Will trees or grasses profit from changing rainfall regimes in savannas?

Increasing rainfall variability is widely expected under future climate change scenarios. How will savanna trees and grasses be affected by growing season dry spells and altered seasonality and how tightly coupled are tree-grass phenologies with rainfall? We measured tree and grass responses to growing season dry spells and dry season rainfall. We also tested whether the phenologies of 17 deciduous woody species and the Soil Adjusted Vegetation Index of grasses were related to rainfall between 2019 and 2023. Tree and grass growth was significantly reduced during growing season dry spells. Tree growth was strongly related to growing season soil water potentials and limited to the wet season. Grasses can rapidly recover after growing season dry spells and grass evapotranspiration was significantly related to soil water potentials in both the wet and dry seasons. Tree leaf flushing commenced before the rainfall onset date with little subsequent leaf flushing. Grasses grew when moisture became available regardless of season. Our findings suggest that increased dry spell length and frequency in the growing season may slow down tree growth in some savannas, which together with longer growing seasons may allow grasses an advantage over C3 plants that are advantaged by rising CO2 levels.

Rooting depth as a key woody functional trait in savannas.

Dimensions of tree root systems in savannas are poorly understood, despite being essential in resource acquisition and post-disturbance recovery. We studied tree rooting patterns in Southern African savannas to ask: how tree rooting strategies affected species responses to severe drought; and how potential rooting depths varied across gradients in soil texture and rainfall. First, detailed excavations of eight species in Kruger National Park suggest that the ratio of deep to shallow taproot diameters provides a reasonable proxy for potential rooting depth, facilitating extensive interspecific comparison. Detailed excavations also suggest that allocation to deep roots traded off with shallow lateral root investment, and that drought-sensitive species rooted more shallowly than drought-resistant ones. More broadly across 57 species in Southern Africa, potential rooting depths were phylogenetically constrained, with investment to deep roots evident among miombo Detarioids, consistent with results suggesting they green up before onset of seasonal rains. Soil substrate explained variation, with deeper roots on sandy, nutrient-poor soils relative to clayey, nutrient-rich ones. Although potential rooting depth decreased with increasing wet season length, mean annual rainfall had no systematic effect on rooting depth. Overall, our results suggest that rooting depth systematically structures the ecology of savanna trees. Further work examining other anatomical and physiological root traits should be a priority for understanding savanna responses to changing climate and disturbances.

Grasses continue to trump trees at soil carbon sequestration following herbivore exclusion in a semiarid African savanna.

Although studies have shown that mammalian herbivores often limit aboveground carbon storage in savannas, their effects on belowground soil carbon storage remain unclear. Using three sets of long-term, large herbivore exclosures with paired controls, we asked how almost two decades of herbivore removal from a semiarid savanna in Laikipia, Kenya affected aboveground (woody and grass) and belowground soil carbon sequestration, and determined the major source (C3 vs. C4 ) of belowground carbon sequestered in soils with and without herbivores present. Large herbivore exclusion, which included a diverse community of grazers, browsers, and mixed-feeding ungulates, resulted in significant increases in grass cover (~22%), woody basal area (~8 m2 /ha), and woody canopy cover (31%), translating to a ~8.5 t/ha increase in aboveground carbon over two decades. Herbivore exclusion also led to a 54% increase (20.5 t/ha) in total soil carbon to 30-cm depth, with ~71% of this derived from C4 grasses (vs. ~76% with herbivores present) despite substantial increases in woody cover. We attribute this continued high contribution of C4 grasses to soil C sequestration to the reduced offtake of grass biomass with herbivore exclusion together with the facilitative influence of open sparse woody canopies (e.g., Acacia spp.) on grass cover and productivity in this semiarid system.

Large herbivores maintain a two-phase herbaceous vegetation mosaic in a semi-arid savanna.

Many arid and semi-arid rangelands exhibit distinct spatial patterning of vegetated and bare soil-dominated patches. The latter potentially represent a grazing-induced, degraded ecosystem state, but could also arise via mechanisms related to feedbacks between vegetation cover and soil moisture availability that are unrelated to grazing. The degree to which grazing contributes to the formation or maintenance of degraded patches has been widely discussed and modeled, but empirical studies of the role of grazing in their formation, persistence, and reversibility are limited.We report on a long-term (17 years) grazing removal experiment in a semi-arid savanna where vegetated patches composed of perennial grasses were interspersed within large (>10 m2) patches of bare soil.Short-term (3 years) grazing removal did not allow bare patches to become revegetated, whereas following long-term (17 years) grazing removal, bare soil patches were revegetated by a combination of stoloniferous grasses and tufted bunchgrasses. In the presence of grazers, stoloniferous grasses partially recolonized bare patches, but this did not lead to full recovery or to the establishment of tufted bunchgrasses.These results show that grazers alter both the balance between bare and vegetated patches, as well as the types of grasses dominating both patch types in this semiarid savanna.Synthesis: Large herbivores fundamentally shaped the composition and spatial pattern of the herbaceous layer by maintaining a two-phase herbaceous mosaic. However, bare patches within this mosaic can recover given herbivore removal over sufficiently long time scales, and hence do not represent a permanently degraded ecosystem state.

Defence strategies in African savanna trees.

Southern African savannas are commonly polarised into two broad types based on plant functional types and defences; infertile savannas dominated by broad-leaved trees typically defended by nitrogen-free secondary compounds and fertile savannas dominated by fine-leaved trees defended by structural defences. In this study, we use trait and other data from 15 wooded savanna sites in Southern Africa and ask if broad-leaved and fine-leaved species dominate on nutrient-poor and nutrient-rich soils, respectively. We then test if there is there any evidence for trade-offs in chemical (i.e., condensed tannins and total polyphenols) vs. structural defences on different soil types. We did not find strong evidence for a general divide in fine- vs. broad-leaved savannas according to soil fertility, nor for a simple trade-off between chemical and structural defences. Instead, we found savanna species to cluster into three broad defence strategies: species were high in leaf N and either (A) highly defended by spines and chemicals or (B) only structurally defended, or (C) low in leaf N and chemically defended. Finally, we tested for differences in browser utilisation between soil types and among plant defence strategies and found that browsing by meso-herbivores was higher on nutrient-rich soils and targeted species from groups A and B and avoided C, while browsing by elephants was mostly not affected by soil type or defence strategy. We propose a framework that can be used as a basis for asking strategic questions that will help improve our understanding of plant defences in savannas.