Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Scientific Data logoLink to Scientific Data
. 2020 Feb 4;7:39. doi: 10.1038/s41597-020-0375-0

Nexus of grazing management with plant and soil properties in northern China grasslands

Li Wang 1,✉, Limin Luan 2, Fujiang Hou 3, Kadambot H M Siddique 4
PMCID: PMC7000820  PMID: 32019931

Abstract

Grasslands provide habitats for living organisms and livelihoods for ~800 million people globally. Many grasslands in developing countries are severely degraded. Some measures have been taken to curb the trend of degradation for decades. It is important to determine how decade-long rejuvenation efforts affected grassland ecosystems. We identified 65 data-rich studies based on six criteria, from >2500 relevant publications, and generated a dataset with 997 rows and 12 variables. The dataset covers different grazing intensities (grazing exclusion, light, moderate, and heavy grazing) and their impacts on plant traits (vegetation coverage, aboveground and root biomass, and plant diversity) and soil physiochemical properties (bulk density, moisture content, organic C, total and available N, total and available P, C:N ratio, and pH). The dataset could be used to (i) quantify the effectiveness of rejuvenation processes by determining the impact on plant community and soil properties, (ii) perform comprehensive analyses to elucidate large-picture effects of grazing management and rejuvenation, and (iii) analyze the impact of grass–climate–soil–human interactions on grassland ecosystem sustainability.

Subject terms: Agroecology, Environmental impact, Sustainability

Measurement(s) plant trait • structure of soil • composition of soil • soil biological activity
Technology Type(s) digital curation
Factor Type(s) grazing intensity (grazing exclusion, light, moderate, and heavy grazing)
Sample Characteristic - Environment grassland ecosystem
Sample Characteristic - Location China
Open in a new tab

Machine-accessible metadata file describing the reported data: 10.6084/m9.figshare.11663340

Background & Summary

Grasslands cover ~50 million square kilometers or ~40 percent of the terrestrial area on Earth (excluding Greenland and Antarctica), and comprise various types including prairies, savannahs, rangelands, agricultural grasslands, and coastal grasslands1. As one of the largest ecosystems, grasslands are essential to living organisms including plants, animals and bird species, and it functions as a habitat for wildlife2 and livestock3, and the livelihoods of ~800 million people globally4.

China has the largest grasslands in the world with ~330 million hectares used for feeding animals for human foods5. However, a significant proportion has been degraded since the 1960s, mainly due to: (i) large-scale land reclamation from grasslands to croplands in the 1980s6,7 that aimed at producing more grain-based food for the growing human population but led to a rapid decline in available grasslands for grazing8 and accelerated the degradation of the remaining grasslands9; (ii) an expansion of the livestock industry in the 1990s that reduced the amount of grasslands per head of livestock10, and led to overgrazing of the remaining grasslands with high stocking rates11 and decreased grassland productivity12,13; (iii) exploitation of industrial by-products or mineral resources in some conventional grassland areas14 that decreased feeding-type grasslands; (iv) freshwater shortages for agriculture that presented a major problem for restoring grazing-induced degradation, especially in the arid and semiarid northwest where annual precipitation is typically <160 mm15 and annual evaporation >1,800 mm16; and (v) a shift from traditional nomadic grazing to sedentary feeding systems in the 1990s and 2000s that led to the loss of self-recovery capacity of grazed grasslands17 and reduced the intrinsic biological functions for soil structure18 and ecosystem equilibrium19.

To rejuvenate degraded grasslands, China took drastic measures by establishing a number of rejuvenation programs—including ‘grazing exclusion’ that aimed to eliminate grazing grasslands17, ‘grain-for-green’ program that returned steep cultivated land to grassland20 to alleviate the shortage of forage availability for the livestock industry21, ‘returning croplands to grasses’ that involved re-seeding grasses on marginal lands of cropping22—combined with ‘alternating seasonal-grazing with fallowing’ in moderately degraded grasslands23. Some of these programs have been in place for decades. Numerous studies have been conducted to determine the effectiveness of these programs for rejuvenating degraded grasslands; there is large variation between the studies and between geolocations, largely due to the variation in climatic conditions, grass types, duration of grazing practices, and the magnitude of human activities. It is often misleading to draw general conclusions from individual or site-specific experiments. A systematic analysis is required to define the outcome of the decade-long rejuvenation efforts, and a large dataset across various studies provides a unique opportunity to elucidate those effects.

We generated a comprehensive dataset24 derived from multiple studies on the relationship among grazing intensities, duration of grazing exclusion, and plant community traits and soil physiochemical properties. Data were extracted from 65 data-rich studies (Online-only Table 1) conducted across the major grassland areas in northern China (Fig. 1) with representative grassland types and sub-types included. The key variables include plant traits (percent vegetation coverage, plant biomass, root biomass, and plant diversity) and soil physiochemical properties (soil bulk density, moisture content, organic C, total N and available N, total and available P, C:N ratio, and soil pH).

Online-only Table 1.

Key variables extracted from various studies. The numbers in the table body refer to the references cited in the paper.

Coordinate Study year Duration (yr)† Plant community Soil properties
Physical Chemical Biolog.
Biomass Diversity Veg. % Root biom. Bulk density Texture Moisture SOC N Other nutrients pH C/N
37°8′ N, 106°49′ E 2001–2014 13 42 42 42 42
37°8′ N, 106°49′ E 2001–2014 13 43
33°37′ N, 99°48′ E 1998–2000 2 44 44 44 44 44
30°27′–35°39′ N, 83°41′–95°10′ E 2006–2009 3 45 45 45
30°27′–35°39′ N, 83°41′–95°11′ E 2006–2010 N/A 45 45
43°38′ N, 116°42′ E 2007–2009 N/A 46 46 46
42°53′ N, 83°42′ E N/A 27 47 47 47 47 47
37°7′ N, 106°49′ E 2001–2012 11 48
43°34′ N, 119°35′–119°38′ E 2003–2005 N/A 49 49 49 49
37°6′ N, 103°31′ E 2003–2010 7 50 50 50 50 50 50 50
43°33′ N, 116°40′ E 2004–2006 25 51 51 51 51
41°46′–41°50′ N, 111°2′–111°55′ E 2005 8 52 52 52 52 52
37°8′ N, 106°50′ E 2001–2009 8 53 53 53
37°8′ N, 106°50′ E 2001–2010 9 54 54 54 54 54
44°33′ N, 123°40′ E 2009–2012 3 55 55 55 55 55 55 55
43°38′ N, 116°42′ E 2005–2010 9 56 56
41°44′ N, 115°46′ E 2010–2014 4 57 57 57 57 57 57
37°37′ N, 101°12′ E 2006–2009 4 58 58 58 58
43°38′ N, 116°42′ E 2005–2008 3 59 59
43°38′ N, 116°42′ E 1979–2004 25 60 60 60 60
30°57′ N, 88°42′ E 2012 2 61 61 61 61
41°54′ N, 116°0′ E 2009–2010 1 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
44°45′ N, 123°45′ E N/A 5 62 62 62
29°56′–36°41′ N, 83°52′–95°1′ E 1980–2007 27 63 63 63 63 63 63 63
41°44′ N, 115°46′ E 2009–2012 3 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64
44°35′ N, 123°36′ E 2002–2003 17 65 65
38°54′–39°11′ N, 100°48′–101°12′ E 2016 18 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66
43°38′ N, 116°42′ E 2005–2008 3 9 9 9 9
33°42′ N, 102°7′ E 1999–2009 10 67 67 67
43°38′ N, 116°42′ E N/A 25 68
43°50′ N, 116°34′ E 1989–2006 15 69 69 69 69
41°46′ N, 115°41′ E 2001–2012 11 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70
31°38′ N, 92°0′ E 2013 3 71 71 71 71 71
49°19′–49°20′ N, 119°56′–119°57′ E 2009–2014 5 72 72 72
49°23′–49°25′ N, 120°5′–120°11′ E 2009–2014 5 73 73
44°48′–44°50′ N, 116°2′–116°30′ E 2011–2012 N/A 74 74 74
34°54′ N, 102°6′ E 2010–2015 5 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75
34°36′–35°53′ N, 111°15′–112°37′ E N/A N/A 76 76 76
42°55′ N, 120°42′ E 1992–1996 5 77 77 77 77
31°23′ N, 90°2′ E 2010–2013 3 78 78
42°55′N, 120°42′E 2014 25 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79
43°50′ N, 87°37′ E 2004–2005 5 80 80
42°52′ 43°57′ N, 83°42′–89°45′ E 2003 N/A 81
Open in a new tab

†Number of years that the grazing exclusion practice was imposed.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Open in a new tab

Geographic locations of the selected studies for the Data Descriptor. The selected locations/sites (indicated by blue dots) cover the major grassland areas in China from the semi-desert and arid northwest to semiarid and humid northeast regions.

We organized the dataset with a ‘Master’ tab and 15 associated tabs. This dataset can be used to (i) determine whether the decade-long grazing management policies have had positive, negative or neutral impacts on plant community composition and diversity, vegetation characteristics, and soil physiochemical properties; (ii) assess plant–soil–climate interactions using a systemic approach as the dataset contains key information on plants, soil, grassland ecosystems, and geographic information; and (iii) conduct comprehensive assessments of the effectiveness of grazing policies on ecological and socioeconomic implications. The synthesis of this dataset can help draw sound recommendations to manage grasslands sustainably and effectively.

Methods

We employed a three-step approach for data collection and synthesis.

First – literature search

We conducted a comprehensive search of peer-reviewed literature, mainly through Agricola, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Search terms were defined and used to query the Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science since 1979, when the first grazing policy took place in China. The initial search in the article title, abstract and keywords revealed 2,520 articles (n0; Fig. 2) of potential interest. From the initial search, we identified articles meeting the first five criteria: (i) studies conducted under field conditions excluding those conducted in a controlled environment or simulation study; (ii) studies conducted in northern China; (iii) studies including ‘non-grazing or grazing exclusion’ and ‘continuous grazing’ treatments in their experimental structure with other treatments considered optional or additional; (iv) at least two years of field evaluation with replications each year; and (v) at least two or more variables measured. These criteria narrowed the selection of searched articles to 317 (n2; Fig. 2). We narrowed the 317 articles further to 65 using additional criteria—(vi) articles published in journals with a full-text in English and are searchable by main stream databases available scholarly, such as Scopus or Web of Science25. Non-English articles or articles that have an English abstract only but lack the measurements described in the above-described criteria were excluded.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Open in a new tab

Workflow chart for generating dataset output. Brown boxes represent the number of articles (ni, where i = 0, 1… or 6), included or excluded, step-by-step, based on the selection criteria; dark green boxes denote the articles selected for the present Data Descriptor. The six selection criteria are briefly described.

Second – data extraction

We extracted relevant data on a treatment-by-treatment basis from each of the identified articles (Online-only Table 1), entered the data in Excel spreadsheets, examined visually for usefulness, and combined them into a ‘Master’ data file. Some of the results presented in graphs in the original articles were converted into values using a graph-to-value conversion program (https://automeris.io/WebPlotDigitizer/). In some studies, where the results were aggregated, treatment means with a standard error of the mean were determined. Additionally, we reviewed 12 other articles that presented meta-analysis results, including articles describing the effects of grazing exclusion on soil C sequestration that included 78 studies26, plant biomass from 48 studies27, soil microbial communities from 71 studies28, soil C and N cycling from 115 studies29, grassland management and greenhouse gas emissions from 67 studies30, seasonal grazing and soil respiration from a 6-year study31, and grassland management and soil chemical properties in different climates from 105 studies32. Relevant data points from these articles were selectively entered into our ‘Master’ file, if they met the criteria we defined above.

Third - database structure

The Excel ‘Master’ file contained all the data points24 extracted from the original articles, detailed in 997 rows and in various columns (Table 1), with column (A) as code, (B) author name (first author only) and publication year, (C) latitude/longitude coordinates of the study, (D) and (E) ecological region and locations (city or province), (F) year(s) in which the field experiment was conducted, (G) types of grasslands evaluated in the published study (some of the studies did not specify the type), (H) duration (number of years) of grazing treatments imposed, (I) type of animals involved in the study, (J) name of the variable and units reported, and (K) depths of soil sampled for soil physiochemical property measurements.

Table 1.

Detailed names and descriptions for each column shown in the ‘Master’ Tab of the Excel file.

Column Name Description
A Sort Codes for data sorting
B Reference Authors and year of publication
C Coordinate Coordinates where the field experiment was conducted
D Region category Sampling sites sorted into four categories based on geographical location
E Location Location of the study, province, followed by country
F Study period Year(s) in which the field study was conducted
G Type of grassland Specific grass type in the study
H Duration of exclusion Number of years that grazing exclusion was imposed
I Animal Type of animal in the grazing treatments
J Variable Specific variable and the unit; unit conversion detailed in Tab named ‘Units’
K Soil depth (cm) Soil depth for sampling to measure soil attributes
L No grazing (NG) Grazing exclusion treatment in the grazing intensity study
M n1 Number of replicates in the NG treatment
N Light grazing (LG) Light or mild grazing treatment in the grazing intensity study
O n2 Number of replicates in the LG treatment
P NG–LG Difference in the values between the NG and LG treatments
Q Moderate grazing (MG) Moderate grazing treatment in the grazing intensity study
R n3 Number of replicates in the MG treatment
S NG–MG The difference in the values between the NG and MG treatments
T Heavy grazing (HG) Heavy or overgrazing treatment in the grazing intensity study
U n4 Number of replicates in the HG treatment
V NG–HG Difference in the values between the NG and HG treatments
W Standard error Standard error across the four grazing intensities; calculated from four means
X Data source Extracted either from the abstract, tables or converted from figures presented in the original articles
Open in a new tab

Values in columns (L) to (W) related to the four different levels of grazing intensities, including (L) ‘non-grazing or grazing exclusion’, (N) ‘light or mild grazing’, (Q) ‘moderate grazing’, and (T) ‘heavy grazing or overgrazing’. The values in these four columns (L, N, Q, and T) were either actual values extracted directly from the original articles or converted into the same unit across studies. The four adjacent columns (i.e., columns M, O, R and U) following each of the four grazing-intensity columns are the number of replications used in the specific study. To facilitate further analysis (by the authors of the present paper or others who might be interested in using this dataset), we calculated the differences between (P) ‘grazing exclusion’ and ‘light grazing’, (S) ‘grazing exclusion’ and ‘moderate grazing’, and (V) ‘grazing exclusion’ and ‘heavy or overgrazing’. Standard errors in column (W) referred to the variation among the four grazing intensity treatments. In column (X), we specified the data origin, if they were converted from a figure in the original articles.

Data Records

Having entered all the data extracted from original articles into the ‘Master’ tab in the Excel file described above, we created 12 separate tabs to provide detailed information on the 12 key variables derived from the ‘Master’ file. The ‘Article’ tab lists the 65 selected data-rich articles, including the names of attributes for the article, each starting with the name of the first author, followed by the name of the journal and other attributes of the articles.

The 12 variable tabs provide potential data-users with much-needed convenience and may enhance the usefulness of the dataset24. The 12 tabs to the right present data on four plant-related and eight soil-related variables: (1) ‘Veget%’ is percent vegetation coverage (%), (2) ‘AbvBiom’ is aboveground plant biomass (g m−2), (3) ‘RootBiom’ is root biomass (g m−2), (4) ‘PltDiv’ is plant diversity, (5) ‘BulkD’ is soil bulk density, (6) ‘Soil-H2O’ is soil moisture content, (7) ‘SOC’, soil organic carbon at 0–15 cm depth, (8) ‘Soil-N’ is total soil-N at 0–60 cm depth, (9) ‘Avail-N’ is available soil-N including NH4+-N and NO3−-N at 0–60 cm depth, (10) ‘Soil-P’ is total and available soil-P at 0–40 cm depth, (11) ‘C-N Ratio’ is C:N ratio as reported in original articles (not calculated from this dataset), and (12) ‘Soil-pH’ is soil pH. We used a similar layout for each of the 12 variables, considering ease of use for data-users. Two final tabs (‘Units’ and ‘Note’) provide background information on the calculation of each variable’s units and the categories and observations.

Technical Validation

Six grassland types (Ti, where i = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6) were included, with the number of observations varying among the four ecological zones (Nj…with j = 1, 2, 3, and 4) (Fig. 3). The dataset contained 34,747 observations by experimental site × growing season × treatments × grassland types.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Open in a new tab

Six types of grasslands in the four ecological zones in China. Ti (where i = 1, 2….0.6) in each of the six types represents the number of treatments × studies × years; Ni (where i = 1, 2….0.4) in each of the four ecozones represents the number of treatments × studies × years.

Each of the 12 key variables had enough data points to perform some basic analyses. To validate the usefulness of the dataset, we present four plant-related variables to demonstrate how the dataset could be analyzed by potential users, as follow:

For the variable ‘percent vegetation coverage’, we demonstrated that the mean difference (n = 226) between ‘grazing’ and ‘non-grazing’ practices was 20.61% (±1.43), ranging from 17.8 to 23.4% (Table 2). The distribution patterns across the studies showed that the mean differences between the two grazing systems for each of the studies (Fig. 4), where the majority of the studies showed a greater vegetation coverage under non-grazing practice compared to that under continuous grazing. Similarly, for the variable ‘aboveground plant biomass’, the mean difference between the two grazing practices was 6.67 (±0.84) kg ha−1, ranging from 5.02 to 8.31 kg ha−1 (Table 3). Apart from two studies that did not show a difference, all studies showed that aboveground plant biomass distribution patterns favored ‘non-grazing’(Fig. 5). Of the 32 studies that measured root biomass, 28 favored ‘non-grazing’ over ‘grazing’ with a mean difference in root biomass of 97.6 (±7.3) kg ha−1, ranging from 83.2 to 111.9 kg ha−1 (Table 4), and the distribution patterns favored the non-grazing practices with a few exception (Fig. 6). For the variable ‘plant diversity’, the effect of grazing practices was marginal, despite p-values > 0.001 (Table 5), and the distribution patterns scattered widely among studies (Fig. 7), where the mean differences in plant diversity varied considerably, with some studies skewed to the left, a few others skewed to the right, and the remainder with a mean difference near zero (i.e., the central vertical line). These distribution patterns are presented to validate the dataset only and illustrate how the dataset could be used by potential users.

Table 2.

Percent vegetation coverage between grazing and non-grazing practices in northern China grasslands.

Study and effect Duration† Statistics
Difference in means Standard error Variance Lower limit Upper limit Z-value p-value
(# of yrs) ----------------------------------- (%) ------------------------------------
Zhang et al. 2017 7 −26.3 7.6 57.8 −41.2 −11.4 −3.5 0.001
Zhang et al. 2017 6 −19.8 5.7 32.7 −31.0 −8.6 −3.5 0.001
Zhang et al. 2017 1 −10.2 2.9 8.6 −15.9 −4.4 −3.5 0.001
Zhang et al. 2017 10 −9.4 2.7 7.4 −14.7 −4.1 −3.5 0.001
Zhang et al. 2017 4 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.8 3.5 0.001
Zhang et al. 2017 3 0.8 0.2 0.0 0.3 1.2 3.5 0.001
Zhang et al. 2017 12 3.4 1.0 1.0 1.5 5.4 3.5 0.001
Zhu et al. 2018 1 7.1 2.6 6.6 2.1 12.2 2.8 0.006
Zhang et al. 2017 9 10.2 3.0 8.7 4.4 16.0 3.5 0.001
Duan et al. 2012 4 13.2 2.4 5.9 8.4 17.9 5.4 0.000
Yang et al. 2016b 5 16.0 2.7 7.5 10.6 21.4 5.8 0.000
Wang et al. 2017b 18 16.2 3.0 8.9 10.3 22.1 5.4 0.000
Yan et al. 2016a 5 17.6 3.8 14.6 10.1 25.1 4.6 0.000
Wang et al. 2017c 10 20.3 3.7 13.4 13.1 27.5 5.5 0.000
Yan et al. 2018 18 21.4 3.8 14.6 13.9 28.9 5.6 0.000
Duan et al. 2010 3 23.1 4.1 16.6 15.1 31.1 5.7 0.000
Yan et al. 2016a 4 23.9 4.3 18.4 15.5 32.3 5.6 0.000
Zhang et al. 2017 11 26.8 7.7 60.0 11.6 42.0 3.5 0.001
Yan et al. 2016a 3 28.3 4.7 22.3 19.0 37.6 6.0 0.000
Zhang et al. 2017 8 33.6 9.7 94.1 14.6 52.6 3.5 0.001
Yan et al. 2016a 2 35.4 6.3 39.2 23.1 47.7 5.7 0.000
Wu et al. 2009 10 38.7 5.4 29.1 28.1 49.3 7.2 0.000
Zhang et al. 2004 1 41.0 3.4 11.4 34.4 47.6 12.1 0.000
Xu et al. 2014 11 41.9 4.5 19.8 33.2 50.6 9.4 0.000
Zhang et al. 2017 5 44.8 12.9 166.9 19.4 70.1 3.5 0.001
Zhang et al. 2004 2 44.8 3.1 9.6 38.8 50.9 14.5 0.000
Yan et al. 2016a 1 46.9 8.8 76.7 29.7 64.1 5.4 0.000
Zhang et al. 2017 2 53.0 15.3 233.6 23.0 82.9 3.5 0.001
Zhang et al. 2004 4 54.7 3.8 14.3 47.3 62.1 14.5 0.000
Zhang et al. 2004 3 60.2 4.5 20.3 51.4 69.0 13.4 0.000
Zhang et al. 2004 5 74.3 5.7 32.9 63.1 85.5 13.0 0.000
Mean (n = 226) 6.1 20.61 1.43 2.04 17.81 23.41 14.42 0.000
Open in a new tab

†The duration (number of years) of the treatments (Master tab24) or the number of samplings for the specific study.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Open in a new tab

Distribution patterns in percent vegetation coverage between ‘grazing’ and ‘non-grazing’. Mean difference ≥0 means the results favor ‘non-grazing’, ≤0 means the results favor ‘grazing’, and a value of 0 means no difference between the two grazing practices. The distribution pattern shows the 95% confidence interval.

Table 3.

Aboveground plant biomass between grazing and non-grazing practices in northern China grasslands.

Study and effect Duration† Statistics
Difference in means Standard error Variance Lower limit Upper limit Z-value p-value
(# of yrs) ----------------------------------- (g m−2) --------------------------------
Zhang et al. 2018c 11 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 5.5 0.000
Zhu et al. 2018 1 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.6 5.1 0.000
Ren et al. 2012 25 3.1 0.6 0.4 1.9 4.3 5.1 0.000
Ren et al. 2012 9 12.7 3.7 13.9 5.4 20.0 3.4 0.001
Zhang et al. 2017 25 16.1 4.6 21.5 7.0 25.1 3.5 0.001
Ren et al. 2012 9 17.5 4.2 18.0 9.2 25.8 4.1 0.000
Zhang et al. 2017 5 41.5 12.0 143.4 18.0 64.9 3.5 0.001
Zhao et al. 2007 25 52.6 7.8 60.3 37.4 67.8 6.8 0.000
Zhang et al. 2017 9 71.0 20.5 420.2 30.8 111.2 3.5 0.001
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 104.0 18.4 339.1 68.0 140.1 5.7 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 107.9 18.7 350.2 71.2 144.5 5.8 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 112.6 19.9 394.3 73.7 151.5 5.7 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 112.6 20.8 434.2 71.8 153.5 5.4 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 112.7 20.4 416.7 72.7 152.7 5.5 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 128.5 22.8 519.2 83.8 173.1 5.6 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 128.5 22.8 520.2 83.8 173.2 5.6 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 131.7 23.8 564.7 85.1 178.2 5.5 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 136.4 24.3 588.7 88.9 184.0 5.6 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018b 2 143.0 31.9 1016.1 80.5 205.5 4.5 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 143.1 26.0 675.4 92.1 194.0 5.5 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 149.1 27.3 745.6 95.6 202.6 5.5 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 157.5 28.4 808.9 101.8 213.3 5.5 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 163.3 28.9 833.1 106.7 219.9 5.7 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 164.7 30.7 940.7 104.6 224.9 5.4 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 166.6 28.9 833.2 110.0 223.2 5.8 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 173.4 31.4 986.4 111.9 235.0 5.5 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 9 174.5 32.9 1080.4 110.1 238.9 5.3 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 174.9 31.2 972.9 113.7 236.0 5.6 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 189.3 33.3 1108.5 124.1 254.6 5.7 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018a 2 221.1 39.4 1551.7 143.9 298.3 5.6 0.000
Mean (n = 232) 6.67 0.84 0.70 5.02 8.31 7.94 0.000
Open in a new tab

†The duration (number of years) of the treatments (Master tab24) or the number of samplings for the specific study.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 5

Open in a new tab

Distribution patterns in aboveground plant biomass between ‘grazing’ and ‘non-grazing’. Mean difference ≥0 means aboveground plant biomass yield favors ‘non-grazing’, ≤0 means the result favors ‘grazing’, and a value of 0 means no difference between the two practices. The distribution pattern shows the 95% confidence interval.

Table 4.

Root biomass between grazing and non-grazing practices in northern China grasslands.

Study and effect Duration† Statistics
Difference in means Standard error Variance Lower limit Upper limit Z-value p-value
(# of yrs) ---------------------------------- (g m−2) ---------------------------------
Yang et al. 2016b 5 −468.0 100.6 10124.9 −665.2 −270.8 −4.7 0.000
Xu et al. 2014 11 −86.0 35.0 1225.3 −154.6 −17.3 −2.5 0.014
Xu et al. 2014 11 0.4 2.7 7.3 −4.9 5.7 0.1 0.885
Zhang et al. 2018c 11 0.6 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.8 5.9 0.000
Zhu et al. 2018 11 8.7 1.6 2.5 5.6 11.8 5.5 0.000
Wang et al. 2017b 9 20.0 3.9 14.9 12.4 27.6 5.2 0.000
Xu et al. 2014 11 20.3 49.8 2480.8 −77.3 118.0 0.4 0.683
Xu et al. 2014 18 25.8 4.0 15.8 18.0 33.6 6.5 0.000
Xu et al. 2014 11 31.4 6.1 36.7 19.5 43.2 5.2 0.000
Xu et al. 2014 1 48.7 8.4 70.1 32.3 65.1 5.8 0.000
Zhang et al. 2017 4 65.0 18.8 352.1 28.2 101.8 3.5 0.001
Zhang et al. 2017 25 93.0 26.8 720.8 40.4 145.6 3.5 0.001
Zhang et al. 2018b 1 114.1 41.4 1713.4 33.0 195.2 2.8 0.006
Rong et al. 2017 2 120.0 36.0 1298.1 49.4 190.6 3.3 0.001
Wang et al. 2017b 25 133.0 25.6 655.5 82.8 183.2 5.2 0.000
Zhang et al. 2017 4 140.0 40.4 1633.3 60.8 219.2 3.5 0.001
Zhang et al. 2004 25 140.8 12.6 157.6 116.2 165.5 11.2 0.000
Yan et al. 2016a 3 144.0 85.1 7246.4 −22.8 310.8 1.7 0.091
Yan et al. 2016a 4 187.0 69.2 4783.0 51.4 322.6 2.7 0.007
Zhang et al. 2004 2 214.8 15.6 241.8 184.3 245.3 13.8 0.000
Zhang et al. 2004 5 241.2 18.7 349.9 204.5 277.9 12.9 0.000
Wang et al. 2017b 25 250.0 45.8 2093.3 160.3 339.7 5.5 0.000
Zhang et al. 2017 18 258.0 74.5 5547.0 112.0 404.0 3.5 0.001
Zhang et al. 2004 1 265.8 21.3 452.2 224.2 307.5 12.5 0.000
Yan et al. 2016a 3 278.0 85.9 7379.0 109.6 446.4 3.2 0.001
Yan et al. 2016a 5 284.0 75.5 5702.2 136.0 432.0 3.8 0.000
Zhang et al. 2004 18 295.8 21.9 480.5 252.8 338.7 13.5 0.000
Yan et al. 2016a 18 327.0 74.5 5549.0 181.0 473.0 4.4 0.000
Wang et al. 2017b 11 407.0 74.3 5527.5 261.3 552.7 5.5 0.000
Mean (n = 222) 97.6 7.3 53.6 83.2 111.9 13.3 0.000
Open in a new tab

†The duration (number of years) of the treatments (Master tab24) or the number of samplings for the specific study.

Fig. 6.

Fig. 6

Open in a new tab

Distribution patterns in root biomass between ‘grazing’ and ‘non-grazing’. Mean difference ≥0 means root biomass yield favors ‘non-grazing’, ≤0 means the result favors ‘grazing’, and a value of 0 means no difference in root biomass between the two practices. The distribution pattern shows the 95% confidence interval.

Table 5.

Plant diversity between grazing and non-grazing practices in northern China grasslands.

Study and effect Duration† Statistics
Difference in means Standard error Variance Lower limit Upper limit Z-value p-value
(# of yrs) --------------------------- (diversity index) -----------------------------
Wu et al. 2009 10 −8.00 2.18 4.74 −12.27 −3.73 −3.67 0.000
Zhang et al. 2017 25 −4.17 1.20 1.45 −6.53 −1.81 −3.46 0.001
Zhang et al. 2017 25 −2.33 0.67 0.45 −3.65 −1.01 −3.46 0.001
Wang et al. 2016 3 −2.10 0.19 0.04 −2.48 −1.72 −10.87 0.000
Zhang et al. 2017 25 −1.66 0.48 0.23 −2.60 −0.72 −3.46 0.001
Zhang et al. 2004 2 −0.71 0.06 0.00 −0.83 −0.58 −10.92 0.000
Zhang et al. 2004 1 −0.40 0.05 0.00 −0.49 −0.30 −7.98 0.000
Zhang et al. 2017 25 −0.16 0.05 0.00 −0.25 −0.07 −3.46 0.001
Zhu et al. 2018 1 0.10 0.06 0.00 −0.01 0.21 1.73 0.084
Zhang et al. 2017 25 0.17 0.05 0.00 0.07 0.27 3.46 0.001
Ren et al. 2012 9 0.20 0.27 0.07 −0.33 0.73 0.73 0.464
Zhu et al. 2018 2 0.23 0.42 0.17 −0.59 1.05 0.55 0.582
Zhang et al. 2017 25 0.33 0.10 0.01 0.14 0.52 3.46 0.001
Wang et al. 2017b 18 0.49 0.11 0.01 0.27 0.71 4.35 0.000
Zhang et al. 2017 25 0.50 0.14 0.02 0.22 0.78 3.46 0.001
Zhang et al. 2017 25 0.50 0.14 0.02 0.22 0.78 3.46 0.001
Zhao et al. 2007 5 0.51 0.08 0.01 0.35 0.67 6.09 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018c 11 0.58 0.10 0.01 0.38 0.78 5.80 0.000
Zhou et al. 2012 N/A 0.60 0.09 0.01 0.42 0.77 6.73 0.000
Zhang et al. 2017 25 0.67 0.19 0.04 0.29 1.05 3.46 0.001
Zhang et al. 2017 25 1.00 0.29 0.08 0.43 1.57 3.46 0.001
Zhang et al. 2004 3 1.07 0.08 0.01 0.91 1.24 12.74 0.000
Zhang et al. 2017 25 1.50 0.43 0.19 0.65 2.35 3.46 0.001
Wang et al. 2017b 17 1.50 0.66 0.44 0.21 2.79 2.27 0.023
Zhang et al. 2004 4 1.72 0.15 0.02 1.43 2.02 11.30 0.000
Zhang et al. 2004 5 1.80 0.14 0.02 1.52 2.07 12.90 0.000
Zhang et al. 2018c 10 4.17 0.77 0.59 2.66 5.68 5.41 0.000
Yang et al. 2016b 5 4.60 1.15 1.33 2.34 6.86 3.99 0.000
Zhang et al. 2017 25 10.17 2.94 8.62 4.42 15.92 3.46 0.001
Xu et al. 2014 11 12.23 1.31 1.71 9.67 14.79 9.36 0.000
Mean (n = 286) 0.47 0.14 0.02 0.19 0.74 3.34 0.001
Open in a new tab

†The duration (number of years) of the treatments (Master tab24) or the number of samplings for the specific study.

Fig. 7.

Fig. 7

Open in a new tab

Distribution patterns in plant diversity between ‘grazing’ and ‘non-grazing’. Mean difference ≥0 means plant diversity favors ‘non-grazing’, ≤0 means the result favors ‘grazing’, and a value of 0 means no difference in plant diversity between the two practices. The distribution pattern shows the 95% confidence interval.

Usage Notes

The compilation of experimental field data from 65 data-rich studies resulted in a dataset full of meaningful information24, with a set of variables that cover the key attributes of grassland properties. We suggest that potential dataset-users can perform quantitative assessments on whether grassland rejuvenation processes have had a significant impact on grassland ecosystem properties.

In particular, the dataset could be used for the following:

  1. To quantify whether rejuvenation programs have had a significant impact on aboveground plant communities and belowground soil properties by comparing grazing exclusion with other grazing practices (light/mild grazing, and year-around continuous grazing). The aboveground plant community variables—including percent vegetation coverage, quantity of aboveground and belowground biomass (primarily roots), and the derived ratio of aboveground to belowground biomass—can be used by modelers to estimate carbon input into soils by different plant parts. It also provides valuable information on the magnitude of plant diversity in relation to the diverse grassland rejuvenation practices33. Further, the dataset can be analyzed to assess whether the rejuvenation programs have had an impact on soil physiochemical properties, including soil bulk density, moisture content, organic carbon, total and available N, total and available P, soil C:N ratio, and soil pH. Such analyses can help to determine the degree of grassland degradation and rejuvenation and their impact on grassland ecosystem sustainability33–36. Additionally, the dataset includes a variable—duration (the number of years) of grazing practices—that distinguishes grazing exclusion from continuous grazing. A comparison of the two contrasting practices against the duration of grazing can help identify the trend of the effect in grassland properties. The latter feature is unique for this dataset, and is rarely found in existing scientific literature.

  2. The dataset can be used as a solid base for performing more comprehensive analyses such as a meta-analysis37. The dataset presents the results from more than 65 well-designed field studies with two or more replicates and site-years. Analyzing the dataset using meta-analysis may help to elucidate large-picture effects. More data with treatment structure and measurements meeting the criteria defined above could be entered into the Master file to build an even stronger dataset for comprehensive analysis.

  3. The dataset can be analyzed to learn the magnitude of grass–climate–soil–human interactions on the outcome of grassland degradation and rejuvenation. The collected data come from a wide range of grasslands spread across diverse landscapes from semi-desert, arid, semiarid to humid climatic zones with varying weather conditions. Climatic variability across grassland zones may have had an impact on some aspects of grassland properties such as species composition38, herb abundance39, and shrub encroachment40, as well as belowground properties41. Such analysis may help with understanding the complex nature of interactions among meteorological, topographic, and soil environments with plant community structures and management practices. This type of analysis may have significant societal value for policymakers, researchers, and the general public.

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful for the support of ‘Research Program Sponsored by Gansu Provincial Key Laboratory of Aridland Crop Science, Gansu Agricultural University (No. GSCS-2017-3)’; and in-kind support from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and The University of Western Australia.

Online-only Table

Author contributions

L.W. conceived the idea and designed the study; L.L. extracted data from articles; L.W. and F.H. ensured the accuracy of the dataset, interpreted the results, and wrote the manuscript; K.H.M.S. and F.H. reviewed and revised the manuscript; and L.W. finalized the work.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Footnotes

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  • 1.Soussana JF, Lüscher A. Temperate grasslands and global atmospheric change: A review. Grass Forage Sci. 2007;62:127–134. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2494.2007.00577.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Galli A, et al. Integrating ecological, carbon and water footprint into a “footprint family” of indicators: definition and role in tracking human pressure on the planet. Ecol. Indic. 2012;16:100–112. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.06.017. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Odriozola I, García-Baquero G, Laskurain NA, Aldezabal A. Livestock grazing modifies the effect of environmental factors on soil temperature and water content in a temperate grassland. Geoderma. 2014;235–236:347–354. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2014.08.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Statistics Division of Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAOSTAT). FAO Statistical Yearbooks - World food and agriculture. Food and Agriculture Organization of the (United Nations, 2015).
  • 5.National Bureau of Statistics of Central Government of China. China Statistical Yearbook 2018. (China Academic Journals Electronic Publishing House, 2018).
  • 6.Hao F, et al. Effects of land use changes on the ecosystem service values of a reclamation farm in northeast China. Environ. Manage. 2012;50:888–899. doi: 10.1007/s00267-012-9923-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Wang J, Wei Z, Wang Q. Evaluating the eco-environment benefit of land reclamation in the dump of an opencast coal mine. Chem. Ecol. 2017;33:607–624. doi: 10.1080/02757540.2017.1337103. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Su H, et al. Introducing chicken farming into traditional ruminant-grazing dominated production systems for promoting ecological restoration of degraded rangeland in northern China. Land Degr. Dev. 2018;29:240–249. doi: 10.1002/ldr.2719. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Wiesmeier M, et al. Short-term degradation of semiarid grasslands-results from a controlled-grazing experiment in Northern China. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 2012;175:434–442. doi: 10.1002/jpln.201100327. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Chen J, Hou F, Chen X, Wan X, Millner J. Stocking rate and grazing season modify soil respiration on the Loess Plateau, China. Rangeland Ecol. Manage. 2015;68:48–53. doi: 10.1016/j.rama.2014.12.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Wu J, Zhao Y, Yu C, Luo L, Pan Y. Land management influences trade-offs and the total supply of ecosystem services in alpine grassland in Tibet, China. J. Environ. Manage. 2017;193:70–78. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.02.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Feng Y, Lu Q, Tokola T, Liu H, Wang X. Assessment of grassland degradation in Guinan county, Qinghai province, China, in the past 30 years. Land Degr. Dev. 2009;20:55–68. doi: 10.1002/ldr.877. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Zhang X, et al. Understanding grassland degradation and restoration from the perspective of ecosystem services: A case study of the Xilin River Basin in Inner Mongolia, China. Sustainability (Switzerland) 2016;8:1–17. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Dong W, Yang Y. Exploitation of mineral resource and its influence on regional development and urban evolution in Xinjiang, China. J. Geogr. Sci. 2014;24:1131–1146. doi: 10.1007/s11442-014-1143-x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Chai Q, et al. Water-saving innovations in Chinese agriculture. Adv. Agron. 2014;126:149–201. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-800132-5.00002-X. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Deng XP, Shan L, Zhang H, Turner NC. Improving agricultural water use efficiency in arid and semiarid areas of China. Agric. Water Manage. 2006;80:23–40. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2005.07.021. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Conte TJ, Tilt B. The effects of China’s Grassland contract policy on pastoralists’ attitudes towards cooperation in an Inner Mongolian banner. Hum. Ecol. 2014;42:837–846. doi: 10.1007/s10745-014-9690-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Dong GR, et al. Present situation, cause and control way of desertification in China. J Desert Res. 1999;19:318–332. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Tan SH, et al. Understanding grassland rental markets and their determinants in eastern inner Mongolia, PR China. Land Use Policy. 2017;67:733–741. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.07.006. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Treacy P, Jagger P, Song C, Zhang Q, Bilsborrow RE. Impacts of China’s Grain for Green Program on Migration and Household Income. Environ. Manage. 2018;62:489–499. doi: 10.1007/s00267-018-1047-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Feng Z, Yang Y, Zhang Y, Zhang P, Li Y. Grain-for-green policy and its impacts on grain supply in West China. Land Use Policy. 2005;22:301–312. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.05.004. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Shang Z-H, Cao J-J, Guo R-Y, Long R-J, Deng B. The response of soil organic carbon and nitrogen 10years after returning cultivated alpine steppe to grassland by abandonment or reseeding. Catena. 2014;119:28–35. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2014.03.006. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Li S-L, et al. Understanding the effects of a new grazing policy: the impact of seasonal grazing on shrub demography in the Inner Mongolian steppe. J. Appl. Ecol. 2013;50:1377–1386. doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.12159. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Wang L, Luan L, Hou F, Siddique KHM. 2020. Nexus of grazing management with plant and soil properties in northern China grasslands. figshare. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 25.Clarivate Analytics. Back to the Future: Institute for Scientific Information Re-established Within Clarivate Analytics (Clarivate Analytics, 2017).
  • 26.Xiong D, Shi P, Zhang X, Zou CB. Effects of grazing exclusion on carbon sequestration and plant diversity in grasslands of China—A meta-analysis. Ecol. Eng. 2016;94:647–655. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2016.06.124. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Yan, L., Zhou, G. & Zhang, F. Effects of different grazing intensities on grassland production in China: A meta-analysis. PLoS ONE8 (2013). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 28.Zhao F, et al. Grazing intensity influence soil microbial communities and their implications for soil respiration. Agric., Ecosyst. Environ. 2017;249:50–56. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2017.08.007. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Zhou G, et al. Grazing intensity significantly affects belowground carbon and nitrogen cycling in grassland ecosystems: a meta-analysis. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2017;23:1167–1179. doi: 10.1111/gcb.13431. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Nayak D, et al. Management opportunities to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions from Chinese agriculture. Agric., Ecosyst. Environ. 2015;209:108–124. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2015.04.035. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Wang H, et al. Warm- and cold- season grazing affect soil respiration differently in alpine grasslands. Agric., Ecosyst. Environ. 2017;248:136–143. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2017.07.041. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Zhou GY, Wu YY. Meta-analysis of effects of grazing on carbon pools in grassland ecosystems in different climatic regions. Acta Pratacult. Sin. 2016;25:1–10. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Bloor JMG, Bardgett RD. Stability of above-ground and below-ground processes to extreme drought in model grassland ecosystems: Interactions with plant species diversity and soil nitrogen availability. Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2012;14:193–204. doi: 10.1016/j.ppees.2011.12.001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.van Rooijen NM, et al. Plant species diversity mediates ecosystem stability of natural dune grasslands in response to drought. Ecosystems. 2015;18:1383–1394. doi: 10.1007/s10021-015-9905-6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Rzanny M, Voigt W. Complexity of multitrophic interactions in a grassland ecosystem depends on plant species diversity. J. Anim. Ecol. 2012;81:614–627. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2012.01951.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Oelmann Yvonne, Buchmann Nina, Gleixner Gerd, Habekost Maike, Roscher Christiane, Rosenkranz Stephan, Schulze Ernst-Detlef, Steinbeiss Sibylle, Temperton Vicky M., Weigelt Alexandra, Weisser Wolfgang W., Wilcke Wolfgang. Plant diversity effects on aboveground and belowground N pools in temperate grassland ecosystems: Development in the first 5 years after establishment. Global Biogeochemical Cycles. 2011;25(2):n/a-n/a. doi: 10.1029/2010GB003869. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Borenstein M, Higgins JPT. Meta-analysis and subgroups. Prev. Sci. 2013;14:134–143. doi: 10.1007/s11121-013-0377-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Luo W, et al. Patterns of plant biomass allocation in temperate grasslands across a 2500-km transect in northern China. PLoS One. 2013;8:e71749. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0071749. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Li H, et al. Shift in soil microbial communities with shrub encroachment in Inner Mongolia grasslands, China. Eur. J. Soil Biol. 2017;79:40–47. doi: 10.1016/j.ejsobi.2017.02.004. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Chen L, et al. Climate and native grassland vegetation as drivers of the community structures of shrub-encroached grasslands in Inner Mongolia, China. Landscape Ecol. 2015;30:1627–1641. doi: 10.1007/s10980-014-0044-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Wang SK, et al. Responses of soil fungal community to the sandy grassland restoration in Horqin Sandy Land, northern China. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2016;188:21–29. doi: 10.1007/s10661-015-5031-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Chen T, Christensen M, Nan Z, Hou F. The effects of different intensities of long-term grazing on the direction and strength of plant–soil feedback in a semiarid grassland of Northwest China. Plant Soil. 2017;413:303–317. doi: 10.1007/s11104-016-3103-y. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Chen T, Christensen M, Nan Z, Hou F. Effects of grazing intensity on seed size, germination and fungal colonization of Lespedeza davurica in a semi-arid grassland of northwest China. J. Arid Environ. 2017;144:91–97. doi: 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2017.04.006. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Dong QM, et al. Response of soil properties to yak grazing intensity in a Kobresia parva-meadow on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, China. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 2012;12:535–546. [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Duan M, et al. Biomass estimation of alpine grasslands under different grazing intensities using spectral vegetation indices. Can. J. Remote Sens. 2012;37:413–421. doi: 10.5589/m11-050. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Gan L, Peng XH, Peth S, Horn R. Effects of grazing intensity on soil water regime and flux in Inner Mongolia grassland, China. Pedosphere. 2012;22:165–177. doi: 10.1016/S1002-0160(12)60003-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Gong YM, et al. Response of carbon dioxide emissions to sheep grazing and N application in an alpine grassland-Part 1: Effect of sheep grazing. Biogeosciences. 2014;11:1743–1750. doi: 10.5194/bg-11-1743-2014. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Gou YN, Nan ZB, Hou FJ. Diversity and structure of a bacterial community in grassland soils disturbed by sheep grazing, in the Loess Plateau of northwestern China. Gen. Mol. Res. 2015;14:16987–16999. doi: 10.4238/2015.December.15.5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Han G, et al. Effect of grazing intensity on carbon and nitrogen in soil and vegetation in a meadow steppe in Inner Mongolia. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2008;125:21–32. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2007.11.009. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Jiao T, Nie Z, Zhao G, Cao W. Changes in soil physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of a temperate desert steppe under different grazing regimes in northern China. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2016;47:338–347. doi: 10.1080/00103624.2015.1122801. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Kölbl A, et al. Grazing changes topography-controlled topsoil properties and their interaction on different spatial scales in a semi-arid grassland of Inner Mongolia, P.R. China. Plant Soil. 2011;340:35–58. doi: 10.1007/s11104-010-0473-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Li C, Hao X, Zhao M, Han G, Willms WD. Influence of historic sheep grazing on vegetation and soil properties of a desert steppe in Inner Mongolia. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2008;128:109–116. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2008.05.008. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Liu T, Nan Z, Hou F. Culturable autotrophic ammonia-oxidizing bacteria population and nitrification potential in a sheep grazing intensity gradient in a grassland on the loess plateau of Northwest China. Can. J. Soil Sci. 2011;91:925–934. doi: 10.4141/cjss2010-003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Liu T, Nan Z, Hou F. Grazing intensity effects on soil nitrogen mineralization in semi-arid grassland on the Loess Plateau of northern China. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 2011;91:67–75. doi: 10.1007/s10705-011-9445-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Qu TB, et al. Impacts of grazing intensity and plant community composition on soil bacterial community diversity in a steppe grassland. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0159680. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159680. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Ren H, Schönbach P, Wan H, Gierus M, Taube F. Effects of grazing intensity and environmental factors on species composition and diversity in typical steppe of Inner Mongolia, China. PLoS One. 2012;7:e52180. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0052180. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Rong Y, Johnson DA, Wang Z, Zhu L. Grazing effects on ecosystem CO2 fluxes regulated by interannual climate fluctuation in a temperate grassland steppe in northern China. Agric., Ecosyst. Environ. 2017;237:194–202. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2016.12.036. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Rui Y, et al. Warming and grazing affect soil labile carbon and nitrogen pools differently in an alpine meadow of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau in China. J. Soils Sed. 2011;11:903–914. doi: 10.1007/s11368-011-0388-6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Schönbach P, et al. Grazing effects on the greenhouse gas balance of a temperate steppe ecosystem. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 2012;93:357–371. doi: 10.1007/s10705-012-9521-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Steffens M, Kölbl A, Kögel-Knabner I. Alteration of soil organic matter pools and aggregation in semi-arid steppe topsoils as driven by organic matter input. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 2009;60:198–212. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2389.2008.01104.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Sun J, et al. Effects of grazing regimes on plant traits and soil nutrients in an alpine steppe, northern Tibetan Plateau. PLoS One. 2014;9:e108821. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0108821. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Wang RZ. Photosynthetic pathway types of forage species along grazing gradient from the Songnen grassland, Northeastern China. Photosynthetica. 2002;40:57–61. doi: 10.1023/A:1020185906183. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Wang X, Yan Y, Cao Y. Impact of historic grazing on steppe soils on the northern Tibetan Plateau. Plant Soil. 2012;354:173–183. doi: 10.1007/s11104-011-1053-y. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Wang Z, Johnson DA, Rong Y, Wang K. Grazing effects on soil characteristics and vegetation of grassland in northern China. Solid Earth. 2016;7:55–65. doi: 10.5194/se-7-55-2016. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Wang D, Du J, Zhang B, Ba L, Hodgkinson KC. Grazing intensity and phenotypic plasticity in the clonal grass Leymus chinensis. Rangeland Ecol. Manage. 2017;70:740–747. doi: 10.1016/j.rama.2017.06.011. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Wang T, Zhang Z, Li Z, Li P. Grazing management affects plant diversity and soil properties in a temperate steppe in northern China. Catena. 2017;158:141–147. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2017.06.020. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Wu GL, Li XP, Cheng JM, Wei XH, Sun L. Grazing disturbances mediate species composition of alpine meadow based on seed size. Isr. J. Ecol. Evol. 2009;55:369–379. doi: 10.1560/IJEE.55.4.369. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Wu H, et al. Labile organic C and N mineralization of soil aggregate size classes in semiarid grasslands as affected by grazing management. Biol. Fert. Soils. 2012;48:305–313. doi: 10.1007/s00374-011-0627-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Xu Y, Wan S, Cheng W, Li L. Impacts of grazing intensity on denitrification and N2O production in a semi-arid grassland ecosystem. Biogeochemistry. 2008;88:103–115. doi: 10.1007/s10533-008-9197-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Xu MY, Xie F, Wang K. Response of vegetation and soil carbon and nitrogen storage to grazing intensity in semi-arid grasslands in the agro-pastoral zone of northern China. PLoS One. 2014;9:e96604. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0096604. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Xue HY, et al. Effect of short-term enclosure on soil nematode communities in an alpine meadow in Northern Tibet. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2016;36:6139–6148. [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Yan R, et al. Grazing intensity and driving factors affect soil nitrous oxide fluxes during the growing seasons in the Hulunber meadow steppe of China. Environ. Res. Lett. 2016;11:054004. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/11/5/054004. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Yan R, et al. Effects of livestock grazing on soil nitrogen mineralization on hulunber meadow steppe, China. Plant Soil Environ. 2016;62:202–209. doi: 10.17221/445/2015-PSE. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Yang LL, et al. Effects of grazing intensity and grazing exclusion on litter decomposition in the temperate steppe of Nei Mongol, China. Chin. J. Plant Ecol. 2016;40:748–759. doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2015.0481. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Yang Z, et al. Soil properties and species composition under different grazing intensity in an alpine meadow on the eastern Tibetan Plateau, China. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2016;188:678–688. doi: 10.1007/s10661-016-5663-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Zhang JT, Dong Y. Effects of grazing intensity, soil variables, and topography on vegetation diversity in the subalpine meadows of the Zhongtiao Mountains, China. Rangeland J. 2009;31:353–360. doi: 10.1071/RJ08051. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Zhang T, Zhao H, Li S, Zhou R. Grassland changes under grazing stress in horqin sandy grassland in Inner Mongolia, China. N. Z. J. Agric. Res. 2004;47:307–312. doi: 10.1080/00288233.2004.9513599. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Zhang Y, et al. Effects of grazing and climate warming on plant diversity, productivity and living state in the alpine rangelands and cultivated grasslands of the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. Rangeland J. 2015;37:57–65. doi: 10.1071/RJ14080. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Zhang J, et al. Long-term grazing effects on vegetation characteristics and soil properties in a semiarid grassland, northern China. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2017;189:216–226. doi: 10.1007/s10661-017-5947-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Zhao WY, Li JL, Qi JG. Changes in vegetation diversity and structure in response to heavy grazing pressure in the northern Tianshan Mountains, China. J. Arid Environ. 2007;68:465–479. doi: 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2006.06.007. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Zhou D, et al. Impacts of grazing and climate change on the aboveground net primary productivity of mountainous grassland ecosystems along altitudinal gradients over the northern Tianshan mountains, China. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2012;32:0082–0091. [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Citations

  1. Wang L, Luan L, Hou F, Siddique KHM. 2020. Nexus of grazing management with plant and soil properties in northern China grasslands. figshare. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]

Articles from Scientific Data are provided here courtesy of Nature Publishing Group

RESOURCES