Briana Bennett

Separate Effects of Human Visitation and Touch on Plant Growth and Herbivory in
an Old-Field Community
It's already been proven that human interaction with nature can alter its growth and
development, or in the case of animals, their survival rates and behavioral activity. For example,
with butterflies, if their wings are touched by human hands they will not be able to fly and will
die shorty after exposure. Again, another example is birds. If humans tamper with a bird's nest,
or the eggs of a bird's nest, the mother will abandon the nest and her eggs and her babies will
hatch and die from starvation. However, in this study, Cahill, Castell, and Casper are studying the
effects human interaction and visitation has on plant height, viability, and leaf herbivory. Of the
six species tested, one showed results of increased damage, one showed improvement, while four
showed no difference. The variability and unpredictability of the results led to the naming of an
effect called "the herbivory uncertainty principal." This, is what Cahill, Castell, and Casper
wanted to challenge.
The objective of the study was to test and discover what effects, if any, do humans have
directly on plant growth and development as well as leaf herbivory. There were three main
variables in this study. 1) Plants that were unvisited. These plants were the control. 2) Plants that
were visited once weekly, but not touched, and 3) plants that were visited and touched once
weekly. These 3 variables were crucial for Cahill, Castel, and Casper to determine whether or
not, and in what way, human interaction affects plant growth/herbivory.
Three focal species were chosen for experimentation: Apocynum Cannabinum, Potentilla
Recta, Erigernon Philadelphicus. Next 30 experimental blocks were established. Each block was

approximately 15 meters wide and ranged in length from 7-22 meters long. No block was located
closer than 15 meters from a wooded area and no closer than 5 meters from its neighboring
block. Each block had up to ten shoots of each focal species labeled by tying flagging tape
around the stem and placing a pin flag so cm from the plant stem. Then leaf number and size was
accumulated. Then blocks were randomly assigned to each of the three treatment types: Not
visited (NV), visited (V), and visited and touched (VT.)
After 9 weeks of treatment, the plants were evaluated for light availability. 2 random
specimen were selected for evaluation. Prior to harvesting, photon flux density was measured
above the canopy as well as at the soil surface to determine which plants had the best access to
sunlight. Next, viability was determined; was the plant alive or dead. Then, in the live plants, leaf
damage was inspected and by visual estimation was given a number 0-4 with 0 representing +1%
of the leaf area missing and 4 meaning +75% of area missing. Where at the beginning of the
study all plants were given scores of 0-1. Then the results were compared with the different
variable types. Not Visited versus Visited versus Visited and Touched. All analyses was
conducted using PROC MIXED and SAS, which used a log likelihood function to account for
error associated with random effects.
Finally after many evaluations and calculations, results were concluded. Starting with
light availability, more light reached the meristem of both A. Cannabinum and P. Recta when
visited or visited and touched than when not visited. Visitation had no effect on light reaching the
meristem of E. Philadelphicus, probably because these plants were as tall as or taller than the
surrounding vegetation in all treatments. Next, we have the results for plant growth and
herbivory. The results varied greatly among the species types. There was greater leaf damage in
A. Cannabinum when it was visited (or visited and touched) than when left alone. Neither human

handling nor visitation affected E. Philadelphicus's biomass. However in general, smaller plants
tended to have less leaf biomass per unit stem biomass. The results for mortality percentage
demonstrated that mortality was greatest in the visited treatment than in not visited and visited
and touched.
After the study was complete and the data/results were fully evaluated, three main
conclusions were able to be drawn. The first being that visitation alone plus visitation and the
handling of plants affects each species of plant differently and that research has demonstrated
both direct and indirect biological consequences. Secondly, the effects on the plants consisted of
herbivory leaf biomass, viability (mortality), as well as plant growth in general. The third
conclusion being that every species reacted differently to the experiment and being visited or
visited and touched, but A. Cannabinum was affected the most.
Though the experiment went well and was properly organized and analyzed, there were
some limitations. This study was done in Pennsylvania so the field they had access to wasn't the
most viable, plush field. Plant growth was nutrient limited and there was root competition with
the already existing plants that were there. Also they had planned on measuring the insects found
on each plant but those plants rapidly deteriorated so it made determining biomass for these
plants impossible.