Cited by 16Rangeland and Wildlife ManagementIsotope Analysis in EcologyWildlife Ecology and Conservation

Reintroduced bison diet changes throughout the season in restored prairie

Blackburn, Ryan C., Barber, Nicholas A., Jones, Holly P.·2021·Restoration Ecology

Abstract

Grazing as a management tool is often intended to alter plant community dynamics through preferential foraging. Bison diet in the western United States has been well studied, especially in short and mixed grass remnant prairies. However, there is little known about what bison consume in restored and tallgrass prairies. As bison reintroductions are used more commonly in eastern tallgrass prairies, it is important to understand their diet to predict future impacts on prairie plant communities. This study aims to understand bison diet across different seasons, and asks whether diet differs among male and female, and differently aged bison. We used stable isotope analysis to quantify δ 13 C and δ 15 N in plants and used a Bayesian isotope mixing model to estimate bison diet. We found bulls relied more heavily on C 4 plants and wetland plants than cows, which relied more heavily on forbs, but no differences in diet between ages. Our analysis shows that bison primarily grazed on C 4 grasses throughout the late spring and summer. However, bison foraged more on wetland species and forbs in the late summer and fall. This change in diet could have implications for wetland species and habitats, through dung inputs and trampling. The relatively high reliance on forbs for nearly one‐third of bison diet could mean intended impacts of reintroduced bison such as increased plant diversity through preferential grazing on grasses could be dampened. Managers reintroducing bison to restored prairie ecosystems should ensure adequate wetland and forb species, in addition to a mix of grasses.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/rec.13161

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Blackburn, R. C., Barber, N. A., & Jones, H. P.
Affiliations
  • Northern Arizona University (US)
  • San Diego State University (US)
  • Northern Illinois University (US)
Corresponding author
Blackburn, Ryan C.
Venue
Restoration Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-06-30
Volume
29
Issue
S1
ISSN
  • 1061-2971 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-100X
OpenAlex
W3012456528
Cited by
16
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2
FWCI
0.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Restoration Ecology (publishedVersion)
Funders
Nature Conservancy
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Isotope Analysis in Ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Keywords
bison reintroduction, seasonal diet variation, tallgrass prairie restoration, C4 grasses, aquatic plants, forbs, sex differences in diet, age differences in diet, stable isotope analysis, Bayesian isotope mixing model, grazing 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