DOI: 10.5061/dryad.gqnk98sjn
title: Data from: Knowledge co-production with traditional herders on cattle grazing behaviour for better management of species-rich grasslands

description: The research gap between rangeland/livestock science and conservation
 biology/vegetation ecology has led to a lack of evidence needed for
 grazing-related conservation management. Connecting scientific
 understanding with traditional ecological knowledge of local livestock
 keepers could help bridge this research and knowledge gap. 1. We studied
 the grazing behaviour (plant selection and avoidance) of beef cattle (ca.
 33 000 bites) on species-rich lowland pastures in Central Europe and
 traditional herding practices. We also did &gt;450 outdoor interviews
 with traditional herders about livestock behaviour, herders’ decisions to
 modify grazing behaviour, and effects of modified grazing on pasture
 vegetation. 2. We found that cattle grazing on species-rich pastures
 displayed at least 10 different behavioural elements as they encountered
 117 forage species from highly desired to rejected. The small
 discrimination error suggests that cattle recognize all listed plants ‘by
 species’. 3. We also found that herders had broad knowledge of grazing
 desire and they consciously aimed to modify desire by slowing, stopping or
 redirecting the herd. Modifications were aimed at increasing grazing
 intensity in less desired patches and decreasing grazing selectivity in
 heterogenous swards. 4. Synthesis and applications: These traditional herd
 management practices have significant conservation benefits, such as
 avoiding under- and overgrazing, and targeted removal of pasture weeds,
 litter and enchroaching bushes, tall competitive plants and invasive
 species. We argue that knowledge co-production with traditional herders
 who belong to another knowledge system could help connect isolated
 scientific disciplines especially if ecologists and rangeland scientists
 work closely with traditional herders, co-designing research projects and
 working together in data collection, analysis and interpretation. Stronger
 links between these disciplines could help develop evidence-based,
 specific conservation management practices while herders could contribute
 with their practical experiences and with real world testing of new
 management techniques.04-May-2020
description: We observed ingestive bite selection and avoidance behaviour of
 cattle at and just above the feeding station level in May, June, August,
 October 2014 and May, June, August, September, October 2015, altogether
 during 22 days, both during morning and afternoon meals (4-5 hours each)
 on three nearby pastures. Livestock were calm, individuals were selected
 randomly. We went as close as possible (0.8-2 m) keeping impact on cattle
 to the minimum while having a good view of plants near each animal’s
 mouth. When plants were difficult to identify to the species level, we
 visited the feeding station just after the animal departed. We documented
 how and how often certain plant species were approached, eaten or avoided
 by cattle (see behavioural elements in Table 1). To avoid differences
 among observers, most observations were done by the first author who had a
 full knowledge of the local flora and was experienced using binoculars
 (Nikon, 8*40 mm). We grouped bite-level observations
 (ca. 33 000 bites) into frequency categories as our goal was to document
 behaviour towards as many plant species as possible instead of quantifying
 daily intake or forage preference (cf. Agreil et al., 2005). We did not
 study grazing preference (i.e. choice given alternatives, comparing intake
 and available biomass for each species separately) which would have been
 impossible in such species-rich pastures. Frequency category 3 (see
 Appendix S3) means more than 6 (usually 20&lt;) observations per meal,
 2 means 3-6 observations per meal, and 1 means 1-2 observations per meal
 (category boundaries were set arbitrarily). We analysed 117 species (from
 a total of 241) for which we had observations on at least 3 independent
 days in spring and autumn, respectively. We developed a desirability index
 using the proportion of intake-positive elements (the first 5 in Table 1)
 divided by the total frequency of all 10 elements.
description: None.