SynthesisEnvironmental evidence2024
Effects on biodiversity in semi-natural pastures of giving the grazing animals access to additional nutrient sources: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Environmental evidence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effects on biodiversity in semi-natural pastures of giving the grazing animals access to additional nutrient sources: a systematic review.Environmental evidence · 2024Pooled it
- The Effect of Fertilization on Floristic Composition and Biodiversity of Montane Grasslands (HNV) in the Eastern Carpathians.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The Impact of Fertilizer Gradient on High Nature Value Mountain Grassland.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Ecosystem Services Linked to Extensive Sheep and Goat Farming in Mountain Areas: A Global Literature Analysis Using Text Mining and Topic Analysis.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTraditionally managed semi-natural pastures are recognised for their high biodiversity. One drawback is that these pastures are often low in fodder production and hence rather unprofitable, which may lead to abandonment. Two ways to increase production and profitability and maintain grazing are to (i) offer the grazers supplementary feed, or (ii) co-enclose the semi-natural pasture with an improved pasture. Both practices may transfer nutrients to the semi-natural pasture, with potential negative effects on biodiversity. This systematic review aimed to analyse the available evidence concerning the following primary question: "What is the effect of giving grazers access to additional nutrient sources on biodiversity in semi-natural pastures?" (Q1). We also used two supporting questions: "What is the effect of giving grazers access to additional nutrient sources on nutrient status of the soils of semi-natural pastures?" (Q2) and "How do the grazers of semi-natural pastures behave while having access to additional nutrient sources?" (Q3).
methodsSearches for peer-reviewed and grey literature were made using bibliographic databases, search engines, specialist websites, and stakeholder contacts. Literature was screened for relevance according to predefined eligibility criteria, and critical appraisal was performed using the tool CEECAT. A database of the relevant studies was compiled. Descriptive information about the evidence base is presented in tables and an interactive evidence atlas. Because of absent study setup replication, Q1 and Q2 were not analysed quantitatively. However, sample size allowed the use of mixed modelling to quantitatively analyse Q3 regarding the effects of (i) co-enclosing an improved pasture on grazers' electivity for the improved area, and (ii) supplementary feed on the forage intake of grazers. REVIEW
findingsA total of 12 articles on the effects of supplementary feeding and 19 on the effects of co-enclosing an improved pasture were included, of which some targeted multiple review questions. Because of the limited literature, it is not possible to draw any conclusions concerning the effects on biodiversity (Q1) or nutritional status (Q2) in semi-natural pastures. For Q3, 28 studies fulfilled our criteria, of which 18 investigated the behaviour of grazers related to co-enclosing an improved pasture, and 10 investigated their forage intake while having access to supplementary fodder. The results show that all grazer species except goats preferred grazing in the improved areas regardless of whether they were grazing together with other grazer species or not. We found no effect of supplementary feeding on forage intake of the grazers.
conclusionsWe detected a knowledge gap concerning the effects of the two additional nutrient sources on semi-natural pasture biodiversity (Q1) and nutrient status (Q2), which points toward further research needs. Analysis of Q3 showed that grazers prefer to graze improved compared to semi-natural pasture areas. However, how this behaviour subsequently affects nutrient transport and biodiversity is unclear and cannot be translated into management recommendations. To gain better knowledge about the primary question of our review, research focusing specifically on this question is needed. We provide suggestions for how such studies could be designed, including spatio-temporal setup, and key management and environmental conditions to consider.
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.