ArticleRoyal Society open science2025
Should elephants graze or browse? The nutritional and functional consequences of dietary variation in a mixed-feeding megaherbivore.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2025. 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.
- Should elephants graze or browse? The nutritional and functional consequences of dietary variation in a mixed-feeding megaherbivore.Royal Society open science · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unlike specialist browsers and grazers, the diets of mixed-feeding megaherbivores are broad and complex, comprising numerous plant species of variable nutritional quality. Understanding key axes of nutritional variation in the diets of mixed-feeding megaherbivores is challenging but is crucial to understand their impacts on vegetation. Here, we revisit a long-standing debate on whether browse is more nutritious than grasses for elephants, as browse is thought to contain higher crude protein (CP). We quantified diet composition using carbon isotope analyses and analysed forage quality in 102 Asian elephant faecal samples from southern India, and found that high-browsing and low-browsing diets had similar forage quality, as indexed by nitrogen and carbon-to-nitrogen ratio. To explore the generality of this finding, we analysed nutritional differences between browse and grass across 141 plant species consumed by Asian elephants across their distribution range. We show that woody tissues and non-legume plants, which dominate elephant browse, do not have higher forage quality or CP than grasses, a trend which may be common in Asia's mixed-feeding large herbivores. Finally, based on the observed habitat-wide variation in browsing, we provide a new framework to assess the impacts of Asian elephants on woody vegetation, with important implications for carbon cycling.
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.