Effect of pasture composition in cattle grazed systems on soil properties and nutrient cycling: impact on herbage, soil and cattle excreta

Cite this as

This dataset contains data on herbage yield; soil moisture; soil physical properties (bulk density, mean weight density, soil loss through 50 µm sieve); soil chemistry (various measures of carbon and nitrogen content, pH and ergosterol); herbage and manure total carbon and nitrogen; micro- and macronutrient concentrations of herbage, soil, urine and manure; and earthworm counts. Urine and manure are characterised before being applied as treatments, while soil and forage samples were taken at various time points from shortly before the application of treatments through to several months later. In the case of the micro- and macronutrient content of soil as assessed by ICP, baseline samples – taken prior to the implementation of the farmlet treatments – are also included.

Full experimental details can be found in McAuliffe et al. (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2020.106978, and
Segura et al. (2023), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.117096. The experiment took place on the North Wyke Farm Platform (NWFP), a UK National Capability in SW England. The NWFP is split into a number of self-contained farms (‘farmlets’) that are managed according to different operation philosophies or practices. The NWFP is highly instrumented and monitored, and core NWFP datasets are open and include in-situ water flow and chemistry taken at 15-minute intervals; 15-minute Met measurements; 15-minute soil moisture measurements; 30-minute GHG emissions; soils, crop and botanical field survey data; livestock and crop performance data; and farm operational activities, and contextual information is also available. See https://nwfp.rothamsted.ac.uk/.

At the time of the experiment, there were three farmlets on the NWFP with different pasture management strategies. Permanent pasture (PP), a perennial ryegrass monoculture (HS) which was sown with a high sugar Lolium perenne cv. AberMagic, and a white clover/perennial ryegrass mix (WC) with the same ryegrass variety as the HS pasture. The PP and HS pastures received N fertilizer at a standard rate, but the WC pastures did not due to the inclusion of a legume. Fields within a farmlet are cut for silage and grazed by cattle and sheep, with livestock grazing or consuming silage only
from one farmlet. This experiment used a single field from each farmlet, chosen as they represent a trio of fields that typically undergo very similar timings in agricultural management, such as grazing by the same species at the same time, as far as is feasible.

Within each field there were three experimental blocks each containing six plots (2.5 x 1.5 m). Each of the six plots within a block were randomised to controls or treatments. Treatments were dung, cattle urine, or synthetic urine. The dung was collected from fields within a farmlet, homogenised using a concrete mixer, and refrigerated in sealed barrels until application on the plots. Cattle urine was collected from cattle within a farmlet over the period of a couple of days, bulked, and frozen until application on the plots. Synthetic urine was included as a treatment to investigate the effect of pasture composition on N2O emissions to be tested without the confounding effects of different urine compositions.
Three plots within each block were controls. One control plot in each block received no N fertilizer, while the other two plots in the PP and HS blocks were controls plus N fertilizer to replicate the rest of the field; the WC blocks had three controls with no N fertilizer as this farmlet does not receive N fertilizer. In some cases, only one of the two plus N fertilizer controls were analysed for some of the measurements.

Baseline samples

To indicate whether any differences between catchments were due to difference in pasture species, or whether there were any pre-existing differences between fields, samples from earlier experiments that had been archived were analysed for a range of elements via ICP. Soil samples were taken in June 2012 in a nested sampling pattern on a 25 m or 50 m grid, to 10 cm. Samples were air-dried, homogenised and stored in a cool location. The archived samples closest to each corner of each experimental block were analysed where they were available, but where they were unavailable no alternative sample was taken.

The herbage baseline samples were taken in the weeks prior to the start of the experiment. The samples were snips taken in a W across the field, which were bulked, air-dried and analysed for a range of elements via ICP. Note that samples NW653/023 and NW653/024 are not from the field in which the experiment took place but instead represent the field where the animals were grazing when dung and urine were collected. However, these had the same pasture mixtures as the experimental fields, and livestock solely grazed a single pasture mixture (‘Catchment’).

Data tables

01_Site_info.csv
A lookup table with treatment information for every sample. Samples were taken at 3 different levels of granularity. Baseline samples were taken at the farmlet level, where WC = white clover, PP = permanent pasture and HS = high sugar. Other samples were taken at the block level (3 blocks per farmlet) and the plot level (6 plots per block, 18 per farmlet). Plots received one of 5 different treatments, with control plots replicated. See experimental details for full information.

02_Herbage_yield.csv
Dry matter herbage yield taken on 3 dates during the experiment.
Methods - McAuliffe et al. 2020 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2020.106978

03_Soil_moisture.csv.csv
Soil moisture content (0 – 10 cm soil) taken on numerous dates throughout the experiment. Taken at the block level prior to treatments being applied, and at a plot level subsequently.
Methods - McAuliffe et al. 2020 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2020.106978

04_Soil_physical_properties.csv
Soil bulk density, mean weight density (an index of soil resistance to disintegration) and soil loss (percentage of soil lost through a 50 µm mesh sieve).
Methods – Segura et al. 2023 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.117096

05_Soil_biochemistry.csv
Soil samples (0 – 10 cm) were taken at 7 time points during the experiment, ranging from 2/6/2017 - 11 days prior to treatments being applied to plots - until the end of the sampling period, 10/10/2017. The data includes total carbon and nitrogen content (as percentage of dry matter and bulk isotope abundance), dissolved organic carbon, soil organic matter, organic carbon, pH and ergosterol (as a proxy for fungal availability in grasslands). The different measurements were all made on the same soil samples, although not every measure was made at each time point.
Methods – Segura et al. 2023 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.117096

06_Herbage_and_manure_TCTN .csv
Total carbon and nitrogen content (as percentage of dry matter and bulk isotope abundance) in herbage and manure.
Collection method - McAuliffe et al. 2020 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2020.106978. Analysis method – Segura et al.
2023 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.117096

07_Urine.csv
Micro- and macronutrient composition of cattle urine applied as a treatment. The replicates are analytical replicates. Missing data indicate that sample concentrations were either below the limit of detection or were a true missing
sample.
Cattle urine collection method - McAuliffe et al. 2020 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2020.106978. Synthetic urine was made
according to the standard recipe developed by Kool et al. 2006 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2005.11.030
and described by Cardenas et al. 2016 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2016.10.025. Analysis method – see Table
11_ICP_methods below.

08_Micronutrients.csv
Micro- and macronutrient composition of manure applied as a treatment, and of soil and herbage taken at baseline and during the experimental period. Missing data indicate that sample concentrations were either below the limit of detection or were a true missing sample.
See Table 11_ICP_methods below for methods.

09_Earthworms.csv
Earthworm counts and masses.
Methods – Segura et al. 2023 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.117096

10_Event_dates.csv
An overview of the activities that took place during the experiment and when samples were taken. The numbers in the Urine, Manure, Soil, Herbage and Earthworms columns indicate which tables contain data for that sample type, and the rows indicate the dates on which data is available.

11_ICP_methods.csv
Soil, herbage and manure samples were air-dried and finely ground prior to analysis. Total I was analysed using a 25% tetramethylammonium hydroxide (TMAH) extraction for 4 hours with analysis by ICP-MS by NUVetNA (University of Nottingham, UK). For the analysis of the other elements, soil and manure samples were prepared using an aqua regia digest (McGrath and Cunliffe 1985), and herbage samples by microwave digestion. Analysis was by either ICP-MS (NexION 300X Inductively Coupled Plasma – Mass Spectrometer, Perkin Elmer) or ICP-OES (Optima 7300 DV Inductively
Coupled Plasma – Optical Emission Spectrometer, Perkin Elmer), depending on element concentrations and this table contains information on which was used for each soil type.
Urine total I was analysed using the same method as for the other sample types, but a creatinine adjustment level was also calculated. Creatinine is a waste product of protein metabolism and is excreted in urine at a constant rate relative to muscle mass. Making the assumption that the cattle in this study have similar muscle masses, urine creatinine concentration can therefore be used as a correction against element concentrations in urine varying with hydration levels. To calculate an element relative to creatinine, multiply the creatinine adjustment value by the element concentration. For the analysis of other elements, urine samples were prepared by either aqua regia or microwave digestion and analysed by either ICP-OES or ICP-MS, as shown in this table.

  Geolocation Point 
    (Latitude, Longitude) : ( 50.7695, -3.9028 ) 
  

  Geolocation Box:
     Lower Left Corner (Latitude,Longitude): ( ,  ) 
     Top Right Corner (Latitude,Longitude): ( ,  )