Paper · 2002 · Journal of Range Management

Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow

V. S. Baron; E. Mapfumo; A. C. Dick; et al.

18
claims
54
verbatim quotes
4
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

There is little information on the impact of grazing intensity on productivity and sustainability of intensively managed pastures in the humid, short-season parkland of the Canadian prairies. Our hypothesis was that above-ground productivity of dry matter, carbon, nitrogen, and in vitro digestible organic matter would be reduced proportionately with increasing grazing intensity. The study was conducted on a Typic Haplustoll at Lacombe, Alberta. Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities. Measurements and analyses were carried out for 3 years. Yields of dry matter, carbon, nitrogen, and in vitro digestible organic matter before and after grazing were determined and seasonal pools of above ground production, disappearance and residual were calculated. Concentrations of acid and neutral detergent fiber and lignin were also determined before and after grazing. Increasing grazing intensity tended to increase nitrogen and decrease fiber concentrations for available and residual forage. Heavy and medium grazing intensities produced 83 and 90% as much above ground dry matter and 87 and 90% above ground carbon as the light intensity. All disappearance pools were similar among grazing intensities except in vitro digestible organic matter, where heavy was 116% of light. Heavy grazing reduced the contribution of vegetative dry matter, in vitro digestible organic matter, carbon and nitrogen to the residual to 41, 50, 36, and 52% of that for light grazing. Adding estimated fecal-carbon to the residual significantly increased total residual carbon. Estimated fecal-carbon represented 68, 51, and 42% of all carbon inputs to litter for heavy, medium and light grazing, respectively. Grazing intensity did not affect estimated pools of excreted nitrogen, but increased estimated precent of nitrogen excreted as urine.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 18

Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Increasing grazing intensity tended to increase forage nitrogen concentration.

Taxon
foragee0
Treatment
grazing intensitye0
Outcome
nitrogene0
Direction
increasee0

Verbatim

e0

“Increasing grazing intensity tended to increase nitrogen and decrease fiber concentrations for available and residual forage.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 963–1088 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–61 · show in text ↑
e1

“Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–586 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Increasing grazing intensity tended to decrease forage fiber concentration.

Taxon
foragee0
Treatment
grazing intensitye0
Outcome
fiber concentrationse0
Direction
decreasee0

Verbatim

e0

“Increasing grazing intensity tended to increase nitrogen and decrease fiber concentrations for available and residual forage.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 963–1088 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–61 · show in text ↑
e1

“Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–586 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Heavy grazing yielded 83% as much above-ground dry matter as light grazing.

Taxon
meadow bromegrasse1
Treatment
Heavye0
Outcome
above ground dry mattere0
Direction
as muche0
Value
83e0
Comparator
light intensitye0

Verbatim

e0

“Heavy and medium grazing intensities produced 83 and 90% as much above ground dry matter and 87 and 90% above ground carbon as the light intensity.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1089–1236 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–61 · show in text ↑
e1

“Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–586 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Medium grazing yielded 90% as much above-ground dry matter as light grazing.

Taxon
meadow bromegrasse1
Treatment
medium grazing intensitiese0
Outcome
above ground dry mattere0
Direction
as muche0
Value
90%e0
Comparator
light intensitye0

Verbatim

e0

“Heavy and medium grazing intensities produced 83 and 90% as much above ground dry matter and 87 and 90% above ground carbon as the light intensity.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1089–1236 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–61 · show in text ↑
e1

“Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–586 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Heavy grazing yielded 87% as much above-ground carbon as light grazing.

Taxon
meadow bromegrasse1
Treatment
Heavye0
Outcome
above ground carbone0
Direction
as muche0
Value
87e0
Comparator
light intensitye0

Verbatim

e0

“Heavy and medium grazing intensities produced 83 and 90% as much above ground dry matter and 87 and 90% above ground carbon as the light intensity.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1089–1236 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–61 · show in text ↑
e1

“Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–586 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Medium grazing yielded 90% as much above-ground carbon as light grazing.

Taxon
meadow bromegrasse1
Treatment
medium grazing intensitiese0
Outcome
above ground carbone0
Direction
as muche0
Value
90%e0
Comparator
light intensitye0

Verbatim

e0

“Heavy and medium grazing intensities produced 83 and 90% as much above ground dry matter and 87 and 90% above ground carbon as the light intensity.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1089–1236 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–61 · show in text ↑
e1

“Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–586 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Disappearance pools were similar across grazing intensities except for digestible organic matter.

Taxon
meadow bromegrasse1
Outcome
disappearance poolse0
Comparator
grazing intensitiese0

Verbatim

e0

“All disappearance pools were similar among grazing intensities except in vitro digestible organic matter”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1237–1341 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–61 · show in text ↑
e1

“Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–586 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Heavy grazing produced 116% of the light-grazing disappearance pool of digestible organic matter.

Taxon
meadow bromegrasse1
Treatment
heavye0
Outcome
in vitro digestible organic mattere0
Direction
wase0
Value
116%e0
Comparator
lighte0

Verbatim

e0

“in vitro digestible organic matter, where heavy was 116% of light.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1307–1373 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–61 · show in text ↑
e1

“Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–586 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Under heavy grazing, residual vegetative dry matter was 41% of that under light grazing.

Taxon
meadow bromegrasse1
Treatment
Heavy grazinge0
Outcome
vegetative dry mattere0
Direction
reducede0
Value
41e0
Comparator
light grazinge0

Verbatim

e0

“Heavy grazing reduced the contribution of vegetative dry matter, in vitro digestible organic matter, carbon and nitrogen to the residual to 41, 50, 36, and 52% of that for light grazing.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1374–1560 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–61 · show in text ↑
e1

“Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–586 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Under heavy grazing, residual digestible organic matter was 50% of that under light grazing.

Taxon
meadow bromegrasse1
Treatment
Heavy grazinge0
Outcome
in vitro digestible organic mattere0
Direction
reducede0
Value
50e0
Comparator
light grazinge0

Verbatim

e0

“Heavy grazing reduced the contribution of vegetative dry matter, in vitro digestible organic matter, carbon and nitrogen to the residual to 41, 50, 36, and 52% of that for light grazing.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1374–1560 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–61 · show in text ↑
e1

“Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–586 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Under heavy grazing, residual carbon was 36% of that under light grazing.

Taxon
meadow bromegrasse1
Treatment
Heavy grazinge0
Outcome
carbone0
Direction
reducede0
Value
36e0
Comparator
light grazinge0

Verbatim

e0

“Heavy grazing reduced the contribution of vegetative dry matter, in vitro digestible organic matter, carbon and nitrogen to the residual to 41, 50, 36, and 52% of that for light grazing.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1374–1560 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–61 · show in text ↑
e1

“Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–586 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Under heavy grazing, residual nitrogen was 52% of that under light grazing.

Taxon
meadow bromegrasse1
Treatment
Heavy grazinge0
Outcome
nitrogene0
Direction
reducede0
Value
52%e0
Comparator
light grazinge0

Verbatim

e0

“Heavy grazing reduced the contribution of vegetative dry matter, in vitro digestible organic matter, carbon and nitrogen to the residual to 41, 50, 36, and 52% of that for light grazing.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1374–1560 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–61 · show in text ↑
e1

“Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–586 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Including fecal carbon significantly increased total residual carbon.

Taxon
meadow bromegrasse1
Treatment
estimated fecal-carbone0
Outcome
total residual carbone0

Verbatim

e0

“Adding estimated fecal-carbon to the residual significantly increased total residual carbon.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1561–1653 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–61 · show in text ↑
e1

“Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–586 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Estimated fecal carbon supplied 68% of litter carbon inputs under heavy grazing.

Taxon
meadow bromegrasse1
Outcome
carbon inputs to littere0
Value
68e0
Qualifier
heavye0

Verbatim

e0

“Estimated fecal-carbon represented 68, 51, and 42% of all carbon inputs to litter for heavy, medium and light grazing, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1654–1786 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–61 · show in text ↑
e1

“Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–586 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Estimated fecal carbon supplied 51% of litter carbon inputs under medium grazing.

Taxon
meadow bromegrasse1
Outcome
carbon inputs to littere0
Value
51e0
Qualifier
mediume0

Verbatim

e0

“Estimated fecal-carbon represented 68, 51, and 42% of all carbon inputs to litter for heavy, medium and light grazing, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1654–1786 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–61 · show in text ↑
e1

“Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–586 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Estimated fecal carbon supplied 42% of litter carbon inputs under light grazing.

Taxon
meadow bromegrasse1
Outcome
carbon inputs to littere0
Value
42%e0
Qualifier
light grazinge0

Verbatim

e0

“Estimated fecal-carbon represented 68, 51, and 42% of all carbon inputs to litter for heavy, medium and light grazing, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1654–1786 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–61 · show in text ↑
e1

“Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–586 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grazing intensity did not affect estimated excreted nitrogen pools.

Taxon
meadow bromegrasse1
Outcome
estimated pools of excreted nitrogene0

Verbatim

e0

“Grazing intensity did not affect estimated pools of excreted nitrogen”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1787–1856 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–61 · show in text ↑
e1

“Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–586 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grazing intensity increased the estimated percentage of nitrogen excreted as urine.

Taxon
meadow bromegrasse1
Treatment
Grazing intensityt0
Outcome
estimated precent of nitrogen excreted as urinee0
Direction
increasede0

Verbatim

e0

“increased estimated precent of nitrogen excreted as urine.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1862–1920 · show in text ↑
t0

“Grazing intensity impacts on pasture carbon and nitrogen flow”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–61 · show in text ↑
e1

“Paddocks of meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), replicated 4 times, were subjected to heavy, medium and light grazing intensities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–586 · show in text ↑