Wood-pasture hypothesis

This is a good article. Click here for more information.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Free-ranging Longhorn cattle, stands of mature oaks in the distance, Knepp Wildland.
According to the hypothesis, open wood-pasture like this one in Langå Egeskov, Jutland, Denmark comes close to a European virgin vegetation.

The wood-pasture hypothesis (also known as the Vera hypothesis and the megaherbivore theory) is a scientific hypothesis positing that open and semi-open pastures and wood-pastures formed the predominant type of landscape in post-glacial temperate Europe, rather than the common belief of primeval forests. The hypothesis proposes that such a landscape would be formed and maintained by large wild herbivores. Although others, including landscape ecologist Oliver Rackham, had previously expressed similar ideas, it was the Dutch researcher Frans Vera, who, in his 2000 book Grazing Ecology and Forest History, first developed a comprehensive framework for such ideas and formulated them into a theorem. Vera's proposals, although highly controversial, came at a time when the role grazers played in woodlands was increasingly being reconsidered, and are credited for ushering in a period of increased reassessment and interdisciplinary research in European conservation theory and practice. Although Vera largely focused his research on the European situation, his findings could also be applied to other temperate ecological regions worldwide, especially the broadleaved ones.

Vera's ideas have met with both rejection and approval in the scientific community, and continue to lay an important foundation for the

rewilding-movement. While his proposals for widespread semi-open savanna as the predominant landscape of temperate Europe in the early to mid-Holocene have at large been rejected, they do partially agree with the established wisdom about vegetation structure during previous interglacials. Moreover, modern research has shown that, under the current climate, free-roaming large grazers can indeed influence and even temporarily halt vegetation succession. Whether the Holocene prior to the rise of agriculture provides an adequate approximation to a state of "pristine nature" at all has also been questioned, since by that time anatomically modern humans
had already been omnipresent in Europe for millennia, with in all likelihood profound effects on the environment.

The severe loss of megafauna at the end of the

Quaternary extinction event, which is frequently linked to human activities, did not leave Europe unscathed and brought about a profound change in the European large mammal assemblage and thus ecosystems as a whole, which probably also affected vegetation patterns. The assumption, however, that the pre-Neolithic represents pristine conditions is a prerequisite for both the "high-forest theory" and the Vera hypothesis in their respective original forms. Whether or not the hypothesis is supported may thus further depend on whether or not the pre-Neolithic Holocene
is accepted as a baseline for pristine nature, and thus also on whether the Quaternary extinction of megafauna is considered (primarily) natural or man-made.

Vera's hypothesis has important repercussions for nature conservation especially, because it advocates for a reorientation of emphasis away from the protection of old-growth forest (as per the competing

traditional agricultural practices
in Europe, which may conserve biodiversity in a similar way to wild herbivore herds.

Names and definitions

Frans Vera's hypothesis has many names, since Vera himself did not provide a distinguished name for it. Instead, he simply referred to it as the alternative hypothesis, alternative to the high-forest theory, which he called the null hypothesis.[1] As a result, it has been called by many names over the years, including the wood-pasture hypothesis,[2][3] the wooded pasture hypothesis,[4] the Vera hypothesis,[5] the temperate savanna hypothesis[4] and the open woodland hypothesis.[6] Especially in Continental Europe, it is commonly known as the megaherbivore hypothesis and literal translations of it.

Vera limited the geographic area of his ideas to Western and Central Europe between 45°N and 58°N latitude and 5°W and 25°E longitude. This includes most of the British Isles and everything between France (except the Southern third) and Poland and Southern Scandinavia to the Alps. Furthermore, he confined it to altitudes below 700 m (2,300 ft).[7] By extension, the North American East Coast is also addressed as an analogy with a comparable climate.[8]

High-forest theory

Heinrich Cotta: high-forest theory

In his 1817 work Anweisungen zum Waldbau (Directions for Silviculture), Heinrich Cotta posited that if humans abandoned his native Germany, in the space of 100 years it would be "covered with wood".[9] This assumption laid the foundation for what is now called the high-forest theory, which assumes that deciduous forests are the naturally predominant ecosystem type in the temperate, broad-leaved regions.

Frederic Clements: linear succession

The image shows the succession from bare land to forest in 6 phases. Each phase is characterised by the prominence of one feature; bare soil decreases as vegetation increases. Mosses and annuals are outcompeted by grasses and perennials, which give rise to woody pioneers, then fast-growing trees and eventually the climax community. Simultaneously, the disturbance through fire, storm or antropogenic factors decreases steadily, while biodiversity, the soil layer and total biomass increases following a flat curve
The natural succession in the temperate hemisphere as per the high-forest theory, and the characteristics associated with each phase.

Later,

forest reserves such as Białowieża
.

Further refinements

Clements' notion of stable

climax communities was later challenged and refined by authorities such as Arthur Tansley,[11] Alexander Watt[12] and Robert Whittaker,[13] who championed the inclusion of dynamic processes, like temporary collapse of canopy cover because of windthrow, fire or calamities, into Clements' framework. This, however, did not change anything about the status of the "high-forest theory" as the commonly accepted view; that without human intervention closed-canopy forest would dominate the global temperate regions as the potential natural vegetation. This is also the concept that was advocated by European plant experts like Heinz Ellenberg, Johannes Iversen and Franz Firbas.[14][15][16]

The reconstruction of vegetation history

Old-growth beech forest in Biogradska Gora National Park, Montenegro
If the high-forest theory holds true, beech forests would naturally dominate temperate Europe.

Apart from theoretical considerations, this concept has relied and continues to rely heavily on both

field observations and, more recently, on findings from pollen analysis, which allow inferences about the vegetation structure of past epochs. For example, vegetation trends can be reconstructed from the ratio of tree pollen to pollen associated with grassland. Pollen analysis is the most widely used means of generating historic vegetation data[17] and the analysis of pollen data has provided a solid database from which a predominance of forest throughout the early stages of the Holocene of temperate Europe, especially the Atlantic, is generally inferred,[18][19] although the possibility of regional differences remains open.[20][21] On that basis, the history of vegetation in Europe is generally reconstructed as a history of forest.[16][22][15]

Pollen analysis, however, has been criticized for its inherent bias towards wind-pollinated plant species and, importantly, wind-pollinated trees,[23] and has been shown to overestimate forest cover.[24][25] To account for this bias, a corrective model (REVEALS) is used,[6] whose application leads to results that differ substantially from those drawn from the traditional comparison of pollen percentages alone.[26] Alternatively to or in combination with pollen, fossil indicator organisms – such as beetles and molluscs – can be used to reconstruct vegetation structure.[20]

Large herbivores and high-forest theory

Mature red deer stag in a pasture near an oak tree
Red deer can prevent the regeneration of forest. Whether this is seen as negative or positive may depend on both the conditions and the eye of the beholder.

There is no general agreement on herbivores and their influence on succession in natural ecosystems in the temperate hemisphere. In the high-forest theory framework, wild herbivores are mostly considered as minor factors, derived from the assumption that the natural vegetation was forest. Therefore, wild herbivores were characterised by Tansley as followers of succession, not as actively influencing it, because otherwise Europe would not have been forested.[11] From this assumption the principle was developed that the natural abundance of herbivores does not hinder forest succession, which means that herbivore numbers are necessarily considered too high once as they impede natural forest regeneration. For example, WWF Russia considers five to seven animals the optimal density of bison per 1000 ha (10 km²), because if the population exceeds 13 animals per 1000 ha, first signs of vegetation suppression are observed.[27] Consequently, the bison population in Białowieża is controlled by culling.[28] Similarly, it is widely believed that two to seven deer per 1 square kilometre (1,000,000 m2) is a sustainable number[29] based on the assumption that if deer numbers exceed this bar, they start having a negative impact on woodland regeneration. Consequently, culling is commonly seen as necessary to reduce a perceived overabundance of deer to sustainable levels and mimic natural predation.[30][31][32]

Others, however, have criticised this view. In a 2023 publication, Brice B. Hanberry and Edward K. Faison argued that in the

landscape of fear their presence can create, promoting landscape heterogeneity. However, in the presence of megafauna over 1,000 kilograms (0.98 long tons; 1.1 short tons), which are largely immune to predation, even this ability is limited.[37] Overall, how ungulate populations are controlled in nature is controversial, and food availability is an important constraint, even in the presence of apex predators.[36][38]

In regions with relatively intact large-mammal assemblages in

Eemian interglacial has been estimated as more than 15,000 kilograms (15 long tons; 17 short tons) per km2, which is equivalent to more than 2.5 fallow deer per ha.[39] Hence, the ecologist Christopher Sandom and others have suggested that the comparatively high forest cover of the pre-Neolithic European Holocene may be a consequence of megaherbivore extinctions during the Quaternary extinction event, as compared to the last interglacial in Europe with a pristine megafauna, the Eemian, the early stages of the Holocene appear to have been much more forested. According to the authors, this is unlikely to be the result of the latter's only slightly cooler climate as compared to the Eemian.[3] However, this is also subject to debate.[40]

Background: grazers and browsers

The impact herbivores have on the landscape level depends on their way of feeding. Namely, browsers like roe deer, elk and the black rhino focus on woody vegetation, while the diet of grazers like horse, cattle and the white rhino is dominated by grasses and forbs. Intermediate feeders, like the wisent and the red deer, fall in between. Generally, grazers tend to be more social, less selective in their food choices and forage more intensively. Therefore, their impact on vegetation composition tends to be higher, as well as their ability to maintain open spaces.[41]

Since the extinction of the aurochs in 1627 and the wild horse around 1900, none of the remaining large wild herbivores in Europe is an obligate grazer. Similarly, domesticated descendants of aurochs and wild horse, cattle and horse, are now largely kept in stables, factory farms and close to settlements, making them effectively extinct in the landscape. What remains are browsers and mixed feeders[a] – roe deer, red deer, elk, wild boar, wisent and beaver, often in low densities. Backbreeding-projects, such as the German Taurus project and the Dutch Tauros programme are addressing this issue by breeding domestic cattle that can be released into the landscape as hardy and sufficiently similar proxies to act as ecological replacements for the aurochs.[43] Similarly, primitive horse breeds such as the Konik, Exmoor pony and the Sorraia are being used as proxies for the tarpan.[44]

Frans Vera

African savanna. Trees in the background, grassland in the foreground, wildebeest crossing
In how far African savannas are adequate to draw comparisons to the primeval European landscape remains debated.

Vera argued that the dominating landscape-type of the early to mid-Holocene was not closed forest, but a semi-open,

submediterranean and continental areas, but maintain that forest largely dominated.[20]

In his book Vera also discussed the decline of ancient oak-hickory-forest communities in Eastern North America. Many forests that stem from Pre-Columbian times (old-growth forests) feature light-demanding oaks and hickories prominently. However, these do not readily regenerate in modern forests; a phenomenon commonly referred to as oak regeneration failure. Instead, shade-tolerant species such as red maple and American beech dominate increasingly. While the cause is still poorly understood, a lack of natural fire is commonly presumed to play a role.[45] Vera instead suggested that the grazing and browsing of wild herbivores, most importantly American bison, created the conditions oaks and hickories need for successful regeneration to happen, and explained the modern lack of regeneration of these species in forests with the mass-slaughter of bisons committed by European settlers.

Paleoecological evidence drawn from fossil Coleoptera deposits has also shown that, albeit rare, beetle species associated with grasslands and other open landscapes were present throughout the Holocene of Western Europe, which points to open habitats being present, but restricted.[46][47] However, paleoecological data from previous interglacials when the larger megafauna was still present indicate widespread warm temperate savannah. This could mean that elephants and rhinos were more effective creators of open landscapes than the herbivores left after the Quaternary extinction event.[3][26] On the other hand, traditional animal husbandry may have mitigated the effects of possibly human-induced megafaunal die-off, allowing the survival of species of the open landscape previously created and maintained by megafauna.[48]

Frans Vera was not the first to question the high-forest paradigm. Botanist Francis Rose had expressed doubts already in the 1960s, knowing about British plant and lichen species and their light requirements.[49] The relationship between large grazers and landscape openness, and the significance of the Quaternary extinctions of megafauna in this regard, had also been recognized prior to Vera. In 1992, for example, the archaeologist Wilhelm Schüle theorized that the genesis of closed forest in temperate Europe was the result of prehistoric man-made megafauna extinctions.[50] Landscape ecologist Oliver Rackham, in a 1998 article entitled "Savanna in Europe", envisaged a kind of savanna as the original predominant landscape type of northwestern Europe.[51] Vera, however, was the first to develop a comprehensive theorem to explain why forest did not dominate even in the Holocene, and to thus propose a real alternative to the high-forest theory.[49]

In some of its aspects, the wood-pasture hypothesis bears similarity to Gradmann's steppe theory [de][52] which was proposed by Robert Gradmann [de] but challenged and refuted by scholars such as Reinhold Tüxen and Karl Bertsch [de].

Main arguments

Oak and hazel

Vera relies on several lines of argument based on experiments, ecology, evolutionary ecology, palynology, history and etymology. One of his main arguments is of an ecological nature; the widespread lack of successful regeneration of light-demanding tree species in modern forests. Especially the lack of regeneration of pedunculate oak, sessile oak (together hereafter addressed as "oak") and common hazel in Europe. He contrasts this reality with European pollen deposits from previous ages, where oak and hazel often form a dominant amount of pollen, making a dominance of these species in previous ages conceivable. Especially in regard to hazel, sufficient flowering is only achieved when enough sunlight is available, i.e. the plant grows outside of a closed canopy. He argues that the only explanation for the great abundance of oak and hazel pollen in previous ages is that the primeval landscape was open, and this contrast forms the principal theorem of his hypothesis. It has also been suggested that oak requires disturbances for successful establishment, disturbance large herbivores may provide.[53]

However, pollen records from islands that lacked many of the large grazers and browsers that, according to Vera, were essential for the maintenance of landscapes with an open character in temperate Europe show almost no differences in comparison to mainland Europe. More specifically, pollen records from Holocene Ireland, which during the early Holocene was apparently, owing to a lack of fossils, devoid of any big herbivores except for abundant wild boar and rare red deer, show almost equally high percentages of oak and hazel pollen. Thus it could be concluded that large herbivores were not a required factor for the degree of openness in a landscape, and that the abundance of pollen from species that are unable to reproduce and regenerate sufficiently under a closed canopy, such as hazel and oak, can only be explained by other factors like windthrow and natural fires.[54]

Vera's notion may be supported by observations over the course of 20 years forest regeneration in forest gaps created by windthrow, which showed that hornbeam and beech dominate the emerging stands and largely displace oaks on fertile, nutrient-rich soil.[55] However, after the last Ice Age oak returned earlier to Central and Western Europe than beech or hornbeam,[56] which may have contributed to its commonness, at least during the early Holocene. Still, other shade-tolerant tree species like lime and elm were equally fast returnees, and do not seem to have limited oak abundance.[56][57]

On the other hand, substantial natural oak-regeneration commonly takes place outside of forests in fringe and transitional habitats, suggesting that a focus on regeneration in forests in an attempt to explain oak regeneration failure may be insufficient in regard to the ecology of Central European oak species.[58] Rather, an underestimated reason for widespread failure of oak regeneration may be found in the direct effects of land-use changes since the early modern period, which has led to a more simplistic, homogeneous landscape,[58] as spontaneous regeneration of both oak and hazel does frequently occur in margins, thickets, and low-grazing-intensity or abandoned pasture/arable land.[59][60][61] Overall, oak is an adept coloniser of open areas and especially of transitional zones between vegetation zones such as forest and open grassland. Looking for regeneration within forests may therefore be futile from the outset. There is, therefore, no general "failure" in oak regeneration, but only a failure of oak regeneration within closed forests. This, however, may be expectable and natural given oak's colonising nature.[58]

Furthermore, new species of oak mildew (Erysiphe alphitoides) observed on European oaks for the first time at the beginning of the 20th century have been cited as a possible reason for the modern lack of oak regeneration in forests, since they affect the shade tolerance, particularly of young pedunculate and sessile oaks.[62] Although the origin of these new oak pathogens remains obscure, it seems to be an invasive species from the tropics, possibly conspecific with a pathogen found on mangos.[63]

Ecological anachronisms

Vera prominently argued that since other light-demanding and often thorny woody species exist in Europe—species such as

blackthorn, Crataegus rhipidophylla, wild pear and crab apple—their ecology can only be explained under the influence of large herbivores, and that in the absence of these they represent an anachronism.[64][65]

Shortcomings of pollen analysis

Pollen from plants that are pollinated by insects, such as here Zilla Spinosa by a dwarf honey bee, rarely or never ends up in places that favour preservation, such as lakeshores. It is therefore generally underrepresented in pollen deposits.

Vera further contested that pollen diagrams can adequately display past species occurrences since, inherently, pollen deposits tend to overrepresent species that are wind-pollinated and notoriously underrepresent species that are pollinated by insects.[66] Furthermore, he proposed that an absence of grass pollen in pollen diagrams can be explained by high grazing pressure, which would prevent the grasses from flowering. Under such conditions, he claimed, open environments with only scattered mature trees may appear as closed forests in pollen deposits. He consequently proposed that the conspicuous scarcity of grass pollen in pollen deposits dating from the pre-Neolithic Holocene might not necessarily speak against the existence of open environments dominated by grasses.[67] However, it is generally considered that over 60% tree pollen in pollen deposits indicates a closed forest canopy, which is true for the vast majority of European early to mid-Holocene deposits. Sites with less than 50% arboreal pollen, on the other hand, are consistently associated with human activities.[54]

Circular reasoning

Vera stressed that the prevailing high-forest theory was born out of observations of spontaneous regeneration in the absence of grazing animals. He argued that the presupposition that these animals do not exert a significant influence on natural regeneration, and thus on the vegetation structure as a whole, has been made without comparative confirmation, and is therefore a

timber and oak galls for the manufacture of ink, as well as for the production of charcoal, crops and fruit.[68]
This former usage of forests is often still revealed by a big age gap between tree generations, particularly if the oldest trees are mainly oaks, and many Central European forest reserves originated as common wood-pastures.

Shifted baselines

In nature conservation, a shifted baseline is a baseline for conservation targets and desired population sizes that is based on non-pristine conditions. In this sense, the term was coined by marine biologist

fisheries scientists used the population sizes of fish at the beginning of their own careers to assess a desired baseline, notwithstanding whether the fishing stocks they used as baselines had already been diminished by human exploitation. He noticed, that the estimations these scientists took for reference markedly differed from historical accounts. Consequently, he concluded that over generations the perception of what is considered to be normal would change, and so may what is considered a depleted population. Pauly called this the shifting baseline syndrome.[69]

Reclining female lion looks directly toward camera
An example of a shifted baseline: Asiatic lions were present in the Balkans well into Classical Antiquity, yet few would consider them native to Europe. (Pictured: An Asiatic lioness in India's Gir National Park
.)

In line with this, it may be argued that the prevalence of closed-canopy forest as the prevailing conservation narrative in Europe similarly arises from multiple shifted baselines:

  • While it is plausble that
    EU's Habitats Directive's annexes.[76] Likewise, globally extinct megafauna such as straight-tusked elephants and rhinos would likely be native to Europe without human interference, and they would in all probability have a strong positive impact on biodiversity and ecosystem functions.[77] It is therefore very likely that the megafauna extinctions of the late Pleistocene and early Holocene had profound implications for European and worldwide ecosystems,[78][79][80] especially given the paramount importance comparable animals have for modern ecosystems.[81][82]
  • Vera pointed out that words like wold and forest used to have different connotations than they do today. While today, a forest is a dense and reasonably large tract of trees, the medieval Latin forestis, from which it derives, assigned open stands of trees, and was a wild and uncultivated land home also to aurochs and wild horses. According to historical sources, these forestis included hawthorn, blackthorn, wild cherry, wild apple and wild pear, as well as oaks, all of which are light-demanding species that cannot regenerate successfully in closed-canopy forest. From this Vera concluded that original wildwoods still existed in Europe during the Medieval period. Thus, when scholars of the 19th and 20th century assumed that grazing animals had destroyed the original European closed-canopy wildwoods, they were misinterpreting these terms. Instead, these forests, he found, had been destroyed following the industrial revolution and the population growth it caused, which in turn caused overexploitation.[83]
    Old beeches in a forest. The structure with a thick trunk and proportionally thin branches is reminiscient of a use as pollards
    Many European forests were formerly managed as wood-pasture, coppice or were, as in this case, pollarded.
  • He further argued that from this initial misinterpretation gave rise to another misinterpretation: that forest regeneration would naturally take place inside the forest. Thus, scholars of the 19th and 20th century such as
    natural regeneration was not synonymous with the natural regeneration of trees in a natural situation. It was not until the 19th and 20th centuries that this distinction was abandoned in German. However, in the absence of thorny nurse bushes, which disappeared due to the shadow under the trees, the planted trees then had to be protected manually. The "natural regeneration" was therefore still depended on work like ploughing, removal of browsing pressure and the suppression of weeds, making it not "natural" in the conventional sense. Instead, according to Vera, the original meaning of the word "natural" in this context was that a seed fell from a tree and then grew by itself, as opposed to being planted. This shift in expectation of where regeneration of trees was to be expected, from thorny fringes of groves in wood-pastures to the interior of closed tree stands, then led to the notion that herbivores were detrimental to forest regeneration, and necessitated fenced-out areas, tree shelters and population control via hunting.[83][84]
  • Considered "alien" to the landscape, akin to invasive species, cattle and horses were now also removed from the forests, as it happened in former wood-pastures like Białowieża, because they were seen as harmful to the creation of a new old-growth forest. At the same time, the introduction of the potato made pannage, the fattening of pigs on acorns, obsolete, and grass species specifically bred for a high yield superseded the traditional pasturing, mostly of cattle, in wood-pastures.[83] Together, these mechanisms created the spatial separation between livestock rearing and forestry, grassland and forest enshrined into modern law and practice.
  • Finally, the biodiversity losses associated with the conversion of open grassland, mantle and fringe vegetation and open-grown trees into closed-canopy forests were legitimised by the assumption that the forest was the only natural ecosystem, and hence species losses were casualties of a natural cause.[83]

However, a strong argument that may put Vera's etymological evidence into perspective altogether is that the composition of medieval woodlands may not be relevant to their naturalness. Since by the medieval period agricultural traditions had already been ubiquitous in most of Europe for millennia, it may be unrealistic to assume that what people of the time perceived and labelled as wilderness may indeed have been one. Instead, it is doubtful that pristine conditions had survived in the Central- and Western European lowlands, Vera's area of study, at any rate up to this point.[85]

Succession in grazed ecosystems

There are several ecological processes at work in herbivore grazing systems, namely associational resistance, shifting mosaics, cyclic succession, and gap dynamics. These processes would collectively transform the surrounding landscape, as per Vera's model.

Associational resistance

The term associational resistance describes facilitating relationships between plants that grow close to each other, against both

whitebeam, which are distributed by fruit-eating birds through their faeces, would also frequently be placed within these shrubs, through resting birds leaving their droppings.[89]

On the other hand, nut-bearing species such as hazel, beech, chestnut, pedunculate and sessile oak would become "planted" somewhat deliberately in the vicinity of those shrubs by rodents such as red squirrel and wood mouse, the nuthatch and corvids such as crows, magpies, ravens and especially jays, which store them for winter supply. In Europe, the Eurasian jay represents the most important seed disperser of oak, burying acorns individually or in small groups. Eurasian jays not only bury acorns in depths favoured by oak saplings, but seemingly also prefer spots with sufficient light availability, i.e. open grassland and transitions between grassland and shrubland, seeking for vertical structures such as shrubs in the near surroundings.[90] Since oak is relatively light-demanding while not having the ability to regenerate on its own under high browsing pressure, these habits of the jay presumably benefit oak, since they provide the conditions oak requires for optimal growth and health.[91] On a similar note, the nuthatch seems to assume a prominent role for hazel dispersal.[92]

In addition, species such as

wind-dispersed species such as maple, elm, lime or ash would land within these shrubs by chance.[94]

Thorny bushes play an important role in tree regeneration in the European lowlands,[95] and evidence is emerging that similar processes can also ensure the survival of browsing-sensitive species like rowan in browsed boreal forests.[96]

Shifting mosaics and cyclic succession

The four phases of vegetation succession according to the hypothesis: In the park phase, grassland and heath prevail. In the scrub phase they get invaded by thorny shrubs, which in turn provide protection for tree saplings. Then, in the grove phase, the saplings grow up and displace the nurse bushes. Eventually, in the break-up phase, the trees start to die, the groves thin out and grassland species return.

A natural pasture ecosystem would therefore undergo various stages of succession, starting with unpalatable perennial plants, which provide shelter for thorny woody plants. Second, these would start to form thickets and enable the establishment of larger, palatable shrubs and trees respectively. Over time these would then outshadow the unpalatable but light-demanding thickets and emerge as big solitary trees, in the case of single-standing shrubs like hawthorn, or groups of trees in the case of expanding blackthorn shrubs. Because of the herbivore disturbance (browsing, trampling, wallowing, dust bathing), not even shade-tolerant tree saplings would be able to grow under the established trees. Therefore, once the established trees would start to decay, either due to old age or other factors like pathogens, illness, lightning strike or windbreak, this would leave open, bare land behind, for grasses and unpalatable species to colonise, closing the cycle.[97]

On a large scale, different successional stages would thus contribute an ecosystem where open grassland, scrubland, emerging tree growth, groves of trees and solitary trees exist next to each other, and the alternation between these various successional stages would create dynamic shifting mosaics of vegetation.[97] This in turn stimulates high biodiversity.[98][99] Consequently, Vera's counter-proposal to the linear succession and Watt's gap-phase model[12] of closed-canopy forest, to which it has been compared[2] is a model of successional cycles known as the shifting mosaics model.[97]

In effect however, not all areas would have necessarily been subject to this permanent change. Since grazing animals generally prefer to spend time in grasslands rather than in closed stands of trees, it would practically be possible for three different landscape types to coexist over longer periods in the same spots: permanently open areas, permanently closed groves and areas subject to constant shifting mosaics.[100]

The prehistoric baseline

The Eemian landscape

Merck's rhinoceros
(Stephanorhinus kirchbergensis) in a mixed Eemian landscape with solitary oak trees.

Although Vera himself limited his argument to the Holocene and the

Eemian interglacial, which was the last warm period before the current Holocene, approximately 130,000 to 115,000 years ago, and the last warm period before Homo sapiens.[d] While archaic humans existed in the form of neanderthals, their influence was probably only localised, due to their low population density.[102] During this warm period, paleoecological data indeed suggest that semi-open landscapes, as postulated by Vera, were widespread and common, most likely maintained by large herbivores.[26] Next to these semi-open landscapes, however, the researchers also found evidence for closed-canopy forest. Overall, the Eemian landscape appears to have been very dynamic and probably consisted of varying degrees of openness, including open grasslands, wood pastures, light-open woodland and closed-canopy forest.[26]

The European megafauna