Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-2l2gl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-26T08:17:48.552Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Wildlife and Reclamation Ecology: Rabbit Middens on Seeded Limestone Quarry-spoil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2009

Jean M. Dixon  and
David J. Hambler
Jean M. Dixon
Affiliation:
Lecturer and Honorary Senior Lecturer respectively, Department of Environmental Science, University of Bradford, Bradford BD7 1DP, England, UK.
David J. Hambler
Affiliation:
Lecturer and Honorary Senior Lecturer respectively, Department of Environmental Science, University of Bradford, Bradford BD7 1DP, England, UK.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Middens (i.e. persistent ‘dung-heaps’) produced by Rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) on a limestone quarry-spoil bank in the process of reclamation were small areas of enhanced biological activity, initiated and maintained by Rabbits, that were probably beneficial, through recycling of nutrients, to those same Rabbits.

The soil of the middens, at a depth of 0–5 cm, was moister, richer in nutrients, of lower pH, and more humic, than elsewhere on the spoil. It probably owed these characteristics to the Rabbits' urine as well as dung.

Middens were ‘beneficial’ to the pioneer vegetation through the resultant of increased fertility and grazing; sown grasses were stimulated to produce local patches of sward on the spoil. The plants themselves were more intensely green, and richer in nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium, than those in the surrounding area.

Associated with the soil surface of the middens was a rich invertebrate fauna, some members of which must be directly and entirely dependent on the dung. Overall the Rabbits were judged beneficial to the reclamation.

Type
Main Papers
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , Spring 1993 , pp. 65 - 73
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, S.E., Grimshaw, H.M., Parkinson, J.A. & Quarmby, C. (1974). Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, England, UK: x + 565 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Clark, P.J. & Evans, F.C. (1954). Distance to nearest neighbour as a measure of spatial relationships in populations. Ecology, 35(4), pp. 445–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curry, J.P. (1988). The ecology of earthworms in reclaimed soils and their influence on soil fertility. Pp. 251–61 in Earthworms in Waste and Environmental Management (Eds Edwards, C.A. & Neuhauser, E.F.). SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague, The Netherlands: viii + 392 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Dawkins, R.D. (1982). The Extended Phenotype. W.H. Freeman, Oxford, England, UK: xii + 307 pp.Google Scholar
Dixon, J.M. & Hambler, D.J. (1984). An experimental approach to the reclamation of a limestone quarry floor: the first three years. Environmental Conservation, 11(1), pp. 19–28, illustr.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, P.J. & Hollis, S. (1982). The distribution of excreta on New Forest grassland used by cattle, ponies and deer. Journal of Applied Ecology, 19(3), pp. 953–64, illustr.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, C.A. & Lofty, J.R. (1977). Biology of Earthworms. Chapman & Hall, London, England, UK: xiv + 333 pp., illustr.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gemmell, R. & Crombie, S.A. (1976). Management of waste-tips for enhancement of landscape quality. Landscape Research News, 1(2), pp. 10–1, illustr.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hambler, D.J. & Dixon, J.M. (1986). An experimental approach to the reclamation of a limestone quarry floor: the fourth to seventh years. Environmental Conservation, 13(4), pp. 337–45, illustr.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kozma, C., Laurence, W.M., Cummins, M. & Mauer, R. (1974). Pp. 51–72 in The Biology of the Laboratory Rabbit (Eds Weisbroth, S.H. et al. ). Academic Press, London, England, UK: xiv + 496 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Lawson, D.M. (1989). The principles of fertilizer use for sports turf. Soil Use and Management, 5(3), pp. 122–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lockley, R.M. (1961). Social structure and stress in a Rabbit warren. Journal of Animal Ecology, 30, pp. 385–423, illustr.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lockley, R.M. (1962). Production of faecal pellets in the wild rabbit. Nature (London), 194, pp. 988–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lockley, R.M. (1976). The Private Life of the rabbit. Andre Deutsch, London, England, UK: 152 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Mykytowycz, R. (1962). Territorial function of chin-gland secretion in the Rabbit Oryctolagus cuniculus (L.). Nature (London), 193, p. 799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Southern, H.N. (1940). Ecology and population dynamics of the wild rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus). Annals of Applied Biology, 27, pp. 509–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, A.S. (1963). Further changes in vegetation since the advent of myxomatosis. Journal of Ecology, 51(1), pp. 151–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, H.V. & Worden, A.N. (1956). The Rabbit. Collins, London, England, UK: xii + 240 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Watt, A.S. (1981). Further observations on the effects of excluding rabbits from Grassland A in East Anglian Breckland: the pattern of change and factors affecting it (1936–73). Journal of Ecology, 69(2), pp. 499–508, illustr.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, O.B., Wells, T.E.C. & Wells, D.A. (1974). Grazing management of Woodwalton Fen: seasonal changes in the diet of cattle and rabbits. Journal of Applied Ecology, 11(2), pp. 499–516, illustr.CrossRefGoogle Scholar