ArticleEcology and evolution2022
Long-term cattle grazing shifts the ecological state of forest soils.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Erratum:.Ecology and evolution · 2022Article
- Long-term cattle grazing shifts the ecological state of forest soils.Ecology and evolution · 2022Article
- Grazing lowers soil multifunctionality but boosts soil microbial network complexity and stability in a subtropical grassland of China.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedErratum:.2022
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cattle grazing profoundly affects abiotic and biotic characteristics of ecosystems. While most research has been performed on grasslands, the effect of large managed ungulates on forest ecosystems has largely been neglected. Compared to a baseline seminatural state, we investigated how long-term cattle grazing of birch forest patches affected the abiotic state and the ecological community (microbes and invertebrates) of the soil subsystem. Grazing strongly modified the soil abiotic environment by increasing phosphorus content, pH, and bulk density, while reducing the C:N ratio. The reduced C:N ratio was strongly associated with a lower microbial biomass, mainly caused by a reduction of fungal biomass. This was linked to a decrease in fungivorous nematode abundance and the nematode channel index, indicating a relative uplift in the importance of the bacterial energy-channel in the nematode assemblages. Cattle grazing highly modified invertebrate community composition producing distinct assemblages from the seminatural situation. Richness and abundance of microarthropods was consistently reduced by grazing (excepting collembolan richness) and grazing-associated changes in soil pH, Olsen P, and reduced soil pore volume (bulk density) limiting niche space and refuge from physical disturbance. Anecic earthworm species predominated in grazed patches, but were absent from ungrazed forest, and may benefit from manure inputs, while their deep vertical burrowing behavior protects them from physical disturbance. Perturbation of birch forest habitat by long-term ungulate grazing profoundly modified soil biodiversity, either directly through increased physical disturbance and manure input or indirectly by modifying soil abiotic conditions. Comparative analyses revealed the ecosystem engineering potential of large ungulate grazers in forest systems through major shifts in the composition and structure of microbial and invertebrate assemblages, including the potential for reduced energy flow through the fungal decomposition pathway. The precise consequences for species trophic interactions and biodiversity-ecosystem function relationships remain to be established, however.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.