Journal
PLOS ONE
Volume 18, Issue 10, Pages -Publisher
PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290843
Keywords
-
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
A common practice to restore and maintain biodiversity in grasslands is to reduce or stop the use of fertilizers, but this poses challenges for farmers who need fertilizers for forage and livestock nutrition. This study evaluated the impact of different fertilizer regimes on biodiversity and forage production. The results showed trade-offs between biodiversity and forage production, with farmyard manure being the fertilizer that optimized both. Forage from areas without fertilizer for 27 years did not meet the nutritional needs of cattle but did for sheep.
A common practice used to restore and maintain biodiversity in grasslands is to stop or decrease the use of fertilizers as they are a major cause of biodiversity loss. This practice is problematic for farmers who need fertilizers to increase forage and meet the nutritional needs of livestock. Evidence is needed that helps identify optimal fertilizer regimes that could benefit biodiversity and livestock production simultaneously over the long-term. Here, we evaluated the impact of different fertilizer regimes on indicators related to both biodiversity (plant, pollinator, leaf miners and parasitoid Shannon-Weiner diversity, bumblebee abundance, nectar productivity and forb species richness), and forage production (ash, crude protein, ruminant metabolizable energy and dry matter). To this end, we used data from a grassland restoration experiment managed under four nutrient inputs schemes for 27 years: farmyard manure (FYM; 72 kg N ha-1 yr-1), artificial nitrogen-phosphorus and potassium (NPK; 25 kg N ha-1 yr-1), FYM + NPK (97 kg N ha-1 yr-1) and no-fertilizer. Results showed strong trade-offs between biodiversity and forage production under all treatments even in applications lower than the critical load in the EU. Overall, farmyard manure was the fertilizer that optimized production and biodiversity while 97 kg N ha-1 yr-1 of fertilizer addition (FYM+NPK) had the most negative impact on biodiversity. Finally, forage from places where no fertilizer has been added for 27 years did not meet the nutritional requirements of cattle, but it did for sheep. Rethinking typical approaches of nutrient addition could lead to land management solutions suitable for biological conservation and agriculture.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available