DOI: 10.5061/dryad.85223
title: Data from: An ecosystem services perspective on brush management: research priorities for competing land use objectives

description: 1. The vegetation of semi-arid and arid landscapes is often comprised of
 mixtures of herbaceous and woody vegetation. Since the early 1900s, shifts
 from herbaceous to woody plant dominance, termed woody plant encroachment
 and widely regarded as a state change, have occurred world-wide. This
 shift presents challenges to the conservation of grassland and savanna
 ecosystems and to animal production in commercial ranching systems and
 pastoral societies. 2. Dryland management focused on cattle and sheep
 grazing has historically attempted to reduce the abundance of encroaching
 woody vegetation (hereafter, ‘brush management’) with the intent of
 reversing declines in forage production, stream flow or groundwater
 recharge. Here, we assess the known and potential consequences of brush
 management actions, both positive and negative, on a broader suite of
 ecosystem services, the scientific challenges to quantifying these
 services and the trade-offs among them. 3. Our synthesis suggests that
 despite considerable investments accompanying the application of brush
 management practices, the recovery of key ecosystem services may be
 short-lived or absent. However, in the absence of such interventions,
 those and other ecosystem services may be compromised, and the persistence
 of grassland and savanna ecosystem types and their endemic plants and
 animals threatened. 4. Addressing the challenges posed by woody plant
 encroachment will require integrated management systems using diverse
 theoretical principles to design the type, timing and spatial arrangement
 of initial management actions and follow-up treatments. These management
 activities will need to balance cultural traditions and preferences,
 socio-economic constraints and potentially competing land-use objectives.
 5. Synthesis. Our ability to predict ecosystem responses to management
 aimed at recovering ecosystem services where grasslands and savannas have
 been invaded by native or exotic woody plants is limited for many
 attributes (e.g. primary production, land surface–atmosphere interactions,
 biodiversity conservation) and inconsistent for others (e.g. forage
 production, herbaceous diversity, water quality/quantity, soil erosion,
 carbon sequestration). The ecological community is challenged with
 generating robust information about the response of ecosystem services and
 their interactions if we are to position land managers and policymakers to
 make objective, science-based decisions regarding the many trade-offs and
 competing objectives for the conservation and dynamic management of
 grasslands and savannas.
description: Figure 2, 3 & 5
 dataData used in Table 1 and
 Figures 2, 3 and 5 were derived from published papers obtained from Web of
 Knowledge search strings about brush management. These searches yielded
 1350 unique papers published in refereed journals which were distilled to
 364 papers that report quantitative responses to brush management. This
 database was further refined to 59 papers that directly quantified
 herbaceous production after brush management and these papers contribute
 the data shown in Figures 2, 3 and 5. Brush management was defined as
 mechanical, herbicide, fire, or treatments in combination and excluded
 studies that were confounded by continued sheep or cattle grazing on
 treatment sites. Of those 59 papers, 18 provided mean changes in
 herbaceous production with error on both control and treatment sites. Data
 from these 18 papers were used to generate Figures 2 and 3. Among those in
 the database of 1350 papers were 46 papers that directly measured changes
 in herbaceous diversity after brush management. Of those 46 papers, 29
 provided mean changes in diversity (richness or Shannon diversity) with
 error on both control and treatment sites. Data from these papers were
 used to generate Figure 5. When multiple tables or figures are listed they
 represent data reported by site or year and were averaged in our dataset.
 Data originally published in figure format was quantified using Adobe
 Illustrator CS6 or DataThief III.Archer_Predick_JoE.xlsx