Herbage mass thresholds rather than plant phenology are a more useful cue for grazing management decisions in the mid-north region of South Australia
Abstract
Research was conducted in the mid-north of South Australia over the period 2000–05 to evaluate the effects of different grazing management cues on composition and production of a grassland. The management cues were based on calendar, plant phenology or herbage mass thresholds using grazing exclusion as a control. There were five grazing treatments: (i) regional practice (RP), where sheep grazed continuously for the period April–December; (ii) autumn rest, where sheep grazing was restricted to June–December; (iii) spring rest, where sheep grazing was restricted to April–August; (iv) high density and short duration (HDSD), where herbage mass thresholds determined when grazing occurred and for what duration; and (v) nil (NIL) grazing by domestic herbivores. Mean annual estimates of herbage mass were highest for NIL and HDSD and inclusion of the estimate of herbage consumption by sheep resulted in greatest primary plant production in HDSD. The contribution of perennial grasses to herbage mass declined with RP and seasonal grazing treatments. Frequency of perennial grasses was unaffected by grazing treatment but the number of perennial grass plants increased over time in RP and seasonal treatments. HDSD allowed maintenance of basal cover whereas bare ground increased with RP and seasonal treatments. Litter accumulated in NIL but this was associated with a decline in perennial basal cover. Seasonal grazing treatments did not provide an advantage over RP and there appeared to be no…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
These improvements in the pasture base can then contribute to improved animal production through increased stocking rates.
“These improvements in the pasture base can then contribute to improved animal production through increased stocking rates [16].”
From Impacts of Rotational Grazing on Soil Carbon in Native Grass-Based Pastures in Southern Australia (2015) · cites this paper as [16]
Cites
Sanford, P., Cullen, B. R., Dowling, P. M., Chapman, D. F., Garden, D. L., Lodge, G. M., Andrew, M. H., Quigley, P. E., Murphy, S. R., King, W. M., et al. (2003) · Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture · doi:10.1071/ea02209 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Impacts of Rotational Grazing on Soil Carbon in Native Grass-Based Pastures in Southern Australia
Sanderman, J., Reseigh, J., Wurst, M., Young, M.-A., & Austin, J. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0136157 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
- Authors
- Kahn, L. P., Earl, J. M., & Nicholls, M.
- Affiliations
- Government of New South Wales (AU)
- BMid-North Grasslands Working Group, PO Box 12, Brinkworth, SA 5464, Australia.
- Corresponding author
- Kahn, Lewis P.
- ORCID
- Kahn, Lewis P.
- Venue
- The Rangeland Journal
- Publisher
- CSIRO Publishing
- Published
- 2010-11-26
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 379-388
- ISSN
- 1036-9872 (ISSN-L)
- 1834-7541
- OpenAlex
- W2004799861
- Cited by
- 11
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 2.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Rangeland Journal (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Australian Wool Innovation
- Australian Government
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Forestry › Pasture and Agricultural Systems
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Rangeland Management and Livestock Ecology
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
- Keywords
- grazing management, plant phenology, sheep grazing, perennial grasses, grassland production, basal cover, litter accumulation, stocking rate, grazing exclusion, rangeland management
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