure (center of the picture) (Yellowstone National Park, United States). C courtesy of Bert Hidding.

African elephants (Loxodonta africana) have strong effects on woody plants due to their physical strength and height (21), causing disproportionate mortality of adult shrubs, by pulling them out (16), and trees, by pushing them over (22). Experiments with size-selective exclosures on savannas showed that elephants accounted for more than 80% of all woody plant loss across all plant height classes (22) whereas exclusion of elephants resulted in 42% more trees (23). Furthermore, elephants and all large herbivores debark trees and also feed on saplings and adult shrubs and trees without killing them, but with the effect of limiting woody plant growth and abundance (Fig. 1B) (17, 24). The removal of large browsers is thought to generally lead to a net increase in abundance of woody plants (20), but this effect depends in part on the compensatory response of smaller herbivores, which can have strong impacts, particularly on the recruitment of woody species (14, 16, 25⇓⇓–28).

Ground-dwelling browsers control woody plants mainly by increasing mortality in early life stages or suppressing growth to maturity by injuring plants or removing photosynthetic tissue. These impacts depend on plant height and the reach of the herbivore assemblage (29): Plants can be subject to a “browser trap” where they experience high impact while within the reach of browsers, but escape this trap by growing beyond the browse height. In species-rich herbivore communities, containing large as well as small browsers and a variety of feeding strategies, browsing impacts extend to a wider range of plant growth stages. Demographic bottlenecks imposed by browsing are therefore more difficult to escape (13, 14, 16). Temporary reductions in herbivore numbers allow trees to regenerate and grow into taller height classes, escaping herbivory by the time herbivore populations have recovered (17). Fruit and seed consumption might offset the demographic effects of browsing injury by seed dispersal, but the net effect of large herbivore assemblages on seed predation versus dispersal remains unclear (16).

The feeding mode of herbivores dictates their impact on woody plants. Browsers generally have direct inhibitory effects on growth and survival of woody plants. Grazers can suppress woody plants through trampling or occasional feeding, but can also promote recruitment and survival by reducing competition with herbaceous vegetation, thereby reducing rodent densities and reducing fire frequency by preventing fuel accumulation (15, 30, 31). Nevertheless, feeding mode impacts are complex and poorly understood because large herbivores are often mixed feeders (32).

Impact of Large Herbivores on Woody Plant Species Composition

By selecting palatable species, large herbivores affect woody species composition and promote the abundance of defended browsing-tolerant shrubs and trees (33, 34); furthermore, by creating a certain degree of vegetation openness, they promote the abundance of light-demanding woody species (35). Exclosure studies have documented these effects across a broad range of biomes. For example, in the North American boreal forest, moose (Alces americanus) and white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) selectively feed on hardwoods and the soft-needled balsam fir (Abies balsamea), but avoid the hard-needled white spruce (Picea glauca) (36), creating a spruce parkland, whereas hardwood species dominate in exclosures (Fig. 1C) (37, 38). In deciduous forest, deer browsing likewise reduces regeneration of palatable hardwood species, resulting in a more open habitat resembling oak savanna, with many light-demanding plant species (39). Browsers shift the species composition of African savanna from dominance by palatable shrubs to dominance by thorny acacias (14) and chemically defended or browsing-tolerant species (40).

Similar dynamics are seen in response to forest management. In European forest reserves, removal of domestic cattle and horses and culling of wild ungulates, such as deer and European bison (Bison bonasus), have resulted in the expansion of shade-tolerant tree species such as lime (Tilia spp.), hornbeam (Carpinus betulus) and beech (Fagus sylvatica), creating closed canopy forest and out-competing the shade-intolerant oak (Quercus spp.) (41⇓⇓–44).

Spatially Structured Landscapes

In landscapes characterized by intense herbivory, woody plants can persist by defending themselves, by associating with defended species, or by growing in areas that are physically inaccessible or that are risky for herbivores because of high activity of predators (34, 45). The resulting variation in the local intensity of herbivory can create spatial mosaics of herbaceous plants, shrubs, and trees.

Palatable woody species can regenerate in the vicinity of thorny or poisonous forbs and shrubs that protect them from browsing (Fig. 1D) (46⇓–48). Cyclic succession may occur as grasslands are colonized by thorny shrubs, from which palatable trees can grow, which outcompete the shrubs; with death of the trees, herbivory suppresses woody plant regeneration, returning the system to a grassland state. Because, spatially, patches are out-of-phase over time, this cyclic succession may result in a mosaic of grasslands, shrubs, single trees, and clumps of trees at the landscape scale (35).

Alternatively, palatable species may grow in areas that are physically inaccessible, such as steep slopes or between rocks and logs (49, 50). Spatial heterogeneity in landscape structure can also be induced by the presence of predators imposing a landscape of fear (51). As a response to perceived predation risk, often heterogeneously distributed across the landscape (52), herbivores may select less risky areas, creating spatial variability in herbivore pressure and thus varying impacts on vegetation (34, 53). Therefore, the presence of predators can allow local increases in the abundance of woody species, such as observed after the introduction of wolves in temperate woodlands followed by reduced browsing pressure from deer and locally enhanced recruitment of palatable shrubs and trees (45, 54⇓–56), resembling that observed in exclosures (Fig. 1E).

Because extremely large size confers a high degree of invulnerability to predation (21), adult megaherbivores may prefer areas with a higher density of trees, because of greater forage availability, whereas smaller herbivores often prefer open grassland due to higher risk of ambush by predators in the woodland (53). As a result, assemblages of different-sized herbivores will exert spatially heterogeneous grazing and browsing pressure across the landscape, which affects woody plant abundance and species composition (34).

How Did Extinct Late Pleistocene Megaherbivores Affect Woody Plants?

The interpretation of extinct megaherbivore impact relies on the comparison with the ecology of modern megaherbivores. There are 8 extant megaherbivores, from three orders (Cetartiodactyla, Perissodactyla, Proboscidea), and 35 extinct megaherbivores from the Late Pleistocene, from seven orders (Cetartiodactyla, Cingulata, Diprotodontia, Notoungulata, Perissodactyla, Pilosa, and Proboscidea) (1). An open question is whether extinct megaherbivores would have had similar effects on woody plants as their contemporary closest relatives. The nine extinct Late Pleistocene proboscideans had divergent feeding strategies, from the predominantly grazing woolly mammoth (Mammuthus primigenius) to the browsing American mastodon (Mammut americanum) (57⇓–59), the latter being supposedly most similar in feeding ecology to present-day browsing black rhinoceros (Diceros bicornis) or moose (A. americanus) (60, 61). Whereas some niche separation was evident (57, 61, 62), recent multiproxy data on megaherbivore paleodiets suggests that many were mixed feeders that adapted their diets to local plant availability (62⇓–64). Similarly, extant megaherbivores are mostly mixed feeders with a few grazing specialists like the hippopotamus (Hippopotamus amphibius) and white rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum) (65). Further work comparing the guild structures of megaherbivores both in the present and the Late Pleistocene would provide better understanding of the potential impact of these species on vegetation structure.

Extinct megaherbivores would have impacted woody plants through consumption, but also by other physical impacts. Wear patterns on the teeth and tusks of mastodons have been interpreted as indication of their bark stripping behavior (60, 66), which would undoubtedly have killed many trees and shrubs as observed with contemporary African elephants (59). Selective feeding of mastodons on spruce may have contributed to the spruce–pine transition in the US Great Lakes region in the Late Pleistocene (57). Furthermore, many extinct and extant megaherbivores are avid fruit consumers and thus contributed strongly to the abundance of woody plants through dispersal of fruits, in particular those that bear the megafaunal dispersal syndrome (67, 68).

The paleoecological record provides evidence of geomorphological engineering by mammoths, presumably digging for water and mineral-rich sediments, trail formation, and trampling, similar to what elephants do today (69). Combined geo-engineering and enhanced nutrient cycling by extinct megaherbivores would have significantly contributed to the maintenance of open habitats, dominated by fast growing palatable herbaceous vegetation over slower growing woody species (59, 70). The impact of Pleistocene herbivore assemblages may have been amplified by lower atmospheric CO2 concentrations during glacial episodes. Low CO2 probably limited woody plant growth, impeding recovery from herbivory and increasing total impact of herbivores (71, 72).

Evidence of Large-Herbivore Impact from the Paleoecological Record

The extinction and density reductions of Late Pleistocene large herbivores represent a grand removal experiment (1). We assess this experiment by comparing landscape structure and vegetation composition in the presence and absence of Late Pleistocene diverse large-herbivore faunas over time, under more or less similar climatic conditions. Similarities between patterns of woody plant response to large herbivore removal in the paleoecological record and modern exclosure experiments are indicated in Table 1.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Examples of the impact of large herbivores on woody plants, species composition, and landscape structure as found in contemporary (exclosure) studies and from the paleoecological record

The initial ecological adjustment of plant communities to release of browsing and grazing after megafauna extinctions should be completed within relatively short periods of decades or centuries and can thus seem rapid in paleoecological records spanning thousands of years. After that, long-term changes, such as through reduced seed dispersal, would continue to influence plant species distributions up until present times (67). The ecological consequences of megafaunal extinctions have received little study, which is in part due to limitations inherent to comparing a discontinuous vertebrate bone record with a vegetation record constructed primarily from lake sediment records that are typically not associated with megafaunal fossils. Recently, the use of Sporormiella and other coprophilous fungi has shown promise for determining the abundance of large herbivores and testing their impact on vegetation in the paleoecological record. Sporormiella spores are preserved in lakes and mires along with pollen and so can be used to provide the ecological context of functional large herbivore collapse (73⇓⇓⇓–77).

Several pollen records from eastern North America show an increase in hardwood deciduous taxa immediately after the Sporormiella-indicated megafaunal decline, including increases in palatable and shade-tolerant woody species (74, 75, 78), and a more closed vegetation, consistent with release from browsing pressure. The continued postextinction presence of light-demanding oak (Quercus alba) indicates that the surviving large herbivores could have maintained a certain degree of openness of the landscape (42), which has also been ascribed to the effect of dry climate and anthropogenic fires (79). Similarly, the now-endangered grass balds of the southern Appalachian mountains are hypothesized to be remnants of past herbivory (later maintained by Native American burning) (80).

Pollen and Sporormiella records from northeastern Australia (76) during the last glaciation record a decline of large herbivores around 40,000 years ago, followed by a shift from a mixed and relatively open vegetation, consisting of elements of angiosperm and gymnosperm rainforest along with sclerophyll species, to pure sclerophyllous vegetation, in apparent absence of major climate change. This vegetation shift was evidently due to a combination of relaxed herbivory pressure and increased fire that closely followed the onset of herbivore decline (76).

Evidence from fossil beetles indicates that regions of European vegetation were more open in the Last Interglacial and supported more dung beetles, than after the extinctions, in the preagricultural Holocene. Some wood-pasture and moderate open vegetation remained in the early Holocene, indicating a role for the remaining wild herbivores (81⇓⇓–84).

In northeastern Siberia, the productive pastures of the mammoth steppe disappeared after the removal of the high densities of large herbivores that may have maintained this ecosystem and was replaced by mossy forests and tundras (85, 86). The modern climate of this area is inside the mammoth steppe climatic envelope, suggesting that the removal of high densities of large herbivores determined the biome transition from pasture to tundra with woody plants (70). Modern experiments show that herbivores can inhibit shrub encroachment on tundra with climate warming, but this effect is site-dependent (87, 88).

The presence and loss of megafauna might also have long-term impacts on biotic communities that are still ongoing and witnessed by current plant traits that coevolved with megafauna, which may be less adaptive in modern landscapes (e.g., ecological anachronisms) (89). For example, woody species that are adapted to megafauna dispersal (67) may still be experiencing slow declines (90), depending on whether megafauna have been substituted by smaller wild animals, domestic livestock, or humans. Similarly, coevolution with the recently exterminated moa and elephant birds, flightless ratite birds 20–500 kg (91), can explain some remarkable idiosyncrasies of New Zealand and Madagascar vegetation, especially the high representation of “wire plants,” a growth form likely to have reduced the foraging efficiency of moa, thus providing protection from browsing (92⇓–94). Browsing by moa might also have created canopy gaps that sustained high diversity of light-loving herbs and regeneration of light-demanded conifer seedlings (95).

In summary, modern studies and paleo-studies indicate that removal of large herbivores is followed by increased abundance of woody plants and altered vegetation composition and structure toward less open landscapes, with more shade-tolerant and palatable species (Table 1).

Under What Conditions Would Pleistocene Large Herbivore Assemblages Have Had Most Impact?

Based on the evidence from modern exclosure studies and the paleoecological record, we expect that the Late Pleistocene large herbivore assemblages would have had at least equal, but probably stronger impacts on woody plant abundance than most contemporary assemblages, due to their broader range of body sizes and higher species-richness imposing more complete inhibition of woody plant life stages (Fig. 2). However, a central question that needs to be answered is under what conditions were herbivore densities high enough to have strong impacts on landscape structure.

Fig. 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 2.

Hypothesized impact of large herbivore removal on landscape structure, proportion of light-demanding woody species, and fire frequency. All of these landscapes represent sites where the climate and soil allow trees to dominate. The dotted and dashed lines in A–C correspond to the three herbivore assemblages indicated on the x axis of D. The three herbivore combinations represent a series of herbivore diversity indicating simplification from the full Pleistocene fauna to the common late Holocene condition. We predict that removal of megaherbivores would result in (A) increased woody plant abundance, (B) reduced percentage of light-demanding species, and (C) increased fire frequency, depending on the densities of the remaining wild herbivores. (D) The resulting landscape structure. In essence, over time, the landscape developed in many areas from open in the Late Pleistocene, with high densities of diverse herbivore assemblages (D, Top Right), to defaunated wild herbivore communities controlled at low densities in the Holocene, resulting in a wooded landscape (D, Bottom Left), unless livestock is introduced, which could take over the role of native extinct grazers, resulting in a wood pasture (D, Middle). In the wood pasture, palatable light-demanding trees can regenerate within the protection of light-demanding thorny shrubs. When browsers are not managed, they can reach high densities, resulting in an open landscape with unpalatable, light-demanding trees (D, Top Left).

Landscape geomorphology plays an important role in sustaining particularly megaherbivore densities because these animals often tend to avoid steep slopes. Therefore, high concentrations of large herbivores are more often found in a plains habitat than in steep terrain, both in modern times and in the Pleistocene, resulting in higher impacts on woody plants and greater openness on plains (96, 97). The effect of terrain may be amplified by hydrology because both modern and Pleistocene large and megaherbivores frequently visit water bodies, resulting in enhanced local landscape openness around fresh water (98). Modern large herbivore communities reach their highest densities and diversities at sites of high soil fertility, due to high food quantity and quality (99, 100). Plant traits confirm this pattern because woody species in fertile areas defend themselves heavily with thorns or tolerate herbivory through rapid growth, indicating adaptations to high browsing pressure (35, 47, 101, 102). Similarly, during the Last Interglacial, open vegetation was found in European lowlands whereas less fertile uplands were more wooded, suggesting a larger herbivore impact in fertile habitats (Table 1) (82).

Although the places in the landscape attracting the highest densities of large herbivores can be identified, the absolute densities and the fluctuations therein of Pleistocene large herbivore assemblages remain difficult to determine. In the Late Pleistocene, communities of large predators were also more diverse than today, and they probably limited the densities or habitat use of large herbivores (103). Despite this predator diversity, Late Pleistocene densities of large herbivores at the mammoth steppe in Alaska and northeastern Siberia have been estimated at 88 and 105 kg⋅ha−1, respectively, during the Last Glacial (61, 85). In the Last Interglacial in Great Britain, densities were estimated at ≥2.5 large ungulates per hectare in over half of the studied sites (81), which amounts to ≥125 kg⋅ha−1 (at a mean ungulate weight of 50 kg). These densities of Pleistocene large herbivores are in the range of the African game reserves (9–191 kg⋅ha−1 [in Pachzelt et al. (104)] and imply strong impacts on woody plants. They also suggest that at least some landscapes were kept open by herbivory, given that to allow regeneration of modern temperate closed-canopy forests herbivore densities (deer) have to be very low (<3.5 kg⋅ha−1) and that at densities of >25 kg⋅ha−1 the forest is transformed toward oak savanna or wood-pasture (39). The temperate wood–pastures, in turn, respond fundamentally differently to herbivory than closed-canopy forests because here trees can persist by regeneration within light-demanding thorny shrubs, also in the presence of high densities of large ungulates at fertile soils (110–187 kg⋅ha−1) (35, 47, 105, 106). More estimates of densities of Pleistocene herbivores would greatly advance our understanding of their ecological impacts.

Perspectives for Future Research

The paleoecological record provides several examples that support the hypothesis that the Quaternary extinctions of megaherbivores rapidly changed vegetation composition and structure in different regions, but further tests are needed to confirm the generality of these findings. We propose the following approaches to provide such evidence.

Geographically Spread Paleoecological Records.

More detailed, chronological records of herbivore abundance and vegetation change from the Late Pleistocene-to-Holocene transition are needed to determine whether herbivore decline preceded vegetation change or not. Sampling more lake and peatland cores for both pollen and Sporormiella would yield such data to allow generalization of the few currently available studies (75, 76), taking into account improvements in the calibration of Sporormiella (77). Furthermore, comparisons of landscape openness and herbivore abundance before and after megafaunal extinctions under similar climatic conditions yields evidence of the impact of large herbivores [e.g., Sandom et al. (81)]. In both cases, the use of multiple proxies for herbivore density and abundance of woody plants would be valuable (Table 2) because each proxy will have its own limitations. Proxies need to be calibrated with modern data. Geographical spread of the sample locations across continents would allow for further generalization of herbivore impact across taxonomically very different faunas. These samples should be distributed over gradients of climate, fertility, and topography to assess the abiotic factors governing the impact of large herbivores on vegetation.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Characteristics of a herbivore-influenced landscape that can be found in the paleoecological record

Large-Scale Modeling.

Modeling climate envelopes in which biomes occur, when regulated by climate conditions alone, allows identification under what conditions large herbivore impacts would potentially make a strong difference. Especially where alternative vegetation states are climatically possible, this approach generates testable hypotheses about the impact of herbivores, such as in the case of the mammoth steppe and savannas (85, 107). These hypotheses could subsequently be addressed either by adding herbivores in the model, using literature data or performing experiments. Similarly, the present-day landscape structure and woody species composition can be linked to abundance and species richness of large herbivore assemblages over large biogeographical areas [see, for instance, Greve et al. (108)]. This relationship will yield baseline data that can be applied to Late Pleistocene conditions to predict what the landscape structure was, given estimates of large herbivore abundances. Furthermore, mechanistic models can be used to predict the interaction between herbivore communities and vegetation. Recently, large-scale coupling of physiologically based vegetation and herbivore population models has been applied to predict herbivore population dynamics at continental scales (104). This approach could also be used to predict herbivore impact on the vegetation.

Experiments.

Because woody species have long generation times and spatial heterogeneity in landscape structure is a key feature of wooded habitats under herbivory, small-scale and short-term exclosures may capture only part of the resulting woody plant dynamics at the landscape scale. Therefore, long-term and large-scale experiments—including unintentional experiments—are extremely valuable to determine large herbivore impact on woody plants (12). These conditions can be found, for instance, at the Finnish–Russian border [which had markedly different reindeer densities across the border (109)], in ongoing and future rewilding projects (110), and in forest reserves where large herbivores were removed to protect tree regeneration (42). In this respect, the forestry literature may offer valuable information about the regeneration ecology, competitive ability, and herbivore tolerance of woody species (42, 44). Such long-term fencing studies are also very useful to test proxies for herbivore and woody species abundance in an experimental setting (111).

Study of Contemporary Large Herbivore-to-Megaherbivore Impacts.

Studies on current megaherbivore impacts are extremely valuable because these animals are the only proxies that we have for extinct megafauna. Better insight into the behavior, habitat preferences, and whole ecosystem functions of large herbivores is required (112) to predict their impact on landscape structure. Because most are experiencing alarming declines, some may already be too rare to study whereas, for several species, the wider impacts of their ecosystem engineering effects only very recently have started to become clear (8, 113, 114).

Conclusions

Given the ecological importance of modern large herbivores, we see the end-Pleistocene reduction in diversity and biomass of such animals as being a significant event in global ecology. Growing evidence supports the hypothesis that the loss of large herbivores strongly affected woody plants and triggered regime shifts across the World’s biomes. Linking large herbivores and their impact on vegetation at Quaternary timescales is an enormous task, but an interdisciplinary approach that combines proxy records and modeling grounded by modern studies will help to link pattern and process in the paleoecological record (Table 2). Modern large herbivores are now among some of the most threatened species, facing the combined threats of anthropogenic land use and climate change (8). The ecological consequences of the end-Pleistocene extinctions are therefore relevant not only to understanding the vegetation changes of the early Holocene, but also to the management of ecosystems in the Anthropocene. In this respect, modern and paleoecological analyses have much to contribute to one another. Testing hypotheses to explain the variation in effects of large herbivores and their decline on woody plants and landscape structure should be a priority for future work. This hypothesis testing should integrate the effects of fire and herbivory across large abiotic and geographical gradients to obtain a better understanding of herbivore regulation of woody plants and the importance of herbivore body size, density, and diversity.

Acknowledgments

We thank the people who set up and maintain the exclosure in Yellowstone National Park that we photographed as illustration in Fig. 1E. J.-C.S. was supported by European Research Council Grant ERC-2012-StG-310886-HISTFUNC. We additionally consider this article a contribution to the Danish National Research Foundation Niels Bohr Professorship Project Aarhus University Research on the Anthropocene. This manuscript is number 5926 from the Netherlands Institute of Ecology.

Footnotes

  • ↵1To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: l.bakker{at}nioo.knaw.nl.
  • Author contributions: E.S.B., J.L.G., C.N.J., F.W.M.V., C.J.S., G.P.A., and J.-C.S. wrote the paper.

  • The authors declare no conflict of interest.

  • This article is a PNAS Direct Submission. C.E.D. is a guest editor invited by the Editorial Board.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Sandom C,
    2. Faurby S,
    3. Sandel B,
    4. Svenning JC
    (2014) Global late Quaternary megafauna extinctions linked to humans, not climate change. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 281(1787):20133254
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Koch PL,
    2. Barnosky AD
    (2006) Late quaternary extinctions: State of the debate. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 37:215–250
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  3. ↵
    1. Estes JA, et al.
    (2011) Trophic downgrading of planet Earth. Science 333(6040):301–306
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    1. Zalasiewicz J, et al.
    (2015) When did the Anthropocene begin? A mid-twentieth century boundary level is stratigraphically optimal. Quat Int doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2014.11.045, in press
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  5. ↵
    1. McCauley DJ, et al.
    (2015) Marine defaunation: Animal loss in the global ocean. Science 347(6219):1255641
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Young HS, et al.
    (2013) Effects of mammalian herbivore declines on plant communities: Observations and experiments in an African savanna. J Ecol 101(4):1030–1041
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Dirzo R, et al.
    (2014) Defaunation in the Anthropocene. Science 345(6195):401–406
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Ripple WJ, et al.
    (2015) Collapse of the world’s largest herbivores. Sci Adv 1(4):e1400103:1–12
    .
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    1. Danell K,
    2. Bergström R,
    3. Duncan P,
    4. Pastor J
    , eds (2006) Large Herbivore Ecology, Ecosystem Dynamics and Conservation (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, UK)
    .
  10. ↵
    1. Johnson CN
    (2009) Ecological consequences of Late Quaternary extinctions of megafauna. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 276(1667):2509–2519
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    1. Gill JL
    (2014) Ecological impacts of the late Quaternary megaherbivore extinctions. New Phytol 201(4):1163–1169
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Asner GP, et al.
    (2009) Large-scale impacts of herbivores on the structural diversity of African savannas. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106(12):4947–4952
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. ↵
    1. Sankaran M,
    2. Augustine DJ,
    3. Ratnam J
    (2013) Native ungulates of diverse body sizes collectively regulate long-term woody plant demography and structure of a semi-arid savanna. J Ecol 101(6):1389–1399
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  14. ↵
    1. Augustine DJ,
    2. McNaughton SJ
    (2004) Regulation of shrub dynamics by native browsing ungulates on East African rangeland. J Appl Ecol 41(1):45–58
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  15. ↵
    1. Keesing F,
    2. Young TP
    (2014) Cascading consequences of the loss of large mammals in an African savanna. Bioscience 64(6):487–495
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. ↵
    1. Pringle RM, et al.
    (2014) Low functional redundancy among mammalian browsers in regulating an encroaching shrub (Solanum campylacanthum) in African savannah. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 281(1785):20140390
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    1. Staver AC,
    2. Bond WJ
    (2014) Is there a ‘browse trap’? Dynamics of herbivore impacts on trees and grasses in an African savanna. J Ecol 102(3):595–602
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  18. ↵
    1. Owen-Smith N
    (1989) Megafaunal extinctions: The conservation message from 11,000 years B.p. Conserv Biol 3(4):405–412
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Guldemond R,
    2. Van Aarde R
    (2008) A meta-analysis of the impact of African elephants on savanna vegetation. J Wildl Manage 72(4):892–899
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  20. ↵
    1. Maron JL,
    2. Crone E
    (2006) Herbivory: Effects on plant abundance, distribution and population growth. Proc Biol Sci 273(1601):2575–2584
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. ↵
    1. Owen-Smith RN
    (1988) Megaherbivores: The Influence of Very Large Body Size on Ecology (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, UK)
    .
  22. ↵
    1. Asner GP,
    2. Levick SR
    (2012) Landscape-scale effects of herbivores on treefall in African savannas. Ecol Lett 15(11):1211–1217
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Kimuyu DM,
    2. Sensenig RL,
    3. Riginos C,
    4. Veblen KE,
    5. Young TP
    (2014) Native and domestic browsers and grazers reduce fuels, fire temperatures, and acacia ant mortality in an African savanna. Ecol Appl 24(4):741–749
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Kuiters AT,
    2. van der Sluijs LAM,
    3. Wytema GA
    (2006) Selective bark-stripping of beech, Fagus sylvatica, by free-ranging horses. For Ecol Manage 222(1–3):1–8
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  25. ↵
    1. Prins HHT,
    2. Van der Jeugd HP
    (1993) Herbivore population crashes and woodland structure in East Africa. J Ecol 81(2):305–314
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  26. ↵
    1. O’Kane CAJ,
    2. Duffy KJ,
    3. Page BR,
    4. Macdonald DW
    (2011) Are the long-term effects of mesobrowsers on woodland dynamics substitutive or additive to those of elephants? Acta Oecol 37(5):393–398
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  27. ↵
    1. Moe SR,
    2. Rutina LP,
    3. Hytteborn H,
    4. du Toit JT
    (2009) What controls woodland regeneration after elephants have killed the big trees? J Appl Ecol 46(1):223–230
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  28. ↵
    1. Keesing F
    (2000) Cryptic consumers and the ecology of an African Savanna. Bioscience 50(6):205–215
    .
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  29. ↵
    1. du Toit JT
    (1990) Feeding height stratification among African browsing ruminants. Afr Ecol 28(1):55–61
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  30. ↵
    1. Goheen JR,
    2. Palmer TM,
    3. Keesing F,
    4. Riginos C,
    5. Young TP
    (2010) Large herbivores facilitate savanna tree establishment via diverse and indirect pathways. J Anim Ecol 79(2):372–382
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. ↵
    1. Maclean JE,
    2. Goheen JR,
    3. Doak DF,
    4. Palmer TM,
    5. Young TP
    (2011) Cryptic herbivores mediate the strength and form of ungulate impacts on a long-lived savanna tree. Ecology 92(8):1626–1636
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. ↵
    1. Codron D, et al.
    (2007) Diets of savanna ungulates from stable carbon isotope composition of faeces. J Zool (Lond) 273(1):21–29
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  33. ↵
    1. Danell K,
    2. Bergström R,
    3. Duncan P,
    4. Pastor J
    1. Gill R
    (2006) The influence of large herbivores on tree recruitment and forest dynamics. Large Herbivore Ecology, Ecosystem Dynamics and Conservation, eds Danell K, Bergström R, Duncan P, Pastor J (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, UK), pp 170–202
    .
  34. ↵
    1. Ford AT, et al.
    (2014) Large carnivores make savanna tree communities less thorny. Science 346(6207):346–349
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  35. ↵
    1. Danell K,
    2. Bergström R,
    3. Duncan P,
    4. Pastor J
    1. Vera FWM,
    2. Bakker ES,
    3. Olff H
    (2006) Large herbivores: Missing partners of western European light-demanding tree and shrub species? Large Herbivore Ecology, Ecosystem Dynamics and Conservation, eds Danell K, Bergström R, Duncan P, Pastor J (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, UK), pp 203–231
    .
  36. ↵
    1. Pastor J,
    2. Dewey B,
    3. Naiman RJ,
    4. McInnes PF,
    5. Cohen Y
    (1993) Moose browsing and soil fertility in the boreal forest of Isle Royale National Park. Ecology 74(2):467–480
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  37. ↵
    1. McInnes PF,
    2. Naiman RJ,
    3. Pastor J,
    4. Cohen Y
    (1992) Effects of moose browsing on vegetation and litter of the boreal forest, Isle Royale, Michigan, USA. Ecology 73(6):2059–2075
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  38. ↵
    1. Hidding B,
    2. Tremblay JP,
    3. Côté SD
    (2013) A large herbivore triggers alternative successional trajectories in the boreal forest. Ecology 94(12):2852–2860
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. ↵
    1. Tanentzap AJ, et al.
    (2011) Seeing the forest for the deer: Do reductions in deer-disturbance lead to forest recovery? Biol Conserv 144(1):376–382
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  40. ↵
    1. Wigley BJ,
    2. Fritz H,
    3. Coetsee C,
    4. Bond WJ
    (2014) Herbivores shape woody plant communities in the Kruger National Park: Lessons from three long-term exclosures. Koedoe 56(1):1–12
    .
    OpenUrl
  41. ↵
    1. Bernadzki E,
    2. Bolibok L,
    3. Brzeziecki B,
    4. Zajaczkowski J,
    5. Zybura H
    (1998) Compositional dynamics of natural forests in the Bialowieza National Park, northeastern Poland. J Veg Sci 9(2):229–238
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  42. ↵
    1. Vera FWM
    (2000) Grazing Ecology and Forest History (CAB International, Wallingford, UK)
    .
  43. ↵
    1. Jedrzejewska B,
    2. Jedrzejewski W,
    3. Bunevich AN,
    4. Milkowski L,
    5. Krasinski ZA
    (1997) Factors shaping population densities and increase rates of ungulates in Bialowieza Primeval Forest (Poland and Belarus) in the 19th and 20th centuries. Acta Theriol (Warsz) 42(4):399–451
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  44. ↵
    1. Pigott D
    (2012) Lime-Trees and Basswoods: A Biological Monograph of the Genus Tilia (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, UK)
    .
  45. ↵
    1. Kuijper DPJ, et al.
    (2013) Landscape of fear in Europe: Wolves affect spatial patterns of ungulate browsing in Bialowieza Primeval Forest, Poland. Ecography 36(12):1263–1275
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  46. ↵
    1. Olff H, et al.
    (1999) Shifting mosaics in grazed woodlands driven by the alternation of plant facilitation and competition. Plant Biol 1(2):127–137
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  47. ↵
    1. Bakker ES, et al.
    (2004) Ecological anachronisms in the recruitment of temperate light-demanding tree species in wooded pastures. J Appl Ecol 41(3):571–582
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  48. ↵
    1. Smit C,
    2. Vandenberghe C,
    3. den Ouden J,
    4. Müller-Schärer H
    (2007) Nurse plants, tree saplings and grazing pressure: Changes in facilitation along a biotic environmental gradient. Oecologia 152(2):265–273
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  49. ↵
    1. Milchunas DG,
    2. Noy-Meir I
    (2002) Grazing refuges, external avoidance of herbivory and plant diversity. Oikos 99(1):113–130
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  50. ↵
    1. Smit C,
    2. Kuijper DPJ,
    3. Prentice D,
    4. Wassen MJ,
    5. Cromsigt J
    (2012) Coarse woody debris facilitates oak recruitment in Bialowieza Primeval Forest, Poland. For Ecol Manage 284:133–141
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  51. ↵
    1. Lima SL,
    2. Dill L
    (1990) Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: A review and prospectus. Can Zool 68(4):619–640
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  52. ↵
    1. Kauffman MJ, et al.
    (2007) Landscape heterogeneity shapes predation in a newly restored predator-prey system. Ecol Lett 10(8):690–700
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  53. ↵
    1. Riginos C,
    2. Grace JB
    (2008) Savanna tree density, herbivores, and the herbaceous community: Bottom-up vs. top-down effects. Ecology 89(8):2228–2238
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  54. ↵
    1. Laundre JW,
    2. Hernandez L,
    3. Altendorf KB
    (2001) Wolves, elk, and bison: Re-establishing the “landscape of fear” in Yellowstone National Park, USA. Can Zool 79(8):1401–1409
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  55. ↵
    1. Painter LE,
    2. Beschta RL,
    3. Larsen EJ,
    4. Ripple WJ
    (2015) Recovering aspen follow changing elk dynamics in Yellowstone: Evidence of a trophic cascade? Ecology 96(1):252–263
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  56. ↵
    1. Callan R,
    2. Nibbelink NP,
    3. Rooney TP,
    4. Wiedenhoeft JE,
    5. Wydeven AP
    (2013) Recolonizing wolves trigger a trophic cascade in Wisconsin (USA). J Ecol 101(4):837–845
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  57. ↵
    1. Metcalfe JZ,
    2. Longstaffe FJ,
    3. Hodgins G
    (2013) Proboscideans and paleoenvironments of the Pleistocene Great Lakes: Landscape, vegetation, and stable isotopes. Quat Sci Rev 76:102–113
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  58. ↵
    1. Teale CL,
    2. Miller NG
    (2012) Mastodon herbivory in mid-latitude late-Pleistocene boreal forests of eastern North America. Quat Res 78(1):72–81
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  59. ↵
    1. Owen-Smith N
    (1987) Pleistocene extinctions: The pivotal role of megaherbivores. Paleobiology 13(3):351–362
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract
  60. ↵
    1. Green JL,
    2. Semprebon GM,
    3. Solounias N
    (2005) Reconstructing the palaeodiet of Florida Mammut americanum via low-magnification stereomicroscopy. Palaeogeogr Palaeocl 223(1-2):34–48
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  61. ↵
    1. Mann DH,
    2. Groves P,
    3. Kunz ML,
    4. Reanier RE,
    5. Gaglioti BV
    (2013) Ice-age megafauna in Arctic Alaska: Extinction, invasion, survival. Quat Sci Rev 70:91–108
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  62. ↵
    1. Franca LD, et al.
    (2015) Review of feeding ecology data of Late Pleistocene mammalian herbivores from South America and discussions on niche differentiation. Earth Sci Rev 140:158–165
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  63. ↵
    1. Willerslev E, et al.
    (2014) Fifty thousand years of Arctic vegetation and megafaunal diet. Nature 506(7486):47–51
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  64. ↵
    1. van Asperen EN,
    2. Kahlke RD
    (2015) Dietary variation and overlap in Central and Northwest European Stephanorhinus kirchbergensis and S. hemitoechus (Rhinocerotidae, Mammalia) influenced by habitat diversity. Quat Sci Rev 107:47–61
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  65. ↵
    1. Kissling WD, et al.
    (2014) Establishing macroecological trait datasets: Digitalization, extrapolation, and validation of diet preferences in terrestrial mammals worldwide. Ecol Evol 4(14):2913–2930
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  66. ↵
    1. Lister A,
    2. Bahn P
    (2009) Mammoths: Giants of the Ice Age (Univ of California Press, Oakland, CA)
    .
  67. ↵
    1. Janzen DH,
    2. Martin PS
    (1982) Neotropical anachronisms: The fruits the gomphotheres ate. Science 215(4528):19–27
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  68. ↵
    1. Campos-Arceiz A,
    2. Blake S
    (2011) Megagardeners of the forest: The role of elephants in seed dispersal. Acta Oecol 37(6):542–553
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  69. ↵
    1. Haynes G
    (2012) Elephants (and extinct relatives) as earth-movers and ecosystem engineers. Geomorphology 157:99–107
    .
    OpenUrl
  70. ↵
    1. Zimov SA, et al.
    (1995) Steppe-tundra transition: A herbivore-driven biome shift at the end of the pleistocene. Am Nat 146(5):765–794
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  71. ↵
    1. Kgope BS,
    2. Bond WJ,
    3. Midgley GF
    (2010) Growth responses of African savanna trees implicate atmospheric CO2 as a driver of past and current changes in savanna tree cover. Austral Ecol 35(4):451–463
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  72. ↵
    1. Ward JK, et al.
    (2005) Carbon starvation in glacial trees recovered from the La Brea tar pits, southern California. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102(3):690–694
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  73. ↵
    1. Burney DA,
    2. Robinson GS,
    3. Burney LP
    (2003) Sporormiella and the late Holocene extinctions in Madagascar. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100(19):10800–10805
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  74. ↵
    1. Robinson GS,
    2. Burney LP,
    3. Burney DA
    (2005) Landscape paleoecology and megafaunal extinction in southeastern New York state. Ecol Monogr 75(3):295–315
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  75. ↵
    1. Gill JL,
    2. Williams JW,
    3. Jackson ST,
    4. Lininger KB,
    5. Robinson GS
    (2009) Pleistocene megafaunal collapse, novel plant communities, and enhanced fire regimes in North America. Science 326(5956):1100–1103
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  76. ↵
    1. Rule S, et al.
    (2012) The aftermath of megafaunal extinction: Ecosystem transformation in Pleistocene Australia. Science 335(6075):1483–1486
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  77. ↵
    1. Johnson CN, et al.
    (2015) Using dung fungi to interpret decline and extinction of megaherbivores: problems and solutions. Quat Sci Rev 110:107–113
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  78. ↵
    1. Gill JL,
    2. Williams JW,
    3. Jackson ST,
    4. Donnelly JP,
    5. Schellinger GC
    (2012) Climatic and megaherbivory controls on late-glacial vegetation dynamics: A new, high-resolution, multi-proxy record from Silver Lake, Ohio. Quat Sci Rev 34:66–80
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  79. ↵
    1. Faison EK,
    2. Foster DR,
    3. Oswald WW,
    4. Hansen BCS,
    5. Doughty E
    (2006) Early holocene openlands in southern New England. Ecology 87(10):2537–2547
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  80. ↵
    1. Weigl PD,
    2. Knowles TW
    (2014) Temperate mountain grasslands: A climate-herbivore hypothesis for origins and persistence. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 89(2):466–476
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  81. ↵
    1. Sandom CJ,
    2. Ejrnæs R,
    3. Hansen MDD,
    4. Svenning JC
    (2014) High herbivore density associated with vegetation diversity in interglacial ecosystems. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111(11):4162–4167
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  82. ↵
    1. Svenning J-C
    (2002) A review of natural vegetation openness in north-western Europe. Biol Conserv 104(2):133–148
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  83. ↵
    1. Alexander K
    (2005) Wood decay, insects, palaeoecology, and woodland conservation policy and practice: Breaking the halter. Antenna 29:171–178
    .
    OpenUrl
  84. ↵
    1. Whitehouse NJ,
    2. Smith D
    (2010) How fragmented was the British Holocene wildwood? Perspectives on the “Vera” grazing debate from the fossil beetle record. Quat Sci Rev 29(3-4):539–553
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  85. ↵
    1. Zimov SA,
    2. Zimov NS,
    3. Tikhonov AN,
    4. Chapin FS
    (2012) Mammoth steppe: A high-productivity phenomenon. Quat Sci Rev 57:26–45
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  86. ↵
    1. Kienast F, et al.
    (2011) Paleontological records indicate the occurrence of open woodlands in a dry inland climate at the present-day Arctic coast in western Beringia during the Last Interglacial. Quat Sci Rev 30(17-18):2134–2159
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  87. ↵
    1. Olofsson J, et al.
    (2009) Herbivores inhibit climate-driven shrub expansion on the tundra. Glob Change Biol 15(11):2681–2693
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  88. ↵
    1. Post E,
    2. Pedersen C
    (2008) Opposing plant community responses to warming with and without herbivores. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105(34):12353–12358
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  89. ↵
    1. Barlow C
    (2002) The Ghosts of Evolution: Nonsensical Fruit, Missing Partners, and Other Ecological Anachronisms (Basic Books, New York)
    .
  90. ↵
    1. Zaya DN,
    2. Howe HF
    (2009) The anomalous Kentucky coffeetree: Megafaunal fruit sinking to extinction? Oecologia 161(2):221–226
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  91. ↵
    1. Perry GLW,
    2. Wheeler AB,
    3. Wood JR,
    4. Wilmshurst JM
    (2014) A high-precision chronology for the rapid extinction of New Zealand moa (Aves, Dinornithiformes). Quat Sci Rev 105:126–135
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  92. ↵
    1. Bond WJ,
    2. Lee WG,
    3. Craine JM
    (2004) Plant structural defences against browsing birds: A legacy of New Zealand’s extinct moas. Oikos 104(3):500–508
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  93. ↵
    1. Wilson JB,
    2. Lee WG
    (2012) Is New Zealand vegetation really ‘problematic’? Dansereau’s puzzles revisited. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 87(2):367–389
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  94. ↵
    1. Bond WJ,
    2. Silander JA
    (2007) Springs and wire plants: Anachronistic defences against Madagascar’s extinct elephant birds. Proc Biol Sci 274(1621):1985–1992
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  95. ↵
    1. Lee WG,
    2. Wood JR,
    3. Rogers GM
    (2010) Legacy of avian-dominated plant–herbivore systems in New Zealand. New Zeal Ecol 34(1):28–47
    .
    OpenUrl
  96. ↵
    1. Colgan MS,
    2. Asner GP,
    3. Levick SR,
    4. Martin RE,
    5. Chadwick OA
    (2012) Topo-edaphic controls over woody plant biomass in South African savannas. Biogeosciences 9(5):1809–1821
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  97. ↵
    1. Diedrich CG
    (2012) Cave bear killers and scavengers from the last ice age of central Europe: Feeding specializations in response to the absence of mammoth steppe fauna from mountainous regions. Quat Int 255:59–78
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  98. ↵
    1. Pop E,
    2. Bakels C
    (2015) Semi-open environmental conditions during phases of hominin occupation at the Eemian Interglacial basin site Neumark-Nord 2 and its wider environment. Quat Sci Rev 117:72–81
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  99. ↵
    1. Fritz H,
    2. Duncan P
    (1994) On the carrying capacity for large ungulates of African savanna ecosystems. Proc Biol Sci 256(1345):77–82
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  100. ↵
    1. Olff H,
    2. Ritchie ME,
    3. Prins HHT
    (2002) Global environmental controls of diversity in large herbivores. Nature 415(6874):901–904
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  101. ↵
    1. Cromsigt J,
    2. Kuijper DPJ
    (2011) Revisiting the browsing lawn concept: Evolutionary interactions or pruning herbivores? Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst 13(3):207–215
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  102. ↵
    1. Kuijper DPJ, et al.
    (2010) Bottom-up versus top-down control of tree regeneration in the Bialowieza Primeval Forest, Poland. J Ecol 98(4):888–899
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  103. ↵
    1. Van Valkenburgh B,
    2. Hayward MW,
    3. Ripple WJ,
    4. Meloro C,
    5. Roth VL
    (2016) The impact of large terrestrial carnivores on Pleistocene ecosystems. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 113:862–867
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  104. ↵
    1. Pachzelt A,
    2. Rammig A,
    3. Higgins S,
    4. Hickler T
    (2013) Coupling a physiological grazer population model with a generalized model for vegetation dynamics. Ecol Modell 263:92–102
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  105. ↵
    1. Rackham O
    (1980) Ancient Woodland: Its History, Vegetation and Uses in England (Edward Arnold, London)
    .
  106. ↵
    1. Putman RJ
    (1986) Grazing in Temperate Ecosystems: Large Herbivores and the Ecology of the New Forest (Croom Helm, London, UK)
    .
  107. ↵
    1. Staver AC,
    2. Archibald S,
    3. Levin SA
    (2011) The global extent and determinants of savanna and forest as alternative biome states. Science 334(6053):230–232
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  108. ↵
    1. Greve M, et al.
    (2012) Continental-scale variability in browser diversity is a major driver of diversity patterns in acacias across Africa. J Ecol 100(5):1093–1104
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  109. ↵
    1. Vare H,
    2. Ohtonen R,
    3. Mikkola K
    (1996) The effect and extent of heavy grazing by reindeer in oligotrophic pine heaths in northeastern Fennoscandia. Ecography 19(3):245–253
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  110. ↵
    1. Svenning J-C, et al.
    (2015) Science for a wilder Anthropocene: Synthesis and future directions for trophic rewilding research. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 113:898–906
    .
    OpenUrl
  111. ↵
    1. Mitchell FJG,
    2. Cole E
    (1998) Reconstruction of long-term successional dynamics of temperate woodland in Bialowieza Forest, Poland. J Ecol 86(6):1042–1059
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  112. ↵
    1. Kerley GIH,
    2. Kowalczyk R,
    3. Cromsigt J
    (2012) Conservation implications of the refugee species concept and the European bison: King of the forest or refugee in a marginal habitat? Ecography 35(6):519–529
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  113. ↵
    1. Cromsigt J,
    2. te Beest M
    (2014) Restoration of a megaherbivore: Landscape-level impacts of white rhinoceros in Kruger National Park, South Africa. J Ecol 102(3):566–575
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  114. ↵
    1. Pennisi E
    (2014) The river masters. Science 346(6211):802–805
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Bond WJ
    (2008) What limits trees in C4 grasslands and savannas? Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 39:641–659
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. Sankaran M,
    2. Ratnam J,
    3. Hanan N
    (2008) Woody cover in African savannas: The role of resources, fire and herbivory. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 17(2):236–245
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. Bond WJ,
    2. Keeley JE
    (2005) Fire as a global ‘herbivore’: The ecology and evolution of flammable ecosystems. Trends Ecol Evol 20(7):387–394
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Gill JL, et al.
    (2013) Linking abundances of the dung fungus Sporormiella to the density of bison: Implications for assessing grazing by megaherbivores in palaeorecords. J Ecol 101(5):1125–1136
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. Smith D,
    2. Nayyar K,
    3. Schreve D,
    4. Thomas R,
    5. Whitehouse N
    (2014) Can dung beetles from the palaeoecological and archaeological record indicate herd concentration and the identity of herbivores? Quat Int 341:119–130
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. Widga C,
    2. Colburn M
    (2015) Paleontology and paleoecology of guano deposits in Mammoth Cave, Kentucky, USA. Quat Res 83(3):427–436
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. Cerling TE, et al.
    (2011) Woody cover and hominin environments in the past 6 million years. Nature 476(7358):51–56
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  115. ↵
    1. Asner GP, et al.
    (2007) Carnegie Airborne Observatory: In-flight fusion of hyperspectral imaging and waveform light detection and ranging (wLiDAR) for three-dimensional studies of ecosystems. J Appl Remote Sens 1:013536
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  116. ↵
    1. Cornelissen P,
    2. Gresnigt MC,
    3. Vermeulen RA,
    4. Bokdam J,
    5. Smit R
    (2014) Transition of a Sambucus nigra L. dominated woody vegetation into grassland by a multi-species herbivore assemblage. J Nat Conserv 22(1):84–92
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
PreviousNext
Back to top
Article Alerts
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on PNAS.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Combining paleo-data and modern exclosure experiments to assess the impact of megafauna extinctions on woody vegetation
(Your Name) has sent you a message from PNAS
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the PNAS web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Effect of megafauna extinctions on woody plants
Elisabeth S. Bakker, Jacquelyn L. Gill, Christopher N. Johnson, Frans W. M. Vera, Christopher J. Sandom, Gregory P. Asner, Jens-Christian Svenning
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Jan 2016, 113 (4) 847-855; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1502545112

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
Effect of megafauna extinctions on woody plants
Elisabeth S. Bakker, Jacquelyn L. Gill, Christopher N. Johnson, Frans W. M. Vera, Christopher J. Sandom, Gregory P. Asner, Jens-Christian Svenning
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Jan 2016, 113 (4) 847-855; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1502545112
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Article Classifications

  • Biological Sciences
  • Ecology
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: 113 (4)
Table of Contents

Submit

Sign up for Article Alerts

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Impact of Large-Herbivore Assemblages on Woody Plant Abundance
    • Impact of Large Herbivores on Woody Plant Species Composition
    • Spatially Structured Landscapes
    • How Did Extinct Late Pleistocene Megaherbivores Affect Woody Plants?
    • Evidence of Large-Herbivore Impact from the Paleoecological Record
    • Under What Conditions Would Pleistocene Large Herbivore Assemblages Have Had Most Impact?
    • Perspectives for Future Research
    • Conclusions
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

You May Also be Interested in

Smoke emanates from Japan’s Fukushima nuclear power plant a few days after tsunami damage
Core Concept: Muography offers a new way to see inside a multitude of objects
Muons penetrate much further than X-rays, they do essentially zero damage, and they are provided for free by the cosmos.
Image credit: Science Source/Digital Globe.
Water from a faucet fills a glass.
News Feature: How “forever chemicals” might impair the immune system
Researchers are exploring whether these ubiquitous fluorinated molecules might worsen infections or hamper vaccine effectiveness.
Image credit: Shutterstock/Dmitry Naumov.
Venus flytrap captures a fly.
Journal Club: Venus flytrap mechanism could shed light on how plants sense touch
One protein seems to play a key role in touch sensitivity for flytraps and other meat-eating plants.
Image credit: Shutterstock/Kuttelvaserova Stuchelova.
Illustration of groups of people chatting
Exploring the length of human conversations
Adam Mastroianni and Daniel Gilbert explore why conversations almost never end when people want them to.
Listen
Past PodcastsSubscribe
Horse fossil
Mounted horseback riding in ancient China
A study uncovers early evidence of equestrianism in ancient China.
Image credit: Jian Ma.

Similar Articles

Site Logo
Powered by HighWire
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • RSS Feeds
  • Email Alerts

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Special Feature Articles – Most Recent
  • List of Issues

PNAS Portals

  • Anthropology
  • Chemistry
  • Classics
  • Front Matter
  • Physics
  • Sustainability Science
  • Teaching Resources

Information

  • Authors
  • Editorial Board
  • Reviewers
  • Subscribers
  • Librarians
  • Press
  • Cozzarelli Prize
  • Site Map
  • PNAS Updates
  • FAQs
  • Accessibility Statement
  • Rights & Permissions
  • About
  • Contact

Feedback    Privacy/Legal

Copyright © 2021 National Academy of Sciences. Online ISSN 1091-6490