4.0 Review

Characterisation of locoweeds and their effect on livestock production in the western rangelands of China: a review

Journal

RANGELAND JOURNAL
Volume 36, Issue 2, Pages 121-131

Publisher

CSIRO PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/RJ13105

Keywords

biological diversity, damage control techniques, desertification, poisonous weeds, toxins.

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation [31201958, 31072175]
  2. Special Scientific Research Fund of Agriculture Public Welfare Industry [201203062]
  3. Basic Scientific Research Project of Northwest AF University [QN2011108]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The rangelands of China are an important resource for livestock production, and play a strategic role in maintaining ecosystems and protecting the living environment of humans. Drought, overgrazing, infrastructure development, insufficient investment and poor management of rangelands have led to the invasion and spread of poisonous weeds in these rangelands in recent years. The rapid spread of poisonous weeds over the last few decades have caused a series of ecological problems, including a decrease in biological diversity and consequent desertification, and they are seriously affecting the ecological balance of rangelands, and the sustainable livestock production. Locoweeds, which belong to the genera Oxytropis and Astragalus, are an important species of poisonous legumes in the western rangelands of China, causing large economic losses. This review summarises the species and their ecological distribution, the toxic ingredients, the poisoning mechanism of locoweeds and damage control techniques for locoweeds. It attempts to highlight certain issues relating to research on locoweeds and how they are being tackled in order to understand the significance of locoweeds in preserving ecosystem diversity and the steps that require to be taken to control the spread of locoweeds in the western natural rangeland of China.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available