The Influence of Management on the Content of Macro- and Microelements in Plant Shoots of a Meadow Sward of an Arrhenatheretalia Plant Community
1
Department of Botany and Plant Ecology, Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences, pl. Grunwaldzki 24a, 50-363 Wrocław, Poland
2
Department of Botany, Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Wrocław, Kanonia 6/8, 50-328 Wrocław, Poland
3
Institute of Agroecology and Plant Production, Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences, pl. Grunwaldzki 24a, 50-363 Wrocław, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2025, 15(5), 1020; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15051020
Submission received: 4 March 2025
/
Revised: 30 March 2025
/
Accepted: 22 April 2025
/
Published: 24 April 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Weed Biology and Ecology: Importance to Integrated Weed Management)
Abstract
:The concentrations of macro- and micro-nutrients in meadow swards should be influenced by habitat factors and by different meadow and pasture management methods. Therefore, the aim of the study was to learn about the ranges of macro- and micro-nutrient contents in selected species characteristic of mesic meadows, their sward and dead organic matter in relation to the concentrations in mountain soils and to different management methods. The study was conducted in the Central Sudetes (SW Poland) within meadow phytocoenoses representing the Arrhenatheretalia order managed in a mowing, mowing-pasture and fallowing manner. The studied species of dicotyledon herbs and grasses showed differences in the uptake of nutrients between those two plant groups, regarding such elements as phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium and manganese. The comparison between forbs, grasses and the entire meadow sward revealed the highest contents of phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium, zinc and copper were recorded in forbs, and the lowest in the sward. In the case of manganese, the inverse relationship was observed. The management methods did not have a strong influence on element concentrations in studied plant species and sward.
Keywords:
mountain grassland; habitat features; phytocoenoses; herbs; forbs; grasses; nutrient uptake1. Introduction
Mountain grasslands are phytocenoses characterized by high species diversity and the presence of many endangered species, which is a crucial element of the European Union meadow protection policy [1]. Their formation and persistence are related to century-old low-intensity management [2]. Traditionally managed meadows are among the richest ecosystems in Europe with regard to species number [3]. These habitats would be extinct without mowing and grazing along their diverse flora and fauna [4].
The species composition and diversity of grassland communities are influenced by many topographic, edaphic and land management factors [5,6,7,8]. Traditional meadow management shapes the physicochemical properties of soils [9], soil nutrient cycling [10], microbiological soil activity [11], nutrient allocation [12] and soil carbon concentration [13]. Despite the existence of many studies on these issues, the impact of management on soil nutrients uptake by plants of mountain grassland communities is still unclear, which is caused by the complex mountain grassland soil and the diversity of grazing practices in these areas [14]. In addition, the fallowing of meadows and pastures can lead to increased nutrient availability due to their pollution from the atmosphere, the mineralization of organic matter in the soil, or the chemical decomposition of minerals contained in soils [15]. As a consequence, these processes can affect the content of macro- and micro-nutrients in the meadow sward and the potential for its use in feeding farm animals.
Nutrient concentrations in grassland herbage show significant differences depending on the species and the geographical location [16]. Extensive use of meadows—with one to two applications of fertilizer and double mowing during the growing season—is typical of high mountain locations, while intensive fertilization up to five times per season with up to five-time mowing is typical of lower hypsometric heights [17]. This study was motivated by the still incomplete understanding of the influence of different management methods on the chemical properties of mountain soils and on the absorption of macro- and micro-nutrients by species characteristic of mesic mountain meadows. The aim of the study was to determine the content of macro- and micro-nutrients in selected species characteristic of mesic meadows, their sward and dead organic matter in relation to their concentration in mountain soils and different methods of management. We tested the hypothesis assuming that the management methods may significantly modify the influence of the habitat factors on macro- and micro-nutrient accumulation by meadow plants.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Filed Study
The study was conducted in the Central Sudetes (SW Poland) in an area with diverse topographic factors, physicochemical soil properties and land management methods. The concentrations of selected elements (phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium, iron, manganese, copper and zinc) were examined in the above ground parts of Arrhenatheretalia order species occurring percentage of frequency in mesic meadows, such as Achillea millefolium, Agrostis capillaris, Festuca rubra, Lotus corniculatus, Plantago lanceolata, Rumex acetosa and Veronica chamaedrys. Plants were collected in full vegetation period, at the turn of June and July. The 20 study plots were selected as most differentiated from the almost 100 plots studied in an earlier survey [18] regarding diversity of mesic meadows in the area. They represented two natural management types: mowing and mixed-use encompassing mowing and grazing without fertilizers for at last three years before study, as well as abandoned meadows as the control. Systematic-random sampling was adopted: samples were collected randomly within 9 component squares of an evenly divided (3 × 3 rows) study area of 1 m2. The component samples were then combined into a collective sample. Samples of the meadow sward and residual plant necromass were also collected for analysis. A 5 × 5 cm frame was used for this purpose. The slope was measured with a clinometer and soil depth with a graduated steel blade.
2.2. Laboratory Study
In the laboratory, the material was dried to a constant weight at 85 °C with forced air circulation and then ground in an impact mill. Physicochemical analyses were performed in accordance to the methods used in ecological studies [19,20].
The maximum soil water capacity (MSWC) was determined using Kopecki cylinders with a capacity of 100 cm3.
The organic matter content was determined by igniting 2 g of soil in a muffle furnace at 600 °C for 6 h.
The soil texture was determined using the Bouyoucos areometric method as modified by Casagrande and Prószyński.
The soil reaction was determined in water with the potentiometric method.
Exchangeable forms of potassium, magnesium and calcium were extracted with 1 M ammonium acetate (pH 7.0); soluble phosphorus was determined using Olsen method with 0.5 M sodium bicarbonate solution at pH 8.5 [19].
The total nitrogen content in soil was determined by the modified Kjeldahl method.
The contents of exchangeable forms of micro-nutrients in soils (iron, manganese, copper and zinc) were determined using 0.01 M CaCl2 extraction.
Macro- and micro-nutrient contents in plants were determined after mineralization of 0.5 g plant materials in a mixture of perchloric and nitric acids (ratio 1:4). The 0.5 g soil was mineralization in a mixture of perchloric and nitric acids in ratio 1:1. Mineralization was carried out in an aluminum block maintaining the temperature of 220 °C for at least 6 h until clear solutions were obtained. After cooling the mixture, 2 mL of hydrogen peroxide was added and then the solution was gently heated to 120 °C.
The contents of magnesium, iron, manganese, copper and zinc in the analyzed solutions were determined with flame atomic absorption spectrometry (AAS) on a Varian Spectraa 200 spectrometer (Varian Mulgrave Victoria Australia Pty Ltd manufacturing site). Potassium and calcium were determined in emission mode using the same device.
Total phosphorus in the plant material was determined using the ammonium molybdate method with Photorex and sodium acetate (Thermo Scientific, Heλios Gamma). Phosphorus in the plant and soil material was determined using a spectrocolorimeter (Cambridge England manufacturing site).
2.3. Statistical Analysis
Statistical analyses were performed on Statistica software (Version 13) [21]. The compliance of data with the normal distribution was analyzed using the Shapiro–Wilk W test. Variables deviating from the normal distributions were analyzed using nonparametric methods—the Kruskal–Wallis test and Spearman’s rank correlation. Data with normal distributions and homogeneity of variance tested by in the Levene test were analyzed using the Tukey HSD test and Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to determine the relationship between the concentrations of macro- and micro-nutrients in the soil and topographic factors and physical properties of the soil. Calculations were performed with the use of a correlation matrix.
3. Results
3.1. The Relationship Between Soil Macro- and Micro-Nutrient Concentrations, Topographic Factors and Physical Properties of Soil
The decisive range of variability in the PCA calculations for topographic factors, physical properties of soil and soil macro- and micro-nutrient concentrations is defined by the first two components, for which eigenvalues of 6.36 and 3.84, respectively, were recorded. They explain 33.46% and 20.20% of the total variance, respectively. The obtained results are presented in Figure 1. There is a notable negative correlation between potassium and magnesium concentrations in the soil and soil thickness, a positive correlation between iron and hypsometric height, a positive correlation between calcium and manganese and slope inclination, positive correlations between calcium and magnesium concentrations in the soil, a negative correlation between zinc and soil pH, positive correlations between calcium, magnesium and iron concentrations in the soil and a negative correlation between manganese and organic matter, negative correlations between iron and dust and clay, positive correlations with sand fraction and total nitrogen in the soil, a positive correlation between manganese and clay and a negative correlation with nitrogen (Table 1).
3.2. Concentrations of Macro- and Micro-Nutrient in Above-Ground Plant Shoots and Meadow Sward
The concentrations of the analyzed elements in above-ground plant shoots and meadow sward are presented in graphs (Figure 2). Dicotyledon herbs contained more calcium, phosphorus, potassium, magnesium and, with the exception of Rumex acetosa, calcium. In the case of manganese and iron (excluding Rumex acetosa and Achillea millefolium), inverse correlations were noted. The results show high contents of manganese, iron and zinc in the plant necromass.
In order to determine the relationship between the concentrations of macro- and micro-nutrients in three categories of samples, forbs, grasses and meadow sward, principal component analyses were used. Calculations were performed using a correlation matrix. For the first component, the eigenvalues were found at the level of 2.73 and for the second, 1.43. They explain 34.11 and 17.90% of the total variance, respectively. The highest contents of the tested elements, excluding manganese and iron, were recorded in forbs, while the lowest—in sward. The weak separation in the ordination space of two functional groups is noteworthy: grasses and sward, indicating a high share of monocotyledonous species in the total biomass (Figure 3).
3.3. The Influence of Different Management Methods on the Concentration of Macro- and Micro-Nutrients
Calculations showed a significant effect of management methods on the concentrations of selected macro- and micro-nutrients in the above-ground parts of the studied species (Table 2). In the case of manganese concentration in plant necromass (F = 4.457; p = 0.029) and Veronica chamaedrys (F = 7.123, p = 0.007), the lowest concentrations were found on areas used for mowing and pasture, while the highest on grasslands used for mowing. Similar results were obtained for copper concentration in above-ground shoots of Agrostis capillaris (H = 6.519; p = 0.384). In the case of zinc concentration in the above-ground parts of Rumex acetosa, the lowest concentrations were found on fallow areas, while the highest on areas used for mowing and pasture (F = 7.147; p = 0.006).
4. Discussion
Mineral nutrients in proper doses are essential for plant growth, development, and maximum crop profit [22]. The uptake of elements is influenced by many environmental factors, including geographical location [16]. Our study shows a negative correlation between soil depth and potassium and magnesium concentrations in the soil, a positive correlation between iron and hypsometric height, a positive correlation between calcium and manganese and slope inclination and a positive correlation between calcium concentrations and magnesium concentrations in the soil. Moreover, there is a negative correlation between zinc and soil pH, a positive correlation between calcium and magnesium concentration and iron concentration in the soil and a negative correlation between manganese and organic matter. Furthermore, the study revealed a negative correlation between iron concentration and the silt and clay fraction of the soil, a positive correlation between the sand fraction and total nitrogen in the soil, and a positive correlation between manganese and clay fraction of the soil and a negative correlation with nitrogen. These correlations can be associated with the influence of topographic factors that intensify erosion processes and surface runoff, the variability of the parent rock in mountain areas and the small thickness of the soil profiles.
The management methods of the studied meadows did not have a significant effect on the content of nutrients in soils or plants. Only in the case of manganese concentration in plant necromass and Veronica chamaedrys, the lowest concentrations were found in areas used for mowing and pasture, while the highest in meadows used for mowing. Analogous results were obtained in the case of copper concentration in the above-ground shoots of Agrostis capillaris. In the case of zinc concentration in the above-ground parts of Rumex acetosa, the lowest concentrations were found in areas left fallow, while the highest in areas used for mowing and pasture. Despite the lack of a strong effect of management methods on the content of macro- and micro-nutrients in our studies, it should be noted that other authors have presented equivocal results. He et al. [23] and Oliveira Filho et al. [24] suggest that soil concentrations of macronutrients as nitrogen and phosphorus may decrease along with increased grazing intensity, although other authors point out the opposite effect [10,25] and some point out that grazing does not affect nutrient concentrations [26]. Klaus et al. [27] draw attention to the increase in phosphorus concentration along with increased meadow usage intensity. In the study by Hou et al. [12], it was shown that an increase in the concentrations of nitrogen, phosphorus, magnesium, copper, iron, manganese and zinc in plants occurs along with increased grazing intensity. Du and Gao [28] draw attention to reduced nitrogen and phosphorus content as a result of grazing cessation, which does not correspond to the results of Bai et al. [29], whose study showed that grazing leads to a decrease in nitrogen and phosphorus. Urine is rich in potassium, poor in calcium and magnesium, leads to a reduction in manganese concentration, but has no effect on zinc and copper, which should be associated with changes in soil pH [16]. In the studies of Davies et al. [30], long-grazed areas had more potassium than those used for mowing, while the differences in calcium and magnesium concentrations were slightly different. Mowing typically means the removal of biomass in a non-selective manner, making carbon and nitrogen available and, consequently, leading to the allocation of nutrients [31]. Grazing, through vegetation reduction, reduces soil carbon [13] and leads to an increase in nutrients due to local fertilization. In our studies, the lack of significant differentiation of macro- and micro-nutrient concentrations in the soil should be explained by extensive mowing and pasture usage, which does not significantly affect the properties of the habitats, which was also determined by us in other areas located in the Central Sudetes [32].
Our study revealed that the highest contents of the elements, excluding manganese and iron, were recorded in forbs, while the lowest in sward. According to Whitehead [16], grasses and legumes have similar potassium concentrations under the same conditions, while calcium concentrations are often 2–3 times higher in legumes than in grasses and magnesium concentrations are about 20% higher in legumes. Some authors suggest that legumes may also contain more potassium than grasses [33]. Iron, zinc, copper and cobalt concentrations are often higher in legumes than in grasses, with manganese showing inverse correlations [34,35]. Some other author draw attention to the wider variation in copper concentrations in legumes than in grasses [16]. Comparison of individual grass species, including perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.), timothy (Phleum pratense L.), cocksfoot (Dactylis glomerata L.) and meadow fescue (Festuca pratensis Huds.) showed that cocksfoot (Dactylis glomerata L.) was relatively richer in manganese and copper, possibly also zinc, while meadow fescue was richer in iron [16]. In our study, we showed that, in the case of Festuca rubra, the species accumulated less calcium, manganese, copper, iron and zinc compared to Agrostis capillaris. Our results suggest a greater value of dicotyledonous herbs present in the sward in meeting the mineral needs of animals grazing on mountain meadows.
5. Conclusions
The results did not show any clear relations between the methods of management of mountainous mesic meadow communities and the content of macro- and micro-nutrients in their above-ground parts. The studied species showed strong variation in the uptake of nutrients, however, some differences between forbs and grasses were revealed, especially regarding phosphorus, potassium, calcium and magnesium. In order to maintain high quality of feed obtained from mountain meadows and pastures, a high share of dicotyledonous species should be maintained, which will allow to meet the needs for mineral nutrients of grazing animals, in particular copper, phosphorus, potassium, magnesium and calcium. As the results remain equivocal to a significant degree, we assume that the reaction of plants on the particular configuration of edaphic factors and management methods may differ between sites. Therefore, studies like that one here presented should be continued in a number of diversified areas as it concerns the soil and topographic features and management ways.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, D.P. and L.Ż.; methodology, D.P. and L.Ż.; formal analysis, D.P. and Z.Ł.; investigation, D.P.; writing—original draft preparation, D.P., Z.Ł., A.D. and L.Ż.; writing—review and editing, D.P., Z.Ł., A.D. and L.Ż.; visualization, D.P. and Z.Ł. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement
Data are contained within the article.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
- Pullin, A.S.; Báldi, A.; Emre Can, O.; Dieterich, M.; Kati, V.; Livoreil, B.; Lövei, G.; Mihók, B.; Nevin, O.; Selva, N.; et al. Conservation focus on Europe: Major conservation policy issues that need to be informed by conservation science. Conserv. Biol. 2009, 23, 818–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Feurdean, A.; Ruprecht, E.; Molnár, Z.; Hutchinson, S.M.; Hickler, T. Biodiversity-rich European grasslands: Ancient, forgotten ecosystems. Biol. Conserv. 2018, 228, 224–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fumy, F.; Schwarz, C.; Fartmann, T. Intensity of grassland management and landscape heterogeneity determine species richness of insects in fragmented hay meadows. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 2023, 47, e02672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Török, P.; Janišová, M.; Kuzemko, A.; Rūsiņa, S.; Dajić Stevanović, Z. Grasslands, Their Threats and Management in Eastern Europe. In Grasslands of the World: Diversity, Management and Conservation; Squires, V.R., Dengler, J., Hua, L., Feng, H., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2018; pp. 64–88. [Google Scholar]
- Marini, L.; Scotton, M.; Klimek, S.; Isselstein, J.; Pecile, A. Effects of local factors on plant species richness and composition of Alpine meadows. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2007, 119, 281–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Merunková, K.; Chytrý, M. Environmental control of species richness and composition in upland grasslands of the southern Czech Republic. Plant Ecol. 2012, 213, 591–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Socher, S.A.; Prati, D.; Boch, S.; Müller, J.; Klaus, V.H.; Hölzel, N.; Fischer, M. Direct and productivity-mediated indirect effects of fertilization, mowing and grazing on grassland species richness. J. Ecol. 2012, 100, 1391–1399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pruchniewicz, D. Abandonment of traditionally managed mesic mountain meadows affects plant species composition and diversity. Basic Appl. Ecol. 2017, 20, 10–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steffens, M.; Köelbl, A.; Totsche, K.U.; Köegel-Knabner, I. Grazing effects on soil chemical and physical properties in a semiarid steppe of Inner Mongolia (PR China). Geoderma 2008, 143, 63–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, C.; Wang, L.; Song, X.; Chang, Q.; Frank, D.A.; Wang, D.; Li, J.; Lin, H.; Du, F. Towards a mechanistic understanding of the effect that different species of large grazers have on grassland soil N availability. J. Ecol. 2018, 106, 357–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Randall, K.; Brennan, F.; Clipson, N.; Creamer, R.; Griffiths, B.; Storey, S.; Doyle, E. Soil bacterial community structure and functional responses across a long-term mineral phosphorus (Pi) fertilisation gradient differ in grazed and cut grasslands. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2019, 138, 134–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hou, D.; Guo, K.; Liu, C. Asymmetric effects of grazing intensity on macroelements and microelements in grassland soil and plants in Inner Mongolia Grazing alters nutrient dynamics of grasslands. Ecol. Evol. 2020, 10, 8916–8926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yan, L.; Li, Y.; Wang, L.; Zhang, X.; Wang, J.; Wu, H.; Yan, Z.; Zhang, K.; Kang, X. Grazing significantly increases root shoot ratio but decreases soil organic carbon in Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau grasslands: A hierarchical meta-analysis. Land Degrad. Dev. 2020, 31, 2369–2378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, C.; Li, W.; Zu, J.; Wei, W.; Xue, P.; Yan, H. Response of soil nutrients and stoichiometry to grazing management in alpine grassland on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Soil Tillage Res. 2021, 206, 104822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Köhler, B.; Ryser, P.; Güsewell, S.; Gigon, A. Nutrient availability and limitation in traditionally mown and in abandoned limestone grasslands: A bioassay experiment. Plant Soil 2001, 230, 323–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whitehead, D.C. Nutrient Elements in Grassland: Soil-Plant-Animal Relationships; CABI Publishing: Wallingford, UK, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Zistl-Schlingmann, M.; Kwatcho Kengdo, S.; Kiese, R.; Dannenmann, M. Management intensity controls nitrogen-use-efficiency and flows in grasslands-a 15N tracing experiment. Agronomy 2020, 10, 606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pruchniewicz, D.; Żołnierz, L. The influence of environmental factors and management methods on the vegetation of mesic grasslands in a central European mountain range. Flora 2014, 209, 687–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allen, S.E. (Ed.) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials; Second Edition Completely Revised; Blackwell Scientific Publications: Oxford, UK, 1974. [Google Scholar]
- Radojević, M.; Bashkin, V. Plant analysis. In Practical Environmental Analysis; Radojevic, M., Bashkin, V., Eds.; Royal Society of Chemistry Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2006; p. 457. [Google Scholar]
- TIBCO Software Inc. Statistica (Data Analysis Software System), Version 13; TIBCO Software Inc.: Palo Alto, CA, USA, 2017. Available online: https://www.statistica.com/en/software/tibco-data-science-/-tibco-statistica (accessed on 2 October 2024).
- Grzegorczyk, S.; Olszewska, M.; Alberski, J. Accumulation of copper, zinc, manganese and iron by selected species of grassland legumes and herbs. J. Elem. 2014, 19, 109–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, N.P.; Zhang, Y.H.; Yu, Q.; Chen, Q.S.; Pan, Q.M.; Zhang, G.M.; Han, X.G. Grazing intensity impacts soil carbon and nitrogen storage of continental steppe. Ecosphere 2011, 2, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliveira Filho, J.S.; Vieira, J.N.; Ribeiro da Silva, E.M.; Beserra de Oliveira, J.G.; Pereira, M.G.; Brasileiro, F.G. Assessing the effects of 17 years of grazing exclusion in degraded semi-arid soils: Evaluation of soil fertility, nutrients pools and stoichiometry. J. Arid Environ. 2019, 166, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reeder, J.D.; Schuman, G.E.; Morgan, J.A.; Lecain, D.R. Response of organic and inorganic carbon and nitrogen to long-term grazing of the shortgrass steppe. Environ. Manag. 2004, 33, 485–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cui, X.; Wang, Y.; Niu, H.; Wu, J.; Wan, S.; Schnug, E.; Rogasik, J.; Fleckenstein, J.; Tang, Y. Effect of long-term grazing on soil organic carbon content in semiarid steppes in Inner Mongolia. Ecol. Res. 2005, 20, 519–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klaus, V.H.; Kleinebecker, T.; Hölzel, N.; Blüthgen, N.; Boch, S.; Müller, J.; Socher, S.A.; Prati, D.; Fischer, M. Nutrient concentrations and fibre contents of plant community biomass reflect species richness patterns along a broad range of land-useintensities among agricultural grasslands. Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2011, 13, 287–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Du, C.; Gao, Y. Grazing exclusion alters ecological stoichiometry of plant and soil in degraded alpine grassland. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2021, 308, 107256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bai, Y.; Wu, J.; Clark, C.M.; Pan, Q.; Zhang, L.; Chen, S.; Wang, Q.; Han, X. Grazing alters ecosystem functioning and C:N:P stoichiometry of grasslands along a regional precipitation gradient. J. Appl. Ecol. 2012, 49, 1204–1215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davies, R.O.; Jones, D.I.H.; Milton, W.E.J. Factors affecting the composition and nutritive value of herbage from fescue and Molinia areas. J. Agric. Sci. 1959, 53, 268–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hou, S.L.; Yi, J.X.; Sistla, S.; Yang, J.J.; Sun, Y.; Li, Y.Y.; Lü, X.T.; Han, X.G. Long-term mowing did not alter the impacts of nitrogen deposition on litter quality in a temperate steppe. Ecol. Eng. 2017, 102, 404–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pruchniewicz, D.; Lomba, Ȃ.; Żołnierz, L.; Dradrach, A.; Honrado, J.P. The impact of environmental factors and management on the fitness of Carlina acaulis subsp. caulescens (Lam.) Schübl. et G. Martens in mountain mesic meadows. Turk. J. Bot. 2023, 47, 586–594. [Google Scholar]
- Stockdale, C.R. Effects of season and time since defoliation on the nutritive characteristics of three irrigated perennial pasture species in northern Victoria. 2. Macro-minerals. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 1999, 39, 567–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wheeler, D.M. Investigation into the mechanisms causing lime responses in a grass/clover pasture on a clay loam soil. N. Z. J. Agric. Res. 1998, 41, 497–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scott, D. Sustainability of New Zealand high-country pastures under contrasting development inputs. 1. Site and shoot nutrients. N. Z. J. Agric. Res. 1999, 42, 365–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1.
Principal component analysis (PCA) prepared for the concentration of exchangeable forms of macro- and micro-nutrients in soil and the physical properties of soil and topographic factors.
Figure 1.
Principal component analysis (PCA) prepared for the concentration of exchangeable forms of macro- and micro-nutrients in soil and the physical properties of soil and topographic factors.
Figure 2.
Concentrations of macro- and micro-nutrients in above-ground plant shoots and meadow sward. The graph shows mean values, standard errors and 95% confidence intervals.
Figure 2.
Concentrations of macro- and micro-nutrients in above-ground plant shoots and meadow sward. The graph shows mean values, standard errors and 95% confidence intervals.
Figure 3.
Principal component analysis (PCA) prepared for the concentration of macro- and micro-nutrients in the functional groups studied. Red color indicates forbs; blue—grasses; green—sward.
Figure 3.
Principal component analysis (PCA) prepared for the concentration of macro- and micro-nutrients in the functional groups studied. Red color indicates forbs; blue—grasses; green—sward.
Table 1.
Summary of correlation coefficients between topographic factors and physical properties of soils and concentrations of macro- and micro-nutrients in soil. Only significant values of the correlation coefficient are shown: * p ≤ 0.05, ** p ≤ 0.01, *** p ≤ 0.001.
Table 1.
Summary of correlation coefficients between topographic factors and physical properties of soils and concentrations of macro- and micro-nutrients in soil. Only significant values of the correlation coefficient are shown: * p ≤ 0.05, ** p ≤ 0.01, *** p ≤ 0.001.
| Altitude | Slope | Thickness | pH | MSWC | Org_Mat | Stone | Sand | Dust | Silt | N | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P | |||||||||||
| K | −0.461 * | ||||||||||
| Ca | 0.480 * | 0.788 *** | 0.505 * | ||||||||
| Mg | −0.685 *** | 0.496 * | 0.532 * | ||||||||
| Cu | |||||||||||
| Fe | 0.448 * | 0.726 *** | 0.810 *** | 0.741 *** | −0.614 ** | −0.631 ** | 0.671 *** | ||||
| Mn | −0.798 *** | −0.551 * | 0.509 * | −0.587 ** | |||||||
| Zn | −0.673 *** |
Table 2.
Arithmetic means with standard errors of macro- and micro-nutrient concentrations in the study species. Homogeneous groups obtained during the Kruskal–Wallis test and analysis of variance at p ≤ 0.05 are marked with letters only for comparisons where significant differences were revealed.
Table 2.
Arithmetic means with standard errors of macro- and micro-nutrient concentrations in the study species. Homogeneous groups obtained during the Kruskal–Wallis test and analysis of variance at p ≤ 0.05 are marked with letters only for comparisons where significant differences were revealed.
| Mowing | Mowing-Pasture | Fallowing | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| x | SE | x | SE | x | SE | |
| Phosphorus [mg·kg−1] | ||||||
| Achillea millefolium | 8.02 | 1.09 | 7.07 | 0.89 | 8.67 | 1.65 |
| Lotus corniculatus | 4.82 | 0.57 | 5.42 | 0.77 | 3.94 | 0.71 |
| Plantago lanceolata | 6.16 | 0.79 | 7.69 | 0.93 | 5.76 | 1.19 |
| Rumex acetosa | 8.29 | 1.21 | 8.64 | 2.00 | 7.00 | 0.74 |
| Veronica chamaedrys | 6.07 | 0.71 | 5.87 | 0.75 | 6.29 | 0.92 |
| Agrostis capillaris | 3.63 | 0.32 | 4.50 | 0.98 | 3.91 | 0.63 |
| Festuca rubra | 3.76 | 0.63 | 3.20 | 0.27 | 2.95 | 0.33 |
| Meadow sward | 4.26 | 0.40 | 3.99 | 0.32 | 4.48 | 1.09 |
| Necromass | 3.96 | 0.40 | 3.06 | 0.54 | 3.75 | 0.23 |
| Exchangeable forms | 14.23 | 1.40 | 14.53 | 1.08 | 27.99 | 9.04 |
| Potassium [mg·kg−1] | ||||||
| Achillea millefolium | 35,774.24 | 1730.84 | 39,484.14 | 4954.71 | 31,123.15 | 2521.99 |
| Lotus corniculatus | 19,310.43 | 2054.75 | 17,468.04 | 2316.25 | 24,015.90 | 5374.46 |
| Plantago lanceolata | 29,156.68 | 3050.82 | 28,940.65 | 1906.01 | 29,175.00 | 2318.02 |
| Rumex acetosa | 41,730.88 | 3658.04 | 39,464.25 | 3016.31 | 29,076.20 | 5534.57 |
| Veronica chamaedrys | 21,843.72 | 936.24 | 22,514.55 | 850.42 | 28,637.08 | 7405.31 |
| Agrostis capillaris | 11,616.06 | 1119.60 | 13,118.21 | 1433.42 | 14,800.90 | 1232.31 |
| Festuca rubra | 15,059.93 | 1976.29 | 16,752.67 | 2610.29 | 13,672.38 | 3561.87 |
| Meadow sward | 21,378.34 | 2561.05 | 18,631.33 | 2123.12 | 18,290.75 | 2861.62 |
| Necromass | 9935.78 | 1969.97 | 8488.17 | 1197.22 | 8898.00 | 647.14 |
| Total content | 10,928.27 | 430.62 | 10,180.60 | 1005.88 | 10,699.83 | 1704.58 |
| Exchangeable forms | 124.99 | 11.23 | 144.00 | 31.61 | 316.87 | 129.30 |
| Magnesium [mg·kg−1] | ||||||
| Achillea millefolium | 3415.97 | 305.78 | 3333.90 | 395.82 | 3406.22 | 265.74 |
| Lotus corniculatus | 3375.01 | 396.88 | 5085.53 | 611.81 | 3925.85 | 730.80 |
| Plantago lanceolata | 4498.00 | 641.62 | 3915.48 | 355.92 | 4491.92 | 879.44 |
| Rumex acetosa | 4445.72 | 577.98 | 5053.55 | 729.74 | 3116.77 | 599.85 |
| Veronica chamaedrys | 4152.34 | 363.30 | 4693.61 | 683.16 | 4793.10 | 325.54 |
| Agrostis capillaris | 1732.67 | 465.26 | 1772.78 | 464.61 | 3122.02 | 691.36 |
| Festuca rubra | 2243.16 | 397.69 | 2619.04 | 273.65 | 1970.97 | 422.58 |
| Meadow sward | 1996.22 | 189.43 | 1764.76 | 134.49 | 1947.93 | 257.06 |
| Necromass | 2918.24 | 678.84 | 2574.81 | 444.91 | 2493.58 | 260.95 |
| Total content | 4552.69 | 629.33 | 4105.13 | 784.38 | 4597.84 | 593.90 |
| Exchangeable forms | 141.82 | 21.93 | 107.01 | 19.80 | 171.29 | 61.33 |
| Calcium [mg·kg−1] | ||||||
| Achillea millefolium | 21,547.36 | 2705.41 | 14,682.14 | 1560.77 | 18,224.00 | 1836.71 |
| Lotus corniculatus | 17,858.93 | 3103.17 | 24,205.00 | 3936.78 | 14,357.00 | 2365.49 |
| Plantago lanceolata | 26,672.14 | 5420.83 | 22,020.50 | 1712.22 | 23,441.88 | 4692.74 |
| Rumex acetosa | 9595.00 | 786.79 | 7683.33 | 1468.74 | 9049.00 | 1412.97 |
| Veronica chamaedrys | 17,721.25 | 2969.12 | 21,576.98 | 4195.19 | 14,822.50 | 4148.19 |
| Agrostis capillaris | 5338.89 | 1236.95 | 11,111.00 | 3052.31 | 14,238.50 | 3669.30 |
| Festuca rubra | 7772.86 | 1988.23 | 11,915.42 | 1619.51 | 5531.25 | 2765.82 |
| Meadow sward | 7474.06 | 1378.87 | 5545.83 | 743.51 | 5972.50 | 990.13 |
| Necromass | 13,382.50 | 2956.65 | 12,445.83 | 2789.52 | 10,877.50 | 3095.58 |
| Total content | 1191.60 | 168.17 | 1363.75 | 283.05 | 1063.33 | 152.72 |
| Exchangeable forms | 1606.93 | 246.77 | 1357.58 | 246.30 | 1061.20 | 208.75 |
| Manganese [mg·kg−1] | ||||||
| Achillea millefolium | 397.13 | 70.11 | 452.30 | 75.62 | 393.78 | 76.94 |
| Lotus corniculatus | 134.77 | 30.26 | 213.29 | 66.53 | 101.09 | 19.93 |
| Plantago lanceolata | 147.90 | 27.59 | 199.14 | 22.58 | 193.50 | 13.93 |
| Rumex acetosa | 324.83 | 84.85 | 262.35 | 63.22 | 310.65 | 88.85 |
| Veronica chamaedrys | 311.21 | 37.05 b | 157.00 | 15.81 a | 185.41 | 33.11 ab |
| Agrostis capillaris | 698.24 | 64.07 | 631.11 | 113.01 | 601.13 | 83.27 |
| Festuca rubra | 519.13 | 59.85 | 450.05 | 132.35 | 415.39 | 46.05 |
| Meadow sward | 502.80 | 66.52 | 472.79 | 112.48 | 457.33 | 84.10 |
| Necromass | 1091.72 | 153.33 b | 496.34 | 57.53 a | 865.75 | 196.34 ab |
| Total content | 1282.87 | 125.06 | 954.85 | 97 59 | 928.33 | 92.89 |
| Exchangeable forms | 95.21 | 8.39 | 77.93 | 19.11 | 92.23 | 10.94 |
| Copper [mg·kg−1] | ||||||
| Achillea millefolium | 16.24 | 1.64 | 21.53 | 3.98 | 14.07 | 2.07 |
| Lotus corniculatus | 9.64 | 0.67 | 9.85 | 1.13 | 9.19 | 0.81 |
| Plantago lanceolata | 12.54 | 0.56 | 14.96 | 1.49 | 15.63 | 3.16 |
| Rumex acetosa | 8.78 | 1.28 | 9.73 | 1.35 | 10.15 | 1.76 |
| Veronica chamaedrys | 11.83 | 0.91 | 12.13 | 1.63 | 12.47 | 1.80 |
| Agrostis capillaris | 11.78 | 2.01 b | 6.33 | 0.41 a | 7.60 | 0.94 ab |
| Festuca rubra | 7.64 | 0.67 | 8.30 | 1.26 | 7.30 | 1.59 |
| Meadow sward | 12.23 | 1.30 | 12.91 | 1.03 | 11.05 | 1.20 |
| Necromass | 11.42 | 1.79 | 9.93 | 0.79 | 11.50 | 1.99 |
| Total content | 27.51 | 4.58 | 25.08 | 3.13 | 21.00 | 2.80 |
| Exchangeable forms | 0.28 | 0.05 | 0.77 | 0.57 | 0.33 | 0.10 |
| Iron [mg·kg−1] | ||||||
| Achillea millefolium | 194.31 | 34.31 | 400.11 | 214.38 | 203.76 | 51.18 |
| Lotus corniculatus | 137.60 | 18.80 | 272.44 | 68.72 | 168.36 | 26.36 |
| Plantago lanceolata | 318.44 | 74.61 | 295.04 | 61.32 | 165.04 | 33.89 |
| Rumex acetosa | 371.88 | 150.80 | 360.31 | 113.33 | 198.30 | 36.34 |
| Veronica chamaedrys | 206.04 | 33.49 | 140.94 | 16.30 | 243.80 | 45.89 |
| Agrostis capillaris | 463.26 | 180.22 | 137.13 | 28.32 | 155.29 | 30.93 |
| Festuca rubra | 253.04 | 64.57 | 281.50 | 54.12 | 175.47 | 54.03 |
| Meadow sward | 133.14 | 13.91 | 263.04 | 64.73 | 174.00 | 31.28 |
| Necromass | 579.23 | 170.62 | 409.26 | 77.47 | 963.04 | 432.24 |
| Total content | 27,629.33 | 1636.96 | 30,843.29 | 3129.27 | 29,291.00 | 3528.17 |
| Exchangeable forms | 4.04 | 3.50 | 20.35 | 12.77 | 0.73 | 0.19 |
| Zinc [mg·kg−1] | ||||||
| Achillea millefolium | 64.52 | 8.21 | 99.25 | 12.31 | 95.35 | 16.46 |
| Lotus corniculatus | 48.19 | 7.48 | 77.52 | 24.77 | 77.83 | 13.55 |
| Plantago lanceolata | 82.52 | 5.09 | 88.93 | 11.81 | 103.23 | 11.91 |
| Rumex acetosa | 53.70 | 2.16ab | 79.33 | 8.47b | 73.83 | 4.76b |
| Veronica chamaedrys | 84.29 | 7.79 | 92.39 | 10.03 | 98.03 | 19.57 |
| Agrostis capillaris | 74.77 | 4.69 | 76.12 | 8.55 | 69.22 | 9.08 |
| Festuca rubra | 54.91 | 6.69 | 67.11 | 9.37 | 42.10 | 7.99 |
| Meadow sward | 61.93 | 5.59 | 69.08 | 5.46 | 64.01 | 9.11 |
| Necromass | 81.49 | 5.00 | 87.55 | 7.01 | 90.49 | 22.06 |
| Total content | 87.54 | 5.34 | 107.46 | 8.02 | 106.14 | 12.53 |
| Exchangeable forms | 2.83 | 0.35 | 4.16 | 1.34 | 4.68 | 0.59 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
MDPI and ACS Style
Pruchniewicz, D.; Łobas, Z.; Dradrach, A.; Żołnierz, L. The Influence of Management on the Content of Macro- and Microelements in Plant Shoots of a Meadow Sward of an Arrhenatheretalia Plant Community. Agronomy 2025, 15, 1020. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15051020
AMA Style
Pruchniewicz D, Łobas Z, Dradrach A, Żołnierz L. The Influence of Management on the Content of Macro- and Microelements in Plant Shoots of a Meadow Sward of an Arrhenatheretalia Plant Community. Agronomy. 2025; 15(5):1020. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15051020
Chicago/Turabian StylePruchniewicz, Daniel, Zbigniew Łobas, Agnieszka Dradrach, and Ludwik Żołnierz. 2025. "The Influence of Management on the Content of Macro- and Microelements in Plant Shoots of a Meadow Sward of an Arrhenatheretalia Plant Community" Agronomy 15, no. 5: 1020. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15051020
APA StylePruchniewicz, D., Łobas, Z., Dradrach, A., & Żołnierz, L. (2025). The Influence of Management on the Content of Macro- and Microelements in Plant Shoots of a Meadow Sward of an Arrhenatheretalia Plant Community. Agronomy, 15(5), 1020. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15051020
Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.
