ArticleScientific reports2024
The role of ruminant urine and faeces in the recycling of nutrients by forages.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Camel grazing reshapes root and rhizome economic strategies and trade-offs: synergistic roles of soil water, salinity, and nitrogen availability.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study addresses the effect of using animal excreta on the nutritional content of forages, focusing on macro- and micro-element concentrations (nitrogen; N, phosphorus; P, sulphur; S, copper; Cu, zinc; Zn, manganese; Mn, selenium; Se) from animal feed to excreta, soil, and plants. Data were collected from pot and field trials using separate applications of sheep or cattle urine and faeces. Key findings indicate that soil organic carbon (SOC) and the type of excreta significantly influences nutrient uptake by forages, with varied responses among the seven elements defined above. Although urine contributes fewer micronutrients compared to faeces (as applied at a natural volume/mass basis, respectively), it notably improves forage yield and micronutrient accumulation, thus potentially delivering positive consequences at the farm level regarding economic performance and soil fertility when swards upon clayey soil types receive said urine in temperate agro-climatic regions (i.e., South West England in the current context). In contrast, faeces application in isolation hinders Se and Mn uptake, once again potentially delivering unintended consequences such as micronutrient deficiencies in areas of high faeces deposition. As it is unlikely that (b)ovine grazing fields will receive either urine or faeces in isolation, we also explored combined applications of both excreta types which demonstrates synergistic effects on N, Cu, and Zn uptake, with either synergistic or dilution effects being observed for P and S, depending largely on SOC levels. Additionally, interactions between excreta types can result in dilution or antagonistic effects on Mn and Se uptake. Notably, high SOC combined with faeces reduces Mn and Se in forages, raising concerns for grazed ruminant systems under certain biotic situations, e.g., due to insufficient soil Se levels typically observed in UK pastures for livestock growth. These findings underscore the importance of considering SOC and excreta nutritional composition when designing forage management to optimize nutrient uptake. It should be noted that these findings have potential ramifications for broader studies of sustainable agriculture through system-scale analyses, as the granularity of results reported herein elucidate gaps in knowledge which could affect, both positively and negatively, the interpretation of model-based environmental impact assessments of cattle and sheep production (e.g., in the case of increased yields [beneficial] or the requirement of additional synthetic supplementation [detrimental]).
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.