Does decomposition of standrd materials differ among grassland patches maintained by livestock?

Autores
Vaieretti, Maria Victoria; Cingolani, Ana María; Perez Harguindeguy, Natalia; Gurvich, Diego Ezequiel; Cabido, Marcelo Ruben
Año de publicación
2010
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
Grazing can modify vegetation structure and species composition through selective consumption, modifying plant litter quality and hence decomposability. In most grasslands, moderate stocking rates maintain a mosaic of high-quality patches, preferentially used by herbivores (‘grazing lawns’), and low-quality tall patches, which are avoided. In grazing lawns decomposition rates can be accelerated because of the higher litter quality of its component species and, besides, through the indirect effect of increased nutrient availability in soil. We aimed at testing this indirect effect using standard materials, comparing their decomposition in grazing lawns, open and closed tall tussock grasslands. We selected 10 patches of each type and sampled floristic composition, soil variables and cattle dung deposition. Standard materials were filter paper and Poa stuckertii litter. We prepared litterbags of 0.3 mm (thin mesh) and 1 mm mesh size (coarse mesh). Samples were incubated for 65 days in two ways: above-ground (thin and coarse mesh) and below-ground (only thin mesh), aiming at analysing the conditions for decomposition for surface litter and buried litter or dead roots, respectively. Physical and chemical soil variables did not differ among patch types, despite the differences in species composition. Closed tussock grasslands showed the lowest dung deposition, confirming the less intense use of these patches. Soil nitrogen availability (N-NO3- and N-NH4+) was not significantly different among patch types. Each standard material followed a different decomposition pattern across patch types. For above-ground incubated samples, Poa litter decomposed significantly faster in lawns, and slower in open tussock grasslands. Filter paper decomposed significantly faster in closed tussock grasslands than in the other two patch types. Decomposition of below-ground incubated samples did not significantly differ among patch types, in line with results for soil variables. Above-ground differences in decomposition may be associated with differences in microclimatic conditions resulting from differences in vegetation structure.
Fil: Vaieretti, Maria Victoria. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal (p); Argentina; Argentina
Fil: Cingolani, Ana María. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal (p); Argentina; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; Argentina
Fil: Perez Harguindeguy, Natalia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal (p); Argentina; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; Argentina
Fil: Gurvich, Diego Ezequiel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal (p); Argentina; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; Argentina
Fil: Cabido, Marcelo Ruben. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal (p); Argentina; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; Argentina
Materia
Above-Ground
Below-Ground
Decomposition
Grazing
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/14991

id CONICETDig_7ab75668fe8e9be5ae821708d460b938
oai_identifier_str oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/14991
network_acronym_str CONICETDig
repository_id_str 3498
network_name_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
spelling Does decomposition of standrd materials differ among grassland patches maintained by livestock?Vaieretti, Maria VictoriaCingolani, Ana MaríaPerez Harguindeguy, NataliaGurvich, Diego EzequielCabido, Marcelo RubenAbove-GroundBelow-GroundDecompositionGrazinghttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.6https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1Grazing can modify vegetation structure and species composition through selective consumption, modifying plant litter quality and hence decomposability. In most grasslands, moderate stocking rates maintain a mosaic of high-quality patches, preferentially used by herbivores (‘grazing lawns’), and low-quality tall patches, which are avoided. In grazing lawns decomposition rates can be accelerated because of the higher litter quality of its component species and, besides, through the indirect effect of increased nutrient availability in soil. We aimed at testing this indirect effect using standard materials, comparing their decomposition in grazing lawns, open and closed tall tussock grasslands. We selected 10 patches of each type and sampled floristic composition, soil variables and cattle dung deposition. Standard materials were filter paper and Poa stuckertii litter. We prepared litterbags of 0.3 mm (thin mesh) and 1 mm mesh size (coarse mesh). Samples were incubated for 65 days in two ways: above-ground (thin and coarse mesh) and below-ground (only thin mesh), aiming at analysing the conditions for decomposition for surface litter and buried litter or dead roots, respectively. Physical and chemical soil variables did not differ among patch types, despite the differences in species composition. Closed tussock grasslands showed the lowest dung deposition, confirming the less intense use of these patches. Soil nitrogen availability (N-NO3- and N-NH4+) was not significantly different among patch types. Each standard material followed a different decomposition pattern across patch types. For above-ground incubated samples, Poa litter decomposed significantly faster in lawns, and slower in open tussock grasslands. Filter paper decomposed significantly faster in closed tussock grasslands than in the other two patch types. Decomposition of below-ground incubated samples did not significantly differ among patch types, in line with results for soil variables. Above-ground differences in decomposition may be associated with differences in microclimatic conditions resulting from differences in vegetation structure.Fil: Vaieretti, Maria Victoria. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal (p); Argentina; ArgentinaFil: Cingolani, Ana María. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal (p); Argentina; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; ArgentinaFil: Perez Harguindeguy, Natalia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal (p); Argentina; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; ArgentinaFil: Gurvich, Diego Ezequiel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal (p); Argentina; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; ArgentinaFil: Cabido, Marcelo Ruben. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal (p); Argentina; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; ArgentinaWiley2010-05info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/14991Vaieretti, Maria Victoria; Cingolani, Ana María; Perez Harguindeguy, Natalia; Gurvich, Diego Ezequiel; Cabido, Marcelo Ruben; Does decomposition of standrd materials differ among grassland patches maintained by livestock?; Wiley; Austral Ecology; 35; 8; 5-2010; 935-9431442-99851442-9993enginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2009.02105.x/abstractinfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2009.02105.xinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-10-15T14:20:23Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/14991instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-10-15 14:20:24.153CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Does decomposition of standrd materials differ among grassland patches maintained by livestock?
title Does decomposition of standrd materials differ among grassland patches maintained by livestock?
spellingShingle Does decomposition of standrd materials differ among grassland patches maintained by livestock?
Vaieretti, Maria Victoria
Above-Ground
Below-Ground
Decomposition
Grazing
title_short Does decomposition of standrd materials differ among grassland patches maintained by livestock?
title_full Does decomposition of standrd materials differ among grassland patches maintained by livestock?
title_fullStr Does decomposition of standrd materials differ among grassland patches maintained by livestock?
title_full_unstemmed Does decomposition of standrd materials differ among grassland patches maintained by livestock?
title_sort Does decomposition of standrd materials differ among grassland patches maintained by livestock?
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Vaieretti, Maria Victoria
Cingolani, Ana María
Perez Harguindeguy, Natalia
Gurvich, Diego Ezequiel
Cabido, Marcelo Ruben
author Vaieretti, Maria Victoria
author_facet Vaieretti, Maria Victoria
Cingolani, Ana María
Perez Harguindeguy, Natalia
Gurvich, Diego Ezequiel
Cabido, Marcelo Ruben
author_role author
author2 Cingolani, Ana María
Perez Harguindeguy, Natalia
Gurvich, Diego Ezequiel
Cabido, Marcelo Ruben
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Above-Ground
Below-Ground
Decomposition
Grazing
topic Above-Ground
Below-Ground
Decomposition
Grazing
purl_subject.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.6
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Grazing can modify vegetation structure and species composition through selective consumption, modifying plant litter quality and hence decomposability. In most grasslands, moderate stocking rates maintain a mosaic of high-quality patches, preferentially used by herbivores (‘grazing lawns’), and low-quality tall patches, which are avoided. In grazing lawns decomposition rates can be accelerated because of the higher litter quality of its component species and, besides, through the indirect effect of increased nutrient availability in soil. We aimed at testing this indirect effect using standard materials, comparing their decomposition in grazing lawns, open and closed tall tussock grasslands. We selected 10 patches of each type and sampled floristic composition, soil variables and cattle dung deposition. Standard materials were filter paper and Poa stuckertii litter. We prepared litterbags of 0.3 mm (thin mesh) and 1 mm mesh size (coarse mesh). Samples were incubated for 65 days in two ways: above-ground (thin and coarse mesh) and below-ground (only thin mesh), aiming at analysing the conditions for decomposition for surface litter and buried litter or dead roots, respectively. Physical and chemical soil variables did not differ among patch types, despite the differences in species composition. Closed tussock grasslands showed the lowest dung deposition, confirming the less intense use of these patches. Soil nitrogen availability (N-NO3- and N-NH4+) was not significantly different among patch types. Each standard material followed a different decomposition pattern across patch types. For above-ground incubated samples, Poa litter decomposed significantly faster in lawns, and slower in open tussock grasslands. Filter paper decomposed significantly faster in closed tussock grasslands than in the other two patch types. Decomposition of below-ground incubated samples did not significantly differ among patch types, in line with results for soil variables. Above-ground differences in decomposition may be associated with differences in microclimatic conditions resulting from differences in vegetation structure.
Fil: Vaieretti, Maria Victoria. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal (p); Argentina; Argentina
Fil: Cingolani, Ana María. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal (p); Argentina; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; Argentina
Fil: Perez Harguindeguy, Natalia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal (p); Argentina; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; Argentina
Fil: Gurvich, Diego Ezequiel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal (p); Argentina; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; Argentina
Fil: Cabido, Marcelo Ruben. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal (p); Argentina; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; Argentina
description Grazing can modify vegetation structure and species composition through selective consumption, modifying plant litter quality and hence decomposability. In most grasslands, moderate stocking rates maintain a mosaic of high-quality patches, preferentially used by herbivores (‘grazing lawns’), and low-quality tall patches, which are avoided. In grazing lawns decomposition rates can be accelerated because of the higher litter quality of its component species and, besides, through the indirect effect of increased nutrient availability in soil. We aimed at testing this indirect effect using standard materials, comparing their decomposition in grazing lawns, open and closed tall tussock grasslands. We selected 10 patches of each type and sampled floristic composition, soil variables and cattle dung deposition. Standard materials were filter paper and Poa stuckertii litter. We prepared litterbags of 0.3 mm (thin mesh) and 1 mm mesh size (coarse mesh). Samples were incubated for 65 days in two ways: above-ground (thin and coarse mesh) and below-ground (only thin mesh), aiming at analysing the conditions for decomposition for surface litter and buried litter or dead roots, respectively. Physical and chemical soil variables did not differ among patch types, despite the differences in species composition. Closed tussock grasslands showed the lowest dung deposition, confirming the less intense use of these patches. Soil nitrogen availability (N-NO3- and N-NH4+) was not significantly different among patch types. Each standard material followed a different decomposition pattern across patch types. For above-ground incubated samples, Poa litter decomposed significantly faster in lawns, and slower in open tussock grasslands. Filter paper decomposed significantly faster in closed tussock grasslands than in the other two patch types. Decomposition of below-ground incubated samples did not significantly differ among patch types, in line with results for soil variables. Above-ground differences in decomposition may be associated with differences in microclimatic conditions resulting from differences in vegetation structure.
publishDate 2010
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2010-05
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/11336/14991
Vaieretti, Maria Victoria; Cingolani, Ana María; Perez Harguindeguy, Natalia; Gurvich, Diego Ezequiel; Cabido, Marcelo Ruben; Does decomposition of standrd materials differ among grassland patches maintained by livestock?; Wiley; Austral Ecology; 35; 8; 5-2010; 935-943
1442-9985
1442-9993
url http://hdl.handle.net/11336/14991
identifier_str_mv Vaieretti, Maria Victoria; Cingolani, Ana María; Perez Harguindeguy, Natalia; Gurvich, Diego Ezequiel; Cabido, Marcelo Ruben; Does decomposition of standrd materials differ among grassland patches maintained by livestock?; Wiley; Austral Ecology; 35; 8; 5-2010; 935-943
1442-9985
1442-9993
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2009.02105.x/abstract
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2009.02105.x
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Wiley
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Wiley
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
reponame_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
collection CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.name.fl_str_mv CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.mail.fl_str_mv dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar
_version_ 1846082578589679616
score 13.22299