Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32764754›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2020

A global meta-analysis of livestock grazing impacts on soil properties.

Liming Lai, Sandeep Kumar

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
10.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 176 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Liming LaiDepartment of Agronomy, Hetao College, Bayannur, Inner Mongolia, China.ORCID 0000-0003-0437-8038
Sandeep KumarDepartment of Agronomy, Horticulture and Plant Sciences, South Dakota State University, Brookings, South Dakota, United States of America.
South Dakota State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Grazing effects on soil properties under different soil and environmental conditions across the globe are often controversial. Therefore, it is essential to evaluate the overall magnitude and direction of the grazing effects on soils. This global meta-analysis was conducted using the mixed model method to address the overall effects of grazing intensities (heavy, moderate, and light) on 15 soil properties based on 287 papers published globally from 2007 to 2019. Our findings showed that heavy grazing significantly increased the soil BD (11.3% relative un-grazing) and PR (52.5%) and reduced SOC (-10.8%), WC (-10.8%), NO3- (-23.5%), and MBC (-27.9%) at 0-10 cm depth, and reduced SOC (-22.5%) and TN (-19.9%) at 10-30 cm depth. Moderate grazing significantly increased the BD (7.5%), PR (46.0%), and P (18.9%) (0-10 cm), and increased pH (4.1%) and decreased SOC (-16.4%), TN (-10.6%), and P (-23.9%) (10-30 cm). Light grazing significantly increased the SOC (10.8%) and NH4+ (28.7%) (0-10 cm). Heavy grazing showed much higher mean probability (0.70) leading to overgrazing than the moderate (0.14) and light (0.10) grazing. These findings indicate that, globally, compared to un-grazing, heavy grazing significantly increased soil compaction and reduced SOC, NO3-, and soil moisture. Moderate grazing significantly increased soil compaction and alkalinity and reduced SOC and TN. Light grazing significantly increased SOC and NH4+. Cattle grazing impacts on soil compaction, SOC, TN, and available K were higher than sheep grazing, but lower for PR. Climate significantly impacted grazing effects on SOM, TN, available P, NH4+, EC, CEC, and PR. Heavy grazing can be more detrimental to soil quality based on BD, SOC, TN, C: N, WC, and K than moderate and light grazing. However, global grazing intensities did not significantly impact most of the 15 soil properties, and the grazing effects on them had insignificant changes over the years.

Indexed as

HerbivoryLivestockAnimalsCarbonConservation of Natural ResourcesEcosystemNitrogenSoilCarbonNitrogenSoil

Identifiers

PMID32764754
PMCPMC7413490
OpenAlexW3047984427

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.