Aegean Grasslands As Endangered Ecosystems In Turkey. Pakistan Journal of Botany, 44 (2): 7-18,

Abstract

In all 86 grasslands were investigated in the Aegean region of Turkey. Out of these 10 are found among the red-pine, black-pine, beech-fir, oak-pine and degraded oak-maqui forests. A total of 699 taxa of plants belonging to 68 families are distriburted in these grasslands. Out of these taxa only 104 are of good fodder value, 66 taxa belonging to the family Fabaceae and 38 to Poaceae. Aboveground biomass production in Aydin (139.18 g), Balikesir (122.68 g) and Canakkale (103.78 g) was maximum in Spring, whereas belowground values for Aydin (80 g) and Canakkale (80 g) were highest during spring and for Balikesir (80 g) during winter.

Full text

Pak. J. Bot., 44: 7-17, Special Issue May 2012.
AEGEAN GRASSLANDS AS ENDANGERED ECOSYSTEMS IN TURKEY
MUNIR OZTURK1*, VOLKAN ALTAY2, SALIH GUCEL3 AND AHMET AKSOY4
1Department of Botany, Ege University, Izmir, Turkey
2Department of Biology, Mustafa Kemal University, Hatay, Turkey
3Institute of Environmental Sciences, Near East University, Lefkosa, The Northern Cyprus
4Department of Biology, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey
*Corresponding author’s e-mail: munirozturk@gmail.com
Abstract
In all 86 grasslands were investigated in the Aegean region of Turkey. Out of these 10 are found among the red-pine,
black-pine, beech-fir, oak-pine and degraded oak-maqui forests. A total of 699 taxa of plants belonging to 68 families are
distriburted in these grasslands. Out of these taxa only 104 are of good fodder value, 66 taxa belonging to the family
Fabaceae and 38 to Poaceae. Aboveground biomass production in Aydin (139.18 g), Balikesir (122.68 g) and Canakkale
(103.78 g) was maximum in Spring, whereas belowground values for Aydin (80 g) and Canakkale (80 g) were highest
during spring and for Balikesir (80 g) during winter. In the provinces of Izmir (1144 g), Kutahya (400 g), Usak (800 g), and
Manisa (1312 g) aboveground biomass production was highest during Autumn, whereas belowground production was
maximum during winter at Usak (600 g), Izmir (1360 g), and Kutahya (910 g). In Denizli aboveground biomass production
was higher in summer (400 g) and belowground in autumn (350 g). The biomass production in general was highest in the
fenced as compared to open areas. The calorific values of the species in the fenced areas too were higher (107.2 cal.) as
compared to the open areas (99.40 cal.). Borulceagac and Maltepe were the best areas from the point of view of calorific
values. The grasslands of Isikeli, Pamucak, Karateke, Halitpasa, Urganli, and Gullucam were observed to be the best as
regards the biomass production. However,nomadic activities like summer grazing, trampling and summer tourism are
exerting a great pressure on these, leading towards a degradation and ultimately a loss of eco-diversity in the grassland
ecosystems of the region. This paper enlightens the general plant composition and biomass potential of Aegean grasslands.
Dedicated to Dr. Mehmet Pirdal, a collaborator in this project at the start who lost his life in the
devastating Golcuk Earthquake in 1999.
Introduction
The terms “Grassland” or “Rangeland” have several
definitions and many local impacts are seen in this
connection depending on their disributional area.
According to the definition of UNESCO grasslands are
areas of the land covered with herbaceous plant cover with
less than 10 percent tree and shrub cover (White et al.,
2000; Suttie & Reynolds, 2003).These are among the
largest ecosystems in the world,with an area estimated to be
52.5 million km2 which is equivalent to approximately 40
percent of the Earth's land surface excluding Greenland and
Antarctica (Anon., 2000); dominated mainly by plant taxa
belonging to the family Poaceae, and typically
characterised by low productivity because of water and
nutrient limitation or both, variable rainfall, and complex
natural vegetation (Naz et al., 2010 Knezevic et al., 2012).
Approximately 500 million ha are in the high and medium
land use categories, while 3000 million ha are in low and
zero categories (Reynolds and Frame, 2005). They
contribute to the livelihoods of over 800 million people
including many poor small holders. Our aim here is to
present the situation of these ecosystems in Turkey which
could be included under endangered ecosystems.
Turkey is the world's 37th-largest country in terms of
area (783,562 km2), located between 35° and 43° N
latitudes, and 25° and 45° E longitudes. It is one of the
oldest continuously inhabited regions in the world (Anon.,
1999; Anon., 2005; Thissen, 2007; Immerfall, 2011);
being nearly 2000 km long and 800 km wide, encircled by
the Aegean Sea to the west, the Black Sea to the north and
the Mediterranean to the south (Anon., 2006). The
country is divided into 7 geographical divisions (Fig. 1)
but, according to the classification developed by State
Institute of Statistics (SIS, 2002) there are 9 agricultural
zones; Central North, Aegean, Marmara and Thrace,
Mediterranean, North East, South East, Black Sea,
Central East, and Central South. The work done on the
herbaceous plant communities constituting the grassland
biome in the 9 agricultural zones include the studies
carried out by Tosun et al.,(1977), Kurt & Tan (1984),
Tan (1984a,b), Karagoz et al., (1991), Koc & Gokkus
(1996), Koc & Oztas (2000), Koc et al., (2004,2008),
Oztas et al., (2003), Comakli et al., (2004), Comakli
(2008), Bakoglu (2009), Erkovan et al., (2009), Dasci et
al., (2010), Unal et al., (2011).
This paper deals with the Aegean Agroecological
zone which extends from the Aegean coast to the western
part of Central Anatolia. Diverse topography and
favorable climate has resulted in a rich biodiversity of
communities in this zone. Forest lands are dominant
together with fertile alluvial plains. The plains make the
wealth of the region, which rests on olives, grapes, cotton,
and figs. There is a dense growth of sclerophyllous
maquis plant communities of Ceratonia siliqua, Olea
europaea, Pistacia sps., Arbutus sps., Quercus sps.,
Styrax officinalis, Myrtus communis and Laurus nobilis.
The forests are dominated by the species like Pinus
brutia, Pinus nigra, and Juniperus sps. (Ozturk et
al.,1983). An extreme geo-climatic diversity allows the
production of a wide range of livestock and crops. The
grasslands are distributed from sea level to high altitudes,
which belong to the state and are main source of feed,
open for common use. Nearly 5 percent of the Turkish
grasslands with a hay yield of approximately 600 kg/ha
and a quarter of the goat population are present in the
Aegean region. The cattle are taken to higher elevations
for 7-8 months due to dry arid conditions along the coast.

MUNIR OZTURK ET AL.,
8
The studes undertaken on the grasslands of the Aegean
region include those of Genckan (1985), Genckan et al.,
(1989), Avcioglu (1986), Avcioglu et al., (1991, 2000).
These deal with forage crops, legumes and grains, and
grazing losses. Very few studies have been carried out on
the biomass yield of natural grassland communities
(Ozturk & Pirdal, 1988,1991; Hameed et al., 2008).
Grasslands in this region are facing a serious threat due to
urbanisation, industrialisation, tourism and other
pressures. Historically they have been considered as the
cheapest feed and therefore exploited excessively with no
care for their sustainability.The new scenarios published
on climate change represent an additional source of stress
on an already at-risk pillar of these ecosystems. Land use
change as well as nitrogen deposition also pose risks to
them. They are expected to be particularly vulnerable to
invasive species due to their moderate diversity together
with relative ecological isolation. Our aim here is to
present the results on the plant composition and biomass
potential of grasslands in the Aegean region.
Fig. 1. Geographical divisions of Turkey.
Material and Methods
A total of 86 natural grasslands (Fig. 2) distributed in
the 9 States of Aegean region were surveyed during 1984-
2010, and their plant composition was recorded. The area
shows typical mediterranean climatic features (Fig. 3).
The plant determinations were made with the help of
“Flora of Turkey and East Aegean Islands” (Davis et al.,
1965-1985, 1988; Guner et al., 2000). For primary
productivity determinations harvesting method was used,
data on aboveground and belowground parts in fenced
and unfenced areas was recorded on seasonal basis. All
fenced areas were 1m2 and 5 areas were fenced at random
in each site (Buschermohl et al., 2002). The harvested
aboveground and belowground parts were oven dried at
85oC to constant weight and results recorded as grams.
The calorific values of the biomass were determined by
using "bomb calorimeter".
Results and Discussion
Grasslands cover a very large proportion of the globe and
are a very important source of livestock feed and of
livelihoods for stock raisers and herders (Suttie & Reynolds,
2004; Upton, 2004). Their primary environmental importance
lies in the fact that they are as important as forests in the
recycling of greenhouse gases and large carbon sinks, with
almost equivalent soil organic matter as in tree biomass
(Lipper & Cavatassi, 2003). They are sources of many
products other than food for grazing livestock, seeds are used
as cereals, some wild grass species are harvested as fruit and
vegetables, some are of medicinal value and good for local use
and sale, some are used as wood and fuel; but grassland
scientists are limiting their use to grazing resources. They are
partly reserves of biodiversity, provide important wildlife
habitat and in situ conservation of genetic resources,
management of catchments, wildlife landscapes, tourism,
recreation and hunting (de Haan et al.,1997; Pagiola et al.,
2004; Aumeeruddy-Thomas et al., 2004; Wright, 2005).

AEGEAN GRASSLANDS AS ENDANGERED ECOSYSTEMS IN TURKEY
9
Fig. 2. Map showing the localities (86) surveyed.
General situation of the grasslands in Turkey: Turkey
has changed much during the last decades from a mainly
pastoral country to crop production. This has resulted in a
great reduction in the grassland area, however no parallel
reduction has been observed in livestock, which increased
in numbers. Therefore cropping systems replaced grazed
fallow with pulses and other cash crops, further reducing
grazing resources. Relatively small number of animals
were grazed on natural grasslands at the beginning of 20th
century. There were no serious management problems.
The area of natural grasslands in 1945 was around 440
000 km2 and about 20 million livestock units were grazing
on this area (Kaymakci et al., 2000). In the following
years the number of cattle remained same but grazing
areas decreased. With the passage of time the number of
animals grazing on grasslands increased nearly 4 times
but the area of grazing lands decreased due to mainly
mechanization of agriculture. In 1980 area decreased to
217 000 km2 (Munzur, 1987). Turkey’s pastures are now
stocked well above their carrying capacity. They are the
major plant source of forage species in the country. Major
forage legumes are represented by 57 species of wild
Vicia including Vicia sativa, V. Ervilia, 59 of Lathyrus,
52 of Onobrychis, 95 of Trifolium, 30 of Medicago and
10 of Melilotus. Major grass taxa are Agropyron, Festuca
and Lolium. The productivity as well as quality of the
grasslands has decreased and desirable plant taxa in the
botanical composition is 20 %, but may reach 50 percent
depending on the zone and grazing pressure (Gokkus &
Altin,1986).
Grassland plant diversity of aegean region:
Approximately 5 percent of the Turkish grasslands are
distributed in the Aegean Agroecological zone (Fig. 4a,b,)
with a hay yield of 600 kg/ha. The values for the area lie
around 615 900 ha with a total dry matter production
around 369 540 tons. Nearly quarter of the goat
population in Turkey is found in this region (Fig. 5a,b).
The cattle are taken to higher elevations for 7-8 months.
During our investigations a total of 699 plant taxa
belonging to 68 families were collected from the 86
representative grasslands covering 9 states.Out of these 104
species were of high fodder value. The species most
frequently met are 68 in number, 40 are annuals like
Dactylis glomerata,Trifolium repens,T. resupinatum,T.
pratense and 28 are shrubs/tall shrubs like Vitex agnus-
castus. The dominating families are Fabaceae (14.02%),
Asteraceae (11.02%), and Poaceae (11.44%). Most
important taxa are the species of Poa, Phleum, Alopecurus,
Agropyron, Lolium, Lotus, Medicago, Trifolum, Vicia,
Lathyrus, Hordeum, Koeleria, Melilotus, Festuca,
Panicum, Bromus, and Dactylis glomerata, Cynodon
dactylon, Phalaris paradoxa. These plant taxa belong to
the Mediterranean (133), East Mediterranean (71), Irano-
Turanian (39), Euro-Siberian (37), and Euxin (2)
phytogeographical elements; whereas 16 are Cosmopolitan
and 28 taxa are Endemics, rest are unknown.
The grasslands start from the coastal zone where
halophytes dominate the area, followed by maquis
vegetation cover reaching up to 1000 m along the valleys.
According to Genckan (1985) and Avcioglu et al., (2000)
nearly 75 percent of the species in the maquis of this
region are characteristic species of grasslands and 56
percent of these were recorded from the grasslands
investigated by us. Out of these 104 species are of high
fodder value, 66 belong to the family Fabaceae and 38 to
Poaceae. A list of the important taxa is given in Table 1.
General biomass productivity values for above and
belowground parts (Table 2) varies between 1360-1366
and 1360-1361 g respectively. The calorific values
determined during spring, summer, autumn and winter
seasons in the fenced areas are either higher than
unfenced areas or equalent to these. The highest (99.4 cal)
and the lowest (34.08 cal) calorific values were found at
Borukeagac and Etili respectively. In the fenced areas
highest calorific value (107.92 cal) was recorded in the
Muradiye grassland and lowest (32.66 cal) in the Maltepe
grassland.

MUNIR OZTURK ET AL.,
10
Fig. 3. Climatic diagrams of the Aegean Agroecological zone.
The endemics collected from the grasslands are;
Alyssum pterocarpum, Asperula liliaciflora ssp.phyrgia,
Campanula lyrata ssp. lyrata, Centaurea calolepis, C.
cariensis, C. calcitrapa, Dianthus cibrarius, Erysimum
alpestre, Euphorbia anacampseros, Gypsophila
tubulosa, Laserpitium petrophilium, Linaria corifolia ,
L.genistifolia ssp. linifolia, Linum hirsutum, Maltkia
aurea, Origanum spyleum, Parnonychia chionaea,
Phlomis nissolii, Ranunculus reuterianus, Salvia
pisidica, Stachys cretica ssp. smyrnea, Veronica
cuneifolia,V.multifida, and Wiedemannia orientalis.

AEGEAN GRASSLANDS AS ENDANGERED ECOSYSTEMS IN TURKEY
11
Fig. 4a,b. General views of the grasslands from the Aegean region.
Fig. 5a,b. Animal grazing in the grasslands.
Table 1. List of important plant taxa from the Aegean grasslands.
Alismataceae Medicago minima var. minima
Alisma lanceolatum Medicago polymorpha var. vulgaris
Amaranthaceae Medicago longifolia subsp. typhoides var. typhoides
Suaeda prostrata subsp. prostrata Ononis spinosa subsp. antiquorum
Anacardiaceae Ononis viscosa subsp. brevifolia
Pistacia terebinthus subsp. terebinthus Pisum sativum subsp. elatius var. elatius
Araceae Scorpiurus muricatus var. subvillosus
Arum orientale subsp. orientale Trifolium angustifolium var. angustifolium
Berberidaceae Trifolium plebeium
Leontice leontopetalum subsp. leontopetalum Trifolium arvense var. arvense
Boraginaceae Trifolium echinatum var. carmeli
Alkanna tinctoria subsp. tinctoria Trifolium fragiferum var. pulchellum
Anchusa azurea var. azurea Trifolium hybridum var. anatolicum
Anchusa undulata subsp. hybrida Trifolium nigrescens subsp. petrisarii
Cerinthe minor subsp. auriculata Trifolium pratense var. Pratense
Onosma aucheranum Trifolium purpureum var. purpureum
Onosma tauricum var. tauricum Trifolium repens var. repens
Moltkia aurea* Trifolium resupinatum var. resupinatum
Myosotis ramosissima subsp. ramosissima Trifolium stellatum var. stellatum
A B

MUNIR OZTURK ET AL.,
12
Table 1. (Cont’d.).
Campanulaceae Trigonella supruneriana var. supruneriana
Asyneuma limonifolium subsp. limonifolium Vicia cracca subsp. stenophylla
Campanula lyrata ssp lyrata* Vicia grandiflora var. grandiflora
Capparaceae Vicia villosa subsp. eriocarpa
Caprifoliaceae Vicia lunata var. lunata
Sambucus nigra Liliaceae
Caryophyllaceae Allium pallens
Arenaria rhodia subsp. rhodia var. rhodia Allium scrodosporasum subsp. rotundum
Cerastium dichotomum subsp. dichotomum Gagea granatellii
Dianthus calocephalus Gagea peduncularis
Dianthus cibrarius* Muscari muscarimi
Dianthus leucophaeus var. leucophaeus Ornithogalum pyrenaicum
Dianthus zonatus var. zonatus Ruscus aculeatus var. angustifolius
Gypsophila tubulosa* Linaceae
Minuartia juressi subsp. asiatica Linum corymbulosum
Minuartia hybrida subsp. hybrida Linum hirsutum subsp. anatolicum var. anatolicum*
Moenchia mantica subsp. mantica Lythraceae
Petrorhagia alpina subsp. olympica Malvaceae
Silene dichotoma subsp. dichotoma Althaea hirsuta
Silene vulgaris var. vulgaris Oleaceae
Stellaria media subsp. media Olea europaea var. sylvestris
Vaccaria pyramidata var. grandiflora Onagraceae
Chenopodiaceae Orchidaceae
Chenopodium album subsp. album var. album Orchis anatolica
Cistaceae Orobanchaceae
Helianthemum nummularium subsp. lycaonicum Papaveraceae
Tuberaria guttata var. guttata Fumaria judaica
Compositae Roemeria hybrida subsp. hybrida
Achillea nobilis subsp. sipylea Pinaceae
Anthemis chia Plantaginaceae
Anthemis cretica subsp. leucanthemoides Plantago coronopus subsp. commutata
Anthemis pectinata var. pectinata Plumbaginaceae
Anthemis tinctoria var. tinctoria Acantholimon acerosum var. acerosum
Carduus pycnocephalus subsp. pycnocephalus Poaceae
Centaurea calcitrapa subsp. calcitrapa* Aegilops umbellulata subsp. umbellulata
Centaurea calolepis* Aegilops triuncialis subsp. triuncialis
Centaurea cariensis subsp. cariensis Agropyron cristatum subsp. pectinatum var. pectinatum
Centaurea solstitialis subsp. solstitialis Aira caespitosa
Cirsium hypoleucum Aira elegantissima subsp. elegantissima
Cirsium arvense var. arvense Aira elegantissima subs pambiqua
Cirsium creticum subsp. creticum Alopecurus utriculatus subsp. utriculatus
Chondrilla juncea var. juncea Anthoxanthum odoratum subsp. odoratum
Cnicus benedictus var. benedictus Avena sterilis subsp. sterilis
Crepis foetida subsp. rhoeadifolia Avena barbata subsp. barbata
Echinops viscosus subsp. viscosus Avena fatua var. fatua
Erigeron olympicus Brachypodium retusum
Filago vulgaris Bromus inermis
Gundelia tournefortii var. tournefortii Bromus cappadocicus subsp. cappadocicus
Helichrysum stoechas subsp. barrelieri Catapodium rigidum subsp. rigidum var. majus
Hypochaeris glabra Cynodon dactylon var. dactylon
Matricaria chamomilla var. recutita Dactylis glomerata subsp. hispanica
Rhagadiolus stellatus var. stellatus Elymus repens subsp. repens

AEGEAN GRASSLANDS AS ENDANGERED ECOSYSTEMS IN TURKEY
13
Table 1. (Cont’d.).
Scorzonera elata Elymus panormitanus
Scorzonera laciniata subsp. laciniata Elymus caninus
Sonchus asper subsp. glaucescens Festuca holmbergii
Taraxacum hellenicum Festuca rubra subsp. pseudorvularis
Taraxacum minimum Hordeum marinum var. marinum
Tragopogon longirostris var. longirostris Hordeum marinum var. pubescens
Tussilago farfara Hordeum murinum subsp. glaucum
Xanthium strumarium subsp. strumarium Koeleria cristata
Crassulaceae Lolium temelentum var. temelentum
Sedum acre Panicum repens
Cruciferae Panicum miliaceum
Aethionema arabica Paspalum dilatatum
Alyssum foliosum var. foliosum Paspalum paspalodes
Alyssum minus var. minus Phalaris canariensis
Alyssum murale var. murale Phleum subulatum subsp. subulatum
Alyssum pterocarpum* Piptatherum miliaceum subsp. miliaceum
Alyssum strigosum subsp. strigosum Poa nemoralis
Barbarea verna Poa diversifolia
Cardaria draba subsp. draba Sorghum halepense var. halepense
Erysimum alpestre* Stipa pulcherrima subsp. crassiculmis
Cupressaceae Taeniatherum caput-medusae subsp. crinitum
Cyperaceae Vulpia muralis
Carex flacca subsp. serrulata Vulpia ciliata subsp. ciliata
Dipsacaceae Polygalacea
Knautia integrifolia var. bidens Polygala pruinosa subsp. pruinosa
Ericaceae Polygonaceae
Erica manipuliflora Polygonum pulchellum
Euphorbiaceae Portulacaceae
Euphorbia anacampseros* Primulaceae
Fagaceae Anagallis arvensis var. parviflora
Quercus ithaburensis subsp. macrolepis Lysimachia verticillaris
Frankeniaceae Ranunculaceae
Gentianaceae Adonis aestivalis subsp. aestivalis
Centaurium erythraea subsp. turcicum Consolida regalis subsp. paniculata var. paniculata
Geraniaceae Nigella arvensis var. involucrata
Erodium cicutarium subsp. cicutarium Ranunculus marginatus var. marginatus
Geranium molle subsp. molle Ranunculus reuterianus*
Guttiferae Resedaceae
Hypericum aviculariifolium subsp. aviculariifolium var. aviculariifolium Reseda lutea var. nutans
Illecebraceae Rhamnaceae
Parnonychia chionaea* Rosaceae
Iridaceae Alchemilla mollis
Crocus biflorus subsp. biflorus Crataegus monogyna subsp. azarella
Crocus pallasii subsp. pallasii Rubus canescens var. canescens
Iris pseudocorus Sanguisorba minor subsp. muricata
Juncaceae Rubiaceae
Juncus gerardi subsp. gerardi Asperula liliaciflora ssp phyrgia*
Labiatae Galium graecum subsp. graecum
Marrubium parviflorum var. parviflorum Galium murale
Mentha spicata subsp. spicata Santalaceae
Micromeria graeca subsp. graeca Nepeta italica Scrophulariaceae
Origanum spyleum* Digitalis feruginea subsp. feruginea

MUNIR OZTURK ET AL.,
14
Table 1. (Cont’d.).
Origanum vulgare subsp. hirtum Linaria corifolia*
Phlomis nissolii* Linaria genistifolia ssp linifolia*
Phlomis pungens var. laxiflora Parentucellia latifolia subsp. latifolia
Phlomis pungens var. hirta Scrophularia canina subsp. bicolor
Salvia argentea Verbascum glomeratum
Salvia pisidica* Veronica cuneifolia subsp. cuneifolia*
Scutellaria orientalis subsp. pinnatifida Veronica multifida*
Sideritis curvidens Veronica triloba
Stachys cretica ssp smyrnea* Solanaceae
Stachys tmolea Solanum nigrum subsp. schultesii
Stachys annua subsp. annua var. annua Tamaricaceae
Teucrium scordium subsp. scordioides Typhaceae
Teucrium chamaedrys subsp. chamaedrys Umbelliferae
Thymus zygoides var. zygoides Bupleurum euboeum
Wiedemannia orientalis* Eryngium campestre var. virens
Ziziphora taurica subsp. taurica Ferula communis subsp. communis
Leguminosae Ferulago humilis
Ajuga chamaepitys subsp. chia var. chia Huetia cynapioides subsp. macrocarpa
Anthyllis vulneraria subsp. praepropera Laserpitium petrophilium*
Astragalus angustifolius subsp. angustifolius var. angustifolius Oenanthe pimpinelloides
Astragalus ptilodes var. ptilodes Pimpinella tragium subsp. litophila
Coronilla varia subsp. varia Scandix australis subsp. australis
Glycyrrhiza glabra var. glandulifera Torilis arvensis subsp. purpurea
Lathyrus aphaca var. Pseudoaphaca Urticaceae
Lathyrus laxiflorus subsp. laxiflorus Valerianaceae
Lotus corniculatus var. Corniculatus Verbenaceae
Lupinus angustifolius subsp. angustifolius Phyla nodiflora
Lupinus hispanicus
Table 2. Maximum and minimum values of biomass productivity of aboveground and belowground parts on seasonal basis.
Biomass productivity aboveground
(g) Biomass productivity belowground
(g)
States Spring Summer Autumn Winter Spring Summer Autumn Winter
Unfenced 25.9-97.1 12-27 10-70 15-40 3.5-18.5 4-40 5-70 40-65 Aydin
Fenced 32.9-139.1 30-62 24-100 20-40 3.7-35.5 10-58 10-80 50-70
Unfenced 28.3-69.3 15-32 15-36 15-35 10.9-33 18-30 8-38 40-68 Balikesir
Fenced 23.3-122.6 24-80 34-54 18-40 11.2-26.5 16-64 14-46 50-80
Unfenced 17.4-101.4 6-50 14-30 10-30 1.3-17.2 1-50 4-40 20-60 Çanakkale
Fenced 22.4-103.7 16-110 20-80 20-50 1.6-23.1 6-30 6-34 30-80
Unfenced 45-240.8 40-360 50-200 50-100 17.3-247.5 40-400 20-400 100-250 Denizli
Fenced 45.9-403.9 60-400 90-350 100-300 32.6-285.1 50-220 90-350 175-250
Unfenced 70-1036.4 32-1200 36-1120 56-1020 14-937 9-786 17.5-1150 21-1280 İzmir
Fenced 288-800 282-842 102-1144 174.4-784 10-440 24-416 40-946 96-1360
Unfenced 102-245.1 60-190 30-350 50-200 25.1-249.5 25-250 40-100 100-250 Kütahya
Fenced 125.4-257.5 80-300 85-400 75-250 25.5-187.8 50-340 60-440 175-250
Unfenced 112-1136 144-1248 112-1312 96-1232 11.4-544 144-560 96-368 96-336 Manisa
Fenced 128-1360 160-1264 192-1280 96-1152 192-910 304-688 208-560 208-512
Unfenced 64.5-288.3 90-130 50-100 50-100 9.3-51.3 30-150 30-70 100-150 Muğla
Fenced 91.5-317 180-500 75-225 100-150 95.1-99.1 30-300 35-75 175-225
Unfenced 46.5-194 30-200 60-300 50-250 20.1-80.7 10-250 20-240 100-350 Uşak
Fenced 50.2-190.8 80-220 80-800 75-400 8.3-90.6 20-250 20-450 150-600

AEGEAN GRASSLANDS AS ENDANGERED ECOSYSTEMS IN TURKEY
15
Conclusions
Grasslands have been considered as the cheapest feed
historically and thus exploited excessively with no care
for their sustainability. All discussion on the grasslands
are within the framework of animal production and
humans gaining their livelihood from them (Riveros,
1993). This has lead towards their degradation as well as
reduction in productivity (Haris, 2001).
Although Turkey faces several constraints on
productivity of grasslands and forage crops, there is a
great potential for developing forage sources. It is quite
obvious that current animal numbers are in excess of the
carrying capacity of the grasslands. Therefore all
opportunities should be taken to improve the feed
resources to reduce the grazing pressure. Researchers
have determined means of improving feed resources
including the best grassland rehabilitation and
management activities and forage crop production
systems (Holechek et al., 2004).
Rapid urbanization has increased demand for forages
for peri-urban smallholder dairies. Keeping this in view
management of extensive grasslands is of prime
importance. Greater use can be made of forages under tree
crops and agroforestry systems. Production policies are
needed to remunerate pastoralists who manage grasslands
(Anon., 2000a; Hervieu, 2002). Most cattle are still under
traditional management relying mainly on extensive
grazing, and farms are small-fragmented, 85% under 10
ha. Since young rurals are abandoning the villages labour
requirements are not properly met (Akman et al., 2000;
Thornton et al., 2002).
On the other hand animal producers are increasing
their herd sizes without paying any attention to the
rotational grazing because it requires extra investment
(Delgado et al., 1999). The land tenure system is a major
constraint to grassland management. Common areas are
grazed free of charge, so are not managed properly.
Boundaries of pastures are not clearly determined nor
assigned to the villagers. Labour is becoming scarce in
pastoral areas as people move to towns, so flocks are not
well herded. Therefore the users have no incentives to
invest in grassland resources (Anon., 2004; Ellis, 2000;
Dixon et al., 2001). It is quite obvious that current animal
numbers are in excess of the carrying capacity of the
grasslands.Therefore all opportunities should be taken to
improve the feed resources to reduce the grazing pressure
(Dost, 2001). Greater attention should be paid to the
wider ethnobotanical matters. Sustainable management is
a matter of widespread interest and is not limited to those
who gain their livelihoods therefrom (Horne et al., 2005).
Introduction of invasive plants that are better adapted to
arid conditions could outcompete the grassland vegetation
in the Aegean region (DiTomaso, 2000). Cadastral work
to define the boundaries of pastures should be completed.
It will have a positive impact on pasture management and
rehabilitation. Pastures can be assigned to municipalities
or villagers.
Fertilizing is one of the most effective inputs to
increase grassland productivity (SIS, 2002;
Buyukburc,1983; Buyukburc et al., 1990; Gokkus &
Altin, 1986; Gokkus,1987; Manga et al., 1986), however
it is still not widely accepted because of the land
ownership regime. Pastures are considered common areas
so the farmers do not invest in fertilizers for this purpose.
Rotational grazing is a basic principle of pasture
management, however it requires an extra fencing
investment depending on the topography of the area.
Although the herdsmen are well aware of the benefits of
rotational grazing, they continue to graze all the parts of
the grasslands from early spring until winter. The effect of
rotational grazing on the yield and rangeland vegetation
was investigated by several researchers. Recovery of
degraded pastures requires longer than expected.
Establishment of temporary or seasonal grazing areas
is a feasible way of forage crop production (Munzur et al.,
1991; Peeters,2004). The best mixture for a seasonal
pasture was 40 percent cereal and 60 percent vetch
(Munzur, 1978). Karabulut et al., (1989) state that it is
possible to obtain a liveweight gain of up to 10.5 and 9.5
kg with lambs and ewes, on a spring sown legume cereal
mixture. Lucerne is sown on more than 230000 ha, and
sainfoin on over 93000 ha. to compensate the cattle feed
deficiency. Similarly area of maiz has increased from
1097173 ha to 1114 000 ha.
Crop residues, especially straws and stovers are very
important as livestock feed in both commercial and
traditional systems; their conservation and use together
with hay and straw is stressed by Suttie (2000),
t’Mannetje (2000) and Suttie & Reynolds (2003).
The lean seasons vary being winter in some areas
but in tropics it is the dry season. In the Mediterranean;
which includes our study area too; it is the hot, dry
summer. In many cases, transhumant systems are used to
palliate its effects. Although grasslands are of primary
environmental importance they are rarely fmentioned
(Hu & Zhang, 2003).When discussing sustainable
development of grasslands Anon., (2003) points out that
improperly managed feeding can be very detrimental to
pasture condition.
Very few incentives exist for farmers to reduce
grazing pressure such as limiting number of animals,
grazing period and timely grazing of pastures. But the
villagers rarely plan the management of grasslands, in fact
they leave them to the mercy of shepherds. Productive
pastures are found only on better soils and in more
isolated areas with lower grazing pressure. This source is
still capable of supplying sufficient roughage when
properly managed (Farqher, 1993; Torok et al., 2011).
The newly passed “Pasture Law” brings a new
regime to pasture ownership (Büyükburc and Arkac,
2000). According to the Pasture Law, pastures will be
assigned to municipalities or village communities once
their boundaries are determined and certified (Anon.,
2000). After certification is completed, carrying capacity
and duration of grazing will be determined for each area,
then the villages will be given the right to graze the
previously determined and certified areas for a given
period of time with the set number of animals.

MUNIR OZTURK ET AL.,
16
Acknowledgements
Authors would like to thank TUBITAK (Turkish
Scientific & Techbical Research Council) -Ankara for the
financial support in the form of a Project in the first stages
of this work from 1984 to 1987. Our special thanks are
due to Prof. Dr. Ali Koc-Ataturk University, Erzurum,
Turkey for providing the latest information on the
grasslands of Turkey.
References
Akman, N., K. Ozkutuk, S. Kumlu and S.M. Yener. 2000. Cattle
Raising in Turkey and its Future. In: Vth Technical
Congress of the Agriculture, 17-21 Jan., 2000. p. 741-764.
Chamber of Agricultural Engineers.
Anonymous. 1999. National Geographic Atlas of the World (7th
ed.). Europe: pp. 68-69; Asia: pp. 90-91, National
GeographicWashington, D.C.
Anonymous. 2000. Announcement on the Implementation
Principles for Decision on Support of Animal Husbandry,
No 24067, Decision No: 2000/467, 2 June (Announcement
No: 2000/22).
Anonymous. 2000. World Resources Institute. PAGE
Downloaded from http://earthtrends.wri.org/text/forests-
grasslands-drylands/map-229.htm
Anonymous. 2003. TCP/MON/0066 - pastoral risk management
strategy project.
Anonymous. 2004. Livestock services and the poor. a global
initiative. Collecting, coordinating and sharing
experiences. International Fund for Agricultural
Development (IFAD) Rome, Italy, 132p.
Anonymous. 2005. Geography of Turkey".Turkish Ministry of
Tourism.
http://www.turizm.net/turkey/info/geography.html.
Anonymous. 2006. Geography of Turkey. US Library of
Congress. http://countrystudies.us/turkey/18.htm.
Anonymous.. 2002a. Mobilizing the political will and resources
to banish world food hunger. Foreword by Director-
General, FAO, to: The World Food Summit–five years
later. Technical Background Document, 105p.
Aumeeruddy-Thomas, Y., Y.C. Lama and S. Ghimire.
2004. Medicinal plants within the context of pastoral life in
the village of Pungmo, Dolpo, Nepal. In: Strategic
innovations for improving livelihoods in the Hindu Kush-
Himalayan Highlands. (Eds.): C. Richard and K. Hoffman.
Vol. II, ICIMOD, Kathmandu, Nepal, 107-128.
Avcioglu, R., E. Acikgoz, H. Soya and A. Tan. 2000. Forage
Crops Production. In: Vth Technical Congress of the
Agriculture, 17-21 Jan., 2000. p. 566-585. Chamber of
Agricultural Engineers.
Avcioglu, R., N. Akbari, H. Soya and I. Sabanci. 1991. Ege
sahil kuşağinda yapay çayir-mera kurma olanaklari
üzerinde araştirmalar. Türkiye 2. Çayir-Mera ve
Yembitkileri Kongresi, 28-31 Mayis 1991, Izmir, 181-190.
Avcioulu, R. 1986. Çayir-Mer'alarin Islahi ve Yapay Çayir-
Mer'a Kurma Tekniği. Ege Üniv. Ziraat Fak. Yay. No: 479,
156 s.
Bakoglu, A., E. Bagci, H.I. Erkovan, A. Koc and A. Kocak.
2009. Seeds stocks of grazed and ungrazed rangelands on
Palandoken Mountains of Eastern Anatolia. Journal of
Food, Agriculture and Environment, 7: 674-678.
Buschermohle, M.J., J.B. Wills, W.W. Gill and C.D. Lane.
2002. Planning and Building Fences on the Farm. The
Univ. of Tennessee, Agric. Ext. Serv., PB1541, 20p.
Buyukburc, U. 1983. Investigation on the effects of fertilizers
and rest treatments on the pasture of Yavrucak Village.
Grassland and Animal Husbandry Research Institute Pub.
No: 79. Ankara.
Buyukburc, U. and Z. Arkac. 2000. Preservation and Utilization
of Grasslands. "An evaluation in the Framework of the
New Pasture Law". In: Vth Technical Congress of the
Agriculture, 17-21 Jan., 2000. P:335-342. Chamber of
Agricultural Engineers.
Buyukburc, U., S. Sengul and L. Tahtacioglu. 1990.
Improvement possibilities of natural pastures of Erzurum
Province. In: (Eds.): Y. Serin and A. Gökkus. Results of
pasture and forage crops researched carried out at Eastern
Anatolia. P:8. 2 Atatürk University Agricultural Faculty
Press. Erzurum.
Comakli, B., M. Dasci and A. Koc. 2008. The effects of
traditional grazing practices on upland (yayla) rangeland
vegetation and forage quality. Türk. J Agric For., 32: 259-
265.
Comakli, B., O. Mentese and A. Koc. 2004. Nitrogen Fertilizing
and Pre-anthesis Cutting Stage Improve Dry Matter
Production, Protein Content and Botanical Composition in
Meadows. Acta Agric. Scand., Sect. B, Soil and Plant Sci.,
55: 125-130.
Dasci, M., A. Koc, B. Comakli, M.K. Gullap, M.M. Cengiz and
H.I. Erkovan. 2010. Importance of annual and seasonal
precipitation variations for the sustainable use of
rangelands in semi arid regions with high altitude. African
Journal of Agricultural Research, 5(16): 2184-2191.
Davis, P.H. 1965-1985. Flora of Turkey and the East Aegean
Islands, vol.1-9. Edinburgh Univ. Press, Edinburgh.
Davis, P.H., R.R. Mill and K. Tan. 1988. Flora of Turkey and
the East Aegean Islands, vol. 10 (supplement 1). Edinburgh
Univ. Press, Edinburgh.
de Haan, C., H. Steinfeld and H. Blackburn. 1997. Livestock
and the environment. Finding a balance. European
Commission Directorate General for
Development. Wrenmedia, Eye, UK.115p.
Delgado, C., M. Rosegrant, H. Steinfeld, S. Ehui and C.
Courbois. 1999. Livestock to 2020: the next food
revolution. IFPRI Food, Agriculture and the Environment
Discussion Paper, No. 28. International Food Policy
Research Institute, Washington DC, 72p.
DiTomaso, J.M. 2000. Invasive weeds in rangelands: Species,
impacts, and management. Weed Sci., 48: 255-265.
Dixon, J., A. Gulliver and D. Gibbon. 2001. Farming systems
and poverty. Improving farmers’ livelihoods in a changing
world. FAO and World Bank, Rome & Washington DC,
412p.
Dost, M. 2001. Fodder success story: improved fodder crop
production in the northern areas of Pakistan. Integrated
Crop Management, FAO, Rome, Italy, 4: 23p.
Ellis, F. 2000. Rural livelihoods and diversity in developing
countries. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 273p.
Erkovan, H.I., M.K. Gullap, M. Dasci and A. Koc. 2009.
Changes in leaf area index, forage quality and above-
ground biomass in grazed and ungrazed rangelands of
Eastern Anatolia Region. Tarim Bilimleri Dergisi, 15(3):
217-223.
Farqher, J.D. 1993. Turkish Livestock Strategy Study.
Rangeland and meadow resources, major constraints and
options for improvement. Workshop on the Development
of the Livestock Subsector in Turkey. Ankara, June 1993.
(Draft Summary)
Genckan, M.S., R. Avcioglu, H. Soya and O. Dogan. 1989.
Problems concerning pasture utilization, conservation and
development in Turkey and their solutions. In 3rd Technical
Congress of Turkish Agricultural Engineering. 8-12 Jan.
1990. 53-61. Turkish Chamber of Agricultural Engineers
and Ankara University Agricultural Faculty. Ankara.

AEGEAN GRASSLANDS AS ENDANGERED ECOSYSTEMS IN TURKEY
17
Gençkan, M.S. 1985. Çayir-Mera Kulturu Amenajmam Islahi. Ege
Üni. Ziraat Fak. Yay. No: 483, E.Ü. Basimevi, Izmir, 655 s.
Gokkus, A. 1987. Experiment on herbage, crude protein yield
and botanical composition of several amelioration practices
applied pastures. DOGA TU. Agric. For. Journal, 11(2):
348-361.
Gokkus, A. and M. Altin. 1986. Effect of various pasture
rehabilitation practices on herbage, crude protein yield and
botanical composition. DOGA TU. Agric. For. Journal.,
10(3): 333-342.
Guner, A., N. Ozhatay and T. Ekim. 2000. Flora of Turkey and
the East Aegean Islands, 11. Edinburgh University Press,
Edinburgh.
Hameed, M., N. Naz, M.S.A. Ahmad, Islam-ud-Din and S. Riaz.
2008. Morphological adaptations of some grasses from the
salt range. Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 40(4): 1751-1758
Harris, P.S. 2001. Grassland resource assessment for pastoral
systems. FAO Plant Production and Protection Paper, No.
162. 150 p.
Hervieu, B. 2002. Multi-functionality: a conceptual framework
for a new organisation of research and development on
grasslands and livestock systems. In: (Eds.): J.L. Durand,
J.C. Emile, C. Huyghe and G. Lemaire. Multi-function
grasslands. Quality forages, animal products and
landscapes. EGF Grassland Science in Europe, 7: 1-2.
Holechek, J.L., R.D. Pieper and C.H. Herbel. 2004. Range
Management Principles and Practices. Pearson Education,
Inc., New Jersey, 607 p.
Horne, P., W. Stur, P. Phengsavanh, F. Gabunada and R.
Roothaert. 2005. New forages for smallholder livestock
systems in southeast Asia: recent developments, impacts
and opportunities. In: (Eds.): S.G. Reynolds and J. Frame.
Grasslands: developments, opportunities,
perspectives. FAO and Science Publishers Inc., Rome &
Enfield, USA, 357-382.
Hu, Z. and D. Zhang. 2003. China’s pasture resources. pp. 81-
113, In: Suttie & Reynolds, 2003, q.v.
Immerfall, S. 2011. Handbook of European Societies: Social
Transformations in the 21st Century. Springer Verlag,
pp. 417.
Karabulut, A., M. Munzur and H. Ozturk. 1989. Fattening
performance of lambs and ewes grazing several mixtures
sown on fallow areas. Central Research Institute for Field
Crops. Pub. No:1989/6. Ankara.
Karagoz, A., M. Munzur and A. Tan. 1991. Possibilities of
growing annual forage legume+cereal mixtures on fallow
areas. 2. Grassland-Meadow and Forage Crops Congress.
28-31 May 1991. P:430-438. Aegean University. Izmir.
Kaymakci, M., A. Elicin, E. Tuncel, E. Pekel, O. Karaca, F. Isin,
T. Taskin, Y. Askin, H. Ozder, Emsen, E. Selcuk and R.
Sonmez. 2000. Small Ruminant Raising in Turkey. In: Vth
Technical Congress of the Agriculture, 17-21 Jan., 2000. p.
765-793. Chamber of Agricultural Engineers.
Knežević, A., D. Džigurski, B. Ljevnaić-Mašić and D. Milić.
2012. Ecological Analysis of the Grassland Flora in the
Riparian Zone of Okanj Oxbow Lake (Vojvodina, Serbia).
Pak. J. Bot., 44(1): 21-25.
Koc, A. and A. Gokkus. 1996, Annual Variation of Above
Ground Biomass, Vegetation Height and Crude Protein
Yield on the Natural Rangelands of Erzurum. Tr. J. Agric.
and Forestry, 20: 305-308.
Koc, A. and T. Oztas. 2000. Importance of Rangeland
Management for Sustainable Use of Natural Resources. 1st
Int. Symp. on Problem of Education and Safety of
Population and Territory Under the Thread of Extreme
Circumstances, 20-22 Nov., 2000, Baku, Azerbaijan, Vol.
II 5-10.
Koc, A., A. Gokkus, M. Tan, B. Comakli and Y. Serin. 2004.
Performance of Tall Fescue and Lucerne-Tall Fescue
Mixtures in Highland of Turkey. New Zeal. J.Agric.
Research, 47: 61-65.
Koc, A., H.I. Erkovan and Y. Serin. 2008. Changes in
Vegetation and Soil Properties Under Semi-Nomadic
Animal Raising Areas in Highlands Rangelands of Turkey.
Current World Environment, 3(1): 15-20.
Kurt, O. and A. Tan. 1984. Forage production on fallow areas by
spring and late spring sowing methods. Grassland and
Animal Husbandry Research Institute Pub. No: 93. Ankara.
Lipper, L. and R. Cavatassi. 2003. Land use change, carbon
sequestration and poverty alleviation. ESA Working Paper,
Agricultural and Development Economics Division, FAO
No. 03-13, 22 p.
Manga, I., M. Altin and A. Gokkus. 1986. Experiments on the
effect of long years fertilization on the yield, vegetation and
some soil properties of Erzurum natural pastures. DOGA
TU. Agric. For. Journal., 10(2): 235-244.
Munzur, M. 1978. Experiments on the optimum seed rates of
some vetch-cereal mixtures, suitability to grazing and
herbage yield in Ankara. Grassland and Animal Husbandry
Research Institute Research Activities. Grassland and
Animal Husbandry Research Institute Pub. No: 97, p. 29-31.
Ankara.
Munzur, M. 1987. Fodder Development, Rangeland
Rehabilitation and Management. Grassland and Animal
Husbandry Research Institute. Ankara, Turkey.
Munzur, M., A. Tan and A. Karagöz. 1991. Possibilities of
grazing annual legume and cereal mixtures sown on fallow
areas. 2. Grassland-Meadow and Forage Crops Congress.
28-31 May 1991. P:172-180. Aegean University. Izmir.
Naz, N., M. Hameed, M.S.A. Ahmad, M. Ashraf and M. Arshad.
2010. Soil salinity, the major determinant of community
structure under arid environments. Commun. Ecol., 11(1): 84-90
Oztas, T., A. Koc and B. Comakli. 2003. Changes in Vegetation
and Soil Properties Along a Slope on Overgrazed and
Eroded Rangelands. J. Arid Environ., 55: 93-100.
Ozturk, M. and M. Pirdal. 1988. Ecology of grasslands in the
State of Mugla. Turkish Journal of Botany; 12/2, 164-174.
Ozturk, M. and M. Pirdal. 1991. Productivity and Nutrient Turnover
in Isikeli Canakkale Grasslands. I. Turkish Grasslands-Fodder
Congress, Izmir (Ed.): R.Avcioglu, 202-212.
Ozturk, M., O. Secmen and K. Kondo. 1983.Vegetation in
Aegean region of Turkey. Mem.Fac. Integ. Arts-Sci.
Hiroshima, 8:53-62.
Pagiola, S., P. Agostini, J. Gobbi, C. de Haan, M. Ibrahim, E.
Murgueitio, E. Ramirez, M. Rosales and J.P. Ruiz.
2004. Paying for biodiversity conservation services in
agricultural landscapes. Environment Dept. Papers, No. 96,
The World Bank, 27p.
Peeters, A. 2004. Wild and sown grasses. Profiles of a
temperate species selection: ecology, biodiversity and
use. FAO and Blackwell Publishing, Rome, 314p.
Reynolds, S.G. and J. Frame. 2005. Grasslands: Developments
Opportunities Perspectives. Rome, Italy, and Enfield, USA:
FAO, and Science Publishers Inc. 565 p.
Riveros, F. 1993. Grasslands for our world. In: Grasslands for
our world. (Ed.): M.J. Baker. SIR Publishing, Wellington,
NZ, 6-11.
SIS. 2002b. State Institute of Statistics, Statistical Yearbook of
Turkey, 2001.
Suttie J.M. and S.G. Reynolds. 2003. Transhumant grazing
systems in temperate Asia. Plant Production and
Protection Series, No 31, FAO Rome, 331p.
Suttie, J.M. 2000. Hay and straw conservation for small scale
farming and pastoral conditions. Plant Production and
Protection Series, No. 29, FAO Rome, 244-248.

MUNIR OZTURK ET AL.,
18
Suttie, J.M. and S.G. Reynolds. 2004. Fodder Oats: a World
Overview. FAO Plant Production and Protection Series,
No. 33. 251 p.
Tan, A. 1984 a. Hay yield of some annual legume-barley
mixtures sown at spring and fall during the fallow year in
Corum Province. Grassland and Animal Husbandry
Research Institute Pub. No: 91. Ankara.
Tan. A. 1984b. Hay yield of some annual legume-oats mixtures
in Ankara dry land conditions. Grassland and Animal
Husbandry Research Institute Pub. No: 90. Ankara (In
Turkish).
Thissen, L. 2007. Time trajectories for the Neolithic of Central
Anatolia. CANeW – Central Anatolian Neolithic e-
Workshop. Archived from the original on June 5, 2007.
Thornton, P.K., R.L. Kruska, N. Henninger, P.M. Kristjanson,
R.S. Reid, F. Atieno, A.N. Odero and T. Ndegwa.
2002. Mapping poverty and livestock in the developing
world. International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI),
Nairobi, Kenya, 117p.
t'Mannetje, L. (ed). 2000. Silage making in the tropics with
particular emphasis on smallholders. FAO Plant
Production and Protection Paper, No. 161. 180 p.
Torok P., E. Vida, B. Deak, Sz. Lengyel and B. Tothmeresz.
2011. Grassland restoration on former croplands in Europe:
an assessment of applicability of techniques and costs.
Biodiversity & Conservation, doi: 10.1007/s10531-011-
9992-4.
Tosun, F., I. Manga, M. Altin and Y. Serin. 1977. A study on
the improvement of dry land ranges developed under the
conditions of Erzurum (East Anatolia). XIII. International
Grassland Congress, Leipzig, GDR, 18-27 May, 1977: 607-
610.
Ugrlu, E. 2010. Dry Grassland Profile of Turkey. Bull. Eur. Dry
Grassl. 7-18-23, June.
Unal, S., E. Karabudak, M.B. Ocal and A. Koc. 2011.
Interpretations of vegetation changes of some villages
rangelands in Çankiri province of Turkey. Turkish Journal
of Field Crops, 16: 39-47.
Upton, M. 2004. The role of livestock in economic development
and poverty reduction. Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
(PPLPI) Working Paper No.10. FAO, Rome, 59p.
White, R., S. Murray and M. Rohweder. 2000. Pilot analysis of
global ecosystems (PAGE): grassland ecosystems. World
Resources Institute (WRI), Washington D.C. USA, 100p.
Wright, I.A. 2005. Future prospects for meat and milk from
grass-based systems. In: Grasslands: developments, (Eds.):
S.G. Reynolds and J. Frame. opportunities,
perspectives. FAO and Science Publishers Inc., Rome &
Enfield, USA, 161-179.
(Received for publication 16 April 2012)