Find research datasets worth reusing

opencc-by-4.0May 2020View details →

Fig 1 from: Branson DH (2020) Grasshopper populations respond similarly to multiple moderate intensity livestock grazing treatments. Journal of Orthoptera Research 29(1): 67-69. https://doi.org/10.3897/jor.29.46966

Fig 1 Average grasshopper density (# per m2, mean ± SE) from 1997 through 2000 for each treatment. (3RG: three-pasture, twice-over rotational grazing; HILF: high-intensity low-frequency grazing; SD: short-duration grazing; SL: season-long continuous grazing; and WP: three-pasture winter rotation).

Figure 6. A in Temporal dynamics of invertebrate and aquatic plant communities at three intermittent ponds in livestock grazed Patagonian wetlands

Figure 6. A schematic cross-section of the study wetland (Mallín Crespo) contrasting the condition of the three studied ponds (P1, P2 and P3) during hydrological phases: isolation and connected periods. Distances between ponds, the weather station and sheep are not to scale. Volume (m3) is indicated below each pond. Environment variables are: water temperature (WT), precipitation (PP), pH, specific conductivity (C), dissolved oxygen (DO), total suspended solids (TSS), total nitrogen (TN), and total phosphorus (TP). Invertebrate attributes are: taxa richness (R) density (D), biomass (B) and dominant functional feeding groups (FFG). Dominant taxa in terms of density and frequency are listed over each pond. Bold letters are used for taxa that are also dominants in biomass. For both periods first and second dominant FFG are represented. P, predators; CG, collector–gatherers; and CF, collector–filterers.

Figure 4 in Temporal dynamics of invertebrate and aquatic plant communities at three intermittent ponds in livestock grazed Patagonian wetlands

Figure 4. Seasonal patterns of functional feeding groups (FFG), (A) by density (103 individuals m−3) and (B) by biomass [g DM m−3] at three ponds (May 2008 to April 2009) of Mallín Crespo wetland (Argentina). Sh, shredders; Sc, scrapers; P, predators; CG, collector–gatherers; CF, collector–filterers; P–H, piercers herbivores.

Figure 2 in Temporal dynamics of invertebrate and aquatic plant communities at three intermittent ponds in livestock grazed Patagonian wetlands

Figure 2. Seasonal variation of particulate organic matter (POM, dashed lines) and aquatic plant coverage (solid line) at three ponds on a Patagonian steppe wetland (Argentina) during the study period (May 2008 to April 2009). Categories of aquatic plant coverage explained in methodology. Livestock stocking period is indicated in the figure (black bar).

Figure 1 in Temporal dynamics of invertebrate and aquatic plant communities at three intermittent ponds in livestock grazed Patagonian wetlands

Figure 1. (A) Location of the sampling sites (P1, P2 and P3) at Mallín Crespo (Chubut Province, Patagonia, Argentina) during connected (June–December) and hydrologically isolated (January–May) periods. The three ponds are in the same scale. (B) Daily rain (dashed line) and mean daily air temperature (solid line), from May 2008 to April 2009. (C–E) Physicochemical variables sampled monthly and once per pond. Dashed line (D), indicates unavailable data.

opencc-zeroSep 2020View details →

Livestock grazing promotes ecosystem multifunctionality of a coastal saltmarsh

The effects of livestock grazing on grasslands have garnered much attention; however, little is known about how grazing affects ecosystems' ability to simultaneously support multiple ecosystem functions (i.e., ecosystem multifunctionality, hereafter EMF) in coastal saltmarshes. To comprehensively evaluate the ecological effects of livestock grazing and tidal flooding on saltmarshes, we conducted a grazing-exclusion experiment in the high and middle marsh zones of the Yangtze River Estuary, China. Livestock grazing generally enhanced EMF in the salt marshes, with a stronger impact in the middle marshes than in the high ones. Although plant biomass, aboveground N of plants, soil organic C, and sediment deposition rate decreased under grazing, activities of soil microbes and nematodes, soil N pool, N mineralization, decomposition and soil respiration increased. Synthesis and applications. We suggest that tidal flooding and associated replenishment of sediments may mitigate the negative effects of grazing on plants and sedimentation and strengthen positive grazing impacts on nutrient cycling, consequently reinforcing the beneficial effects of livestock grazing on the saltmarsh ecosystem multifunctionality. Our results provide a holistic framework of ecosystem-level responses to livestock grazing in saltmarshes and highlight the regulatory role of external environmental factors such as tidal flooding. Although livestock grazing enhanced the overall EMF of saltmarshes in our study, it was not necessarily desirable for ecosystem services. Integration of ecosystem function-multifunctionality and ecosystem service-multifunctionality of saltmarshes need to be recommended in future multifunctionality studies.

Supplementary material 4 from: Lightfoot DC (2018) The effects of livestock grazing and climate variation on vegetation and grasshopper communities in the northern Chihuahuan Desert. Journal of Orthoptera Research 27(1): 35-51. https://doi.org/10.3897/jor.27.19945

: Explanation note: Supplementary table 4.

Supplementary material 3 from: Lightfoot DC (2018) The effects of livestock grazing and climate variation on vegetation and grasshopper communities in the northern Chihuahuan Desert. Journal of Orthoptera Research 27(1): 35-51. https://doi.org/10.3897/jor.27.19945

: Explanation note: Supplementary table 3.

Supplementary material 1 from: Lightfoot DC (2018) The effects of livestock grazing and climate variation on vegetation and grasshopper communities in the northern Chihuahuan Desert. Journal of Orthoptera Research 27(1): 35-51. https://doi.org/10.3897/jor.27.19945

: Explanation note: Supplementary figures.

Supplementary material 2 from: Lightfoot DC (2018) The effects of livestock grazing and climate variation on vegetation and grasshopper communities in the northern Chihuahuan Desert. Journal of Orthoptera Research 27(1): 35-51. https://doi.org/10.3897/jor.27.19945

: Explanation note: Supplementary tables 1, 2 and 5.

Fig 6 from: Lightfoot DC (2018) The effects of livestock grazing and climate variation on vegetation and grasshopper communities in the northern Chihuahuan Desert. Journal of Orthoptera Research 27(1): 35-51. https://doi.org/10.3897/jor.27.19945

Fig 6 Cluster analysis dendrograms showing site and grazing treatment similarities of grasshopper species compositions; A. Spring; B. Fall.

Fig 2 from: Lightfoot DC (2018) The effects of livestock grazing and climate variation on vegetation and grasshopper communities in the northern Chihuahuan Desert. Journal of Orthoptera Research 27(1): 35-51. https://doi.org/10.3897/jor.27.19945

Fig 2 Annual average (12 months/year) temperatures at each of the study sites over the five-year study period.

Fig 1 from: Lightfoot DC (2018) The effects of livestock grazing and climate variation on vegetation and grasshopper communities in the northern Chihuahuan Desert. Journal of Orthoptera Research 27(1): 35-51. https://doi.org/10.3897/jor.27.19945

Fig 1 Total annual precipitation (January-December) at each of the study sites over the five-year study period.

Fig 5 from: Lightfoot DC (2018) The effects of livestock grazing and climate variation on vegetation and grasshopper communities in the northern Chihuahuan Desert. Journal of Orthoptera Research 27(1): 35-51. https://doi.org/10.3897/jor.27.19945

Fig 5 Cluster analysis dendrograms of grasshopper species similarities based on substrate use among all grasshopper species over all sites, years and seasons; A. Based on specific substrate use to the plant species level and bare soil; B. Based on substrates categorized to forbs, grasses, shrubs and bare soil.

Fig 4 from: Lightfoot DC (2018) The effects of livestock grazing and climate variation on vegetation and grasshopper communities in the northern Chihuahuan Desert. Journal of Orthoptera Research 27(1): 35-51. https://doi.org/10.3897/jor.27.19945

Fig 4 Examples of each grasshopper life-form type; A. Arbusticole; Bootettix argentatus on Larrea tridentata; B. Graminicole; Paropomala pallida on Bouteloua eriopoda; C. Terri-graminicole; Phlibostroma quadrimaculatum; D. Herbicole; Tropidolophus formosus on Spharalcea hastulata; E. Terricole; Trimerotropis pallidipennis.

Fig 3 from: Lightfoot DC (2018) The effects of livestock grazing and climate variation on vegetation and grasshopper communities in the northern Chihuahuan Desert. Journal of Orthoptera Research 27(1): 35-51. https://doi.org/10.3897/jor.27.19945

Fig 3 Cluster analysis dendrogram showing the similarities of plant species compositions at sites and grazed and not grazed transects within sites, from annual canopy cover/m2 averaged over all years and seasons; A. Spring; B. Fall.

openother-openAug 2019View details →

InVEST model inputs and key outputs for the SESMO journal manuscript "Where should livestock graze?"

Archives of InVEST model data related to optimization of livestock- and water-related ecosystem services. (SESMO journal manuscript "Where should livestock graze?") 1. InVEST inputs: Includes all the inputs to run the open source models InVEST (Seasonal Water Yield and Sediment Delivery Ratio) 2. InVEST marginal values: key outputs derived from the InVEST models that are used in the optimizer (cf. manuscript). Includes baseflow marginal values (MV_SWY) and sediment marginal values (MV_SDR) 3. InVEST outputs figures: key outputs derived from the InVEST models and optimizer that were used to create the figures in the manuscript

opencc-zeroDec 2016View details →

Data from: Livestock grazing reinforces the competitive exclusion of small-bodied birds by large aggressive birds

1.Grazing by domestic livestock is sometimes promoted as a management tool to benefit biodiversity. In many situations, however, it can produce negative outcomes. 2.Here we examine the impacts of recent and historic livestock grazing on bird communities in the semi-arid woodlands in eastern Australia, testing the notion that grazing removes the suppressive effect of structurally complex vegetation on miners, thereby reducing the richness and abundance of small birds. 3.We used time- and area-limited searches of 108 sites varying in livestock grazing history and intensity, to explore the direct and indirect effects of grazing, habitat complexity and the abundance of aggressive, large-bodied birds on smaller-bodied birds using two-way analysis of variance and structural equation modelling. 4.Small birds were less abundant and had lower richness in the presence of miners. Our structural equation models indicated that recent grazing had direct suppressive effects on the abundance of miners, and both richness and abundance of all but the largest-bodied bird groups. However, higher levels of historic livestock grazing reinforced the competitive exclusion of the six small-bodied bird groups (insectivores, nectarivores, declining woodland birds, small ground foraging birds, all small birds, all non-miners) by aggressive miners via reductions in habitat complexity. Moreover, the strength of any suppressive effects on small birds or positive effects on large birds by miners increased with increasing miner abundance. 5.Synthesis and applications. Our results highlight the importance of vegetation structural complexity, not only for providing habitat for woodland birds, but as barriers to the invasion and competitive dominance of miners. Our findings suggest that management actions aimed at reducing tree and shrub density to promote open woodlands are likely to have significant negative consequences for the conservation of small woodland birds.

publicDec 2018View details →

Data from: Livestock grazing reinforces the competitive exclusion of small-bodied birds by large aggressive birds

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.