Abstract
Damage caused by wildlife foraging can lead to significant agricultural losses and the problem can be further complicated if the damage‐inducing animal is a valuable resource in its own right. Provision of alternative food sources such as cover crops might be a means of reducing the damage which appears to be linked to scarcity of alternative foods in intensively‐managed agroecosystems. Cover crops may provide other benefits to agroecosystems, i.e. preventing soil erosion but can potentially have some undesired consequences, i.e. water competition with the cash crop. In our study, we tested the effectiveness of cover crops in reducing the damage caused by foraging European rabbit Oryctolagus cuniculus to vineyards in a semi‐arid agroecosystem in southern Spain. Experimental treatments consisted of a combination of the presence/absence of sown cover crops (70% oat Avena sativa and 30% garden vetch Vicia sativa) with/without rabbit exclusion. In the 2009 growing season, we assessed rabbit‐induced damage using a browsing index on vine shoots, rabbit use of plots was estimated based on faecal pellet counts and grapevine yield was measured at harvest. Rabbits ate the cover crops, and rabbit use was highest in the plots sown with the oat and vetch cover crop. However, the effect of the presence of the cover crop on the amount of damage caused by rabbits was limited and, moreover, the presence of the cover crop had a negative effect on grapevine yield. Exclosure fences effectively reduced rabbit damage by keeping rabbit densities close to zero, but even a low rabbit number (∼ 1 rabbit/ha) can cause significant damage. Although cover crops provided rabbits with an alternative food source, they acted as attractants for rabbits and were not effective in reducing the damage caused to vineyards by higher rabbit numbers. Therefore, adding cover crops might not be an effective measure in controlling rabbit‐induced damage in semi‐arid wine‐growing regions.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 8
Claim · model-written summary
Rabbits ate the cover crops.
- Taxon
- cover cropse0
- Interactor
- Rabbits
.jpg?width=60)
Oryctolagus cuniculuse0herbivore - Outcome
- Rabbits ate the cover cropse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Rabbits ate the cover crops”
t0“vineyards”
Claim · model-written summary
Rabbit use was highest in oat and vetch cover crop plots.
- Taxon
- oat and vetch cover crope0
- Treatment
- sown with the oat and vetch cover crope0
- Interactor
- rabbitOryctolagus cuniculuse0herbivore
- Outcome
- rabbit usee0
- Direction
- higheste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“rabbit use was highest in the plots sown with the oat and vetch cover crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Cover crop presence had a limited effect on rabbit damage.
- Treatment
- presence of the cover crope0
- Interactor
- rabbitsOryctolagus cuniculuse0herbivore
- Outcome
- damage caused by rabbitse0
VitisNot reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the effect of the presence of the cover crop on the amount of damage caused by rabbits was limited”
e1“grapevine yield was measured at harvest”
Claim · model-written summary
Cover crop presence negatively affected grapevine yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the presence of the cover crop had a negative effect on grapevine yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Exclosure fences reduced rabbit damage.
- Treatment
- Exclosure fencese0
- Interactor
- rabbitOryctolagus cuniculuse0herbivore
- Outcome
- rabbit damagee0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Exclosure fences effectively reduced rabbit damage by keeping rabbit densities close to zero”
e1“grapevine yield was measured at harvest”
Claim · model-written summary
About one rabbit per hectare can cause significant damage.
- Interactor
- rabbitOryctolagus cuniculuse0herbivore
- Outcome
- significant damagee0
- Value
- ∼ 1 rabbit/hae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“even a low rabbit number (∼ 1 rabbit/ha) can cause significant damage”
e1“grapevine yield was measured at harvest”
Claim · model-written summary
Cover crops attracted rabbits and failed to reduce vineyard damage at higher rabbit numbers.
- Taxon
- vineyardse0
- Interactor
- rabbitsOryctolagus cuniculuse0herbivore
- Outcome
- damage caused to vineyardse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“they acted as attractants for rabbits and were not effective in reducing the damage caused to vineyards by higher rabbit numbers”
Claim · model-written summary
Adding cover crops may be ineffective for controlling rabbit damage in semi-arid wine regions.
- Taxon
- winee0
- Interactor
- rabbitOryctolagus cuniculuse0herbivore
- Outcome
- controlling rabbit‐induced damagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“adding cover crops might not be an effective measure in controlling rabbit‐induced damage in semi‐arid wine‐growing regions”
The same questions in other papers
cover crop · yield · VitisResults differ
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
11 papers more in this group
See all 15 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.