Journal of Korean Society of Forest Science (한국산림과학회지)

Korean Society of Forest Science (한국산림과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Selection of the Rubbing Trees by Wild Boar (Sus scrofa) and its Ecological Role in a Mixed Forest, Korea

혼효림에서의 멧돼지(Sus scrofa) 비빔목 선택과 생태적 역할

  • Lee, Seong-Min (Department of Forest Sciences, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lee, Woo-Shin (Department of Forest Sciences, Seoul National University)
  • Received : 2014.04.16
  • Accepted : 2014.06.29
  • Published : 2014.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Conflicts between humans and wild boars (Sus scrofa) have increased because of causing crop damage and appearing in downtown. Management to reduce population size has mostly been implemented on pests, but knowledges about ecological values are very rare. Rubbing trees by wild boar was investigated to figure out characteristics and for management ecologically from July to October 2013 in a mixed forest, Geochang, Gyeongnam Province, Korea. Pinus rigida was most frequently founded, and rubbing trees, both conifers and deciduous, were mainly located in 200~600 m above sea level. DBH was no significant difference between rubbing and control trees. The use intensity of conifers was higher than that of deciduous. The coverage of foliage layers and the number of woody plants within a radius of 2.5 m of trees (rubbing and control) were also investigated and compared to determine ecological characteristics. There were 1,332 individuals founded from 25 families. In the coverage of foliage layers, the understory and midstory showed statistically significant, but not in the subover and overstory. The number of Shrubs and saplings are higher in rubbing trees than those of control, but no difference in stems. Total individuals, the number of species, species diversity index(H') within a radius 2.5 m is considerably higher in rubbing trees with high intensity than those of low intensity and control. Our results show that wild boar mainly selected and used conifers more frequently as rubbing trees. Wild boar also modified the physical environments around rubbing trees. Consequently, the positive effects such as species diversity is increase. Thus the conservation policies is required after the intensive population reduction every 3-4 years for forest ecological management rather than annual sustainable hunting.

멧돼지는 농작물 피해, 도심 출몰 등으로 인해 인간과 갈등이 증가하고 있다. 유해야생동물에 대하여 주로 개체수 감소에 대한 노력이 진행되며, 생태적 가치에 대한 연구는 미미하다. 따라서 본 연구는 멧돼지의 비빔목 선택 및 생태학적 역할을 알아보기 위해 2013년 7월부터 10월까지 경남 거창군내 혼효림에서 실시되었다. 멧돼지 비빔목은 리기다소나무(Pinus rigida)가 가장 많이 발견되었으며, 침엽수와 활엽수 모두 해발 200~600 m에서 가장 많이 발견되었다. 흉고직경(DBH)에 있어 비빔목과 대조구 사이 유의한 차이가 나타나지 않았으며, 활엽수보다는 침엽수가 이용강도가 높은 것으로 나타났다. 비빔목 생태학적 특성을 파악하기 위해 반경 2.5 m 이내의 목본식물과 피도량을 대조구와 비교하였다. 총 25과 1,332종의 목본식물이 발견되었다. 각 층별 피도량에서 하층피도량과 중층피도량에서 나무 그룹별 통계적 유의성이 나타났고, 중상층과 상층에서는 나타나지 않았다. 또한 관목과 치수의 수에서 그룹별 유의한 차이가 나타났으며, 교목의 수에서는 나타나지 않았다. 총 개체수, 종수, 종다양도지수(H')에서는 모두 통계적 유의성이 나타났으며, 이용강도가 높은 비빔목에서 가장 높게 나타났다. 따라서 멧돼지는 주로 침엽수를 비빔목으로 선택하며, 이용강도가 높은 비빔목에서는 피도량 등 물리적 환경을 변화시켜 종다양도를 증가시키는 등 여러 가지 긍정적 영향을 끼치는 것으로 나타났다. 멧돼지의 산림생태학적 관리를 위해서는 매년 지속적인 포획보다는 3-4년을 주기로 강도 높은 개체수 감소 후 보전 정책이 필요할 것으로 판단된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Benner, J.M. and Bowyer, R.T. 1988. Selection of trees for rubs by white-tailed deer in Maine. Journal of Mammalogy 69(3): 624-627. https://doi.org/10.2307/1381358
  2. Bratton, S.P. 1975. The effect of the european wild boar, Sus scrofa, on gray beech forest in the great smoky mountains. Ecology 56(6): 1356-1366. https://doi.org/10.2307/1934702
  3. Bryant, J.P. and Kuropat, P.J. 1980. Selection of winter forage by subarctic browsing vertebrates: the role of plant chemistry. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 11: 261-285. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.11.110180.001401
  4. Burst, T.L. and Pelton, M.R. 1983. Black bear mark trees in the smoky mountains. International Association for Bear Research and Management 5: 45-53.
  5. Conover, M. 2002. Resolving human-wildlife conflicts. Lewis. Florida. p. 407.
  6. Dovrat, G., Perevolotsky, A., and Neeman, G. 2012. Wild boars as seed dispersal agents of exotic plants from agricultural lands to conservation areas. Journal of Arid Environments 78: 49-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2011.11.011
  7. Fernandez-Llario. 2005. The sexual function of wallowing in male wild boar (Sus scrofa). Journal of Ethology 23: 9-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10164-004-0121-7
  8. Geochang County. 2011. The 51st Statistics annual report. Geochang County Office. Geochang. p. 459.
  9. Green, G.I. and Mattson, D.J. 2003. Tree rubbing by yellowstone grizzly bears Ursus arctos. Wildlife Biology 9(1): 1-10.
  10. Heinken, T. and Raudnitschka, D. 2002. Do wild ungulates contribute to the dispersal of vascular plants in central european forests by epizoochory? A case study in NE Germany. Forst Wissenschaftliches Centralblatt 121(4): 179-194. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0337.2002.02029.x
  11. Heinken, T., Schmidt, M., Oheimb, G., Kriebitzsch, W., and Ellenberg, H. 2006. Soil seed banks near rubbing trees indicate dispersal of plant species into forests by wild boar. Basic and Applied Ecology 7(1): 31-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2005.04.006
  12. Hone, J. 2007. Wildlife damage control. CSIRO publishing. Australia. pp. 171.
  13. Howe, T.D., Singer, F.J., and Ackerman, B.B. 1981. Forage relationships of european wild boar invading northern hardwood forest. The Journal of Wildlife Management 45(3): 748-754. https://doi.org/10.2307/3808713
  14. Johansson, A., Liberg, O., and Wahlstrom, L.K. 1995. Temporal and physical characteristics of scraping and rubbing in roe deer (Capreolus capreolus). Journal of Mammalogy 76(1): 123-129. https://doi.org/10.2307/1382320
  15. Kent, M. 2012. Vegetation description and data analysis: a practical approach. John Wiley & Sons. Chichester. p. 428.
  16. KNA (Korea National Arboretum). 2010. A field guide to trees and shrubs. Geobook. Seoul. p. 725.
  17. Lacki, M.J. and Lancia, R.A. 1986. Effects of wild pigs on beech growth in great smoky mountains national park. Journal of Wildlife Management 50: 655-659. https://doi.org/10.2307/3800976
  18. Lee, D.K., Woo, H.C., Lee, W.S., and Rhim, S.J. 1999. Characteristics of breeding bird communities due to different forest structure practiced by thinning in conifer plantation. Korean Journal of Ornithology 6(1): 57-64.
  19. Lee, S.M. 2013. Home range, Diet, and Crop Damage of Wild boar (Sus scrofa) in Geochang County, Gyeongnam, Korea. Master Thesis. Seoul National University. Seoul. p. 82.
  20. Massei, G. and Bowyer, R.T. 1999. Scent marking in fallow deer: effects of lekking behaviour on rubbing and wallowing. Journal of Mammalogy 80(2): 633-638. https://doi.org/10.2307/1383307
  21. Massei, G. and Genov, P.V. 2004. The environmental impact of wild boar. Galemys 16: 135-145.
  22. NIBR (National Institute of Biological Resources). 2012. Red data book of endagered mammals in Korea. NIBR. Incheon. pp. 111.
  23. Nielsen, D.G., Dunlap, M.J., and Miller, K.V. 1982. Pre-rut rubbing by white-tailed bucks: nursery damage, social role, and management options. Wildlife Society Bulletin 10(4): 341-348.
  24. MoE (Ministry of Environment). 2012. The law of wildlife protection and management. MoE. p. 17.
  25. Park, C.D., Son, S.H., Hwang, H.S., Lee. W.S., and Lee, E.J. 2014. Characteristics of amphibian and reptile populations in a coniferous plantation and a deciduous forest. Journal of Korean Forest Society 103(1): 1-5. https://doi.org/10.14578/jkfs.2014.103.1.1
  26. Ramos, J.A., Bugalho, M.N., Cortez, P., and Iason, G.R. 2006. Selection of trees for rubbing by red and roe deer in forest plantations. Forest Ecology and Management 222: 39-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2005.10.017
  27. Rhim, S.J. and Lee, W.S. 2001. Habitat preferences of small rodents in deciduous forests of North-eastern South Korea. Mammal Study 26: 1-8. https://doi.org/10.3106/mammalstudy.26.1
  28. Sardin, T. and Cargnelutti, B. 1987. Typologie des arbres marques par le sanglier dans une region a faible taux de boisement. Monitore Zoologico Italiano 21: 345-354.
  29. Schaffer, S.C. 1971. Some ecological relationships of grizzly bears and black bears of the Apgar Mountains in Glacier National Park, Montana. Master Thesis. University of Montana. Missoula. p. 133.
  30. Schley, L. and Roper, T.J. 2003. Diet of wild boar Sus scrofa in Western Europe, with particular reference to consumption of agricultural crops. Mammal Review 33(1): 43-56. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2907.2003.00010.x
  31. Schmidt, M., Sommer, K., Kriebitzsch, W., Ellenberg, H., and Oheimb, G. 2004. Dispersal of vascular plants by game in northern Germany. Part: Roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) and wildboar (Sus scrofa). European Journal of Forest Research 123(2): 167-176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-004-0029-3
  32. Schnitzer, S.A. and Carson, W.P. 2001. Treefall gaps and the maintenance of species diversity in a tropical forest. Ecology 82(4): 913-919. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[0913:TGATMO]2.0.CO;2
  33. Shaffer, S.C. 1971. Some ecological relationships of grizzly bears and black bears of the Apgar mountains in Glacier National Park, Montana. Master thesis. University of Montana. Missoula. p. 133.
  34. Vanschoenwinkel, B., Waterkeyn, A., Vandecaetsbeek, T., Pineau, O., Grillas, P., and Brendonck, A.L. 2008. Dispersal of fresh water invertebrates by large terrestrial mammals: a case study with wild boar (Sus scrofa) in mediterranean wetlands. Freshwater Biology 53: 2264-2273.
  35. Welander J. 1995. Are wild boars a future threat to the swedish flora?. IBEX Journal of Mountains Ecology 3: 165-167.

Cited by

  1. 광, 수분, 토성 그리고 유기물 처리에 따른 떡갈나무 유식물의 생육 반응과 생태적 지위 vol.53, pp.1, 2014, https://doi.org/10.11614/ksl.2020.53.1.102
  2. 비침습 샘플 DNA 분석으로 유추한 영월 한반도습지 내 멧돼지(Sus scrofa)의 생태 연구 vol.29, pp.3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.14249/eia.2020.29.3.230