Cited by 81Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesRangeland and Wildlife ManagementWildlife Ecology and Conservation

A theoretical analysis of competitive exclusion in a Trans‐Himalayan large‐herbivore assemblage

Open access
Mishra, Chardutt, Van Wieren, Sipke E., Heitkönig, Ignas M. A., Prins, Herbert H. T.·2002·Animal Conservation

Abstract

Understanding livestock grazing impacts on native wildlife is difficult when grazing is pervasive and has a long history. Spiti Valley in the Indian Trans‐Himalaya is characterized by overstocking of rangelands and a grazing history of over 3 millennia. An intriguing aspect of the wild large‐herbivore assemblage in Spiti Valley is its low diversity. In the present theoretical exploration, data on body masses of wild large‐herbivore species in the Trans‐Himalaya are examined against the backdrop of competition theory, to evaluate the possible role of competition in structuring the herbivore assemblage. The analysis is then expanded to include the livestock assemblage, and the possibility of the low wild herbivore diversity in Spiti Valley being a consequence of the high livestock diversity is explored. Null model analyses suggest that competitive interactions may have played a role in structuring the Trans‐Himalayan wild herbivore assemblage. This is reflected in a proportional regularity in species body masses, with each species, on average, being a constant proportion larger than the nearest smaller one. Such a proportional regularity is absent in the livestock assemblage. The analyses make a case for the competitive exclusion of at least four wild grazers in Spiti over the last 3 millennia. The present grazer assemblage conforms reasonably to the theoretical predictions ‐ these four species are among the six wild herbivores presently missing from Spiti. The implications of the analyses for conservation management in the Trans‐Himalaya are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1367943002002305

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The large numerical dominance of the domestic yak excludes wild yaks from former habitat.

    “and the large numerical dominance of the domestic yak excludes wild yaks from former habitat (Harris 2008;Mishra et al. 2002).”

    From Bos grunniens and Bos mutus (Artiodactyla: Bovidae) (2009) · cites this paper as Mishra et al. 2002

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mishra, C., Van Wieren, S. E., Heitkönig, I. M. A., & Prins, H. H. T.
Affiliations
  • Nature Conservation Foundation (IN)
  • Wageningen University & Research (NL)
Venue
Animal Conservation
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-08
Volume
5
Issue
3
Pages
251-258
ISSN
  • 1367-9430 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-1795
OpenAlex
W2053822547
Cited by
81
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 2
FWCI
4.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Animal Conservation (publishedVersion)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Keywords
competitive exclusion, large herbivores, Spiti Valley, Trans-Himalaya, livestock grazing, body mass, null model analysis, species diversity, grazing history, conservation management

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review