FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Environmental monitoring and assessment2026; 198(6); 639; doi: 10.1007/s10661-026-15487-8

Open habitats and species differences shape space use in semi-feral cattle and horses across Danish rewilding sites.

Abstract: Large herbivores can strongly influence ecosystem structure and biodiversity, making knowledge of their space use important for trophic rewilding. We used GPS-tracking data collected over two years from 10 semi-feral cattle and 17 horses across ten Danish rewilding sites to analyse habitat use in a use-availability framework using resource selection functions (RSFs), complemented by direct behavioural observations. Both species showed large individual variability but overall used habitats disproportionately to availability, with higher relative use of open habitats; including dry grassland and heath-dune habitats, and lower relative use of dense shrub, conifer forest, mixed and broadleaved forest and wetlands relative to grasslands. Horses showed higher relative use of open wet and heath-dune habitats compared with cattle. Behavioural observations supported marked interspecific differences in activity budgets, with horses spending most observed time grazing and cattle allocating more time to resting and ruminating. Habitat use also varied seasonally, including increased use of wetlands and forests in summer, while supplementary winter feeding caused strong local shifts in habitat use by concentrating animal activity around winter feeding areas. These results show that habitat composition and management strongly determine where herbivore impacts are likely to be concentrated within rewilding sites, and that dense conifer-dominated stands are likely to receive relatively limited use by horses and cattle. Thus, considering herbivore space-use ecology in site planning and management and introducing herbivores with distinct digestive physiologies and foraging strategies such as horses and cattle, will improve the effectiveness of trophic rewilding.
© 2026. The Author(s).
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2026-05-23 PubMed ID: 42174269PubMed Central: PMC13197323DOI: 10.1007/s10661-026-15487-8Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

Overview

  • This study investigated how semi-feral cattle and horses use different habitats in Danish rewilding sites, showing that both species prefer open habitats but differ in their specific space use and behaviors.
  • It highlights the importance of species differences and habitat types for managing herbivore impacts and the success of trophic rewilding projects.

Research Objectives and Context

  • Large herbivores like cattle and horses can shape ecosystems and biodiversity significantly through their feeding and movement patterns.
  • Trophic rewilding aims to restore these ecological roles by reintroducing or supporting herbivore populations.
  • Understanding where and how these animals use the landscape is crucial to predict and manage their ecological impacts.
  • This study focused on comparing habitat use by semi-feral cattle and horses across multiple Danish rewilding sites over two years using GPS tracking and behavior observations.

Methodology

  • Subjects: 10 semi-feral cattle and 17 horses across 10 rewilding sites in Denmark.
  • Data Collection: Two years of GPS tracking to monitor spatial movement and habitat use.
  • Habitat Analysis: Used a ‘use-availability’ framework with resource selection functions (RSFs) to determine preferences or avoidance of particular habitat types relative to availability.
  • Complementary Data: Direct behavioral observations recorded to verify activity patterns and provide context to habitat use differences.

Key Findings on Habitat Use

  • Both species exhibited considerable individual variation in space use, indicating flexibility or personality differences.
  • Overall, there was a clear preference for open habitats such as dry grassland, heathlands, and dune habitats.
  • Reduced relative use was noted for dense shrubland, conifer forests, mixed and broadleaved forests, and wetlands compared to grasslands.
  • Horses showed a higher relative preference for open wet habitats and heath-dune areas than cattle did.
  • Seasonal changes affected habitat choice, with increased use of wetlands and forests in summer, likely related to forage availability and temperature regulation.
  • Winter supplementary feeding strongly concentrated animal activity around feeding sites, causing localized shifts in habitat use.

Differences in Behavior Between Cattle and Horses

  • Behavioral observations revealed distinct activity budgets:
    • Horses spent most of their observed time grazing.
    • Cattle dedicated more time to resting and ruminating.
  • These differences reflect contrasting digestive physiologies and foraging strategies between the two species.

Implications for Rewilding Management

  • Habitat composition and management practices strongly influence how and where herbivores impact the landscape.
  • Dense coniferous forest stands tend to be used less by both species, suggesting limited herbivore influence in those areas.
  • Planning rewilding sites with consideration of herbivore spatial ecology can improve targeted ecosystem outcomes.
  • A mixed herbivore community, including species with different digestive and foraging traits like horses and cattle, broadens the range of vegetation types impacted and can create more diverse ecological effects.
  • Managing supplementary feeding locations is critical as they strongly affect spatial behavior and habitat use patterns during winter.

Conclusion

  • This study underscores the nuanced roles of species differences and habitat characteristics in shaping herbivore space use.
  • Effective trophic rewilding benefits from integrating these insights into site design and species selection to maximize ecological function and biodiversity benefits.

Cite This Article

APA
Bergin MD, Börger L, da Rocha ÉG, Havmøller RW, Jensen M, Svenning JC. (2026). Open habitats and species differences shape space use in semi-feral cattle and horses across Danish rewilding sites. Environ Monit Assess, 198(6), 639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-026-15487-8

Publication

Environmental monitoring and assessment
ISSN: 1573-2959
NlmUniqueID: 8508350
Country: Netherlands
Language: English
Volume: 198
Issue: 6
PII: 639

Researcher Affiliations

Bergin, Marianne Damholdt
  • Center for Ecological Dynamics in a Novel Biosphere (ECONOVO), Department of Biology, Aarhus University, Ny Munkegade 114, DK- 8000, Aarhus C, Denmark. mberg@hempel.com.
  • Danish Nature Agency, Førstballevej 2, 7183, Randbøldal, Denmark. mberg@hempel.com.
Börger, Luca
  • Department of Biosciences, Swansea University, Swansea, Wales, UK.
da Rocha, Érika Garcez
  • Department of Biology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Havmøller, Rasmus Worsøe
  • Department of Zoology, Natural History Museum Denmark, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, OE, Denmark.
  • Natural History Museum and Botanical Garden, University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway.
Jensen, Mads
  • Danish Nature Agency, Førstballevej 2, 7183, Randbøldal, Denmark.
Svenning, Jens-Christian
  • Center for Ecological Dynamics in a Novel Biosphere (ECONOVO), Department of Biology, Aarhus University, Ny Munkegade 114, DK- 8000, Aarhus C, Denmark.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Cattle
  • Ecosystem
  • Horses / physiology
  • Denmark
  • Conservation of Natural Resources / methods
  • Environmental Monitoring
  • Herbivory
  • Biodiversity

Grant Funding

  • 2020-0927 / 15. Juni Fonden
  • 16549 / Villum Fonden
  • DNRF173 / Danmarks Grundforskningsfond
  • 0135-00225B / Danmarks Frie Forskningsfond

Conflict of Interest Statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: All authors have read, understood, and have complied as applicable with the statement on “Ethical responsibilities of Authors” as found in the Instructions. No approval from research ethics committee was required in this study. Clinical trial number: not applicable. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

References

This article includes 78 references
  1. Allen AM, Singh NJ. Linking movement ecology with wildlife management and conservation. (JAN), 1–13.
    doi: 10.3389/fevo.2015.00155google scholar: lookup
  2. Altmann J. Observational study of behavior: Sampling methods. .
    doi: 10.1163/156853974x00534pubmed: 4597405google scholar: lookup
  3. Bakker ES, Gill JL, Johnson CN, Vera FWM, Sandom CJ, Asner GP, Svenning JC. Combining paleo-data and modern exclosure experiments to assess the impact of megafauna extinctions on woody vegetation. (4), 847–855.
    doi: 10.1073/pnas.1502545112pmc: PMC4743795pubmed: 26504223google scholar: lookup
  4. Bakker ES, Svenning JC. Trophic rewilding: Impact on ecosystems under global change. .
    doi: 10.1098/rstb.2017.0432pmc: PMC6231072pubmed: 30348876google scholar: lookup
  5. Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. M., & Walker, S. C. (2015). . (1). 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
    doi: 10.18637/jss.v067.i01google scholar: lookup
  6. Bergin MD, Pedersen RØ, Jensen M, Svenning JC. Mapping rewilding potential – A systematic approach to prioritise areas for rewilding in human-dominated regions. .
    doi: 10.1016/j.jnc.2023.126536google scholar: lookup
  7. Bergin MD, Pedersen RØ, Roux EL, Jensen M, Svenning JC. Reversing the trend: Year-round grazing promotes species-rich grasslands in Natura 2000 sites. .
    doi: 10.1111/avsc.70045google scholar: lookup
  8. Buitenwerf, R., & Svenning, J. (2019). .
  9. Buttenschøn, R. M. (2007). In Miljøministeriet, Skov- og Naturstyrelsen og Center for Skov, Landskab og Planlægning, Københavns Universitet.
  10. Child MF, Selier SAJ, Radloff FGT, Taylor WA, Hoffmann M, Nel L, Power RJ, Birss C, Okes NC, Peel MJ, Mallon D, Davies-Mostert H. A framework to measure the wildness of managed large vertebrate populations. (5), 1106–1119.
    doi: 10.1111/cobi.13299pubmed: 30767306google scholar: lookup
  11. Chodkiewicz A, Prończuk M, Studnicki M, Dawid W. Habitat use by semi-feral Konik horses on wetlands—Three-year GPS study. (9).
    pmc: PMC10415426pubmed: 37563498doi: 10.1007/s10661-023-11605-ygoogle scholar: lookup
  12. Corlett RT. Restoration, reintroduction, and rewilding in a changing world. (6), 453–462.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2016.02.017pubmed: 26987771google scholar: lookup
  13. Cornelissen P, Vulink T. Effects of cattle and horses on vegetation structure. Are cattle and horses browsers enough to stop development of shrubs and trees ?. In B. Gerken, & M. Garner (Eds), , (vol 4, pp. 189–197).
  14. Cornelissen P, Bokdam J, Sykora K, Berendse F. Effects of large herbivores on wood pasture dynamics in a European wetland system. (5), 396–406.
    doi: 10.1016/j.baae.2014.06.006google scholar: lookup
  15. Council of the European Union. Council Directive 98/58/EC concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes. OJ L 221, 8.8.1988, pp. 23-27.
  16. Crawley, M. J. (2012). . Wiley.10.1002/9781118448908
    doi: 10.1002/9781118448908google scholar: lookup
  17. Cromsigt JPGM, Te Beest M, Kerley GIH, Landman M, Le Roux E, Smith FA. Trophic rewilding as a climate change mitigation strategy?. .
    doi: 10.1098/rstb.2017.0440pmc: PMC6231077pubmed: 30348867google scholar: lookup
  18. Cuddington K. Legacy effects: The persistent impact of ecological interactions. (3), 203–210.
    doi: 10.1007/s13752-012-0027-5google scholar: lookup
  19. Danish Environmental Portal. (n.d.). . Retrieved from https://danmarksarealinformation.miljoeportal.dk
  20. Ebrahimi A, Milotić T, Hoffmann M. A herbivore specific grazing capacity model accounting for spatio-temporal environmental variation: A tool for a more sustainable nature conservation and rangeland management. (6), 900–910.
    doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.12.009google scholar: lookup
  21. European Commission. (2020). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0380
  22. European Commission. (2024). . Official Journal of the European Union, L, 2024/1991. http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1991/oj
  23. Fieberg J, Signer J, Avgar T. A ‘how to’ guide for interpreting parameters in habitat-selection analyses. 1027–1043.
    doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.13441pmc: PMC8251592pubmed: 33583036google scholar: lookup
  24. Forbes, R. E., & Kerley, G. I. H. (2022). . (October).10.1163/1568539X-bja10189
    doi: 10.1163/1568539x-bja10189google scholar: lookup
  25. Fretwell SD, Lucas HL. On territorial behavior and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds. 16–36.
  26. Garrido P, Mårell A, Öckinger E, Skarin A, Jansson A, Thulin CG. Experimental rewilding enhances grassland functional composition and pollinator habitat use. (4), 946–955.
    doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.13338google scholar: lookup
  27. Gomez S, English HM, Bejarano Alegre V, Blackwell PG, Bracken AM, Bray E, Evans LC, Gan JL, Grecian WJ, Gutmann Roberts C, Harju SM, Hejcmanová P, Lelotte L, Marshall BM, Matthiopoulos J, Mnenge AMJ, Niebuhr BB, Ortega Z, Pollock CJ, Börger L. Understanding and predicting animal movements and distributions in the Anthropocene. (6), 1146–1164.
    doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.70040pmc: PMC12134457pubmed: 40183529google scholar: lookup
  28. Hagstrup M, Bruhn D, Olsen K, Lukassen M, Pertoldi C. Molecular study of dietary diversity of the Exmoor-ponies. (1), 53–70.
    doi: 10.46325/gabj.v4i1.111google scholar: lookup
  29. Hartvig I, Howe AG, Schmidt ENB, Pertoldi C, Nielsen JL, Buttenschøn RM. Diet of the European bison () in a forest habitat estimated by DNA barcoding. (1), 123–136.
    doi: 10.1007/s13364-020-00541-8google scholar: lookup
  30. Hofmann RR. Evolutionary steps of ecophysiological adaptation and diversification of ruminants: A comparative view of their digestive system. 443–457.
    doi: 10.1007/BF00378733pubmed: 28312172google scholar: lookup
  31. Hughes FMR, Stroh PA, Adams WM, Kirby KJ, Mountford JO, Warrington S. Monitoring and evaluating large-scale, “open-ended” habitat creation projects: A journey rather than a destination. (4), 245–253.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jnc.2011.02.003google scholar: lookup
  32. Jepson P, Schepers F. Making space for rewilding: Creating an enabling policy environment. .
    doi: 10.2307/j.ctv5jxnkx.20google scholar: lookup
  33. Kaczensky P, Huber K, Kaczensky P, Huber K. The use of high frequency GPS data to classify main behavioural categories in a Przewalski’s horse in the Mongolian Gobi The use of high frequency GPS data to classify main behavioural categories in a Przewalski’s horse in the Mongolian Gobi. (11), 281–289.
  34. Kastovska E, Mastnýa J, Konvicka M. Rewilding by large ungulates contributes to organic carbon storage in soils. (November 2023).
    pubmed: 38428182doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.120430google scholar: lookup
  35. Kemppinen J, Lembrechts JJ, Van Meerbeek K, Carnicer J, Chardon NI, Kardol P, Lenoir J, Liu D, Maclean I, Pergl J, Saccone P, Senior RA, Shen T, Słowińska S, Vandvik V, von Oppen J, Aalto J, Ayalew B, Bates O, De Frenne P. Microclimate, an important part of ecology and biogeography. (6).
    doi: 10.1111/geb.13834google scholar: lookup
  36. King SRB. Home range and habitat use of free-ranging Przewalski horses at Hustai National Park, Mongolia. (2–4), 103–113.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00087-4google scholar: lookup
  37. King SRB, Gurnell J. Effects of fly disturbance on the behaviour of a population of reintroduced Przewalski horses () in Mongolia. (1–2), 22–29.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2010.03.006google scholar: lookup
  38. Klich D, Grudzień M. Selective use of forest habitat by Biłgoraj horses. (2), 95–105.
    doi: 10.26496/bjz.2013.132google scholar: lookup
  39. Kowalczyk R, Kamiński T, Borowik T. Do large herbivores maintain open habitats in temperate forests?. .
    doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119310google scholar: lookup
  40. Krause J, Anthoni P, Harfoot M, Kupisch M, Arneth A. Modelling herbivory impacts on vegetation structure and productivity. (23), 9633–9651.
    doi: 10.5194/gmd-18-9633-2025google scholar: lookup
  41. Kristensen JÅ, Buitenwerf R, Berti E, Hansen OLP, Schowanek SD, Ejrnæs R, Hansen MDD, Olsen K, Normand S, Svenning J-C. Space‐use by feral cattle and horses shapes vegetation structure in a trophic rewilding area. (1), e70170.
    pmc: PMC12871458pubmed: 41636694doi: 10.1002/eap.70170google scholar: lookup
  42. Lamoot I, Meert C, Hoffmann M. Habitat use of ponies and cattle foraging together in a coastal dune area. 4, 523–536.
    doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2004.09.009google scholar: lookup
  43. Leverkus SER, Fuhlendorf SD, Geertsema M, Allred BW, Gregory M, Bevington AR, Engle DM, Scasta JD. Resource selection of free-ranging horses influenced by fire in northern Canada. 1, 85–101.
  44. Lovász L, C S-T, JMI B, Scasta JD, Grancharova-Hill R, Lemoine RT, Kerekes V, L M, Svenning JC, Fages A. Rewilded horses in European nature conservation-a genetics, ethics and welfare perspective. .
    pmc: PMC11718625pubmed: 39279124doi: 10.1111/brv.13146google scholar: lookup
  45. Manly, B., McDonald, L., Thomas, D., McDonald, T., & Erickson, W. (2002).  (2nd ed.). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  46. Mata JC, Buitenwerf R, Svenning J. Enhancing monitoring of rewilding progress through wildlife tracking and remote sensing. 1–17.
    pmc: PMC8270134pubmed: 34242225doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253148google scholar: lookup
  47. Matthiopoulos, J., Fieberg, J., & Aarts, G. (2023). . University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing. 10.24926/2020.081320
    doi: 10.24926/2020.081320google scholar: lookup
  48. Menard C, Duncan P, Fleurance G, Georges JY, Lila M. Comparative foraging and nutrition of horses and cattle in European wetlands. 1, 120–133.
    doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2664.2002.00693.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  49. Minister of Food Agriculture and Fisheries. Bekendtgørelse om dyrevelfærdsmæssige mindstekrav til hold af heste. BEK nr 1746 af 30/11/2020.
  50. Mirski P. Space use by semi-free-ranging cows on wetlands and its implication as a conservation management tool. (3).
    doi: 10.1111/rec.13533google scholar: lookup
  51. Nieszała A, Klich D, Perzanowski K, Januszczak M, Wołoszyn-Gałęza A, Olech W. Debarking intensity of European bison in the Bieszczady Mountains in relation to forest habitat features. October 2021.
    doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2022.120057google scholar: lookup
  52. Northrup JM, Vander Wal E, Bonar M, Fieberg J, Laforge MP, Leclerc M, Prokopenko CM, Gerber BD. Conceptual and methodological advances in habitat-selection modeling: Guidelines for ecology and evolution. (1), 1–31.
    doi: 10.1002/eap.2470pmc: PMC9285351pubmed: 34626518google scholar: lookup
  53. Van Oene H, Van Deursen EJM, Berendse F. Plant-herbivore interaction and its consequences for succession in wetland ecosystems: A modeling approach. (2), 122–138.
    doi: 10.1007/s100219900064google scholar: lookup
  54. Pedersen, C., & Havmøller, R. (2025). 10.13140/RG.2.2.36819.64801
    doi: 10.13140/rg.2.2.36819.64801google scholar: lookup
  55. Pedersen PBM, Ejrnæs R, Sandel B, Svenning JC. Trophic rewilding advancement in anthropogenically impacted landscapes (TRAAIL): A framework to link conventional conservation management and rewilding.. 1, 231–244.
    doi: 10.1007/s13280-019-01192-zpmc: PMC6889113pubmed: 31201614google scholar: lookup
  56. Perino A, Pereira HM, Navarro LM, Fernandez N, Bullock JM, Ceausu S, Cortes-Avizanda A, van Klink R, Kuemmerle T, Lomba A, Pe’er G, Plieninger T, Benayas JMR, Sandom CJ, Svenning J-C, Wheeler HC. Rewilding complex ecosystems.. 6438, 351.
    doi: 10.1126/science.aav5570pubmed: 31023897google scholar: lookup
  57. Pettorelli N, Barlow J, Stephens PA, Durant SM, Connor B, to Bühne HS, Sandom CJ, Wentworth J, du Toit JT. Making rewilding fit for policy.. 3, 1114–1125.
    doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.13082google scholar: lookup
  58. Popp A, Scheibe KM. The ecological influence of large herbivores - Behavior and habitat utilization of cattle and horses.. 3, 681–693.
    doi: 10.15666/aeer/1203_681693google scholar: lookup
  59. Pratt PM, Putman RJ, Ekins JR, Edwards PJ. Use of habitat by free-ranging cattle and ponies in the New Forest, Southern England. .
    doi: 10.2307/2404035google scholar: lookup
  60. Putfarken D, Dengler J, Lehmann S, Härdtle W. Site use of grazing cattle and sheep in a large-scale pasture landscape: A GPS/GIS assessment. (1–2), 54–67.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2007.05.012google scholar: lookup
  61. Putman RJ, Pratt RM, Ekins JR, Edwards PJ. Food and feeding behaviour of cattle and ponies in the New Forest, Hampshire. (2), 369–380.
  62. R Core Team. (2023). R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
  63. Schlägel UE, Grimm V, Blaum N, Colangeli P, Dammhahn M, Eccard JA, Hausmann SL, Herde A, Hofer H, Joshi J, Kramer-Schadt S, Litwin M, Lozada-Gobilard SD, Müller MEH, Müller T, Nathan R, Petermann JS, Pirhofer-Walzl K, Radchuk V, Jeltsch F. Movement-mediated community assembly and coexistence. (4), 1073–1096.
    doi: 10.1111/brv.12600pubmed: 32627362google scholar: lookup
  64. Schmitz OJ, Sylvén M, Atwood TB, Bakker ES, Berzaghi F, Brodie JF, Cromsigt JPGM, Davies AB, Leroux SJ, Schepers FJ, Smith FA, Stark S, Svenning J-C, Tilker A, Ylänne H. Trophic rewilding can expand natural climate solutions. (4), 324–333.
    doi: 10.1038/s41558-023-01631-6google scholar: lookup
  65. Schoenecker KA, Esmaeili S, King SRB. Seasonal resource selection and movement ecology of free-ranging horses in the western United States. (2), 1–21.
    doi: 10.1002/jwmg.22341google scholar: lookup
  66. Schoenecker KA, King SRB, Nordquist M, Nandintsetseg D, Cao Q. Habitat and diet of equids. pp. 41–58.
  67. Signer J, Fieberg J, Avgar T. Animal movement tools (amt): R package for managing tracking data and conducting habitat selection analyses. 2, 880–890.
    doi: 10.1002/ece3.4823pmc: PMC6362447pubmed: 30766677google scholar: lookup
  68. Slodowicz, D., Durbecq, A., Ladouceur, E., Eschen, R., Humbert, J.-Y., & Arlettaz, R. (2023). . (September 2022), 1–13.10.1002/2688-8319.12221
    doi: 10.1002/2688-8319.12221google scholar: lookup
  69. Spedener M, Tofastrud M, Austrheim G, Zimmermann B. A grazer in a browser’s habitat: Resource selection of foraging cattle in productive boreal forest. 15–23.
    doi: 10.1016/j.rama.2023.12.004google scholar: lookup
  70. Svenning JC. Rewilding should be central to global restoration efforts. 6, 657–660.
    doi: 10.1016/j.oneear.2020.11.014google scholar: lookup
  71. Svenning JC, Buitenwerf R, Le Roux E. Trophic rewilding as a restoration approach under emerging novel biosphere conditions. 9, R435–R451.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2024.02.044pubmed: 38714176google scholar: lookup
  72. Svenning JC, Pedersen PBM, Donlan CJ, Ejrnæs R, Faurby S, Galetti M, Hansen DM, Sandel B, Sandom CJ, Terborgh JW, Vera FWM. Science for a wilder Anthropocene: Synthesis and future directions for trophic rewilding research. 4, 898–906.
    doi: 10.1073/pnas.1502556112pmc: PMC4743824pubmed: 26504218google scholar: lookup
  73. Tews J, Brose U, Grimm V, Tielbörger K, Wichmann MC, Schwager M, Jeltsch F. Animal species diversity driven by habitat heterogeneity/diversity: The importance of keystone structures. 1, 79–92.
    doi: 10.1046/j.0305-0270.2003.00994.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  74. Thomassen EE, Sigsgaard EE, Jensen MR, Olsen K, Hansen MDD, Svenning J-C, Thomsen PF. Contrasting seasonal patterns in diet and dung-associated invertebrates of feral cattle and horses in a rewilding area. December 2022, 1–21.
    pubmed: 36744391doi: 10.1111/mec.16847google scholar: lookup
  75. Tofastrud M, Devineau O, Zimmermann B. Habitat selection of free-ranging cattle in productive coniferous forests of south-eastern Norway. 1–9.
    doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2019.01.014google scholar: lookup
  76. Tofastrud M, Hegnes H, Devineau O, Zimmermann B. Activity patterns of free-ranging beef cattle in Norway. (1), 39–47.
    doi: 10.1080/09064702.2018.1524928google scholar: lookup
  77. Trepel J, le Roux E, Abraham AJ, Buitenwerf R, Kamp J, Kristensen JA, Tietje M, Lundgren EJ, Svenning JC. Meta-analysis shows that wild large herbivores shape ecosystem properties and promote spatial heterogeneity.. 0–7.
    pubmed: 38337048doi: 10.1038/s41559-024-02327-6google scholar: lookup
  78. Van Soest, P. J. (1994). (2nd ed.). Cornell University Press.

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 105,639 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.