Agric Res Updates 6 Celayaetal 2013

Complimentary Contributor Copy
AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH UPDATES
AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH UPDATES

VOLUME 6
PRATHAMESH GORAWALA
AND
SRUSHTI MANDHATRI
EDITORS
New York

Copyright © 2013 by Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or
transmitted in any form or by any means: electronic, electrostatic, magnetic, tape, mechanical
photocopying, recording or otherwise without the written permission of the Publisher.
For permission to use material from this book please contact us:
Telephone 631-231-7269; Fax 631-231-8175
Web Site: http://www.novapublishers.com
NOTICE TO THE READER

The Publisher has taken reasonable care in the preparation of this book, but makes no expressed or
implied warranty of any kind and assumes no responsibility for any errors or omissions. No
liability is assumed for incidental or consequential damages in connection with or arising out of
information contained in this book. The Publisher shall not be liable for any special,
consequential, or exemplary damages resulting, in whole or in part, from the readers‘ use of, or
reliance upon, this material. Any parts of this book based on government reports are so indicated
and copyright is claimed for those parts to the extent applicable to compilations of such works.
Independent verification should be sought for any data, advice or recommendations contained in
this book. In addition, no responsibility is assumed by the publisher for any injury and/or damage
to persons or property arising from any methods, products, instructions, ideas or otherwise
contained in this publication.
This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information with regard to the
subject matter covered herein. It is sold with the clear understanding that the Publisher is not
engaged in rendering legal or any other professional services. If legal or any other expert
assistance is required, the services of a competent person should be sought. FROM A
DECLARATION OF PARTICIPANTS JOINTLY ADOPTED BY A COMMITTEE OF THE
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION AND A COMMITTEE OF PUBLISHERS.
Additional color graphics may be available in the e-book version of this book.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
ISSN: 2160-1739
ISBN: (eBook)
Published by Nova Science Publishers, Inc. † New York

CONTENTS
Preface vii
Chapter 1 Impacts of Fukushima Nuclear Disaster on Japanese
Agriculture and Food Chains 1
Hrabrin Bachev and Fusao Ito
Chapter 2 Plant Nutrients, Plant Growth Retardants, and Cotton Production 77
Zakaria M. Sawan
Chapter 3 Response of Olive Trees to Deficit Irrigation Regimes:
Growth, Yield and Water Relations 129
Chiraz Charfi-Masmoudi and Mouna Mezghani-Ayachi
Chapter 4 Improving Selectivity in Trawl Fisheries 159
N. Madsen and J. Feekings
Chapter 5 Grazing Management of Native and Naturalised
Pastures in Harsh Environments 181
Zhongnan Nie, Limin Hua, Reto Zollinger,
Degang Zhang and Shangli Shi
Chapter 6 Sustainable Grazing Systems for the Enhancement
of Livestock Production and Biodiversity in Less-Favored
Heathland Areas of Humid Northern Spain 205
R. Celaya, A. Martínez, R. Rosa García,
L. M. M. Ferreira, C. López López,
U. García and K. Osoro
Chapter 7 Genomic Organization and Comparative Analysis of the
Genome of Domesticated Animals and Poultry 229
Rajib Deb, Sandip Chakraborty, Umesh Singh,
Sushil Kumar, Parmad Kumar Panwar and Kuldeep Dhama
Chapter 8 In-Depth Studies of Cattle-Manure-Compost Activated
Carbons for Cu(II) Ions Removal 247
Muhammad Abbas Ahmad Zaini,
Siti Hamidah Mohd. Setapar, Mohd. Johari Kamaruddin
and Mohd. Azizi Che Yunus
Index 267

In: Agricultural Research Updates. Volume 6 ISBN: 978-1-62948-377-1
Editors: P. Gorawala and S. Mandhatri © 2013 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
Chapter 6
SUSTAINABLE GRAZING SYSTEMS

FOR THE ENHANCEMENT OF LIVESTOCK
PRODUCTION AND BIODIVERSITY
IN LESS-FAVORED HEATHLAND AREAS
OF HUMID NORTHERN SPAIN
R. Celaya1,, A. Martínez1, R. Rosa García1, L. M. M. Ferreira2,

C. López López1, U. García1 and K. Osoro1
1
Servicio Regional de Investigación y Desarrollo Agroalimentario (SERIDA),
Villaviciosa, Asturias, Spain
2
Centro de Ciência Animal e Veterinária (CECAV), Departamento de Zootecnia,
Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro (UTAD), Vila Real, Portugal
ABSTRACT
The mountainous less-favored areas of the northwest of the Iberian Peninsula are
mostly covered with heathland vegetation, offering little opportunities for the
development of profitable productive systems in the interests of rural people. The low
nutritive value of heathlands and their high susceptibility to wildfires causes serious
problems to livestock management and biodiversity conservation. The SERIDA research
team on Animal Production Systems has carried out several studies in Cantabrian
heathlands during the last twenty years, aiming to develop sustainable grazing systems
maintaining, simultaneously, high levels of biodiversity. Research has been focused on
the assessment of the nutritive quality of heathland vegetation and its potential for
livestock feeding, the grazing behavior and performance of different domestic herbivore
species, the establishment of improved pastures on heathland areas to get the
sustainability of productive grazing systems, animal health looking at the possible use of
bioactive plants to control gastrointestinal parasites, vegetation dynamics and its
consequences on biodiversity under different grazing managements, and the economic
analysis of production costs and profitability. This chapter summarizes the main results

Corresponding author's e-mail: rcelaya@serida.org.

206 R. Celaya, A. Martínez, R. Rosa García et al.
and findings. In productive terms, cattle generally show lower performance than other
herbivore species on these vegetation communities and a negative balance during most of
the grazing season. Thereby, the needs for external or preserved fodder are much greater
for cattle, increasing yearly costs. Small ruminants are more suitable to utilize heathland
territories, being sheep the most productive species in partially improved heathlands,
while goats better harness heathland resources because of their mixed feeding behavior
(grazer-browser), thus complementing well with grazer species. Within each ruminant
species, smaller breeds thrive better and present a higher productive efficiency than larger
breeds with greater nutritional requirements. The consumption of tannin-containing
heather (Ericaceae) reduces parasitic infections by gastrointestinal nematodes in goats.
Horses have a high intake capacity and compete with other grazers, but they might be
beneficial for restoring heathlands. Results indicate that interspersed open and close
heathlands mixed with grasslands could keep a higher faunistic diversity. Overall, studies
show that the difficult situation of heathland areas can be mitigated by developing
profitable and sustainable grazing systems with appropriate livestock and proper
management strategies according to the available vegetation, thus rising in value these
less-favored areas and enhancing, simultaneously, the conservation of local flora and
fauna.
INTRODUCTION
Heathlands are evergreen shrublands dominated by ericoid plants, i.e. small-leaved
woody plants commonly belonging to Ericaceae family, that grow on acidic soils on areas
with humid climate (Gimingham, 1972; Webb, 1998). They are typical across Western
Europe with Atlantic influence, from north of Portugal to Norway. Apart from their aesthetic,
cultural and historical value, they hold a characteristic biodiversity. In northern and central
Europe, heathland surface has been dramatically reduced in the past century because of
agricultural land transformation, overgrazing, nitrogen deposition, and succession to
woodlands after abandonment, remaining small and fragmented areas whose conservation is
claimed (EC Habitats Directive 92/43/ECC).
C a n t a b r i a n S e a
Asturias
Cantabria
Basque
Galicia Country
C a n t a b r i a n M o u n t a i n s
Castile and León
PORTUGAL SPAIN
Figure 1. Distribution of heathlands in the northwest of the Iberian Peninsula. Source: Corine Land
Cover 2000, European Environmental Agency.

Sustainable Grazing Systems for the Enhancement of Livestock Production … 207
Area covered by heathlands (2002) Burned areas (1988-2010)

(% of municipality area) (cumulative % of municipality area)
< 10% 10-20% 20-30% 30-40% > 40% < 10% 10-20% 20-30% 30-40% > 40%
Source: INDUROT – University of Oviedo Source: SADEI – Government of Principality of Asturias
Figure 2. Heathland surfaces and burned areas from 1988 to 2010 in the municipalities of Asturias.
Conversely, southernmost heathlands extend over large areas in the northwest of the
Iberian Peninsula, occupying around 1,000,000 ha (Figure 1) as a consequence of rural
exodus and abandonment of livestock and agricultural practices, whilst reforestation is limited
on such a poor and shallow soils (Benavides et al., 2009b; Rosa García et al., 2013). As an
example, in the autonomous community of Asturias (northern Spain), heathlands extend over
223,000 ha, which account for more than a fifth part of the regional surface (Álvarez et al.,
2004). Following the rural abandonment and reduction in grazing pressure, mainly by small
ruminants, these heathland areas produce great accumulations of woody phytomass that can
reach 20–35 t DM/ha four or five years after grazing abandonment (Celaya et al., 2007a;
Benavides et al., 2009a; Jáuregui et al., 2009). Such phytomass consists of highly
combustible matter that increases fire risk. Around 65% of the fires concentrate in the
northwestern area of the Iberian Peninsula, and they damage mostly areas covered by woody
vegetation (woodlands and shrublands), which account for 90% of the fires in Spain. A great
part of the wildfires in northern Spain and Portugal occur on heathland areas (Figure 2),
causing serious environmental and economic losses during the last decades.
During the last twenty years, the SERIDA research team on Animal Production Systems,
in collaboration with other research institutes (CECAV-UTAD, SALUVET-Universidad
Complutense de Madrid, and Instituto de Ganadería de Montaña-CSIC-Universidad de León),
has studied the grazing management of Cantabrian heathlands aiming to enhance rural
development and sustainability of these areas with remarkable environmental and
socioeconomic handicaps. The final objective is to establish profitable grazing systems,
mostly focused on meat production (but also on quality fiber), while maintaining high
biodiversity levels.
The studies were carried out in an experimental farm of 250 ha established in 1991 and
located at an altitude of 800–1000 m in Illano (western Asturias). Research centered on the
following main aspects:
 the nutritive value of heathland vegetation and its potential for livestock feeding;
 the grazing behavior and performance of different domestic herbivore species;
 the establishment of improved pastures on heathland areas to get the sustainability of
productive grazing systems;
 the dynamics of vegetation and its consequences on biodiversity under different
grazing managements;

 the use of tannin-containing heather to control gastrointestinal parasites in goats;

 the economic analysis of production costs and profitability.
This chapter summarizes the main results and findings on those research lines, aiming to
get an insight on the development of extensive grazing systems that are better adapted to the
hard conditions of Cantabrian heathlands. The establishment of adequate grazing
managements that consider the distinct foraging behavior and performance of different
domestic herbivore species (and breeds) according to the available vegetation may improve
the sustainability of productive systems, increasing the socioeconomic value of these
underutilized lands whilst encouraging the conservation of biodiversity.
CANTABRIAN MOUNTAIN HEATHLANDS

Southern European heathlands, and specifically in the NW of the Iberian Peninsula,
present a high variability in their botanical composition depending on soil and climatic
characteristics, as well as on management practices. They vary from coastal wet heathlands,
heather bogs, lowland or mountain heather-gorse shrublands, tall heather scrublands, to high
mountain heather-bilberry dwarf shrublands. In this chapter we will center on medium
mountain heathlands co-dominated by different heather species (mainly Erica umbellata,
Erica cinerea, and Calluna vulgaris) and western gorse (Ulex gallii), a thorny woody legume.
Soils are generally shallow, acidic and with low nutrient contents, especially calcium,
magnesium and phosphorus.
Heathland vegetation is characterized by its low nutritive value for grazing animals
(Milne, 1974; Hodgson et al., 1991; Celaya et al., 2007b, 2008; Osoro et al., 2007b, 2013;
Fraser et al., 2009a; Mandaluniz et al., 2009; Table 1). The current year green shoots of
common heather species present low contents of crude protein (50–100 g CP/kg DM) and
high contents of neutral and acid detergent fiber (480–690 g NDF/kg DM, 380–530 g ADF/kg
DM). The green shoots of gorse hold higher protein contents, particularly during spring (175–
220 g CP/kg DM), although such contents decrease thereafter to 90–125 g CP/kg DM as its
thorns develop and become more lignified. Acid detergent lignin contents are very high in
these woody plants, ranging from 230 to 420 g ADL/kg DM in heather and from 130 to 300 g
ADL/kg DM in gorse, and they generally increase as season advances. Herbaceous plants are
mostly grasses such as Pseudarrhenatherum longifolium, Agrostis curtisii and Avenula
sulcata that present rather coarse leaves. Their lignin contents are lower by far than those of
shrubs, ranging from 25 to 60 g ADL/kg DM, but their protein contents are also low, ranging
from 100 to 150 g CP/kg DM during spring, decreasing to 75–110 and to 55–90 g CP/kg DM
in summer and autumn, respectively. These grasses are characterized by their high fiber
contents, particularly of NDF (650–800 g NDF/kg DM), reflecting the high fraction of cell
wall content in leaf tissues (Table 1).

Table 1. Chemical composition (ranges in g/kg DM) of the main plant components of
Cantabrian heathlands
Component Season CP NDF ADF ADL

spring 70–105 480–575 380–515 230–410
Heather
summer-autumn 50–80 500–690 430–540 250–420
spring 175–220 560–640 360–480 130–210
Gorse
summer-autumn 90–125 630–725 460–570 200–300
spring 100–150 645–735 310–375 20–35
Grass
summer-autumn 55–110 690–800 370–470 35–60
CP: crude protein; NDF: neutral detergent fiber; ADF: acid detergent fiber; ADL: acid detergent lignin.
Livestock Performance and Foraging Behavior in Heathlands
The main implication of the low nutritive quality of heathland vegetation is the low
animal performance of domestic herbivores because of the low palatability and reduced intake
of the main plant species. In general, livestock species (cattle, sheep, goats and horses)
develop poor productive responses, especially animals with higher absolute nutritional
requirements, i.e. cattle compared to small ruminants or suckler dams compared to non-
lactating animals. The first consequence is the difficulty in maintaining productive herds with
lactating animals and their offspring into a sustainable grazing system for meat production
when available surface is mostly occupied by heathlands. The second one is the short length
of the grazing season, which can extend to around five months for small ruminants and three
months or little more for cattle and horses.
Table 2. Daily body weight (BW) changes of cows and mares according
to their lactating state and BW gains of calves and foals during summer grazing season
in Cantabrian heathlands
Dams Cows Mares Significance (P)

Lactating state (Ls) Suckler Dry Suckler Dry s.e.m. Sp Ls Sp x Ls
Initial BW (kg) 538 539 290 327 28 *** NS NS
Period 1 (g/day) –759 –254 482 374 167 *** NS (0.061)
Period 2 (g/day) –970 –529 –457 –173 152 *** * NS
Overall (g/day) –871 –391 –4 92 89 *** ** *
Offspring Calves Foals s.e.m. Sign.
Initial BW (kg) 91 80 13 NS
Period 1 (g/day) 647 643 32 NS
Period 2 (g/day) 421 157 47 **
Overall (g/day) 531 396 23 **
Sp: species effect (cattle vs. horses); Period 1: from June to August; Period 2: from August to
September-October; s.e.m. standard error of mean; * P < 0.05; ** P < 0.01; *** P < 0.001; NS
non-significant (P > 0.1).
Comparing large herbivore species grazing together during summer at low stocking rates
(0.25 animals/ha), it was observed that crossbred mares achieved more favorable body-weight
(BW) changes than beef cows (Asturiana de los Valles breed) (Celaya et al., 2011; Table 2).
Mares selected proportionally more herbaceous plants (mostly grasses) and less heather than
did cows, particularly in early summer (0.85 vs. 0.65 herbage proportion in July; 0.63 vs. 0.55

in September). Thus, horses seem more efficient in searching for and gathering grasses than
cattle, having an advantage to maintain a better nutritional status.
The higher reluctance of horses compared to cattle to consume heather is consistent with
the results obtained by Putman et al., (1987) in southern England, where ponies increased the
use of common gorse (Ulex europaeus) when grass availability declined. In our conditions,
horse performance has been proven to be higher in gorse-dominated shrublands compared to
heather-dominated ones (Celaya et al., 2012). Lactating state affected more to cows‘ BW
changes than to mares‘ ones in heathlands. Differences in favor of dry compared to lactating
cows (490 g/day) were very close to those observed in the same cattle breed grazing during
summer on high mountain Calluna-dominated heathlands (Osoro et al., 1999a). The
difference in BW change between dry and lactating mares averaged 100 g/day (Celaya et al.,
2011), which would be related to their milk production.
Regarding the offspring, BW gains between June and August were similar in calves and
foals (645 g/day), but thereafter calves achieved higher gains than foals (421 vs. 157 g/day;
Table 2). Thus, cows seemed to maintain milk production by mobilizing body reserves,
contributing to sustain good calf growth rates, whereas lactating mares showed better
performances than lactating cows at the expense of reducing their milk production, negatively
affecting foal BW gains (Celaya et al., 2011).
Among small ruminants, in general goats achieved better performances than sheep in
different heath-related shrublands, although differences between them depended on the type
of vegetation regarding the dominant plant species. Managing non-lactating adult females,
goats showed better productive responses (changes in BW and body condition score) than
sheep in both grass-rich and heather-dominated shrublands, whilst the reverse occurred in
gorse-dominated ones, mainly because of higher ewes‘ gains during spring (Osoro et al.,
2013). Averaging the three types of shrubland, sheep and goats gained BW similarly in
spring, lost it in summer (sheep more than goats), and lost it similarly in autumn. Across the
five years study, sheep had better performance than goats during the first two years, but the
opposite occurred during the following three years. Apart from the possible climatic
differences between years, this trend reversal was related to changes observed in the botanical
composition of the shrublands. Goats selected proportionally more woody plants (both
heather and gorse) and less herbaceous plants than sheep (Osoro et al., 2013; Figure 3).
In consequence, goats controlled shrub encroachment, phytomass accumulation, and
canopy height more than sheep in either grass-, gorse- or heather-dominated shrublands,
promoting a higher increase of herbaceous species (Jáuregui et al., 2009). Thus, as gorse
dominance steadily increased across years under sheep grazing, ewes‘ performance worsened,
whereas goats thrived better than sheep as they had more herbage available besides their
ability to use woody plants.
Comparing cattle and sheep in British heathlands, although both species rejected heather
(Calluna vulgaris) and preferentially consumed herbaceous plants (mostly grasses and
graminoids), sheep consumed proportionally more heather than cattle (Grant et al., 1987;
Fraser et al., 2009b). Sheep have a narrower mouth that allows them to select more efficiently
the green shoots of heather, while the selecting ability of cattle is more limited because of
their wider muzzle and greater dental arcade (Grant et al., 1987; Illius and Gordon, 1993).

% Grass-dominated Gorse-dominated Heather-dominated

100
80
60
40
20
0
Sheep Goat Sheep Goat Sheep Goat
Heather Gorse Herbaceous
Figure 3. Diet selection of sheep and goats grazing in heathlands of different botanical composition.
In parallel to the differences between large and small herbivore species, there are quite
consistent differences in performance between breeds of different body size within the same
species. In general, smaller breeds thrive better in conditions of poor food resources such as
heathlands because of their lower nutrient requirements compared to larger breeds. In
Cantabrian high mountains (1600–1800 m a.s.l.) where the dominant vegetation consisted of
heather (Calluna vulgaris)-bilberry (Vaccinium myrtillus) shrublands, the smaller Asturiana
de la Montaña breed cows (400 kg BW) achieved more favorable BW changes during the
summer grazing season than the bigger Asturiana de los Valles cows (500 kg BW), both in
the case of lactating (–270 vs. –320 g/day) and dry cows (250 vs. 170 g/day). In spite of the
higher growing potential of Asturiana de los Valles breed, there were no differences between
breeds in calves' BW gains (570 g/day; Osoro et al., 1999a). Grazing similar plant
communities, the smaller Gallega sheep breed (33 kg BW) attained better performances than
the bigger (42 kg BW) Latxa breed (28 vs. 2 g/day), even though the higher intake potential
found in Latxa ewes (Osoro et al., 1999b).
In heather-gorse communities dominated by Erica umbellata with sparse tall heath scrubs
(Erica australis subsp. aragonensis and Erica arborea), diet selection and animal
performance also varied between goat breeds (Osoro et al., 2007b). Local Celtiberic goats (44
kg BW) and smaller Cashmere goats (33 kg BW) were managed at equivalent high stocking
rates (11.7 and 15 goats/ha, respectively, around 500 kg BW/ha). Over four grazing seasons,
Cashmere goats achieved more favorable BW changes than Celtiberic ones (–1 vs. –30
g/day). Celtiberic goats browsed more intensively on heather plants, particularly on isolated
tall scrubs, than Cashmere ones, opening more gaps in the canopy and promoting greater
herbaceous cover (Celaya et al., 2010b). Although Cashmere goats tended to browse more on
gorse than Celtiberic goats, there were no differences in gorse cover changes between breeds
across the four grazing year period. Despite the greater presence of herbaceous plants could
benefit the subsequent animal performance in the Celtiberic breed, goat performance was
worsening over time as the availability of green foliage of heather progressively depleted. In
addition, the defoliation of tall heathers resulted in the lack of shelters against inclement
weather, with additional negative effects on animal welfare and subsequent performance. In
addition to the higher performance of Cashmere compared to Celtiberic goats in terms of BW

change, the production of good quality fiber of the former can add extra output to these
livestock systems located in unfavorable areas with limited socioeconomic alternatives.
Within the Cashmere breed, a lower stocking rate (6.7 vs.15 goats/ha) neither affected goat
BW changes nor the productivity per hectare, indicating that animal performance is more
limited by the nutritive quality of heathland vegetation rather than by the available phytomass
quantity (Osoro et al., 2007b).
Overall these results reveal the limitations of heathlands for the development of
sustainable grazing systems, and the need for integrating them with more nutritive plant
communities. Otherwise, supplementary feeding would be necessary during most of the year,
increasing production costs and reducing profitability.
Partially Improved Heathlands
Areas of improved pasture can be established in relatively level terrains by mechanical

clearing of heath vegetation, soil ploughing, fertilization with lime and NPK, and sowing
perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) and white clover (Trifolium repens) in our conditions.
This management strategy provides a more nutritive vegetation that allows to better meet
animal requirements and to extend grazing season from early- or mid-spring to mid- or late-
autumn, depending on altitude and climatic conditions. The surface percentage to be
improved depends on the herbivore species managed: at equivalent stocking rates in a
livestock unit (LU) basis, cattle need more pasture surface available while small ruminants
can thrive with only 20–25% of improved pasture, because sheep, and particularly goats, use
heathlands more efficiently than cattle, being able to select the most nutritious plant parts on
the unimproved areas. As consequence of the differences in grazing behavior, ability for diet
selection and intake, and total requirements, wintering period is much higher for cattle than
for small ruminants and therefore they need forage conservation as silage or hay.
Apart from the animal production, these improved pastures are also beneficial from the
environmental point of view, as they contribute to landscape diversification and may act as
fire-breaks with no needs of costly mechanical clearings since they can be maintained under
proper grazing management. Grazing, especially by large populations of animals, can reduce
the extent of fires at a landscape scale by forming ‗fire breaks‘ within the grassland matrix
(McNaughton, 1992). According to Vandvik et al. (2005), grazing can create ecological
opportunities for additional sets of species in heathlands by increasing the variability among
habitats and adding complexity to the post-fire successional dynamics, although they also
point out that management prescriptions should take into account that both fire and grazing
effects can vary along the local environmental gradient. Within the grassland areas, grazing
animals inhibit the accumulation of dead biomass through consumption of foliage and
trampling, and within grazing lawns, plants are maintained in a state of continuous
regeneration and the proportion of dead material in the sward may be very low when
managing proper grazing pressures (Leonard et al., 2010).

Foraging Behavior in Partially Improved Heathlands
When animals have access to improved pasture areas within heathlands, there are clear
differences between species in their foraging behavior and productive responses. In
heathlands with 20–25% surface of ryegrass-clover pasture, goats spent longer times grazing
on heathlands than cattle, sheep and horses, which preferentially utilize the improved
pastures. Although there are seasonal switches in the proportional use of one or other type of
vegetation depending on the herbage allowance (sward height) in the improved area, goats
spent 35–70% of their daily grazing time on heathland, frequently over 50% from spring
onwards. On the contrary, cows and ewes in general did not exceed 30% of grazing time on
heathland (Celaya et al., 2008). Although sheep were more willing to use heathland
vegetation than cattle because of their higher selective ability, they also have a higher
capacity to stay grazing on short swards (< 4–5 cm) than cattle. Thus, the higher grazing
times on heathland by sheep early in the grazing season (high herbage allowance) were
compensated with higher grazing times on heathland by cattle later in the season (low herbage
allowance). Mares generally spent longer times grazing than ruminants. This stems from the
different digestive and foraging strategy of horses, relying on faster food passage through the
digestive tract and higher intake capacity, compensating their lower fiber digestive efficiency
compared with ruminants (Demment and Van Soest, 1985; Duncan et al., 1990). In addition,
horses are well adapted to utilize short grassy swards thanks to the tenure of both upper and
lower incisors. Therefore, horses compete with cattle to consume the preferred pasture,
although they switch more readily to heathland vegetation later in the season once the sward
height in the improved area is reduced below 4 cm (Ferreira et al., 2013).
In the Scottish island of Rùm, similar results were observed in Highland cattle, ponies,
sheep and feral goats grazing on grassland-Calluna heathland mosaics (Gordon, 1989). Cattle,
ponies and sheep relied mostly on grassland communities and hardly grazed on heathlands,
only when herbage allowance in grasslands was considerably reduced during winter, whereas
goats utilized heathland vegetation more intensively all year round. In Pyrenean (NE Spain)
high mountain grassland-heathland mosaics, Aldezabal (2001) observed similar patterns of
use by cattle, horses, sheep and goats.
Greatly reflecting the grazing times in each type of vegetation, cattle, sheep and horses
preferentially selected herbaceous plants, mostly from the improved pasture area, accounting
for 90–100% of the diet in spring, when herbage allowance was plentiful (Celaya et al.,
2007b, 2008; Ferreira et al., 2013). By contrast, goats consumed 25–50% of woody plants,
including both heather and gorse, even in spring, increasing its percentages to 50–85% as
season advanced. In general, as sward height in the pasture area was decreasing, shrub
percentages increased in the diets of the other three herbivore species, but they were always
below those attained by goats. Shrub percentages in cattle diets were below 20–25%,
consisting mostly of heather, whereas 30% gorse was recorded in horse diet at the end of the
grazing season (Ferreira et al., 2013; Figure 4). Sheep consumed 6–20% gorse before thorn
hardening occurred in summer, and increased heather percentages in their diet to 35–50% in
late-summer-autumn. In general, goats showed a lower dietary overlap and hence a higher
complementarity with the other herbivore species (Celaya et al., 2007b, 2008; Ferreira et al.,
2013).
In grassland-heathland mosaics of eastern Cantabrian Mountain range (Basque Country),
heather consumption by cattle increased from 5–15% in spring to 25–35% in autumn as grass

availability decreased during the grazing season (Mandaluniz et al., 2011). Cattle
predominantly selected heather from the open heathland sites, whereas dense heathland areas
were avoided.
In mechanically cleared heathland areas with one third of improved ryegrass-clover
pasture, goats grazed for longer (41–81% of daily grazing time) on gorse-dominated
shrubland than sheep (24–48%) and cattle (2–32%). The proportional times in each type of
vegetation also varied according to the type of flock. Cattle and sheep spent slightly higher
periods on improved pasture when they were alone compared to mixed herds (84 vs. 78% in
cattle, 67 vs. 64% in sheep), while the difference was especially noted in goats (50 vs. 30%).
Mean gorse percentage accounted for 28% in goat diet, while it accounted for 7% in sheep
and 2% in cattle diets (Benavides et al., 2009a).
% Cattle Horses Sheep Goats

100
80
60
40
20
0
My Jn Jl Sp Oc Nv My Jn Jl Sp Oc Nv My Jn Jl Sp Oc Nv My Jn Jl Sp Oc Nv
Heather Gorse Herbaceous
Figure 4. Diet selection of cattle, horses, sheep and goats grazing together in a partially (25%) improved
heathland during the grazing season.
Livestock Performance in Partially Improved Heathlands
When improved pastures are associated to heathlands, animal performance is conditioned

by the balance between the needs for maintenance and production of each livestock species
and feed availability at each season. This is mainly determined by the preferred herbage
allowance in the improved area, but also by changes in nutritive quality of pasture and
heathland vegetation. In partially (20–25%) improved heathlands, cattle have good productive
responses during spring, and both non-lactating and suckler cows gain BW when mean sward
height in the pasture area is over 6–7 cm, while calves show good daily growth rates.
Nevertheless, these BW changes depend on the calving season as it is related to cow
physiological state, milk production and calf developmental stage. Summer-calving cows
presented higher BW recoveries than winter-calving cows due to the more advanced lactation
stage in the former and thus lower nutritional requirements for milk production. On the other
hand, calves born in late summer showed higher gains (1295 g/day) than younger winter-born
ones (737 g/day), due to the higher pasture intake capacity of the former (Celaya et al., 2008).
Under the same conditions, BW changes of mares and their foals during spring were similar
to those observed in cattle (Table 3).

Table 3. Daily body-weight (BW) changes per livestock unit (LU) of cattle, horses, sheep
and goats grazing together on a heathland area with 25% of improved pasture
Herbivore species Cattle Horse Sheep Goat

Suckler dams Cows Mares Ewes Goats s.e.m. Sign.
Initial BW (kg) 479 350 41 37 8.6 ***
Initial BW per LU (kg/LU) 479 350 283 256 25.1 ***
BW change (g/day/LU)
Spring 859 842 377 308 103.0 ***
Summer –345 –317 20 –125 95.7 ***
Autumn –32 –71 237 –19 65.0 ***
Winter –1878 –604 –290 41 121.7 ***
Overall –170 63 64 76 55.9 **
Offspring Calves Foals Lambs Kids s.e.m. Sign.
Initial date 3 May 18 June 3 May 3 May
Weaning date 20 Sept. 27 Nov. 24 July 24 July
Initial BW (kg) 149 43 11 8 3.9 ***
BW at weaning (kg) 261 170 24 17 8.4 ***
BW change (g/day/LU) 804 770 1113 721 91.5 ***
s.e.m. standard error of mean; ** P < 0.01; *** P < 0.001.
During summer, once available quantity and quality of the improved pasture are reduced,
cows and mares lose BW in a similar way, and the BW gains of calves and foals are also
reduced. By contrast, ewes and goats show better performances than large herbivores after
weaning their offspring. In this period, the BW changes of all species can vary greatly
between years depending on climatic conditions (mainly rainfall) and the subsequent balance
between pasture growth and senescence. Although BW losses can be ameliorated during
autumn because of pasture regrowth, the productive responses of large herbivores worsen as
season advances, and particularly during winter, cows lose much BW and body condition due
to pasture shortage, lower nutritive quality of autumn pastures compared with the spring ones,
and adverse climatic conditions. These heavy losses will negatively affect the subsequent
reproductive performance (extended anoestrus cycle and decreased conception rate) and thus
cattle productivity.
Overall, taking into account both mothers and their offspring, sheep is the species with
the best daily BW changes per livestock unit (1 LU = 1 cow = 1 mare = 7 ewes = 7 goats)
because of the higher BW gains of lambs compared to calves, foals and kids. Horses and
goats show similar absolute gains per LU, whilst cattle is the species that presents the worst
productive responses due to the great BW losses of cows during summer and autumn-winter,
rather than to calf growth rates (Table 3).
Economics of Different Grazing Systems in Partially Improved Heathlands
The negative BW changes in cattle as grazing season advances and during winter, relative
to small ruminants, mean earlier and higher needs of feed supplementation in cows (from
summer until the following spring). Supplementation for ewes and goats is normally
restricted to winter, coinciding with lambing and kidding periods. This significantly affects
the economic balance of the farm depending on the available improved pasture area and the

livestock species managed. In heathlands with 30% area improved, the annual difference per
LU between the incomes from animal sales (calves, foals, lambs or kids) and the feed
purchase costs is clearly lower for cattle (80–160 €/LU) than for sheep and goats (222 and
313 €/LU, respectively; Table 4). Besides the lower production costs in small ruminants, it is
partly due to the higher prices for kid and lamb meat compared to beef (applied prices of
2013: 2.25, 2.05 and 3.05 €/kg BW for calves, lambs and kids, respectively). In addition,
small ruminants are more prolific than cattle (applied birth rates per female: 0.7, 1.1 and 1.2
for cattle, sheep and goats, respectively).
In cattle, the economic results are more profitable in summer-calving herds compared
with winter-calving ones, because of the higher value of weaned calves in the former case,
weighing 150 kg BW more than the latter, in spite of the higher feeding costs during winter
for summer-born calves as they are supplemented with concentrate fodder (Table 4).
The economic results of horse herds are very different from those composed of domestic
ruminants. Foals can achieve good BW gains until weaning (700–800 g/day), and mares are
able to maintain BW and condition during most of the year feeding on unimproved vegetation
and utilizing the rejected pasture remaining after cattle, sheep or goat grazing in the improved
areas. Thus, the yearly costs of purchased or conserved fodder are very low (105 €/LU) for
horses. However, the low market prices for foals (0,75 €/kg BW) result in a negative balance
(–14 €/LU) between the incomes and feeding costs (Table 4).
Table 4. Yearly offspring sale incomes, fodder consumption and costs, and economic
balance (income – cost) per livestock unit (LU) of different livestock herds managed in
partially improved heathlands
Cattle Horse Sheep Goat

Winter-calving Summer-calving
Sale income (€/LU) 347 473 105 421 512
Feed consumption
(kg DM/LU)
Concentrate 188 258 96 379 379
Silage 1352 1352 583 0 0
Hay 0 0 0 570 570
Feeding cost (€/LU) –264 –312 –119 –199 –199
Balance (€/LU) 82 161 –14 222 313
There is an increasing awareness that diversification plays a strategic role in rural

livelihood systems. So, one of the alternatives in socioeconomically and environmentally
depleted areas like those in northern Spain is to manage mixed flocks in grassland-heathland
mosaics so the system is diversified both attending to the livestock and pasture. Considering
mixed grazing systems in partially improved heathlands, the profitability of two types of flock
managed in a 22.5 ha paddock was compared, one consisting of cattle, sheep and goats (CSG:
6 cows, 42 ewes and 42 goats with their offspring; 0.27, 1.87 and 1.87 breeding females/ha,
respectively), and another one of only sheep and goats (SG: 150 ewes and 75 goats with their
offspring; 6.67 and 3.33 breeding females/ha, respectively). The balance between sale
incomes and feeding costs per unit area was higher in SG (449 €/ha) than in CSG flock (181
€/ha) (Figure 5).

€/ha Cattle + Sheep + Goats Sheep + Goats

1000
800 285
600
204
400 684 734
200 385 449
347
181
0
-166 -235
-200
-400
Sale incomes Subsidies Feeding costs
Sale incomes – feeding costs Total income – costs
Figure 5. Sale incomes, subsidy payments for animal husbandry, feeding costs, and differences between
incomes and costs per hectare in a flock composed of cattle, sheep and goats or of only sheep and goats,
grazing in a partially (25%) improved heathland area.
Apart from the animal production aspects, the investments in infrastructures (fencing
closures, establishment of improved pastures, drinking troughs, etc.) should be considered.
Assuming a cost of 1191 €/ha for initial infrastructure, and adding subsidies from the
Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) of the European Union for animal husbandry per unit
area (204 and 285 €/ha for CSG and SG, respectively) plus the aids for infrastructure
improvements (596 €/ha), the economic balance in the first year is negative for CSG (–211
€/ha) and positive for SG (138 €/ha). In the following years (with no infrastructure
investment), the balances are positive for both types of flock, 385 €/ha in CSG and 734 €/ha
in SG, the difference showing a clearly higher profitability when the flock is composed only
of small ruminants. It should be noted that those subsidies will be restricted with the new
ongoing CAP, so the economic sustainability of livestock enterprises will be more dependent
on increasing incomes whilst simultaneously reducing production costs.
ANIMAL HEALTH
In humid areas, parasitic infections by gastrointestinal nematodes are a major threat to the
development of efficient and sustainable extensive grazing systems, particularly in the case of
small ruminants, due to their negative impact on animal health and therefore on both
production and product quality (Sykes, 1994). Increasing social concerns over safe food and
pesticide residues and the development of resistances to anthelmintic drugs in several
nematode strains make necessary alternative grazing, feed and sanitary management
strategies to control these infections in livestock (Waller, 2006). Anthelmintic drugs may also
have adverse effects on the local biodiversity, affecting non-target organisms which play a
vital role in the processes of dung dispersal, maintenance of pasture hygiene, nutrient cycling,
soil aeration, humus content, etc. (Lumaret and Errouissi, 2002).

The use of bioactive plants as nutraceuticals, specifically those containing condensed

tannins, has been regarded as an efficient method for controlling these worm diseases.
Heather plants (both Calluna vulgaris and Erica spp.) present low to moderate concentrations
of tannins in their green shoots (60–100 g tannin acid equivalents/kg DM), and therefore,
their potential use as anthelmintic was studied in several experiments with goats, as this
species, being browser, is known to have evolved lower immunity level than sheep or cattle
(Hoste et al., 2008), which are mainly grazers (grass-roughage eaters).
In pastures consisting mostly of perennial ryegrass, common bent (Agrostis capillaris)
and white clover, reductions of 30–75% in fecal nematode egg excretion were observed in
goats supplemented with heather (freshly cut plants offered every 3 days) compared with non-
supplemented goats (Osoro et al., 2007a,c; Frutos et al., 2008; Celaya et al., 2010a). This
reduction in parasitism level enhanced animal performance, as heather-supplemented goats
had more favorable BW changes and body condition score than those feeding only on pasture.
The nematode genera or species identified in coprocultures were Trichostrongylus spp.,
Teladorsagia circumcincta, Haemonchus contortus, Oesophagostomum columbianum and
Chabertia ovina (Moreno-Gonzalo et al., 2012). Both in vivo and in vitro experiments
showed that tannin consumption was not associated to clear anti-nutritional effects that could
counteract the beneficial anthelmintic effect of heather. Greater concentrations of volatile
fatty acids were observed in the ruminal fluid of supplemented goats, suggesting an improved
efficiency of ruminal fermentation in these animals compared to those fed only on pasture
(Osoro et al., 2007c; Frutos et al., 2008).
Table 5. Nutrient intake, parasitic status and performance of grazing goats

supplemented or not with heather, in two periods of the grazing season (Period 1: from
late April to early August; Period 2: from mid-August to mid-November)
Period 1 Period 2
Heather supplementation Yes No s.e.m. Sign. Yes No s.e.m. Sign.
Total DMI (g DM/kg 63.9 63.9 3.8 NS 30.9 27.5 2.9 NS
BW0.75/day)
Heather in diet (%) 20.9 0 – – 35.0 0 – –
Nutrient intake (g/kg
BW0.75/day)
CP 11.8 13.9 0.8 * 4.5 5.5 0.6 NS
NDF 33.1 33.6 1.9 NS 16.4 13.6 1.5 NS
ADF 18.0 15.9 1.0 * 10.4 6.6 0.8 **
ADL 5.1 2.3 0.2 *** 5.6 2.4 0.4 ***
Final FEC (eggs/g) 4235 8363 1127 * 2971 5179 532 *
BW change (g/day) –15.5 –45.8 9.2 * 9.8 –32.4 15.8 *
DMI: dry matter intake; BW0.75: metabolic body weight; CP: crude protein; NDF: neutral detergent
fiber; ADF: acid detergent fiber; ADL: acid detergent lignin; FEC: fecal egg count; s.e.m. standard
error of mean; * P < 0.05; ** P < 0.01; *** P < 0.001; NS non-significant (P > 0.05). Feed intake
and diet composition were estimated using alkane markers in mid-June (Period 1) and mid-October
(Period 2).
Parasite burden may also be affected by the grazing management. Goats managed at high
stocking rate (38 goats/ha) showed higher nematode egg excretions than those at lower ones
(24 goats/ha). Worm counts in abomasum and small intestine also tended to be higher at high

stocking rate, particularly in the case of Trichostrongylus spp. (Osoro et al., 2009). In this
trial, fecal egg counts were not significantly affected by heather supplementation, presumably
because of an anomalous dry year that lowered parasite burdens. However, within the high
stocking rate treatment, two nematode species, Teladorsagia circumcincta in abomasum and
Chabertia ovina in large intestine, were more numerous in non-supplemented than in
supplemented goats. Independently of stocking rate, goats‘ BW changes were positively
affected by heather supplementation.
The importance of heather to control parasites might also vary depending on the diet,
especially in animals supplemented with energy rich fodder. The combination of tannin-
containing heather with an energy (oats, Avena sativa) supplementation had additive positive
effects reducing fecal egg excretion and enhancing goats‘ performance (Celaya et al., 2010a).
In this trial, heather-supplemented goats consumed 21–35% heather while total intake was
similar to non-supplemented goats. This implied that protein intake was lower whereas acid
detergent fiber (ADF) and lignin (ADL) intakes were higher in supplemented compared to
pasture-fed goats (Table 5). Thus, goats chose to feed on heather instead of grazing only
pasture, which was better in nutritional terms (higher protein and lower lignin contents), and
sacrificed nutrient intake in the interests of health, which ultimately improved their
productive response. These results suggest that goats self-medicate through the
pharmacological use of heather to enhance their fitness.
Comparing the different ruminant species, goats shed more nematode eggs in feces,
ranging from 110 to 200 eggs/g from September onwards, than cattle (10–20 eggs/g) and
sheep (30–90 eggs/g) in partially improved heathlands (Celaya et al., 2008). Nevertheless,
these counts in goats were much lower than those observed at pasture with no available
heather (2500–8600 eggs/g), indicating that the presence of heathlands, in spite of their low
nutritive value, is beneficial for goats when they are integrated with improved pastures. In
addition to its anthelmintic effect, heather may provide minerals, trace elements and fiber,
improving ruminal processes, animal nutrition and health.
GRAZING EFFECTS ON HEATHLAND VEGETATION

AND BIODIVERSITY
Heathland vegetation is affected by grazing management, i.e. herbivore species and

breed, stocking rate, type of flock, etc., as well as by other management practices such as
burning or cutting (Hobbs and Gimingham, 1987; Calvo et al., 2002a,b), which in turn may
affect local fauna. In our conditions, both burning and mechanical clearing favor gorse
regrowth, becoming dominant in a few years (Celaya et al., 2007a; Jáuregui et al., 2007;
Benavides et al., 2009a). In previously burnt heathlands, grazing can decrease gorse biomass
accumulation, being such reduction higher with goats than with sheep grazing (Jáuregui et al.,
2007, 2009). As a consequence, higher herbaceous cover developed under goat grazing. In
undisturbed heather-dominated shrublands, goats reduced heather cover more than sheep,
again promoting a higher herbaceous cover, although the differences between grazer species
were less important in this case than in previously burnt grass-rich heathlands. Thus, grazing
effects also depend on the initial vegetation stage and previous management (Jáuregui et al.,
2009).

Looking at ground-dwelling arthropod fauna, higher abundances and diversity

(considering families of Araneae, Opiliones, Isopoda, Julida, Microcoryphia, Hemiptera,
Coleoptera and Hymenoptera) were recorded in heather-dominated shrublands, although
certain species were more numerous in grass-rich heathlands (Rosa García et al., 2010b). In
general, effects of the grazer species were lower than those exerted by the shrubland type,
although some groups like sheet weavers (money spiders, Linyphiidae, Araneae) and jumping
bristletails (Microcoryphia) or species such as the wolf spider Pardosa pullata (which prefer
a higher presence of herbs) were favored by goat grazing.
0.8
Bare
ground
cover
Ca Xn
Aa Pm
Ae
Ar Id Cg
Hr
Sg CL
Cn Bh CH Cy
Axis 2
Pv Cc
Pt Pk Ph
Cm Pn
Tt Ih Sf
LH Dr Op Lb
Pp Hd
Ps Tr Lm Pu Os
Ap Sv Pa Heather
Tb Nb Pb
Mf biomass
Le
Herbaceous Bl
cover Nh Hl
– 0.8
–1.0 Axis 1 1.0
Figure 6. Redundancy Analysis (RDA) for the relationships between goat grazing treatments (LH: local
Celtiberic breed at high stocking rate; CH: Cashmere breed at high stocking rate; CL: Cashmere breed
at low stocking rate), heathland vegetation variables and arthropod species in a three-year experiment
carried out in nine paddocks (three replicates per treatment). Arthropod species: Aa: Alopecosa
accentuata; Ae: Amara equestris; Ap: Alopecosa pulverulenta; Ar: Arctosa sp.; Bh: Bradicellus
harpalinus; Bl: Bembidion lampros; Ca: Calathus asturiensis; Cc: Carabus convexus; Cg: C.
getschmanni; Cm: C. macrocephalus; Cn: C. nemoralis; Cy: Cymindis alternans; Dr: Dromius sp.; Hd:
Harpalus decipiens; Hl: Homalenotus laranderas; Hr: Harpalus rufipes; Id: Iberodinodes dives; Ih:
Ischyropsalis hispanica; Lb: Leiobonum blackwalli; Le: Leistus barnevillei; Lm: Lebia marginata; Mf:
Metabeltus foveatus; Nb: Notiophilus biguttatus; Nh: Nemastoma hankiewiczii; Op: Odilellus spinosus;
Os: O. seoanei; Pa: Paroligolophus agrestis; Pb: P. meadii; Ph: Phalangium opilio; Pk: Poecilus
kugelanni; Pm: Pardosa monticola; Pn: P. nigriceps; Pp: P. pullata ; Ps: Pterostichus strennus; Pt: P.
cantaber; Pu: P. cupreus; Pv: P. vernalis; Sf: Sabacon franci; Sg: Steropus gallega; Sv: Synuchus
vivalis; Tb: Trechus barnevillei; Tr: Trochosa robusta; Tt: T. terricola; Xn: Xerolycosa nemoralis.
Regarding the effects of goat breed, higher plant species richness was recorded under
local Celtiberic goat grazing than under Cashmere goat grazing, owing to the more open
heathland generated in the former treatment, allowing more herbaceous species to settle.
However, floristic diversity index and evenness were reduced because of increasing
dominance of the two most abundant grasses, Agrostis curtisii and Pseudarrhenatherum
longifolium (Celaya et al., 2010b). Although it has been assumed that traditional breeds may
enhance overall biodiversity, the present study found no significant differences for arthropod
fauna (Jauregui et al., 2008; Rosa García et al., 2009a).

Within the Cashmere breed, the higher herbaceous cover and lower shrub cover
generated under the higher stocking rate (15 goats/ha) was not accompanied by differences in
floristic diversity compared with the lower stocking rate (6.7 goats/ha) (Celaya et al., 2010b).
The lower stocking rate did not enhance overall arthropod diversity or abundance, although
groups that demand more humid and shady conditions, like harvestmen (Opiliones), were
favored, whereas abundance and species richness of carabids (including various seed eater
species), and abundance of lycosids like Pardosa pullata, were higher under the higher
stocking rate (Rosa García et al., 2009a; Figure 6). Similarly, total grasshopper density
increased under high stocking rate, but this was attained almost exclusively by one species,
the graminivorous Stenobothrus stigmaticus, while the other eight orthopteran species tended
to be favored by the lower grazing intensity (Jauregui et al., 2008). After two years of grazing
cessation in these heathlands, ground dwelling arthropod community composition varied
significantly. Although the abundance of some species such as the opilionid Odiellus spinosus
increased, the abundance of the opilionid Nemastoma hankiewiczii was reduced.
Nevertheless, previous grazing effects remained on both vegetation and fauna two years after
grazing cessation (Rosa García et al., 2009b).
In mechanically cleared heathlands, higher increments of gorse cover, height and
phytomass were observed under single cattle or sheep grazing than under mixed grazing with
goats (Benavides et al., 2009a). More arthropod groups favored the patchier areas with higher
herbaceous biomass generated by mixed herds with goats (Rosa García et al., 2010a).
Compared to adjacent grasslands, these gorse-dominated shrublands held higher abundances
of Opiliones, Julida, Lithobiomorpha, Microcoryphia and Carabidae, while the reverse was
observed for Linyphiidae, Lycosidae and Hemiptera (Rosa García et al., 2010a, 2011; Table
6).
Table 6. Mean number of individuals of different arthropod groups

in shrubland or grassland areas grazed by single (cattle or sheep) or mixed (cattle or
sheep with goats) flocks in partially improved heathlands. Catches of six pitfall traps (10
cm diameter) per paddock from mid-July until mid-September. Means of four paddocks
per grazing treatment are included
Vegetation type Grassland Shrubland

Flock type Single Mixed Single Mixed
Order Araneae 170.5 202.8 69.8 64.8
Family Linyphiidae 125.0 152.0 22.0 18.2
Family Lycosidae 28.0 30.5 17.0 18.2
Order Opiliones 3.0 2.2 98.8 71.5
Order Julida 0.5 0.0 9.5 2.8
Order Lithobiomorpha 3.8 1.5 6.2 10.5
Order Microcoryphia 0.5 0.5 25.8 29.8
Order Hemiptera 24.2 21.2 10.5 8.8
Order Coleoptera 194.2 251.8 176.5 153.5
Family Carabidae 10.2 13.2 43.5 47.8
Overall, these results indicate that the responses of arthropod fauna to grazing
management, and hence to different vegetation structures and composition, are species
specific. Thus, a patchier habitat generated under different grazing regimes and integrating

different plant communities would promote a greater variety of arthropod species in a given
area. In the case of fauna directly linked to resources originated by livestock, such as dung
beetles, a greater diversity is to be hoped under mixed grazing by providing a wider diversity
of resources.
Horses can play an interesting role in heathland vegetation dynamics because of their
preferential consumption of gorse relative to heather (Putman et al., 1987; Ferreira et al.,
2013). In the understorey of Galician (NW Spain) Pinus radiata stands, intensive gorse
utilization by horses resulted in reductions of both Ulex europaeus and Ulex gallii biomass,
thus reducing combustible woody phytomass and decreasing fire risk (Mosquera-Losada et
al., 2010). In different shrubland types (dominated by heather, gorse, or co-dominated by
grasses and gorse) occurring in our experimental farm, horse grazing at heavy stocking rate
(3.3 mares/ha) reduced gorse cover and height while heather cover was maintained (Celaya et
al., 2012). Recently, managing horses at a half of the previous stocking rate (1.6 mares/ha),
progressive reduction in gorse dominance has been verified across three consecutive spring-
summer grazing seasons. Conversely, heather cover substantially increased, while herbaceous
cover slightly increased, especially in gorse-dominated vegetation (Figure 7). In opposition to
ungrazed control paddocks, floristic diversity and species richness increased under horse
grazing, especially in gorse- and grass-gorse-dominated paddocks (unpublished data).
Therefore, besides the control of gorse encroachment and reduction of combustible material
liable to burn, horse grazing can be useful to favor the spread of heather plants, restoring a
more typical botanical composition in heathlands in the long term.
% Heather-dominated Gorse-dominated Grass-gorse co-dominated

100
80
60
40
20
0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2010 2011 2012 2013 2010 2011 2012 2013
Heather Gorse (incl. other shrubs) Herbaceous Dead matter-bare soil
Figure 7. Changes in botanical composition (cover percentage) in three shrubland types (heather-
dominated, gorse-dominated, and grass-gorse co-dominated) grazed by horses (stocking rate 1.6
mares/ha) during three spring-summer seasons.
CONCLUSION
Heathland vegetation has a poor nutritive value for domestic herbivores, limiting
livestock production. Small ruminants are more suitable to develop sustainable grazing
systems in heathland territories. Improved pasture areas within heathlands benefit livestock
nutrition and performance. Sheep are the most productive species in partially improved

heathlands. Cattle show lower performances than other herbivores and a negative balance
during most of the grazing season, although they present the highest productivity during
spring. Thereby, the needs for external or preserved feeds are greater for cattle, increasing
yearly costs. Goats, as mixed feeders (grazer-browser), complement well with sheep and
cattle, and contribute to a more efficient utilization of heathland resources. In addition, goats
reduce shrub dominance and generate higher biodiversity indexes, reducing fire risk. Horses
have a high intake capacity and compete with other grazers, especially with cattle, which
show a low ability for heathland utilization. Preferably, horses should be sequentially
managed after ruminants to consume their refusals, maintaining a better quality pasture.
Horse grazing can reduce gorse dominance in previously burned or mechanically cleared
heathlands, promoting re-colonization by heather species, thus being a possible management
tool in heathland botanical restoration.
Interspersed open and close heathlands mixed with grasslands could keep higher faunistic
diversity. Mixed grazing with small ruminants seems the most appropriate to increase both
economic and environmental value of these marginal areas. Nevertheless, grazing pressure
should be monitored to conserve heathland-grassland associations in good condition in order
to enhance biodiversity and animals‘ sanitary and nutritional status. The profitability of
extensive grazing systems in heathland areas could be supported by the distinguishable
quality products obtained from environmentally friendly systems, in addition to an efficient
utilization of these underused resources, which contributes to enhance biodiversity and to
maintain sustainable production systems.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Authors wish to thank the staff of the SERIDA experimental farm for their work in
livestock management, upkeep of the pastures, paddocks, stables, warehouses and other
infrastructures, and assistance in samplings and measurements. Financial support of several
research projects from INIA (Spanish National Institute for Agrarian and Food Research and
Technology), CICYT (Spanish Interministerial Commission of Science and Technology),
FICYT (Foundation for the Promotion of Applied Scientific Research and Technology in
Asturias) and EU Framework Programme is gratefully acknowledged.
REFERENCES
Aldezabal, A. (2001). El sistema de pastoreo del Parque Nacional de Ordesa y Monte Perdido
(Pirineo central, Aragón). Interacción entre la vegetación supraforestal y los grandes
herbívoros. Zaragoza, Spain: Consejo de Protección de la Naturaleza de Aragón.
Álvarez, M.A., García, P. & Valderrábano, J. (2004). Tipificación, cartografía y evaluación
de los pastos españoles: Cartografía de los pastos de Asturias. Oviedo, Spain: SEEP–
INIA–SERIDA–INDUROT.
Benavides, R., Celaya, R., Ferreira, L.M.M., Jáuregui, B.M., García, U. & Osoro, K. (2009a).
Grazing behaviour of domestic ruminants according to flock type and subsequent

vegetation changes on partially improved heathlands. Spanish Journal of Agricultural

Research, 7, 417–430.
Benavides, R., Roig, S. & Osoro, K. (2009b). Potential productivity of forested areas based
on a biophysical model. A case study of a mountainous region in northern Spain. Annals
of Forest Science, 66, 108:1–108:10.
Calvo, L., Tárrega, R. & Luis, E. (2002a). The dynamics of mediterranean shrub species over
12 years following perturbations. Plant Ecology, 160, 25–42.
Calvo, L., Tárrega, R. & Luis, E. (2002b). Regeneration patterns in a Calluna vulgaris
heathland in the Cantabrian mountains (NW Spain): effects of burning, cutting and
ploughing. Acta Oecologica, 23, 81–90.
Celaya, R., Martínez, A. & Osoro, K. (2007a). Vegetation dynamics in Cantabrian heathlands
associated with improved pasture areas under single or mixed grazing by sheep and goats.
Small Ruminant Research, 72, 165–177.
Celaya, R., Oliván, M., Ferreira, L.M.M., Martínez, A., García, U. & Osoro, K. (2007b).
Comparison of grazing behaviour, dietary overlap and performance in non-lactating
domestic ruminants grazing on marginal heathland areas. Livestock Science, 106, 271–
281.
Celaya, R., Benavides, R., García, U., Ferreira, L.M.M., Ferre, I., Martínez, A., Ortega-Mora,
L.M. & Osoro, K. (2008). Grazing behaviour and performance of lactating suckler cows,
ewes and goats on partially improved heathlands. Animal, 2, 1818–1831.
Celaya, R., Ferreira, L.M.M., Moreno-Gonzalo, J., Frutos, P., Hervás, G., Ferre, I., García,
U., Ortega-Mora, L.M. & Osoro, K. (2010a). Effects of heather and oat supplementation
on gastrointestinal nematode infections and performance of grazing Cashmere goats.
Small Ruminant Research, 91, 186–192.
Celaya R., Jáuregui B.M., Rosa García R., Benavides R., García U., Osoro K. 2010b.
Changes in heathland vegetation under goat grazing: effects of breed and stocking rate.
Applied Vegetation Science, 13: 125–134.
Celaya, R., Ferreira, L.M.M., García, U., Rosa García, R. & Osoro, K. (2011). Diet selection
and performance of cattle and horses grazing in heathlands. Animal, 5, 1467–1473.
Celaya, R., Ferreira, L.M.M., García, U., Rosa García, R. & Osoro, K. (2012). Heavy grazing
by horses on heathlands of different botanical composition. In M. Saastamoinen, M.J.
Fradinho, A.S. Santos & N. Miraglia (Eds.), Forages and grazing in horse nutrition (pp.
219–226). European Association for Animal Production, publ. No. 132. Wageningen,
The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers.
Demment, M.W. & Van Soest, P.J. (1985). A nutritional explanation for body size patterns of
ruminant and nonruminant herbivores. The American Naturalist, 125, 641–672.
Duncan, P., Foose, T.J., Gordon, I.J., Gakahu, C.G. & Lloyd, M. (1990). Comparative
nutrient extraction from forages by grazing bovids and equids: a test of the nutritional
model of equid/bovid competition and coexistence. Oecologia, 84, 411–418.
Ferreira, L.M.M., Celaya, R., Benavides, R., Jáuregui, B.M., García, U., Santos, A.S., Rosa
García, R., Rodrigues, M.A.M. & Osoro, K. (2013). Foraging behaviour of domestic
herbivore species grazing on heathlands associated with improved pasture areas.
Livestock Science, in press (doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2013.05.007).
Fraser, M.D., Theobald, V.J., Davies, D.R. & Moorby, J.M. (2009a). Impact of diet selected
by cattle and sheep grazing heathland communities on nutrient supply and rumen
fermentation characteristics. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 129, 367–377.

Fraser, M.D., Theobald, V.J., Griffiths, J.B., Morris, S.M. & Moorby, J.M. (2009b).
Comparative diet selection by cattle and sheep grazing two contrasting heathland
communities. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 129, 182–192.
Frutos, P., Moreno-Gonzalo, J., Hervás, G., García, U., Ferreira, L.M.M., Celaya, R., Toral,
P.G., Ortega-Mora, L.M., Ferre, I. & Osoro, K. (2008). Is the anthelmintic effect of
heather supplementation to grazing goats always accompanied by anti-nutritional effects?
Animal, 2, 1449–1456.
Gimingham, C.H. (1972). Ecology of heathlands. London, UK: Chapman and Hall.
Gordon, I.J. (1989). Vegetation community selection by ungulates on the isle of Rhum. II.
Vegetation community selection. Journal of Applied Ecology, 26, 53–64.
Grant, S.A., Torvell, L., Smith, H.K., Suckling, D.E., Forbes, T.D.A. & Hodgson, J. (1987).
Comparative studies of diet selection by sheep and cattle: blanket bog and heather moor.
Journal of Ecology, 75, 947–960.
Hobbs, R.J. & Gimingham, C.H. (1987). Vegetation, fire and herbivore interactions in
heathland. Advances in Ecological Research, 16, 87–173.
Hodgson, J., Forbes, T.D.A., Armstrong, R.M., Beattie, M.M. & Hunter, E.A. (1991).
Comparative studies of the ingestive behaviour and herbage intake of sheep and cattle
grazing indigenous hill plant communities. Journal of Applied Ecology, 28, 205–227.
Hoste, H., Torres-Acosta, J.F.J. & Aguilar-Caballero, A.J. (2008). Nutrition-parasite
interactions in goats: is immunoregulation involved in the control of gastrointestinal
nematodes? Parasite Immunology, 30, 79–88.
Illius, A.W., & Gordon, I.A. (1993). Diet selection in mammalian herbivores: constraints and
tactics. In: R.N. Hughes (Ed.), Diet selection. An interdisciplinary approach to foraging
behaviour (pp. 157–181). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Scientific Publications.
Jáuregui, B.M., Celaya, R., García, U. & Osoro, K. (2007). Vegetation dynamics in burnt
heather-gorse shrublands under different grazing management with sheep and goats.
Agroforestry Systems, 70, 103–111.
Jauregui, B.M., Rosa-Garcia, R., Garcia, U., WallisDeVries, M.F., Osoro, K. & Celaya, R.
(2008). Effects of stocking density and breed of goats on vegetation and grasshopper
occurrence in heathlands. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 123, 219–224.
Jáuregui, B.M., García, U., Osoro, K. & Celaya, R. (2009). Sheep and goat grazing effects on
three Atlantic heathland types. Rangeland Ecology & Management, 62, 119–126.
Leonard, S., Kirpatrick, J. & Marsden-Smadley, J. (2010). Variation in the effects of
vertebrate grazing on fire potential between grassland structure types. Journal of Applied
Ecology, 47, 876–883.
Lumaret, J.P. & Errouissi, F. (2002). Use of anthelmintics in herbivores and evaluation of
risks for the non target fauna of pastures. Veterinary Research, 33, 547–562.
Mandaluniz, N., Aldezabal, A. & Oregui, L.M. (2009). Atlantic mountain grassland-
heathlands: structure and feeding value. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 7,
129–136.
Mandaluniz, N., Aldezabal, A. & Oregui, L.M. (2011). Diet selection of beef cattle on
Atlantic grassland-heathland mosaic: Are heathers more preferred than expected?
Livestock Science, 138, 49–55.
McNaughton, S.J. (1992) The propagation of disturbance in savannas through food webs.
Journal of Vegetation Science, 3, 301–314.

Milne, J.A. (1974). The effects of season and age of stand on the nutritive value of heather
(Calluna vulgaris L. Hull) to sheep. Journal of Agricultural Science, 83, 281–288.
Moreno-Gonzalo, J., Ferre, I., Celaya, R., Frutos, P., Ferreira, L.M.M., Hervás, G., García,
U., Ortega-Mora, L.M. & Osoro, K. (2012). Potential use of heather to control
gastrointestinal nematodes in goats. Small Ruminant Research, 103, 60–68.
Mosquera-Losada, M.R., Mouhbi, R., González-Hernández, M.P., Boubaker, A. & Rigueiro-
Rodríguez, A. 2010. Continuous and rotational grazing system with horses: effects on
gorse production understorey developed under Pinus radiata stand. In H. Schnyder, J.
Isselstein, F. Taube, K. Auerswald, J. Schellberg, M. Wachendorf, A. Herrmann, M.
Gierus, N. Wrage & A. Hopkins (Eds.), Grassland in a changing world (pp. 184–186).
Proceedings of the 23th General Meeting of the European Grassland Federation (Kiel,
Germany), Grassland Science in Europe Vol. 15. Duderstadt, Germany: EGF,
Arbeitsgemeinschaft Grünland und Futterbau der Gesellschaft für
Pflanzenbauwissenschaften, Universität Göttingen.
Osoro, K., Fernández Prieto, E., Celaya, R., Noval, G., Alonso, L. & Castro, P. (1999a).
Respuesta productiva de dos razas de ganado vacuno manejadas en dos cubiertas
vegetales de montaña. Información Técnica Económica Agraria (ITEA), 95A, 188–203.
Osoro, K., Oliván, M., Celaya, R. & Martínez, A. (1999b). Effects of genotype on the
performance and intake characteristics of sheep grazing contrasting hill vegetation
communities. Animal Science, 69, 419–426.
Osoro, K., Benito-Peña, A., Frutos, P., García, U., Ortega-Mora, L.M., Celaya, R. & Ferre, I.
(2007a). The effect of heather supplementation on gastrointestinal nematode infections
and performance in Cashmere and local Celtiberic goats on pasture. Small Ruminant
Research, 67, 184–191.
Osoro, K., García, U., Jáuregui, B.M., Ferreira, L.M.M., Rook, A.J. & Celaya, R. (2007b).
Diet selection and live-weight changes of two breeds of goats grazing on heathlands.
Animal, 1, 449–457.
Osoro, K., Mateos-Sanz, A., Frutos, P., García, U., Ortega-Mora, L.M., Ferreira, L.M.M.,
Celaya, R. & Ferre I. (2007c). Anthelmintic and nutritional effects of heather
supplementation on Cashmere goats grazing perennial ryegrass-white clover pastures.
Journal of Animal Science, 85, 861–870.
Osoro, K., Celaya, R., Moreno-Gonzalo, J., Ferreira, L.M.M., García, U., Frutos, P., Ortega-
Mora, L.M. & Ferre, I. (2009). Effects of stocking rate and heather supplementation on
gastrointestinal nematode infections and host performance in naturally-infected cashmere
goats. Rangeland Ecology & Management, 62, 127–135.
Osoro, K., Ferreira, L.M.M., García, U., Jáuregui, B.M., Martínez, A., Rosa García, R. &
Celaya, R. (2013). Diet selection and performance of sheep and goats grazing on different
heathland vegetation types. Small Ruminant Research, 109, 119–127.
Putman, R.J., Pratt, R.M., Ekins, J.R. & Edwards, P.J. (1987). Food and feeding behaviour of
cattle and ponies in the New Forest, Hampshire. Journal of Applied Ecology, 24, 369–
380.
Rosa García, R., Jáuregui, B.M., García, U., Osoro, K. & Celaya, R. (2009a). Effects of
livestock breed and grazing pressure on ground-dwelling arthropods in Cantabrian
heathlands. Ecological Entomology, 34, 466–475.

Rosa García, R., Jáuregui, B.M., García, U., Osoro, K. & Celaya, R. (2009b). Responses of
arthropod fauna assemblages to goat grazing management in northern Spanish
heathlands. Environmental Entomology, 38, 985–995.
Rosa García, R., Ocharan, F.J., García, U., Osoro, K. & Celaya, R. (2010a). Arthropod fauna
on grassland-heathland associations under different grazing managements with domestic
ruminants. Comptes Rendus Biologies, 333, 226–234.
Rosa García, R., Ocharan, F.J., Jáuregui, B.M., García, U., Osoro, K. & Celaya, R. (2010b).
Ground-dwelling arthropod communities present in three types of Cantabrian (NW
Spain) heathland grazed by sheep or goats. European Journal of Entomology, 107, 219–
227.
Rosa García, R., García, U., Osoro, K. & Celaya, R. (2011). Ground-dwelling arthropod
assemblages of partially improved heathlands according to the species of grazer and
grazing regime. European Journal of Entomology, 108, 107–115.
Rosa García, R., Fraser, M.D., Celaya, R., Ferreira, L.M.M., García, U. & Osoro, K. (2013).
Grazing land management and biodiversity in the Atlantic European heathlands: a
review. Agroforestry Systems, 87, 19–43.
Sykes, A.R. (1994). Parasitism and production in farm animals. Animal Production, 59,155–
172.
Vandvik, V., Heegaard, E., Måren, I.E. & Aarrestad, P.A. (2005). Managing heterogeneity:
the importance of grazing and environmental variation on post-fire succession in
heathlands. Journal of Applied Ecology, 42, 139–149.
Waller, P.J. (2006). Sustainable nematode parasite control strategies for ruminant livestock by
grazing management and biological control. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 126,
277–289.
Webb, N.R. (1998). The traditional management of European heathlands. Journal of Applied
Ecology, 35, 987–990.

Agric Res Updates 6 Celayaetal 2013

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Agric Res Updates 6 Celayaetal 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Complimentary Contributor Copy

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH UPDATES

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH UPDATES

Complimentary Contributor Copy

NOTICE TO THE READER

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

ISBN:  (eBook)

Published by Nova Science Publishers, Inc. † New York

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Complimentary Contributor Copy

SUSTAINABLE GRAZING SYSTEMS

R. Celaya1,, A. Martínez1, R. Rosa García1, L. M. M. Ferreira2,

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Castile and León

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Area covered by heathlands (2002) Burned areas (1988-2010)

Source: INDUROT – University of Oviedo Source: SADEI – Government of Principality of Asturias

Complimentary Contributor Copy

 the use of tannin-containing heather to control gastrointestinal parasites in goats;

CANTABRIAN MOUNTAIN HEATHLANDS

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Component Season CP NDF ADF ADL

Livestock Performance and Foraging Behavior in Heathlands

Dams Cows Mares Significance (P)

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Complimentary Contributor Copy

% Grass-dominated Gorse-dominated Heather-dominated

Heather Gorse Herbaceous

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Partially Improved Heathlands

Areas of improved pasture can be established in relatively level terrains by mechanical

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Foraging Behavior in Partially Improved Heathlands

Complimentary Contributor Copy

% Cattle Horses Sheep Goats

Heather Gorse Herbaceous

Livestock Performance in Partially Improved Heathlands

When improved pastures are associated to heathlands, animal performance is conditioned

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Herbivore species Cattle Horse Sheep Goat

Economics of Different Grazing Systems in Partially Improved Heathlands

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Cattle Horse Sheep Goat

There is an increasing awareness that diversification plays a strategic role in rural

Complimentary Contributor Copy

€/ha Cattle + Sheep + Goats Sheep + Goats

Complimentary Contributor Copy

The use of bioactive plants as nutraceuticals, specifically those containing condensed

Table 5. Nutrient intake, parasitic status and performance of grazing goats

Complimentary Contributor Copy

GRAZING EFFECTS ON HEATHLAND VEGETATION

Heathland vegetation is affected by grazing management, i.e. herbivore species and

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Looking at ground-dwelling arthropod fauna, higher abundances and diversity

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Table 6. Mean number of individuals of different arthropod groups

Vegetation type Grassland Shrubland

Complimentary Contributor Copy

% Heather-dominated Gorse-dominated Grass-gorse co-dominated

Heather Gorse (incl. other shrubs) Herbaceous Dead matter-bare soil

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Complimentary Contributor Copy

vegetation changes on partially improved heathlands. Spanish Journal of Agricultural

ISBN: (eBook)