Herbivory as a biotic factor

Introduction

Animals normally depend on plants as a result they actually affect the composition,
accumulation, density, and distribution of plants. Predation decreases the density of
plants population since it affects them directly. The factors that affect the abundance of
organisms are called density dependence factors. The herbivores are also called the
density dependence because they kill more plants when they are in abundance. If the
predators get more of the prey the population of the predators increase because they are
able to reproduce but that of the prey is decreased as they will be more predators that feed
on them (Barnett, 1971: 47).

Animals tend to eat young plants leaves and fruits because they have more proteins and
little cellulose this behavior animals eating young plants led to decline in density of the
plants population because at some time the older plants will die and there will be no other
plants left for reproduction meaning the population of the plants will distinct. Herbivores
affect the distribution of plants in that, where there are no animals there are more plants
accumulating at that place. ( Boughy, 1971:77)

However, plants have their own way of protecting themselves from being eaten by the
animals. They can make their proteins unavailable, as a result their attraction to
herbivores is reduced like the tannin deposited in the oak leaves combines with leaf
proteins in such a way that the proteins cannot be digested by caterpillars and other
herbivores, thereby slowing their growth considerably. Some plants change their physical
appearance to avoid being eaten by herbivores for example; some plants develop spines,
for example cactus. Spines protect plants from being eaten by the animals since they are
piercing. Mimicry is another protecting type. It is a phenomenon whereby some species
resembles the poisonous species that are totally unrelated to them. As a result of trying to
protect themselves they change their compositions. In this practical the impact of
herbivores on distribution composition and density will be determined by studying two
areas which is grazed and ungrazed areas (Robert, 1957:197).
Aim

To determine the effects of grazing on composition, distribution and abundance of plants

in Roma valley.

Procedure
Table 1: Materials and their usage
Study site Roma valley
No. Samples 3

Materials Usage
Field notebook Used to note results obtained
Temperature probe Was used to measure soil temperature
Photocell and light meter Used to measure light intensity
Polythene bags To collect plant species of the three sites in a quardrat
Hygrometer Used to measure relative humidity on the sites
Shear Used to cut the plant species within a site
Balance Used to measure mass of plant species from the sites
Quardrat (size) Used to mark borders of the area being surveyed
Measuring tape Used to measure distance between the sites being surveyed

Variables and their measurement

Variables How measurements were taken
Light intensity The photocell was placed about 10cm above the ground and
the reading was taken
Humidity The hygrometer was swung about for 2 minutes above the
quadrat and the reading was taken as humidity
Air temperature The thermometer was held above the vegetation in the
quardrat and the reading was noted
Soil temperature The thermometer was inserted in the soil at the center of the
quardrat and the soil temperature was noted
Cloud cover Clouds were surveyed and measurements were taken by
assumption
Plants Number of each plant found in the quadrat was counted and
recorded in the field note book
Biomass The plant species which were cut from the field and their
weight was measured on a balance and recorded
Height Measuring tape was placed alongside a plant and its height
was measured and recorded
Results

Table 2: protected area (ungrazed area)

Plot Humidity (%) Soil temp Light intensity Air temp Cloud cover
(◦C) (K) (◦C) (%)
1 32 27 1000 30 90
2 48 30 1000 27 90
3 45 30 1000 30 90
Mean 41.7 29 1000 29 90

Table 3: Unprotected area (grazed area)

Plot Humidity Soil temp Light intensity Air temp Cloud cover
(%) (◦C) (K) (◦C) (%)
1 31.0 32.0 900 31.0 90
2 36.0 38.0 900 34.0 90
3 23.0 34.1 900 31.5 90
Mean 30.0 34.7 900 32.2 90

Table 4: Plant species under ungrazed area

Monocots Dicots
Plant species Plot 1 Plot 2 Plot 3 Plant Plot 1 Plot 2 Plot 3
species
Malebesana 20 Dicot 1 5
Hyperania 26 7 13 Dicot 2 3
Kikiyo 4 Dicot 3 10 10 4
Plant 1 2 Dicot 4 1
Plant2 1 Dicot 5 4
Monocot 1 2 Dicot 6 1
Seboku 10 Dicot 7 4
T. lencothix 1 Dicot 8 3

Total 53 19 14 26 15
Mean 10.6 6.3 7 4.3 5 4
Table 5: Plant species on grazed
Monocots Dicots
Plant Plot 1 Plot 2 Plot 3 Plant species Plot 1 Plot 2 Plot 3
species
Monakalali 15 Lemanamana 2
Datura 2 Dicot 8 2 2
Monocot 3 2
Cypress 3
Monocot 1 23
Lehola 7
Total 19 26 7 2 4
Mean 6.33 13 7 2 2

Table 6: Plant species heights

Ungrazed area Grazed area
Monocots Dicots Monocots Dicots
Plant Height Plant height Plant height Plant species Height
species avg(cm) species species
Malebesana 18.25 Dicot 1 1 Monakalali 7 Lemanamana 3.6
Hyperania 81.5 Dicot 2 6.5 Datura 6 Dicot 8 3.6
Kikiyo 12 Dicot 3 27.5 Monocot 3 2
Plant 1 31 Dicot 4 1 Cypress 8.5
Plant2 4 Dicot 5 3.5 Monocot 1 4
Monocot 1 2 Dicot 6 12 Lehola 9
Seboku 14.5 Dicot 7 12
T. lencothix 35 Dicot 8 6.5
Mean 24.7 8.75 6.5 3.6

Table 7: Biomass of grazed and ungrazed area

Plot Ungrazed area mass (g) Grazed area mass (g)
1 324.0 75.08
2 219.70 16.2
3 364.4 -
Mean 302.7 45.64

Discussion
Considerably, the biomass of ungrazed area was found to be greater than the biomass of
grazed area. This is brought by the fact that the predators have affected the density of the
population of grazed area directly, hence the reproduction of the population is affected
negatively thus the population growth is decreased. Furthermore, the humidity of
ungrazed area was determined to be less than the humidity of grazed area. This is due to
the fact that since the plant population of ungrazed area is more denser than of grazed
area. The phenomenon is brought by the fact that received solar radiation is rather used
for photosynthesis than evaporating the water found in the environment of ungrazed area.

The soil temperature of ungrazed area was found to be less than that of grazed area due to
the fact that the radiation from the sun is absorbed by the plants for photosynthesis
purpose rather than heating the ground at ungrazed area. The light intensity of ungrazed
area was found to be higher than of grazed area due to the geographic position of the two
places. On the other hand, since there is more humidity at grazed area, much of solar
radiation is being absorbed in the atmosphere by rising water molecules due to
temperature difference. Lastly, plants at grazed area were not attractive as they seemed to
have changed colour which is the physical mechanism of plants to defend themselves
against predation.

Conclusion

The average biomass of ungrazed area was found to be 302.7g which is greater than that
of grazed area which was found to be 45.64g

Reference

Barnett. C.J.1971, Natural Selection Humans Population. New York

Boughy.A.S.1971. Ecology of Populationss. 5th edition. Macmillan Company. London.
Pp 1-10
Robert E.R.1973.Ecology.Thomas Nelson and Sons, London
NAME : Kane T.P.
STUDENT # : 200800301
CORSE CODE : B204
DATE OF LAB : 12/02/10
DATE OF SUBMISSION: 19/02/10
GROUP :4
PRACTICAL 2 : Herbivory as a biotic factor