Cited by 55Climate change and permafrostEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesEcology and biodiversity studies

Muskoxen Modify Plant Abundance, Phenology, and Nitrogen Dynamics in a High Arctic Fen

Mosbacher, Jesper Bruun, Michelsen, Anders, Stelvig, Mikkel, Hjermstad-Sollerud, Håvard, Schmidt, Niels Martin·2019·Ecosystems

Abstract

Herbivores are key drivers of vegetation dynamics in most ecosystems. However, the effect of high arctic herbivores on vegetation dynamics throughout a growing season is not well understood. In this study, we examine the impacts of a large dominant herbivore in the tundra ecosystem, the muskox, Ovibos moschatus, using exclosures established in a fen in high Arctic Greenland. Using weekly sampling throughout the growing season, we quantified the effects of muskox exclusion on aboveground plant biomass and on concentrations and pools of carbon and nitrogen, and explored the timing of peak biomass and nutrient pools. Excluding muskoxen profoundly changed plant abundances and dynamics of the fen, with more than a doubling of aboveground plant biomass and carbon and nitrogen pool sizes. Specifically, large increases in mosses and litter were observed, while graminoid biomass did not change significantly with exclusion of muskoxen. Excluding muskoxen advanced the peak of plant biomass, but also led to a more rapid decline, resulting in an earlier and shorter period of maximal plant biomass inside the exclosures. The largest impact of muskoxen on the arctic fen ecosystem seems to be through their trampling effects on the moss layer, which likely mediated most of the observed changes. This study demonstrates how quickly an ecosystem may respond to changes in the abundance of large herbivores and highlights their pivotal role in modifying vegetation dynamics and nutrient cycling in tundra ecosystems.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10021-018-0323-4

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Muskox grazing can alter plant community composition.

    “alter plant community composition (Mosbacher et al. 2018)”

    From Muskox status, recent variation, and uncertain future (2020) · cites this paper as Mosbacher et al. 2018

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 74 · Cited by 55

Authors
Mosbacher, J. B., Michelsen, A., Stelvig, M., Hjermstad-Sollerud, H., & Schmidt, N. M.
Affiliations
  • Aarhus University (DK)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • Copenhagen Zoo (DK)
Corresponding author
Mosbacher, Jesper Bruun
Venue
Ecosystems
Published
2018-12-03
Volume
22
Issue
5
Pages
1095-1107
ISSN
  • 1432-9840 (ISSN-L)
  • 1435-0629
OpenAlex
W2902372651
Cited by
55
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4
FWCI
2.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Ecosystems (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
  • Scopus (Elsevier) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Arctic Research Centre, Aarhus University
  • Danmarks Grundforskningsfond (DNRF 100)
  • 15. Juni Foundation (2014-B-123)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Climate change and permafrost
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Ecology and biodiversity studies
Keywords
Ovibos moschatus, herbivore exclusion, herbivory, plant biomass, plant phenology, nitrogen cycling, carbon pools, moss layer, trampling, graminoids, litter, nutrient cycling, high Arctic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review